Army awards $186.6M construction contract to Coakley & Williams for administrative buildings

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,154,490 ($14.2M)

Contractor: Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-02-13

End Date: 2007-12-31

Contract Duration: 1,417 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200407!000884!96CE!W912DR!USA ENGINEER DIST BALTIMORE !W912DR04C0010 !A!N! !N! ! !20040213!20061231!186587523!186587523!186587523!N!COAKLEY & WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTIO!16 SOUTH SUMMIT AVENUE, SU!GAITHERSBURG !MD!20877!50000!001!11!WASHINGTON !DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA !D.C. !+000011613500!N!N!000011613500!Z119!MAINT/OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE & SERVICE BUILDINGS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !236220!A!A!3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !B! !A!U!J!2!004!B! !D!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !C!C!A!A!000!A!C!Y! !N! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20017

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.2 million to COAKLEY & WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION, INC. for work described as: 200407!000884!96CE!W912DR!USA ENGINEER DIST BALTIMORE !W912DR04C0010 !A!N! !N! ! !20040213!20061231!186587523!186587523!186587523!N!COAKLEY & WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTIO!16 SOUTH SUMMIT AVENUE, SU!GAITHERSBURG !MD!20877!50000!001!11!WASHINGTON !DIST… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for construction of administrative and service buildings. 2. Significant investment in facility infrastructure for the Washington D.C. region. 3. Contract duration of nearly four years suggests a complex or phased project. 4. Firm Fixed Price contract type indicates defined scope and cost certainty. 5. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 6. The contract value represents a substantial portion of the agency's construction spending in this category.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $186.6 million for construction services appears reasonable given the nearly four-year duration and the scope of building administrative and service facilities. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects for government facilities would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract helps control costs, but the final expenditure could vary based on unforeseen site conditions or change orders. Without specific details on the size and complexity of the buildings, a definitive per-square-foot cost comparison is difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of four bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this significant construction project. This competitive environment is generally expected to drive down prices and encourage efficient service delivery, benefiting the government and ultimately taxpayers.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically leads to better pricing for taxpayers by ensuring multiple companies vie for the contract, driving down costs through competitive bidding.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and its personnel who will utilize the new administrative and service buildings. The contract delivers construction services for administrative and service buildings, enhancing operational capacity. The geographic impact is concentrated in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area, specifically the District of Columbia. The contract supports the construction workforce, including skilled trades and project management professionals in the D.C. region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if scope changes significantly from the initial fixed-price agreement.
Delays in construction could impact the operational readiness of the facilities.
Ensuring compliance with all environmental and building codes throughout the construction process.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition likely resulted in a competitive price.
Long contract duration may indicate a well-planned, phased approach to construction.
The contractor, Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc., has experience in commercial and institutional building construction.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically commercial and institutional building construction. The U.S. construction market is vast, with significant government spending on infrastructure and facilities. This contract represents a substantial investment in administrative facilities, aligning with broader government efforts to modernize and maintain its physical assets. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale government building projects within the D.C. area or for similar military branches.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded to Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc., a large business. There is no indication of a small business set-aside for this particular contract. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist, depending on the prime contractor's strategy and the specific needs of the project, but this is not explicitly detailed in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant project management office within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified facilities within the agreed-upon cost. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, which record award details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Department of the Army Construction Contracts
Federal Building and Facility Construction
Washington D.C. Area Federal Contracts
Administrative Building Construction
Service Building Construction

Risk Flags

Potential for cost escalation beyond fixed price if not managed carefully.
Risk of construction delays impacting facility readiness.
Ensuring compliance with all relevant building codes and environmental regulations.
Adequate oversight required to monitor progress and quality.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.2 million to COAKLEY & WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION, INC.. 200407!000884!96CE!W912DR!USA ENGINEER DIST BALTIMORE !W912DR04C0010 !A!N! !N! ! !20040213!20061231!186587523!186587523!186587523!N!COAKLEY & WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTIO!16 SOUTH SUMMIT AVENUE, SU!GAITHERSBURG !MD!20877!50000!001!11!WASHINGTON !DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA !D.C. !+000011613500!N!N!000011613500!Z119!MAINT/OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE & SERVICE BUILDINGS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !236220!A!A!3! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is COAKLEY & WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION, 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 $14.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-02-13. End: 2007-12-31.

What is the track record of Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of the Army?

Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc. has a history of securing federal contracts, including those with the Department of the Army. While this specific contract for $186.6 million is substantial, the company's experience in commercial and institutional building construction suggests a capacity for such projects. A deeper dive into their past performance, including any past performance evaluations or awards on similar projects, would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and expertise. Examining their contract history for any significant issues, such as disputes, delays, or performance failures, is crucial for a complete assessment. However, the award of this large contract implies a positive assessment of their capabilities by the Army.

How does the awarded amount of $186.6 million compare to similar administrative building construction projects by the Department of the Army or other federal agencies?

The $186.6 million award for administrative and service buildings is a significant sum, reflecting the scale and complexity typically associated with large government construction projects. To benchmark this value effectively, one would need to compare it against similar projects in terms of square footage, type of facility (e.g., office space, specialized service areas), location, and construction duration. For instance, comparing the cost per square foot or cost per year of construction against other recently awarded contracts for similar administrative facilities by the Army, or even other agencies like the General Services Administration (GSA), would provide context. Without these specific comparative data points, it's challenging to definitively state whether this represents an exceptionally high or low cost, but it is indicative of a major infrastructure investment.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm fixed-price construction contract of this magnitude and duration?

The primary risks associated with a firm fixed-price construction contract of this magnitude ($186.6 million) and duration (nearly four years) for the contractor include potential cost overruns if material prices escalate unexpectedly, labor shortages, or unforeseen site conditions that increase the scope of work. For the government, the main risk is that the fixed price might not be the most economical if market conditions change favorably during the contract period, or if the initial estimate was too high. However, the firm fixed-price structure is designed to transfer most of the cost risk to the contractor, providing budget certainty for the government. Effective project management, clear scope definition, and robust change order processes are critical to mitigating these risks for both parties.

What is the expected impact of this contract on the local construction workforce and economy in the Washington D.C. area?

A contract of this size, valued at $186.6 million for construction, is expected to have a substantial positive impact on the local construction workforce and economy in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. It will likely create numerous jobs for skilled tradespeople (carpenters, electricians, plumbers, masons, etc.), project managers, engineers, and support staff. Furthermore, it will stimulate economic activity through the procurement of materials, equipment, and services from local suppliers and subcontractors. The duration of nearly four years ensures a sustained period of employment and economic contribution. This project can also enhance the region's infrastructure, providing modern facilities that support government operations.

How does the competition level (4 bidders) for this contract influence the final price and potential for innovation?

Having four bidders for this $186.6 million construction contract indicates a healthy level of competition. This number suggests that the opportunity was attractive enough to draw multiple qualified firms, but not so niche as to limit participation significantly. In a competitive environment with multiple bidders, companies are incentivized to offer competitive pricing to win the contract. This generally leads to a more favorable price for the government compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario. While firm fixed-price contracts can sometimes limit the scope for radical innovation due to the defined scope and price, a competitive process can still encourage bidders to propose efficient construction methods or value engineering options to gain an edge, potentially leading to cost savings or faster project completion.

What is the historical spending trend for administrative and service building construction by the Department of the Army in the Washington D.C. region?

Analyzing the historical spending trend for administrative and service building construction by the Department of the Army in the Washington D.C. region would require access to historical contract data over several fiscal years. This specific contract award of $186.6 million represents a significant single investment. To understand the trend, one would look at the total annual spending on similar construction projects, the number and average value of contracts awarded, and whether spending has been increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable. Factors such as military base realignments, modernization initiatives, and budget allocations would influence these trends. Without that historical data, it's difficult to place this $186.6 million award in a broader spending context, but it clearly signifies a major commitment to facility upgrades in the region.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 16 SOUTH SUMMIT AVENUE, SU, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 20877

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline