Department of the Army awarded $106.5M for ANP National Training Center construction, completed in 2011

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $106,547,514 ($106.5M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-01-05

End Date: 2011-10-23

Contract Duration: 1,021 days

Daily Burn Rate: $104.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 13

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: DESIGN & CONSTRUCT ANP NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER WARDAK

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $106.5 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: DESIGN & CONSTRUCT ANP NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER WARDAK Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a potentially competitive pricing environment. 2. The firm-fixed-price contract type indicates that the contractor assumed the risk for cost overruns. 3. The project duration of 1021 days (approx. 2.8 years) for construction is a significant undertaking. 4. The lack of disclosed domestic awardees warrants further investigation into the specific companies involved. 5. The contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code, indicating a focus on infrastructure development.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $106.5 million construction contract is challenging without specific details on the scope of work and comparable projects. However, the firm-fixed-price structure suggests that the government secured a predictable cost. The duration of the project (1021 days) indicates a substantial construction effort, and the final cost should be evaluated against initial estimates and any change orders. Without more granular data on the specific deliverables and market conditions at the time of award, a definitive value assessment is difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, which typically involves a broad solicitation to all responsible prospective contractors. This method is designed to maximize competition and potentially achieve better pricing and quality. The number of bidders (13) suggests a healthy level of interest, though the specific details of the bidding process and the final award criteria are not provided. A robust competition generally leads to a more efficient use of taxpayer funds.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to bid, driving down prices and fostering innovation to win the contract.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of Defense and its personnel, who will utilize the ANP National Training Center. The services delivered include the design and construction of a significant training facility. The geographic impact is localized to Wardak, Afghanistan, where the training center is situated. The project likely involved a substantial workforce, including construction laborers, engineers, and project managers, contributing to local and potentially international employment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of disclosed domestic awardees makes it difficult to assess contractor track record and potential conflicts of interest.
The significant contract value and duration raise questions about project management and oversight effectiveness.
Geopolitical instability in Afghanistan during the project's execution period (2009-2011) could have presented unforeseen risks and cost implications.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a structured procurement process.
Firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
The project successfully delivered a national training center, fulfilling a critical military requirement.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The market for large-scale military infrastructure projects is often dominated by a few large, specialized construction firms. The value of this contract, over $100 million, places it in the category of major federal construction awards. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve other large base or facility construction projects undertaken by the Department of Defense in similar operational environments.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the contract was not specifically targeted towards small businesses. While there's no explicit information on subcontracting, large construction projects often involve significant subcontracting opportunities. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether small businesses were able to secure subcontracts from the prime awardee(s).

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for a contract of this magnitude, especially in a deployed environment, would typically involve rigorous project management, regular site inspections, and potentially oversight from the Department of Defense's Inspector General. Accountability measures would be tied to the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified facility within the agreed-upon cost and timeline. Transparency is often limited in military construction contracts due to security concerns, but reporting requirements would exist within the DoD.

Related Government Programs

Afghanistan Infrastructure Projects
Department of Defense Construction Contracts
Military Training Facilities
Global Contingency Operations Support

Risk Flags

Lack of transparency regarding awardee identity.
Potential for cost overruns despite fixed-price contract due to operational environment.
Geopolitical risks associated with project location.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $106.5 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). DESIGN & CONSTRUCT ANP NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER WARDAK

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $106.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-01-05. End: 2011-10-23.

What was the specific scope of work for the ANP National Training Center construction?

The provided data indicates the contract was for the 'DESIGN & CONSTRUCT ANP NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER WARDAK'. This implies the scope included both the architectural and engineering design phases, as well as the physical construction of the training facility. The ANP (Afghan National Police) National Training Center would likely encompass buildings for classrooms, barracks, administrative offices, training grounds, and supporting infrastructure such as utilities and security perimeters. The exact specifications, square footage, and specialized training facilities would have been detailed in the contract's statement of work, which is not publicly available in this dataset.

How did the final cost compare to the initial estimated cost for this project?

The provided data only shows the final award amount of $106,547,514.20. It does not include the initial estimated cost or any breakdown of potential cost changes throughout the project lifecycle. For a firm-fixed-price contract, the goal is to adhere to the awarded price. However, significant unforeseen issues, scope changes requested by the government, or contractor-initiated changes (if allowed and approved) could lead to modifications. Without access to the contract's modification history or initial cost estimates, a comparison is not possible.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this construction contract?

Key performance indicators for a construction contract of this nature typically revolve around schedule adherence, quality of workmanship, safety compliance, and adherence to design specifications. For a firm-fixed-price contract, meeting the final cost is also a critical performance metric for the contractor. Specific KPIs would have been detailed in the contract's performance standards and evaluation criteria. Given the project's location and nature, KPIs related to security and operational readiness of the completed facility would also be paramount for the Department of the Army.

Were there any significant delays or cost overruns during the project, and how were they managed?

The contract duration was 1021 days, approximately 2.8 years. While this duration is substantial, it does not inherently indicate delays without knowing the originally planned schedule. As this was a firm-fixed-price contract, the contractor bore the risk of cost overruns. Any significant deviations from the planned schedule or budget would typically be managed through contract modifications, change orders, or potentially liquidated damages if the contractor failed to meet contractual obligations. Information on specific delays or overruns and their management is not available in the provided data.

What is the significance of the ANP National Training Center for the Department of Defense's mission in Afghanistan?

The ANP National Training Center in Wardak was crucial for building the capacity and effectiveness of the Afghan National Police. A well-trained police force is essential for maintaining law and order, combating insurgents, and enabling the transition of security responsibilities to Afghan forces. This facility would have provided a dedicated and standardized environment for training police recruits and specialized units, contributing directly to the Department of Defense's broader mission of stabilizing Afghanistan and supporting the Afghan government.

What is the typical profit margin for similar large-scale military construction contracts?

Profit margins for large-scale military construction contracts can vary significantly based on factors such as project complexity, risk, competition, and the specific economic climate. Generally, profit margins for construction projects can range from 5% to 15% of the total contract value. For firm-fixed-price contracts, contractors aim to build in contingency and profit while remaining competitive. Without specific financial data from the contractor or industry benchmarks for projects in similar high-risk environments, determining the exact profit margin for this $106.5 million contract is speculative.

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: W917PM08R0092

Offers Received: 13

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $106,547,514

Exercised Options: $106,547,514

Current Obligation: $106,547,514

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline