NEESER CONSTRUCTION INC awarded $44.7M contract for Army construction services in Alaska

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $44,702,441 ($44.7M)

Contractor: Neeser Construction, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-04-14

End Date: 2009-04-12

Contract Duration: 1,459 days

Daily Burn Rate: $30.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Place of Performance

Location: FORT WAINWRIGHT, FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR County, ALASKA, 99703

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $44.7 million to NEESER CONSTRUCTION, INC for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of 1459 days indicates a significant, long-term project. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type helps manage cost certainty for the government. 4. The award was made by the Department of the Army, a major federal agency. 5. The contract was awarded in April 2005 and completed in April 2009. 6. The contract was not set aside for small businesses.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $44.7 million for construction services over approximately four years requires benchmarking against similar projects to assess value for money. Without specific details on the scope of work, it's challenging to provide a precise value assessment. However, the firm fixed-price nature suggests an attempt to control costs. Further analysis would involve comparing the per-square-foot cost or cost per unit of service to industry standards for similar military construction projects in Alaska.

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 a bid. The presence of 6 bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition for this project. A higher number of bidders generally leads to more competitive pricing and a wider range of solutions, potentially benefiting the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive bidding process for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of the Army and its personnel stationed in Alaska, who would have received improved or new construction facilities. The services delivered were construction-related, likely involving the building, renovation, or maintenance of military infrastructure. The geographic impact is specifically limited to Alaska (ST: AK, SN: ALASKA), where the construction activities took place. The contract supported jobs in the construction sector, potentially benefiting local and regional workforces in Alaska.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed price did not adequately account for unforeseen construction challenges in Alaska's environment.
Risk of delays due to the remote location and logistical complexities of construction in Alaska.
Ensuring the quality of construction meets military standards over the long term.
Adequacy of the competition to ensure the best possible price for the taxpayer.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract was successfully completed, suggesting project management was effective.
The award was made by a major federal agency (Department of the Army).

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically related to government infrastructure development. The market for federal construction contracts is substantial, with significant annual spending across various agencies. Projects in remote or challenging environments like Alaska often command higher costs due to logistical and environmental factors. Benchmarking would involve comparing this contract's cost to other military construction projects in similar geographic and climatic conditions.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it indicate any specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This means the primary award went to a large business, and the direct impact on the small business ecosystem through this specific award is likely minimal unless NEESER CONSTRUCTION, INC. subcontracted portions to small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the contracting officers and relevant project managers within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract structure, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed budget. Transparency is generally provided through contract databases like FPDS, which record award details, though detailed project performance data may be less accessible.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
Department of Defense Facilities Management
Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to remote location and environmental factors.
Risk of schedule delays associated with Alaskan construction.
Ensuring long-term quality and durability of constructed facilities.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $44.7 million to NEESER CONSTRUCTION, INC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is NEESER 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 $44.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-04-14. End: 2009-04-12.

What was the specific scope of construction services provided under this contract?

The provided data does not detail the specific scope of construction services. However, given the award was to NEESER CONSTRUCTION, INC. by the Department of the Army and the contract value of $44.7 million over nearly four years, it likely involved significant infrastructure development or renovation. This could range from building new barracks, administrative facilities, maintenance depots, or upgrading existing structures to meet modern military standards in Alaska. The firm fixed-price nature suggests a well-defined scope was established prior to bidding to ensure cost control.

How does the $44.7 million contract value compare to similar military construction projects in Alaska?

Benchmarking the $44.7 million contract value requires detailed comparison with similar military construction projects in Alaska, considering factors like project type (e.g., barracks, hangar, road), size (square footage), complexity, and the specific year of award. Construction costs in Alaska are generally higher than in the contiguous United States due to logistical challenges, climate, and specialized labor requirements. Without specific project details, a direct comparison is difficult, but the value suggests a substantial undertaking. For instance, a large barracks complex or a significant infrastructure upgrade could easily reach this figure in such a demanding environment.

What were the primary risks associated with this construction contract in Alaska?

Construction projects in Alaska present unique risks, including extreme weather conditions (cold, snow, permafrost), limited daylight hours during winter, and significant logistical challenges related to transportation of materials and personnel. Environmental considerations, such as protecting sensitive ecosystems and managing waste, are also critical. Furthermore, the availability of skilled labor in remote areas can be a risk, potentially impacting schedules and costs. The firm fixed-price contract structure shifts much of the cost risk to the contractor, but scope creep or unforeseen site conditions could still lead to claims or disputes.

What was the track record of NEESER CONSTRUCTION, INC. prior to this award?

The provided data does not include information on NEESER CONSTRUCTION, INC.'s track record prior to this award. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their past performance on federal and commercial contracts, including their history of on-time delivery, budget adherence, and quality of work. Examining their portfolio of previous projects, particularly those in similar environments or of comparable scale, would provide insight into their capabilities and reliability as a contractor for this significant Department of the Army project.

How effective was the competition in ensuring value for money for this contract?

The contract was awarded under full and open competition with 6 bidders, which generally indicates a healthy level of competition conducive to achieving value for money. A larger number of bidders typically drives down prices and encourages innovation. While the firm fixed-price structure helps lock in costs, the effectiveness of the competition in securing the best possible price depends on the clarity of the solicitation, the competitiveness of the market for the specific services required, and the evaluation criteria used. Without knowing the bid prices of the other competitors, it's hard to definitively state the exact value achieved, but the process itself suggests an effort to maximize taxpayer benefit.

What are the historical spending patterns for similar construction contracts by the Department of the Army in Alaska?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for similar construction contracts by the Department of the Army in Alaska would involve examining contract databases for awards made over several fiscal years. This would reveal trends in contract values, types of projects undertaken, average contract durations, and the number of bidders per solicitation. Such analysis could identify periods of increased or decreased investment in Alaskan infrastructure, common project scopes, and the typical cost ranges for different types of construction. This context helps determine if the $44.7 million award was within the expected range for similar undertakings during that timeframe.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2501 BLUEBERRY RD, ANCHORAGE, AK, 00

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DACA8502D0012

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline