DoD's $13.9M Fort Carson Dining Facility Construction Awarded to Alutiiq International Solutions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,925,557 ($13.9M)

Contractor: Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-04-30

End Date: 2009-09-01

Contract Duration: 489 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: MIL - DESIGN CONSTRUCTION OF DINING FACILITY AT FORT CARSON, COLORADO

Place of Performance

Location: COLORADO SPRINGS, EL PASO County, COLORADO, 80913

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.9 million to ALUTIIQ INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS, LLC for work described as: MIL - DESIGN CONSTRUCTION OF DINING FACILITY AT FORT CARSON, COLORADO Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but potential for cost overruns still exists. 3. The project duration of 489 days indicates a significant construction timeline. 4. The award was made by the Department of the Army, a major component of the DoD. 5. The construction falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code. 6. The contract was awarded in 2008, providing historical context for current spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific construction contract is challenging without comparable project data for similar dining facilities in the same region and timeframe. The firm fixed-price structure is a standard cost control mechanism. However, the final cost relative to initial estimates and the overall value delivered in terms of facility quality and longevity would require a deeper dive into project execution and any change orders.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' indicating that multiple bids were solicited and considered. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition for this type of specialized construction project. A higher number of bidders generally leads to more competitive pricing, but the specific nature of military construction can sometimes limit the pool of qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive bidding process for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source award. Ensuring transparency and broad solicitation helps prevent inflated costs.

Public Impact

Service members at Fort Carson, Colorado, will benefit from the new dining facility. The project delivers essential infrastructure for troop support and morale. The geographic impact is localized to Fort Carson, Colorado. The construction project likely created temporary jobs for skilled trades and laborers in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns in fixed-price contracts if scope changes or unforeseen issues arise during construction.
Ensuring the quality of construction meets long-term durability standards for military infrastructure.
Managing the construction timeline effectively to avoid delays that could impact troop readiness.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process.
Firm fixed-price contract type helps to establish a clear cost ceiling.
The project addresses a critical need for improved troop facilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The market for military construction is a specialized segment, often characterized by stringent requirements and specific security protocols. While general construction benchmarks exist, military projects may command different pricing due to these unique demands. The total federal spending on construction varies significantly year-to-year based on infrastructure needs and appropriations.

Small Business Impact

The contract details indicate that small business participation was not a primary set-aside factor (ss: false, sb: false). While the prime contractor is Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC, there is no explicit information on subcontracting goals for small businesses within this award notice. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Department of the Army contract would typically fall under the purview of the Army Corps of Engineers and potentially the Department of Defense's Inspector General. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction, Army
Fort Carson Infrastructure Projects
Department of Defense Facilities
General Building Construction Services

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns in fixed-price contracts
Construction project timeline risks
Ensuring long-term quality and durability of military infrastructure

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.9 million to ALUTIIQ INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS, LLC. MIL - DESIGN CONSTRUCTION OF DINING FACILITY AT FORT CARSON, COLORADO

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALUTIIQ INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-04-30. End: 2009-09-01.

What is the track record of Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC with federal contracts, particularly in construction?

Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC has a history of receiving federal contracts, primarily with the Department of Defense. Their contract portfolio includes various services, with a notable presence in construction and base operations support. Analyzing their past performance on similar construction projects, including adherence to schedule, budget, and quality standards, would provide further insight into their capabilities and reliability as a contractor. Reviewing past contract awards and any associated performance evaluations or disputes would be crucial for a comprehensive assessment of their track record.

How does the awarded amount of $13.9 million compare to similar military dining facility construction projects?

Directly comparing the $13.9 million award to similar projects is difficult without access to a comprehensive database of military dining facility construction costs, adjusted for factors like location, size, specific amenities, and the year of award. However, construction costs for large institutional buildings can vary widely. Factors such as prevailing wage rates, material costs in Colorado at the time of the award (2008), and the specific architectural and engineering requirements for a military facility would influence the final price. A detailed cost-benefit analysis would require benchmarking against projects with similar square footage, capacity, and feature sets.

What were the primary risk indicators associated with this specific construction project at Fort Carson?

Primary risk indicators for a project of this nature often include potential for unforeseen site conditions (e.g., soil issues, underground utilities), fluctuations in material costs, labor availability and cost, weather delays impacting the construction schedule, and the complexity of integrating new facilities with existing base infrastructure. Given it's a firm fixed-price contract, risks related to scope creep and contractor performance are also significant. The duration of 489 days suggests a substantial project, increasing the potential for encountering such risks over the execution period.

How effective was the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' in ensuring value for money?

The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' mechanism is designed to maximize competition while allowing for specific exclusions if justified. In this case, with 3 bidders, it suggests a reasonable level of competition was achieved. The effectiveness in ensuring value for money hinges on whether these bidders were truly qualified and competitive, and if the bidding process itself was robust. While competition generally drives down prices, the specific nature of military construction can sometimes limit the number of truly capable bidders, potentially impacting the degree of price discovery achieved compared to a broader, unrestricted competition.

What is the historical spending trend for similar construction projects by the Department of the Army?

Historical spending trends for similar construction projects by the Department of the Army are substantial and fluctuate based on military readiness needs, modernization efforts, and congressional appropriations. The Army, through entities like the Army Corps of Engineers, manages a vast portfolio of construction projects ranging from barracks and training facilities to operational infrastructure. Spending in this category can see significant increases during periods of conflict or major force structure changes, and decreases during budget austerity. Analyzing multi-year spending data for military construction would reveal these patterns and allow for comparison of this specific award within broader fiscal contexts.

Were there any notable issues or disputes during the execution of this contract?

Information regarding specific issues, disputes, or contract modifications for this particular award (ID: 236220) is not readily available in the provided summary data. A thorough review of contract modification history, performance reports, or any litigation records associated with Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC and this specific project would be necessary to determine if any significant problems arose during its execution. Publicly accessible contract databases may contain more detailed historical performance information.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W9128F07R0029

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Afognak Native Corp (UEI: 052089695)

Address: 3033 S PARKER RD STE 1111, AURORA, CO, 06

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $13,925,557

Exercised Options: $13,925,557

Current Obligation: $13,925,557

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline