DoD's $115M Army contract for building construction awarded to J KOKOLAKIS CONTRACTING INC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $115,341,061 ($115.3M)

Contractor: J Kokolakis Contracting Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2021-04-09

End Date: 2024-10-30

Contract Duration: 1,300 days

Daily Burn Rate: $88.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: MCA2 FORCE MODERNIZATION & PROPONENCY CENTER

Place of Performance

Location: AUGUSTA, RICHMOND County, GEORGIA, 30905

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $115.3 million to J KOKOLAKIS CONTRACTING INC for work described as: MCA2 FORCE MODERNIZATION & PROPONENCY CENTER Key points: 1. The contract's firm-fixed-price structure suggests predictable costs for the government. 2. With 7 bidders, the competition level indicates a healthy market for this type of construction. 3. The contract duration of 1300 days points to a significant, long-term project. 4. Awarded under full and open competition, this contract likely secured competitive pricing. 5. The project's focus on building construction aligns with broader infrastructure development needs. 6. The contract's value places it within a substantial spending category for the Army. 7. The geographic location in Georgia may indicate regional construction priorities.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value of approximately $115 million for building construction appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this scale and duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction contracts awarded by the Department of the Army or other federal agencies would provide a more precise assessment of value for money. The firm-fixed-price contract type helps manage cost uncertainty for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with 7 bidders participating. This indicates a robust competitive environment, suggesting that multiple qualified contractors were able to bid on the requirement. The presence of numerous bidders generally leads to more competitive pricing and a wider selection of qualified firms, benefiting the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The high level of competition for this contract is beneficial for taxpayers as it likely drove down prices and ensured the government received a fair market value for the construction services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of the Army, which will receive modernized or new building facilities. The contract delivers essential construction services for institutional and commercial buildings. The project's impact is geographically focused within Georgia, supporting local economic activity. The construction work will likely involve a significant number of skilled laborers and tradespeople, impacting the regional workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen construction challenges arise, despite the fixed-price nature.
Delays in project completion could impact the Army's operational readiness or facility needs.
Quality control and adherence to specifications will be critical throughout the long project duration.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The extensive competition suggests a high likelihood of selecting a capable and experienced contractor.
The long duration allows for thorough planning and execution of complex construction tasks.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this area supports military infrastructure, government facilities, and other institutional needs. The market for large-scale federal construction projects is competitive, with many firms capable of undertaking such work. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large military construction contracts.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not specify any small business set-aside. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses mandated by this specific award. However, the prime contractor may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their overall project management strategy.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the relevant Army contracting command. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules tied to milestones. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific project details might be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
Federal Building Construction
Department of Defense Facilities Management

Risk Flags

Potential for schedule delays
Risk of unforeseen site conditions
Quality control challenges on large projects
Labor availability and cost fluctuations

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $115.3 million to J KOKOLAKIS CONTRACTING INC. MCA2 FORCE MODERNIZATION & PROPONENCY CENTER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is J KOKOLAKIS 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 $115.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-04-09. End: 2024-10-30.

What is the track record of J KOKOLAKIS CONTRACTING INC. with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

A review of federal contract databases would be necessary to fully assess J KOKOLAKIS CONTRACTING INC.'s track record. This would involve examining past awards, performance evaluations, and any history of contract disputes or modifications. Understanding their experience with similar-sized projects and their performance on previous Department of Defense contracts is crucial for evaluating their capability to successfully execute this $115 million building construction project. Specific details on their past performance, including on-time delivery and adherence to budget on prior federal work, would provide valuable context for this current award.

How does the awarded price compare to similar building construction contracts for the Department of the Army?

To benchmark the value, one would compare the per-square-foot cost, the cost per unit of construction (e.g., per room, per office), or the overall project cost against similar Department of the Army building construction contracts awarded within the last 2-3 years. Factors such as location, complexity of design, materials used, and prevailing labor rates in Georgia would need to be considered for a fair comparison. Without access to detailed cost breakdowns and specific project scopes, a precise comparison is difficult, but the $115 million figure suggests a substantial investment in facility development.

What are the primary risks associated with a large-scale, multi-year construction contract like this one?

Key risks include potential cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions, material price fluctuations (though mitigated by fixed-price), labor shortages, or design changes. Schedule delays are also a significant risk, which can impact the Army's operational needs and potentially incur penalties. Quality control issues, contractor performance failures, and environmental or safety compliance problems are other critical risks. The long duration (1300 days) amplifies these risks, requiring robust project management and oversight from both the contractor and the government.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in managing costs for complex construction projects?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective for managing costs in construction projects where the scope of work is well-defined and risks are understood. It shifts most of the cost risk to the contractor, providing the government with budget certainty. However, for highly complex or uncertain projects, FFP can sometimes lead contractors to inflate their bids to cover potential risks, or it may disincentivize them from finding cost efficiencies if they are guaranteed a profit margin. In this case, with 7 bidders, the competitive nature likely ensured that the FFP offered a fair price.

What is the historical spending trend for building construction within the Department of the Army over the past five years?

Analyzing historical spending trends for building construction within the Department of the Army would reveal patterns of investment in infrastructure. This would involve aggregating data on contracts awarded for similar types of construction (e.g., barracks, administrative buildings, training facilities) over several fiscal years. Such an analysis could show whether spending in this category is increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable, and identify any significant shifts in priorities or funding levels. This context helps determine if the current $115 million award is consistent with past investment patterns or represents a notable change.

What are the implications of awarding a large contract in Georgia for the local economy and construction industry?

Awarding a $115 million construction contract in Georgia has significant positive implications for the local economy. It is expected to create numerous jobs for construction workers, engineers, architects, and support staff. Local suppliers of materials, equipment, and services will also benefit from increased demand. Furthermore, the project contributes to the state's tax base and can stimulate further economic development in the surrounding area. The presence of a large federal contract can also enhance the reputation and capacity of local construction firms.

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: SEALED BID

Solicitation ID: W912HN21B3002

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: J. Kokolakis Contracting, Inc.

Address: 202 E CENTER ST, TARPON SPRINGS, FL, 34689

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $115,341,061

Exercised Options: $115,341,061

Current Obligation: $115,341,061

Actual Outlays: $3,281,381

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline