Walsh Construction awarded $30.7M design-build contract for Army facilities in Connecticut
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $30,688,159 ($30.7M)
Contractor: Walsh Construction Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2011-09-28
End Date: 2013-11-08
Contract Duration: 772 days
Daily Burn Rate: $39.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 21
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: DESIGN-BUILD CONSTRUCTION
Place of Performance
Location: WINDSOR LOCKS, HARTFORD County, CONNECTICUT, 06096
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $30.7 million to WALSH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY for work described as: DESIGN-BUILD CONSTRUCTION Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in military infrastructure. 2. The fixed-price nature of the contract aims to control costs. 3. A full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process. 4. The project duration of over two years indicates a substantial undertaking. 5. This contract falls within the broader category of institutional building construction.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $30.7 million for design-build construction appears reasonable given the scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale military construction projects would provide a more precise assessment of value for money. The firm fixed-price structure is a positive indicator for cost control, assuming the initial bid was competitive and well-researched.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified contractors had the opportunity to bid. With 21 bids received, this suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for the project. A higher number of bidders generally leads to more competitive pricing and better value for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The extensive competition for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.
Public Impact
Benefits the Department of Defense by providing necessary facilities. Delivers design and construction services for institutional buildings. Geographic impact is concentrated in Connecticut. Potential workforce implications for construction labor in the region.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if initial design-build estimates are inaccurate.
- Delays in construction could impact military readiness or operational needs.
Positive Signals
- Firm fixed-price contract helps mitigate cost escalation risks.
- Full and open competition suggests a competitive bid process leading to better value.
- Experienced contractor with a history of large-scale projects.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the commercial and institutional building construction sector, a significant segment of the overall construction industry. The Department of Defense is a major client for construction services, often requiring specialized facilities. Benchmarking against other large federal construction projects of similar scope and complexity would be relevant for assessing cost-effectiveness.
Small Business Impact
The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary award went to a large business. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small business subcontracting opportunities were mandated or voluntarily pursued by the prime contractor.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the relevant Army Corps of Engineers district. The firm fixed-price nature provides a degree of accountability for the contractor to deliver within the agreed budget. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific oversight reports are not detailed here.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction
- Design-Build Contracts
- Federal Facilities Construction
Risk Flags
- Potential for schedule delays
- Risk of design errors impacting functionality
- Contractor performance variability
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, connecticut, design-build, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, institutional-building, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $30.7 million to WALSH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. DESIGN-BUILD CONSTRUCTION
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is WALSH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $30.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2011-09-28. End: 2013-11-08.
What is Walsh Construction Company's track record with large federal design-build projects?
Walsh Construction Company has a substantial history of undertaking large-scale construction projects, including significant work for federal agencies. Their portfolio often includes complex infrastructure, healthcare facilities, and institutional buildings. While specific details on past federal design-build projects require deeper database searches, their general experience suggests a capacity to manage projects of this magnitude. Reviewing past performance evaluations and any past performance issues or commendations would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and effectiveness in delivering similar federal contracts on time and within budget.
How does the $30.7 million contract value compare to similar Army design-build projects?
Comparing the $30.7 million contract value requires identifying similar Department of the Army design-build projects awarded within a comparable timeframe and geographic region, or for similar types of facilities. Without access to a comprehensive database of comparable contracts, a precise benchmark is difficult. However, for large institutional or military facility construction, this value is within a common range. Factors like specific site conditions, complexity of design requirements, and prevailing labor costs in Connecticut would influence the final price. A detailed comparison would involve analyzing the scope of work, square footage, and specific construction elements of other projects.
What are the primary risks associated with this design-build contract for the Army?
The primary risks for the Army in this design-build contract include potential design deficiencies that could lead to costly changes or performance issues, and contractor performance risks such as schedule delays or quality control failures. Given it's a firm fixed-price contract, the financial risk of cost overruns is largely borne by the contractor, but significant delays could still impact operational readiness. Ensuring robust oversight of the design phase and diligent construction monitoring are crucial to mitigate these risks. The contractor's experience and financial stability are also key risk indicators.
How effective is the firm fixed-price contract type in ensuring value for this project?
The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective in ensuring value for projects where the scope of work is well-defined, as it places the primary cost risk on the contractor. This incentivizes the contractor to manage costs efficiently and complete the project within the agreed-upon price. For a design-build project like this, the FFP structure encourages the contractor to optimize the design for cost-effectiveness from the outset. However, the effectiveness hinges on the accuracy of the initial bid and the government's ability to clearly define requirements to prevent scope creep, which could lead to change orders that erode the fixed-price benefit.
What is the historical spending pattern for similar construction contracts by the Department of the Army in Connecticut?
Analyzing historical spending patterns for similar construction contracts by the Department of the Army in Connecticut would involve examining contract databases for awards related to facility construction, maintenance, and renovation within the state over several fiscal years. This would reveal trends in contract values, types of services procured (e.g., design-build, general construction), and the number of competitors typically involved. Understanding these patterns can help contextualize the $30.7 million award, indicating whether it is an outlier, a typical investment, or indicative of increased spending in the region for military infrastructure.
What are the implications of having 21 bidders for this contract?
Having 21 bidders for this design-build contract is a strong positive signal. It indicates a competitive marketplace for the type of construction services required and suggests that the government's solicitation was well-structured and accessible to a wide range of qualified firms. High competition typically drives down prices, leading to better value for the government and taxpayers. It also provides the awarding agency with a broader pool of potential contractors to choose from, increasing the likelihood of selecting a highly capable and cost-effective provider. This level of competition minimizes concerns about contractor collusion or lack of viable options.
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: W91ZRS11R0002
Offers Received: 21
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Walsh Group Ltd., the (UEI: 121476675)
Address: 929 W ADAMS ST, CHICAGO, IL, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $30,688,159
Exercised Options: $30,688,159
Current Obligation: $30,688,159
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 168
Total Subaward Amount: $192,325,481
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2011-09-28
Current End Date: 2013-11-08
Potential End Date: 2013-11-08 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2014-08-02
More Contracts from Walsh Construction Company
- Construct Mental Health Inpatient Bldg 1 — $161.8M (Department of Defense)
- Recoveryproject#::5014::rp# Construction of the Noaa PRC AT Ford Island, Pearl Harbor, HI. the Work to BE Performed Provides for and Involves Adaptive Reuse of Historic Hangars and NEW Construction on an Historic Landmark Site. the Diverse Program Includes Marine Biology Laboratories, National Data Cneter, Dive Center, International Tsunami Information Center, Pacific Tsunami Warning Center, National Weather Service and Administrative Functions. Project Includes Site Work, Hazardous Material Abatement Work and Incidental Related Work — $158.2M (Department of Defense)
- Replace Family Housing Wafb — $137.4M (Department of Defense)
- THE NEW Outpatient Clinic Will Replace the Existing Chalmers P. Wylie VA Outpatient Clinic. the NEW OPC IS to BE a NEW 295,000 SQ. FT. Outpatient Clinic Located on 20 Acres of the Defense Supply Center in Columbus, Ohio. the NEW Clinic Will Include Services for Human Resources, Nursing Administration, Radiology, Engineering, Outpatient Pharmacy, Outpatient Surgery, Pharmacy, EEG, Pathology and Laboratory, Physical Medicine, Rehabilitation, Prosthetics and Medical Administration Services. the Project Will Also Include Surface Parking, Necessary Utilities, Site Work and Landscaping — $89.9M (Department of Veterans Affairs)
- General Construction of a NEW BED Tower Building for the VA Westside Medical Center and the Renovation of Building 1 — $86.4M (Department of Veterans Affairs)
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)