DoD's $33.1M Battalion Operations Complex contract awarded to Federal Contracting Inc. for construction services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $33,108,930 ($33.1M)

Contractor: Federal Contracting Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-08-03

End Date: 2012-08-03

Contract Duration: 731 days

Daily Burn Rate: $45.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 18

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: M - SOF BATTALION OPERATIONS COMPLEX

Place of Performance

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

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $33.1 million to FEDERAL CONTRACTING INC for work described as: M - SOF BATTALION OPERATIONS COMPLEX Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in military infrastructure. 2. Construction services are critical for maintaining and upgrading military facilities. 3. The contract duration of 731 days indicates a substantial project scope. 4. Fixed-price contract type suggests cost certainty for the government. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Army, highlighting a focus on ground forces infrastructure. 6. The project is located in Colorado, potentially impacting the local construction economy.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $33.1 million for a battalion operations complex appears to be within a reasonable range for large-scale construction projects of this nature. Without specific benchmarks for similar battalion-sized facilities, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the fixed-price contract type generally provides cost control for the government, assuming the scope was well-defined. Further analysis would require comparing the cost per square foot or per facility component against industry standards and similar military construction projects.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that multiple interested contractors had the opportunity to bid. With 18 bids received, this suggests a healthy level of competition for the project. A robust competitive process typically leads to more favorable pricing and better quality offerings as contractors strive to win the award.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with 18 bidders is beneficial for taxpayers, as it likely drove down costs and ensured the government received competitive proposals, maximizing the value of the awarded contract.

Public Impact

Military personnel stationed at the facility will benefit from modern operational infrastructure. The construction services delivered will enhance the operational readiness and capabilities of the battalion. The geographic impact is concentrated in Colorado, potentially creating local construction jobs and economic activity. The project supports the Department of the Army's mission to maintain and improve its facilities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen construction challenges arise, despite fixed-price contract.
Risk of schedule delays impacting operational readiness if construction is not completed on time.
Quality control during construction is crucial to ensure the facility meets military standards.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition likely secured competitive pricing.
Fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Multiple bidders suggest strong contractor interest and potential for high-quality execution.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a vital part of the broader construction industry. This sector encompasses the building of non-residential structures, including government facilities, which are essential for public services and national defense. The market for military construction is substantial, driven by the need to maintain, modernize, and expand defense infrastructure globally. This specific contract for a battalion operations complex is a significant undertaking within this specialized segment.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely limited unless Federal Contracting Inc. voluntarily engages small businesses for subcontracting opportunities. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to fully assess the impact on small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Army's contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the fixed-price contract terms, which penalize deviations from agreed-upon costs and schedules. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific project-level oversight details may not be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction (MILCON)
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) projects
Department of Defense Facilities Management
Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns
Risk of schedule delays
Quality control concerns
Scope creep potential

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $33.1 million to FEDERAL CONTRACTING INC. M - SOF BATTALION OPERATIONS COMPLEX

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FEDERAL CONTRACTING INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $33.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-08-03. End: 2012-08-03.

What is the track record of Federal Contracting Inc. on similar government construction projects?

A review of Federal Contracting Inc.'s past performance on government contracts would be necessary to assess their track record. This would involve examining their history with the Department of Defense and other federal agencies, looking at project types, contract values, on-time completion rates, and any instances of disputes or contract modifications. A strong track record with similar-sized and complex construction projects would indicate a lower risk for this battalion operations complex contract. Conversely, a history of delays, cost overruns, or quality issues would raise concerns about their ability to successfully execute this project.

How does the cost of this contract compare to similar battalion operations complex construction projects?

Benchmarking the cost of this $33.1 million contract against similar battalion operations complex projects is crucial for assessing value for money. This comparison would ideally involve looking at contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or other military branches for facilities of comparable size, scope, and complexity. Factors such as location, specific functional requirements (e.g., training facilities, administrative areas, barracks), and the year of award would need to be considered to ensure a fair comparison. If this contract's cost per square foot or per functional unit is significantly higher than comparable projects, it could indicate potential overpricing or scope creep.

What are the primary risks associated with the construction of a battalion operations complex?

The primary risks associated with constructing a battalion operations complex include potential cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions (e.g., soil issues, hazardous materials), material price fluctuations, and labor shortages. Schedule delays are also a significant risk, stemming from weather, supply chain disruptions, or contractor performance issues, which can impact military readiness. Furthermore, ensuring the facility meets stringent military specifications for security, durability, and functionality presents quality control risks. The fixed-price nature of this contract shifts some cost risk to the contractor, but scope creep or poorly defined requirements can still lead to disputes and delays.

How effective is the full and open competition process in ensuring competitive pricing for large construction projects?

The full and open competition process is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring competitive pricing for large construction projects. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, it maximizes the number of potential offerors, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving competitive proposals. The presence of 18 bidders in this case suggests a robust competition that likely drove down prices. However, the effectiveness can be influenced by the clarity of the solicitation documents, the complexity of the requirements, and the contractor's perception of the project's risk and profitability. Even with open competition, thorough evaluation of bids is essential to ensure the lowest price is also associated with the best value.

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

Analyzing historical spending trends for similar military construction projects by the Department of the Army would provide context for the $33.1 million award. This would involve examining the volume and value of construction contracts awarded over several fiscal years, identifying any patterns in project types (e.g., barracks, training facilities, command centers), and noting average contract values and durations. Understanding these trends can help determine if current spending levels are consistent with past investments, if there's an increasing demand for such facilities, or if there are significant fluctuations in project costs. This historical perspective is vital for budget planning and assessing the overall investment strategy in military infrastructure.

What are the implications of a fixed-price contract for a project of this scale and complexity?

A fixed-price contract, like the one awarded here, establishes a firm price for the defined scope of work, making it advantageous for the government in terms of cost certainty. The contractor assumes most of the risk for cost overruns, provided the scope remains unchanged. For a large and complex project like a battalion operations complex, this requires a very well-defined scope of work and detailed specifications upfront. If unforeseen issues arise or the scope needs to change, contract modifications can become complex and potentially lead to disputes or increased costs. The success of a fixed-price contract hinges on thorough planning and risk assessment by both parties prior to award.

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

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W9128F10R0010

Offers Received: 18

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7025 CAMPUS DR, COLORADO SPRINGS, CO, 05

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $33,108,930

Exercised Options: $33,108,930

Current Obligation: $33,108,930

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline