Department of the Army awards $24.3M contract for facility construction at PAFB, completed within budget

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,273,973 ($24.3M)

Contractor: MWH Constructors Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-03-27

End Date: 2008-10-24

Contract Duration: 577 days

Daily Burn Rate: $42.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: M - CONSTRUCT A/DACG FACILITY PAFB

Place of Performance

Location: COLORADO SPRINGS, EL PASO County, COLORADO, 80914

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.3 million to MWH CONSTRUCTORS INC for work described as: M - CONSTRUCT A/DACG FACILITY PAFB Key points: 1. Contract achieved its objectives within the allocated budget, indicating effective financial management. 2. The project was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Fixed-price contract type likely mitigated cost overrun risks for the government. 4. The contract duration of 577 days was met, demonstrating project management efficiency. 5. The contractor, MWH Constructors Inc., has a track record of completing government projects. 6. The project falls under industrial building construction, a common category for defense infrastructure.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $24.3 million for constructing an Air Force facility appears reasonable given the scope of industrial building construction. Benchmarking against similar projects would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the initial price was determined through negotiation and competitive bidding, aiming for cost certainty. The absence of significant cost overruns further supports a positive assessment of its value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 3 bidders indicates a healthy level of competition for this project. This competitive environment generally leads to better price discovery and encourages contractors to offer competitive pricing and terms to secure the award.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition as it typically drives down costs through competitive bidding, ensuring that the government receives the best possible value for its investment.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Air Force, receiving a new or improved facility at PAFB. The service delivered is the construction of an industrial building, crucial for operational readiness and support. The geographic impact is localized to Peterson Air Force Base (PAFB). Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers and related trades during the project's execution.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if initial requirements were not clearly defined, though mitigated by fixed-price contract.
Reliance on a single contractor for the duration of the project introduces performance risk.
Ensuring compliance with all environmental and safety regulations during construction.

Positive Signals

Fixed-price contract provides cost certainty and limits the government's exposure to cost overruns.
Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive market and potentially better pricing.
Project completed within the specified timeframe, indicating effective project management by the contractor.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Industrial Building Construction. The market for large-scale government facility construction is substantial, often dominated by a few large firms with the capacity and experience to handle such projects. This contract represents a typical investment in maintaining and expanding critical infrastructure for military operations.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside (ss: false, sb: false). While MWH Constructors Inc. is the prime contractor, there is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. Further investigation into subcontracting reports would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

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. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which places the risk of cost overruns on the contractor. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed project progress reports may not always be publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization
Defense Infrastructure Projects
Air Force Base Operations Support

Risk Flags

Contract performance risk
Potential for unforeseen site conditions
Adherence to military construction standards

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.3 million to MWH CONSTRUCTORS INC. M - CONSTRUCT A/DACG FACILITY PAFB

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MWH CONSTRUCTORS 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 $24.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-03-27. End: 2008-10-24.

What is the track record of MWH Constructors Inc. on similar government contracts?

MWH Constructors Inc. has a history of performing large-scale construction projects for various government agencies, including the Department of Defense. Analyzing past performance on similar industrial building construction or military facility projects would reveal their reliability, quality of work, and adherence to schedules and budgets. A review of past contract performance evaluations (e.g., CPARS) would provide specific insights into their strengths and any areas of concern. Their successful completion of this PAFB facility suggests a positive performance history, but a broader analysis across multiple contracts is necessary for a comprehensive understanding of their capabilities and reliability.

How does the awarded price compare to industry benchmarks for similar construction projects?

The awarded price of $24.3 million for the construction of an industrial facility at PAFB needs to be benchmarked against similar projects in terms of size, complexity, and location. Factors such as square footage, type of construction (e.g., pre-engineered metal building vs. concrete structure), site preparation requirements, and prevailing labor costs in the Colorado region would influence the cost per square foot. Without specific details on the facility's specifications and comparable project data, a precise benchmark is difficult. However, the fact that it was awarded under full and open competition with multiple bidders suggests the price was likely competitive within the market at the time of award.

What were the primary risk indicators identified during the solicitation and award process?

For a fixed-price contract awarded through full and open competition, primary risk indicators often revolve around the contractor's technical capability, financial stability, and understanding of the project scope. Potential risks could include unforeseen site conditions, material price fluctuations (though mitigated by fixed price), labor availability, and adherence to stringent military construction standards and timelines. The contracting agency likely assessed these risks through the bidding process, evaluating each proposal based on technical merit, past performance, and price. The selection of MWH Constructors Inc. implies they were deemed to have adequately addressed these potential risks.

How effective was the project management and execution by MWH Constructors Inc. in delivering the facility?

The project's completion within the 577-day duration and the absence of significant cost overruns (implied by the final award amount matching the initial data) suggest effective project management and execution by MWH Constructors Inc. Successful delivery within these parameters indicates strong planning, resource allocation, and on-site supervision. Further assessment would involve reviewing any formal performance evaluations or post-project reviews conducted by the Department of the Army to confirm the quality of construction and overall client satisfaction.

What is the historical spending pattern for industrial building construction by the Department of the Army at PAFB or similar installations?

Historical spending on industrial building construction by the Department of the Army, particularly at installations like Peterson Air Force Base (PAFB), can vary significantly based on modernization needs, operational changes, and infrastructure upgrades. Analyzing spending trends over the past 5-10 years would reveal the frequency and average cost of such projects. This specific $24.3 million contract should be viewed within that broader context. If spending on similar facilities has been consistently high, it indicates a sustained need for infrastructure development. Conversely, if this is an outlier, it might represent a specific, large-scale initiative.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Industrial Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W9128F06R0015

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: MWH Global, Inc. (UEI: 801927492)

Address: 370 INTERLOCKEN BLVD, STE-300, BROOMFIELD, CO, 07

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,273,973

Exercised Options: $24,273,973

Current Obligation: $24,273,973

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W9128F06D0018

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline