DoD's $250M Barracks Construction Contract Awarded to Clark Caddell A Joint Venture

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $250,663,249 ($250.7M)

Contractor: Clark Caddell a Joint Venture

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-09-27

End Date: 2009-10-09

Contract Duration: 743 days

Daily Burn Rate: $337.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: TRAINEE BARRACKS COMPLEXES, BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS AND PARADE FIELD

Place of Performance

Location: FORT BENNING, CHATTAHOOCHEE County, GEORGIA, 31905

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $250.7 million to CLARK CADDELL A JOINT VENTURE for work described as: TRAINEE BARRACKS COMPLEXES, BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS AND PARADE FIELD Key points: 1. The contract value of $250.7 million represents a significant investment in military infrastructure. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor. 4. The project duration of 743 days indicates a substantial construction timeline. 5. The contract was awarded to a joint venture, potentially pooling expertise for a large-scale project. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 points to commercial and institutional building construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific cost breakdowns or comparable project data. However, the $250.7 million price tag for constructing trainee barracks, brigade headquarters, and a parade field suggests a substantial undertaking. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the awarded price was deemed fair and reasonable by the contracting officer at the time of award, based on the contractor's proposed costs and the competitive landscape. Further analysis would require comparing unit costs for similar military construction projects or civilian building projects of comparable scale and complexity.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 7 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this significant construction project. A competitive bidding process generally leads to better price discovery and can drive down costs for the government, as contractors vie to offer the most attractive terms.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition for this contract likely resulted in a more competitive price for taxpayers, as multiple firms were incentivized to offer their best value proposals.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are U.S. Army trainees and personnel who will utilize the new barracks and facilities. The contract delivers essential infrastructure improvements, including barracks, headquarters, and a parade field. The project is geographically located in Georgia (ST, SN), impacting the local construction workforce and economy. The construction activities will likely create numerous jobs in the skilled trades and related support industries within Georgia.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen construction challenges arise, despite the firm-fixed-price structure.
Ensuring timely completion within the 743-day duration is critical to avoid impacting training schedules.
Quality control and adherence to military construction standards need rigorous oversight.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive pricing environment.
Firm-fixed-price contract type transfers significant cost risk to the contractor.
The joint venture structure may bring specialized expertise to manage a complex project.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the commercial and institutional building construction sector, a broad category encompassing the erection of non-residential buildings. The Department of Defense is a major client in this sector, frequently awarding large contracts for military base construction, upgrades, and housing. The market size for such projects is substantial, driven by ongoing military readiness requirements and infrastructure modernization efforts. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale military construction projects or significant public works projects within the construction industry.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). While the prime contractor is a joint venture, it is unclear if any small businesses are involved as subcontractors. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be necessary to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem. Large federal construction contracts can sometimes offer opportunities for small businesses through subcontracting, but this is not guaranteed without specific provisions.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Army contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified facilities within the agreed-upon price and timeframe. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though detailed project progress and specific oversight activities may not be publicly disclosed.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction, Army
Barracks Construction Projects
Defense Infrastructure Modernization
General Building Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost escalation despite fixed-price contract if unforeseen issues arise.
Risk of project delays impacting military training schedules.
Ensuring adherence to stringent military construction quality standards.
Contractor financial stability and performance risk.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $250.7 million to CLARK CADDELL A JOINT VENTURE. TRAINEE BARRACKS COMPLEXES, BRIGADE HEADQUARTERS AND PARADE FIELD

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CLARK CADDELL A JOINT VENTURE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $250.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-09-27. End: 2009-10-09.

What is the track record of Clark Caddell A Joint Venture on similar large-scale federal construction projects?

Clark Caddell A Joint Venture's track record on similar large-scale federal construction projects would need to be thoroughly reviewed. As a joint venture, its performance is a composite of its constituent members' capabilities and past project execution. Key indicators to examine would include their history with Department of Defense contracts, specifically within the Army, and their experience with constructing military barracks, headquarters, and related infrastructure. Evaluating their on-time and on-budget delivery rates, safety records, and any history of contract disputes or performance issues on comparable projects would provide crucial insights into their reliability and capability to execute this $250.7 million contract successfully.

How does the awarded price of $250.7 million compare to similar military barracks construction projects?

Directly comparing the $250.7 million award to similar military barracks construction projects requires access to detailed cost data for comparable projects, which is often not publicly available. However, a preliminary assessment can be made by considering the scope: trainee barracks, brigade headquarters, and a parade field. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract suggests the government believed this price was competitive at the time of award. To perform a robust benchmark, one would need to identify projects of similar size, complexity, and location, and then normalize for factors like inflation, specific site conditions, and the exact mix of facilities. Without such granular data, a definitive value-for-money assessment relative to peers remains challenging.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for a project of this magnitude and duration?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract for a project of this magnitude ($250.7 million) and duration (743 days) lies with the contractor, Clark Caddell A Joint Venture. While FFP shifts cost overrun risk away from the government, the contractor faces potential financial losses if actual costs exceed their bid price due to unforeseen issues. These could include unexpected site conditions, material price escalations, labor shortages, or design changes. The government's risk is primarily related to contractor performance; if the contractor struggles financially or operationally, project delays, quality issues, or even default could occur, impacting military readiness and requiring government intervention or re-procurement.

How effective are the competition dynamics (7 bidders) in ensuring optimal value for taxpayers on this contract?

The presence of seven bidders for this $250.7 million construction contract suggests a reasonably competitive environment, which is generally beneficial for taxpayers. A larger pool of bidders increases the likelihood that contractors will submit more competitive pricing to win the award. This dynamic encourages efficiency and cost-consciousness among the bidding firms. However, the effectiveness in ensuring optimal value also depends on the quality and experience of the bidders. If some bidders lacked the necessary qualifications or experience, the competition might be less robust than the number of bids suggests. Rigorous evaluation criteria by the Department of the Army are crucial to ensure the lowest price is not achieved at the expense of quality or long-term value.

What are the potential implications of the 743-day duration on the overall program effectiveness and cost?

A duration of 743 days (approximately two years) for constructing trainee barracks, brigade headquarters, and a parade field is substantial and carries several implications. Programmatically, it means that the intended benefits of improved facilities will be delayed, potentially impacting training capacity or quality until completion. From a cost perspective, a longer duration increases the contractor's exposure to risks like material price fluctuations and labor market changes, which could have been factored into their bid. For the government, extended project timelines can also lead to indirect costs, such as maintaining temporary facilities or potential disruptions to operational planning. Efficient project management and minimizing delays are crucial to realizing the value of this investment within the planned timeframe.

What is the significance of the contract being awarded to a joint venture for this type of construction?

Awarding a contract of this scale ($250.7 million) to a joint venture (JV) is often significant because it allows multiple companies to pool their resources, expertise, and bonding capacity to undertake projects that might be too large or complex for a single entity. For the Department of the Army, a JV can bring together specialized skills (e.g., one partner might excel in design-build, another in large-scale concrete work) and potentially offer a more competitive bid by sharing overhead costs. It can also be a mechanism for larger firms to partner with smaller or more specialized firms. The government's assessment would focus on the combined capabilities and financial stability of the JV partners to ensure successful project execution.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912HN07R0042

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2502 N ROCKY POINT DR, TAMPA, FL, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $250,663,249

Exercised Options: $250,663,249

Current Obligation: $250,663,249

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912HN07D0048

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline