VA awards $20M contract for CLC Building 60 construction and renovation to Floyd Construction Corp

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,988,777 ($20.0M)

Contractor: Floyd Construction Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs

Start Date: 2025-01-07

End Date: 2026-12-03

Contract Duration: 695 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCT ADDITION AND RENOVATE CLC BUILDING 60

Place of Performance

Location: WICHITA, SEDGWICK County, KANSAS, 67218

State: Kansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Veterans Affairs obligated $20.0 million to FLOYD CONSTRUCTION CORP for work described as: CONSTRUCT ADDITION AND RENOVATE CLC BUILDING 60 Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a large-scale construction project of this nature. 2. Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process was utilized. 3. The definitive contract type indicates a clear scope of work and pricing. 4. Project duration of nearly two years suggests a significant undertaking. 5. The fixed-price contract type shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor. 6. Location in Kansas may indicate a specific regional need for facility upgrades.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $19.99 million for the construction and renovation of a CLC building is within a typical range for such projects. Benchmarking against similar VA facility construction contracts would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The fixed-price nature of the contract is generally favorable for the government, as it caps the total cost. However, the absence of detailed cost breakdowns makes a granular price assessment challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition after exclusion of sources, indicating that multiple potential bidders were solicited and allowed to submit proposals. The presence of two bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and better value for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages a wider range of contractors to bid, potentially driving down costs and ensuring the government receives the best possible price.

Public Impact

Veterans will benefit from improved facilities at the CLC. The project will deliver construction and renovation services for a critical healthcare infrastructure. The geographic impact is localized to Kansas, where the facility is located. The construction and renovation activities will likely create jobs in the local Kansas workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if renovation requirements are not precisely defined.
Risk of delays due to unforeseen site conditions during construction.
Dependence on the contractor's ability to manage subcontractors effectively.

Positive Signals

Fixed-price contract limits the government's exposure to cost overruns.
Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process.
The contractor, Floyd Construction Corp., has experience in commercial construction.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the construction industry. Federal spending in this sector often supports infrastructure development, facility upgrades, and specialized construction needs for government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the cost per square foot or per project for similar government-owned or leased building renovations and new constructions.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate any specific small business set-aside. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that the primary focus was on selecting the most qualified bidder through open competition, and the impact on the small business ecosystem will depend on whether Floyd Construction Corp. utilizes small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of Veterans Affairs contracting officers and project managers. Accountability measures are inherent in the fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified work within the agreed budget. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed project progress reports may not always be publicly available. The Inspector General's office may conduct audits or investigations if concerns arise regarding performance or financial integrity.

Related Government Programs

VA Medical Facility Construction
Government Building Renovations
Healthcare Infrastructure Projects
Department of Veterans Affairs Capital Investments

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if scope is not clearly defined.
Risk of project delays due to unforeseen site conditions.
Limited competition (2 bidders) may impact price discovery.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Veterans Affairs awarded $20.0 million to FLOYD CONSTRUCTION CORP. CONSTRUCT ADDITION AND RENOVATE CLC BUILDING 60

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FLOYD CONSTRUCTION CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Veterans Affairs (Department of Veterans Affairs).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-01-07. End: 2026-12-03.

What is the track record of Floyd Construction Corp. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Veterans Affairs?

Floyd Construction Corp. has a history of performing construction services, including commercial and institutional building projects. While specific details on their past federal contract performance, especially with the VA, require deeper database analysis, their selection for this significant project suggests they meet the necessary qualifications and experience. A review of their past performance ratings, any past performance issues, and the types of federal projects they have completed would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and expertise. Examining their award history for similar-sized projects and their adherence to schedules and budgets on those contracts would be crucial for a comprehensive assessment.

How does the awarded amount compare to similar VA construction and renovation projects in terms of cost per square foot or project complexity?

Without specific details on the square footage or the exact scope of renovation for CLC Building 60, a precise cost-per-square-foot comparison is difficult. However, the $19.99 million award for a definitive contract suggests a substantial project. To benchmark effectively, one would need to analyze contracts for similar VA facility upgrades or new constructions in comparable geographic regions. Factors such as the age of the existing structure, the extent of modernization required, and specific building codes or healthcare standards applicable to CLC facilities would influence the overall cost. A preliminary assessment suggests the price is within a reasonable range for a project of this magnitude, but detailed comparative analysis is recommended.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with this contract, considering its type and duration?

Key risk indicators for this contract include the potential for unforeseen site conditions during renovation, which could lead to scope creep and cost increases, despite the fixed-price nature. The project's duration of nearly two years also increases the risk of material price fluctuations or labor availability issues. As a definitive contract, the clarity of the initial scope is paramount; any ambiguity could lead to disputes. Furthermore, the performance of Floyd Construction Corp. and its subcontractors, particularly in managing complex construction schedules and quality control, represents a significant risk factor. The VA's oversight capacity to monitor progress and address issues promptly is also a critical element in mitigating these risks.

How effective is the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' method in ensuring competitive pricing for construction projects of this scale?

The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' method is designed to maximize competition by soliciting proposals from all responsible sources. While it aims for broad participation, the 'exclusion of sources' aspect might imply that certain pre-qualification criteria were applied, potentially narrowing the field. For a project of this scale ($19.99 million), this method is generally effective in attracting qualified bidders. However, the fact that only two bids were received suggests that the market for contractors capable of undertaking such a project might be limited, or that the solicitation process itself may have inadvertently discouraged broader participation. A higher number of bidders typically correlates with more aggressive pricing.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar construction and renovation projects by the Department of Veterans Affairs?

The Department of Veterans Affairs consistently allocates significant funds towards the construction, renovation, and maintenance of its vast network of medical centers and facilities. Historical spending patterns reveal a continuous need for infrastructure upgrades to meet evolving healthcare demands, technological advancements, and aging building stock. The VA's capital investment budget typically includes substantial allocations for major construction projects, often in the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars annually, spread across various regions and facility types. Analyzing past VA construction awards for similar CLC buildings or healthcare facilities would reveal trends in contract values, project durations, and the types of contractors frequently engaged.

What are the potential implications of this contract on the local Kansas construction market and workforce?

This $19.99 million contract is likely to have a positive impact on the local Kansas construction market and workforce. It will create demand for skilled labor, including carpenters, electricians, plumbers, and general construction workers, potentially leading to job creation and increased economic activity in the region. Floyd Construction Corp., as the prime contractor, may also engage local subcontractors, further stimulating the local economy. The duration of the project (nearly two years) suggests sustained employment opportunities. However, the extent of the impact will depend on whether the prime contractor prioritizes local hiring and subcontracting.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID

Solicitation ID: 36C77624B0019

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12000 E 53RD ST N, WICHITA, KS, 67226

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $19,988,777

Exercised Options: $19,988,777

Current Obligation: $19,988,777

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline