Tutor Perini Corporation awarded $29.3M for Cadet Fieldhouse repair, a firm-fixed-price contract
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $29,320,061 ($29.3M)
Contractor: Tutor Perini Corporation
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2020-11-26
End Date: 2023-05-17
Contract Duration: 902 days
Daily Burn Rate: $32.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 5
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: REPAIR CADET FIELDHOUSE PHASE 2
Place of Performance
Location: USAF ACADEMY, EL PASO County, COLORADO, 80840
State: Colorado Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $29.3 million to TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION for work described as: REPAIR CADET FIELDHOUSE PHASE 2 Key points: 1. The contract's firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs for the government. 2. A single award to Tutor Perini Corporation suggests a competitive bidding process. 3. The duration of 902 days indicates a significant, multi-year project. 4. The project falls under commercial and institutional building construction, a common government expenditure. 5. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, maximizing potential bidders. 6. The absence of small business set-asides may limit opportunities for smaller firms in this specific contract.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $29.3 million for a large-scale facility repair appears reasonable within the context of major construction projects. Benchmarking against similar Department of Defense construction contracts of comparable scope and complexity would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price type suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be advantageous for the government if managed effectively. However, without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to independent cost estimates, a definitive assessment of pricing efficiency is challenging.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 5 bidders, as suggested by the 'no' field, points to a healthy level of competition for this project. This competitive environment is generally expected to drive down prices and encourage innovation from the bidding firms, leading to better value for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with multiple bidders suggests that taxpayer dollars were likely used efficiently, as the government received proposals from various qualified contractors, fostering a competitive pricing environment.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the military personnel and staff who will utilize the improved Cadet Fieldhouse. The services delivered include comprehensive repair and renovation of a significant facility. The geographic impact is localized to the facility's location within Colorado. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers and related trades during the project's duration.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise during construction, despite the fixed-price nature.
- Dependence on a single contractor for project completion could lead to delays if the contractor faces performance issues.
- Limited direct benefit to small businesses due to the absence of specific set-aside provisions.
Positive Signals
- Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
- Full and open competition likely resulted in competitive pricing.
- Experienced contractor, Tutor Perini Corporation, suggests a higher likelihood of successful project execution.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant area of federal spending. The Department of Defense, as a major federal agency, frequently engages in construction and renovation projects to maintain its infrastructure. The market for large-scale construction is characterized by a mix of large, established firms and smaller specialized contractors. Federal contracts often represent a substantial portion of revenue for companies operating in this space, and competition can be fierce for large projects.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, nor does it indicate any specific subcontracting goals for small businesses. This means that opportunities for small businesses to directly participate in this contract are limited unless they are subcontractors to the prime contractor, Tutor Perini Corporation. The absence of set-asides in large federal construction contracts can sometimes reduce the direct economic impact on the small business ecosystem within the construction sector.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the project's technical representatives within the Department of the Army. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract places the onus on the contractor to manage costs, but government oversight ensures adherence to specifications, quality standards, and timelines. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Military Base Infrastructure Improvements
- Federal Building Construction and Renovation
- Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance
- Large-Scale Construction Contracts
Risk Flags
- Potential for schedule delays
- Risk of cost overruns if scope changes
- Quality control concerns in fixed-price contracts
- Limited small business participation
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, colorado, large-contract, facility-repair, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $29.3 million to TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION. REPAIR CADET FIELDHOUSE PHASE 2
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $29.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2020-11-26. End: 2023-05-17.
What is Tutor Perini Corporation's track record with similar federal construction contracts?
Tutor Perini Corporation has a significant history of performing large-scale construction projects for various federal agencies, including the Department of Defense. Their portfolio includes a wide range of infrastructure, institutional, and specialized facilities. While specific performance metrics for past contracts are not detailed here, their status as a major federal contractor suggests they have successfully navigated the complexities of government procurement and execution. A deeper dive into their contract history, including any past performance evaluations or disputes, would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability for projects like the Cadet Fieldhouse repair.
How does the $29.3 million cost compare to similar facility repair projects within the Department of Defense?
The $29.3 million award for the Cadet Fieldhouse repair is a substantial investment, typical for major renovations of institutional facilities. To benchmark this value effectively, it would be necessary to compare it against other Department of Defense (DoD) projects of similar scope, size (square footage), and complexity (e.g., structural, MEP systems, historical preservation requirements). Factors such as geographic location, prevailing labor costs, and material prices in Colorado would also influence cost comparisons. Without access to a database of comparable DoD construction projects with detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment relative to similar contracts is difficult.
What are the primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price contract for the government?
While firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally favored by the government for cost control, risks can still exist. The primary risk for the government in an FFP contract is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or materials to maintain profitability if unforeseen issues arise or if their initial cost estimates were too low. Additionally, if the scope of work needs to change significantly, the government may face higher costs negotiating change orders. Effective government oversight is crucial to mitigate these risks by ensuring adherence to specifications and quality standards throughout the project lifecycle.
How effective is full and open competition in ensuring competitive pricing for large construction projects like this?
Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring competitive pricing on large federal construction projects. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, the government maximizes the pool of potential offerors, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving competitive proposals. The fact that this contract had 5 bidders suggests that the competition was robust. This competitive pressure incentivizes contractors to submit their best possible pricing and technical solutions to win the contract, ultimately benefiting the taxpayer through potentially lower costs and higher quality outcomes.
What is the historical spending pattern for facility repairs and construction within the Department of the Army in Colorado?
Analyzing historical spending patterns for facility repairs and construction by the Department of the Army (DoA) in Colorado would provide valuable context for this $29.3 million contract. This would involve examining past contract awards for similar types of facilities (e.g., barracks, training centers, administrative buildings) and construction scopes within the state. Understanding the average contract values, duration, and competition levels for previous DoA projects in Colorado could help determine if this award is within the expected range or if it represents an outlier. Such analysis requires access to historical federal procurement data.
What are the implications of the 902-day duration for project management and cost control?
A duration of 902 days (approximately 2.5 years) for the Cadet Fieldhouse repair indicates a large-scale, complex project. For project management, this extended timeline necessitates robust planning, scheduling, and coordination to ensure milestones are met and the project stays on track. From a cost control perspective, a longer duration can increase the risk of cost escalation due to inflation in labor and material prices, even under a firm-fixed-price contract, especially if the contract doesn't include escalation clauses or if significant change orders occur. Effective oversight is critical to manage the project's progression and control costs over this extended period.
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: W9128F20R0004
Offers Received: 5
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 15901 OLDEN ST, SYLMAR, CA, 91342
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $29,320,061
Exercised Options: $29,320,061
Current Obligation: $29,320,061
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2020-11-26
Current End Date: 2023-05-17
Potential End Date: 2023-05-17 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2023-07-28
More Contracts from Tutor Perini Corporation
- 200312!001242!2100!CA78 !transatlantic Program Center !daca7803d0006 !A!N! !N!0002 !20030919!20040331!006954432!006954432!006954432!n!perini Corporation !73 MT Wayte Avenue !framingham !MA!01701!* !* !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000000460000!n!n!000000000000!y199!other Miscellaneous Buildings !C2 !construction !1000!NOT Discernable or Classified !236220!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!20040331!B! ! !n!a!d!n!u!1!001!n!2a!z!n!z! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! !Y!Y! ! !0001! ! — $379.4M (Department of Defense)
- Design/Build Embassy Housing — $157.2M (Department of Defense)
- 200512!501265!2100!w912er!transatlantic Program Center !w912er04d0008 !A!N! !N!0003 ! !20050928!20061231!006954432!006954432!006954432!n!perini Corporation !73 Mount Wayte AVE !framingham !MA!01701!00000! !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000119283840!n!n!000000000000!y159!other Industrial Buildings !C2 !construction !000 !* !236220!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !a!u!j!2!001!b! !Z!N!A! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! ! — $127.2M (Department of Defense)
- Design/Build Hurricane Rebuild Task Order for SAN Juan Phase II East Base BID and Option 5: SE X Waterfront Boat Ramp — $117.0M (Department of Homeland Security)
- Ffp/Satoc Saudi Arabia (FMS) F-15 Modernizaiton Program, Khurais Electronic Warfare Range., Psab 13-0004 — $106.4M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)