Department of Defense awards $10.5M contract to Straub Construction for building construction in Nevada

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,501,225 ($10.5M)

Contractor: Straub Construction, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-04-28

End Date: 2008-09-30

Contract Duration: 886 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Place of Performance

Location: NELLIS AFB, CLARK County, NEVADA, 89191

State: Nevada Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.5 million to STRAUB CONSTRUCTION, INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The fixed-price contract type may offer cost certainty for the government. 3. The contract duration of 886 days indicates a significant project timeline. 4. The award was made by the Department of the Army, a major component of the DoD. 5. The contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code. 6. The contract was awarded in April 2006 and completed in September 2008.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $10.5 million for building construction appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this nature, though specific benchmarks are unavailable without more detailed project scope. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests that the contractor assumed the risk for cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator of value if the project was completed within budget. However, without post-award performance data or comparison to similar projects, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. A competitive bidding process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers by encouraging multiple firms to offer their best pricing to secure the contract.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of the Army and its personnel, who will utilize the constructed facilities. The contract delivered commercial and institutional building construction services. The geographic impact is localized to Nevada, where the construction project was presumably undertaken. The contract supported jobs within the construction industry, including those employed by Straub Construction, Inc. and any subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the contractor's execution beyond basic completion.
Limited information on the specific type and scope of construction prevents a granular value analysis.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a fair and accessible bidding process.
Firm fixed-price contract type, which shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
Contract completed within the specified timeframe, suggesting adherence to the schedule.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a broad category encompassing the building of non-residential structures. This sector is a significant part of the overall construction industry, which is a major contributor to the U.S. economy. Federal spending in this area often supports infrastructure development and facility upgrades for government agencies. Benchmarking this specific contract's value would require comparison to similar-sized construction projects within the same geographic region and for similar types of facilities.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. However, as with any large construction project, the prime contractor, Straub Construction, Inc., may have utilized small businesses as subcontractors, which would indirectly benefit the small business sector.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the Department of the Army contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures would include adherence to the contract terms, specifications, and delivery schedule. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS, where basic information is publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization
General Services Administration (GSA) Building Construction

Risk Flags

Contract completed on time.
Firm fixed-price contract reduces cost overrun risk for the government.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.5 million to STRAUB CONSTRUCTION, INC.. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is STRAUB 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 $10.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-04-28. End: 2008-09-30.

What was the specific nature of the building construction undertaken by Straub Construction, Inc. under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 236220, which is for Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. This typically includes the construction of non-residential buildings such as office buildings, warehouses, factories, schools, hospitals, and other public or private institutions. However, the specific details of the project—whether it was new construction, renovation, or a specific type of facility (e.g., barracks, administrative building, training facility)—are not detailed in the provided data. Further investigation into the contract award details or associated documentation would be necessary to ascertain the precise nature of the construction.

How does the $10.5 million award compare to typical construction contract values for the Department of the Army in Nevada?

Without access to a comprehensive database of similar Department of the Army construction contracts specifically within Nevada, a direct comparison is difficult. However, $10.5 million is a substantial sum for a single construction project, suggesting it was likely a significant undertaking, such as the construction of a new facility or a major renovation. The average value of construction contracts can vary widely based on project scope, location, and market conditions. To provide a precise benchmark, one would need to analyze historical contract awards for similar projects by the Army or other federal agencies in the region, considering factors like square footage, building type, and complexity.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or success metrics for this contract?

The provided data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or success metrics for this specific contract. Typically, for construction contracts, success is measured by adherence to the project schedule, completion within budget (especially relevant for fixed-price contracts), quality of workmanship meeting specified standards, safety compliance on-site, and overall client satisfaction. Since this was a firm fixed-price contract awarded in 2006 and completed in 2008, the primary metrics would likely have revolved around delivering the completed structure according to the design specifications and within the agreed-upon timeline and price. Post-award performance reports, if available, would offer more insight.

Were there any notable challenges or risks encountered during the execution of this contract?

The provided summary data does not detail specific challenges or risks encountered during the execution of this contract. Common risks in large construction projects include unforeseen site conditions, weather delays, material cost fluctuations (though mitigated by fixed-price), labor shortages, and design changes. Given the firm fixed-price nature of the contract, Straub Construction, Inc. would have borne the primary financial risk for cost overruns. The contract duration of 886 days (approximately 2.4 years) suggests a project of considerable scale, increasing the potential for encountering various execution challenges. Without access to contract performance reports or official documentation, identifying specific issues is speculative.

What is the historical spending pattern for Straub Construction, Inc. with the Department of Defense?

The provided data only pertains to a single contract awarded to Straub Construction, Inc. by the Department of the Army. To understand their historical spending patterns with the Department of Defense (DoD), a broader analysis of federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USAspending) would be required. This would involve searching for all contracts awarded to Straub Construction, Inc. across all branches of the DoD over a specified period. Such an analysis could reveal the volume, value, and types of contracts the company has secured with the DoD, indicating their experience and relationship with the agency.

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

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 5256 S MISSION RD STE 310, BONSALL, CA, 48

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline