DOD's $19.8M Commercial Building Construction Contract Awarded to Technologists Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,786,361 ($19.8M)

Contractor: Technologists Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-08-08

End Date: 2013-02-04

Contract Duration: 911 days

Daily Burn Rate: $21.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: FACILITIES: PROJECT E10-015

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $19.8 million to TECHNOLOGISTS INC for work described as: FACILITIES: PROJECT E10-015 Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in facilities infrastructure. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding environment. 3. Fixed-price contract type may offer cost certainty for the government. 4. Contract duration of 911 days indicates a substantial project timeline. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Army, aligning with defense infrastructure needs. 6. The project falls under commercial and institutional building construction. 7. No small business set-aside was utilized for this contract.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of approximately $19.8 million for commercial building construction appears within a reasonable range for a project of this scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects for the Department of Defense would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the initial pricing was competitive. However, without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to industry standards for similar construction projects, a definitive assessment of cost-effectiveness is challenging.

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 fact that it was competed openly suggests that multiple contractors likely vied for the award. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and can lead to more competitive pricing for the government. The specific number of bidders is not provided, which would offer further insight into the intensity of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and encourage innovation, leading to better value for public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and its personnel who will utilize the constructed facilities. The contract delivers essential commercial and institutional building construction services. The geographic impact is localized to the site of the construction project, supporting military operations or administrative functions. The project likely involves a significant workforce of construction laborers, tradespeople, and project managers, contributing to employment in the construction sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if initial estimates were inaccurate, despite fixed-price terms.
Risk of project delays impacting operational readiness or facility availability.
Quality control concerns inherent in large-scale construction projects.
Dependency on the contractor's financial stability and performance capabilities.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process.
Award to an established entity (Technologists Inc.) may indicate prior experience.
Project duration aligns with the complexity of large construction endeavors.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a vital part of the broader construction industry. This sector encompasses the building of non-residential structures such as offices, retail spaces, educational facilities, and government buildings. Spending in this area is often driven by infrastructure upgrades, modernization efforts, and the need for new facilities to support government operations. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the average cost per square foot for similar government construction projects or the total annual federal outlays for construction services.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements mentioned. This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity, and opportunities for small businesses would likely be through direct subcontracting by Technologists Inc., if they choose to engage them. The absence of a set-aside means that the direct award did not prioritize small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program office within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, which hold the contractor responsible for delivering the project within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Construction
Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts
General Services Administration (GSA) Public Buildings Service
Federal Buildings Fund Projects

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns despite fixed-price contract
Risk of project delays impacting operational readiness
Quality control and assurance challenges in large construction projects
Contractor performance and financial stability risks
Unforeseen site conditions or regulatory changes

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $19.8 million to TECHNOLOGISTS INC. FACILITIES: PROJECT E10-015

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TECHNOLOGISTS 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 $19.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-08-08. End: 2013-02-04.

What is the track record of Technologists Inc. in performing similar large-scale construction contracts for the Department of Defense?

Assessing the track record of Technologists Inc. requires a deep dive into their past performance on similar contracts. This would involve reviewing their contract history, including any awards for commercial and institutional building construction, particularly for federal agencies like the Department of Defense. Key metrics to examine would include on-time delivery, adherence to budget (especially relevant for fixed-price contracts), quality of work, and any instances of disputes, claims, or contract terminations. Information from sources like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) would be invaluable. A history of successful project completion on similar projects would indicate a lower risk for this current contract, while a pattern of issues might raise concerns about the contractor's capability and reliability.

How does the awarded price of $19.8 million compare to industry benchmarks for similar construction projects of this scale and complexity?

To benchmark the $19.8 million award, one would need to compare it against industry data for commercial and institutional building construction projects of similar size, scope, and complexity, particularly those undertaken by government entities. This comparison could involve metrics such as cost per square foot, cost per unit of functionality (e.g., cost per bed for a barracks, cost per office space), or total project cost relative to the project duration. Data from construction cost estimating services, industry associations, or publicly available data on similar federal projects would be essential. If the awarded price is significantly higher than comparable projects, it could indicate potential overpricing or unique project requirements. Conversely, a price below benchmarks might suggest exceptional value or potentially underestimated costs.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with this specific contract, considering its fixed-price nature and duration?

The primary risk indicators for this contract, despite its firm fixed-price nature, include potential for scope creep if not managed tightly, contractor performance issues leading to delays or quality defects, and unforeseen site conditions that could impact costs or schedule, even if borne by the contractor. The long duration of 911 days (approximately 2.5 years) increases the risk of material price fluctuations, labor availability issues, and potential changes in regulatory requirements. While the fixed price shifts cost risk to the contractor, the government still faces risks related to schedule delays impacting operational needs and the potential for contractor default or bankruptcy. Robust project management, clear communication channels, and diligent oversight are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' approach in ensuring competitive pricing for large federal construction contracts?

The 'full and open competition' approach is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring competitive pricing for large federal construction contracts. By allowing all responsible sources to submit proposals, it maximizes the pool of potential bidders, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving multiple competitive offers. This competition drives down prices as contractors vie for the award. However, the effectiveness is contingent on the clarity and completeness of the solicitation documents, the fairness of the evaluation criteria, and the actual number of qualified bidders that participate. If the market for specialized construction services is limited, even full and open competition might result in fewer bids than desired, potentially impacting price competitiveness.

What are the historical spending patterns for commercial and institutional building construction by the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for commercial and institutional building construction by the Department of the Army would involve examining aggregate data over several fiscal years. This would reveal trends in annual spending, the average value of awarded contracts, the types of construction projects most frequently funded, and the primary contracting vehicles used (e.g., Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contracts, specific project awards). Understanding these patterns helps in contextualizing the $19.8 million award – is it typical, an outlier, or part of an increasing/decreasing trend? It also informs budget forecasting and resource allocation for future infrastructure needs within the Army. Data from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) is essential for this analysis.

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: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W917PM07R0105

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1700 N MOORE ST, ARLINGTON, VA, 22209

Business Categories: Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Other Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $19,786,361

Exercised Options: $19,786,361

Current Obligation: $19,786,361

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W917PM07D0016

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline