GSA awards $2.9M generator replacement contract to JD Bravo Co Inc for Camden courthouse

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $2,914,260 ($2.9M)

Contractor: JD Bravo CO Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2025-02-26

End Date: 2026-04-24

Contract Duration: 422 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CAMDEN GENERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT, MITCHELL H COHEN US COURTHOUSE & ANNEX, CAMDEN, NJ. THIS AWARD IS FOR THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE EMERGENCY STANDBY GENERATOR AND ASSOCIATED TASKS.

Place of Performance

Location: CAMDEN, CAMDEN County, NEW JERSEY, 08102

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $2.9 million to JD BRAVO CO INC for work described as: CAMDEN GENERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT, MITCHELL H COHEN US COURTHOUSE & ANNEX, CAMDEN, NJ. THIS AWARD IS FOR THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE EMERGENCY STANDBY GENERATOR AND ASSOCIATED TASKS. Key points: 1. The contract focuses on essential infrastructure replacement, ensuring operational continuity for a federal facility. 2. The award was not competed, raising questions about potential price discovery and value for taxpayer funds. 3. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but the lack of competition limits benchmarking. 4. The project duration of 422 days suggests a complex scope of work for the generator system. 5. The General Services Administration (GSA) is the awarding agency, overseeing public buildings. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 indicates a focus on commercial building construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $2.91 million for a generator replacement project appears within a reasonable range for such infrastructure work, though a direct comparison is difficult without more specific project details. The firm fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to cap costs. However, the absence of a competitive bidding process prevents a robust assessment of whether this price represents optimal value for money compared to what could have been achieved in a more open market. Benchmarking against similar GSA projects for generator replacement would be necessary for a more definitive value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not open to competition from multiple bidders. The justification for this approach is not provided in the available data. Sole-source awards can sometimes be necessary for specialized services or urgent requirements, but they limit the government's ability to solicit the best possible pricing and terms through a competitive process. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from the price pressures that typically drive down costs when multiple companies vie for a contract.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not be receiving the best possible price due to the absence of a competitive bidding process. This could result in higher overall spending for this essential infrastructure project.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the users and operators of the Mitchell H. Cohen US Courthouse & Annex in Camden, NJ, who will benefit from reliable backup power. The services delivered include the removal and replacement of an emergency standby generator and associated tasks, ensuring critical facility functions during power outages. The geographic impact is localized to Camden, New Jersey, specifically at the federal courthouse and annex building. The project will likely involve skilled labor in the construction and electrical trades, potentially creating short-term employment opportunities in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to inflated pricing.
Sole-source award justification needs further review to ensure necessity.
Potential for scope creep or unforeseen issues in complex infrastructure projects.
Contract duration of over a year could indicate potential delays or complexities.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract type helps manage cost certainty.
Awarded by GSA, an agency with experience in federal building management.
Project addresses critical infrastructure needs for a federal facility.
Contract completion date provides a clear timeline for project delivery.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically addressing infrastructure upgrades for a federal government facility. The market for construction services, particularly for specialized equipment like emergency generators, is competitive. However, sole-source awards bypass typical market dynamics. Benchmarking this specific project's cost against similar generator replacement projects in federal courthouses or other public buildings across the country would provide a clearer picture of its value proposition. The overall construction market is influenced by factors such as material costs, labor availability, and regulatory requirements.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation is not a primary focus for this award, as the 'ss' (small business set-aside) and 'sb' (small business) flags are false. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that the prime contractor, JD Bravo Co Inc, is likely not a small business, and the contract was not specifically set aside to encourage small business involvement. Further investigation into JD Bravo Co Inc's size and subcontracting plans would be needed to fully assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily be managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically its Public Buildings Service. As a definitive contract, it is subject to standard federal procurement regulations and oversight mechanisms. Transparency regarding the justification for the sole-source award and ongoing project progress reports would be key indicators of accountability. While not explicitly stated, Inspector General oversight may be applicable depending on the nature of any potential issues or audits that arise during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Maintenance Contracts
Emergency Power Systems Procurement
General Services Administration Construction Projects
Courthouse Infrastructure Upgrades
Public Building Service Projects

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competitive bidding
Potential for cost overruns without competition
Infrastructure project complexity

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $2.9 million to JD BRAVO CO INC. CAMDEN GENERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT, MITCHELL H COHEN US COURTHOUSE & ANNEX, CAMDEN, NJ. THIS AWARD IS FOR THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE EMERGENCY STANDBY GENERATOR AND ASSOCIATED TASKS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is JD BRAVO CO INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Public Buildings Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $2.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-02-26. End: 2026-04-24.

What is the track record of JD Bravo Co Inc in performing similar federal construction projects, particularly those involving generator replacements?

Information regarding JD Bravo Co Inc's specific track record with federal projects, especially generator replacements, is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing past performance evaluations, contract history with federal agencies, and any reported issues or successes on similar projects. Understanding their experience with projects of comparable scale and complexity, and their adherence to timelines and budgets on previous federal contracts, is crucial for evaluating their capability to successfully execute the Camden generator replacement project. Without this specific performance data, the assessment relies heavily on the assumption that the GSA conducted due diligence prior to the sole-source award.

How does the awarded amount of $2.91 million compare to the typical costs for similar generator replacement projects in federal courthouses?

The awarded amount of $2.91 million for the Camden generator replacement project is a significant investment. To benchmark this value effectively, it would need to be compared against a database of similar federal courthouse generator replacement projects, considering factors like the generator's capacity (kW), age and condition of the existing system, site complexity, and any required electrical infrastructure upgrades. Without access to such comparative data, it's challenging to definitively state whether this price is high, low, or average. The firm fixed-price nature suggests an attempt to control costs, but the lack of competition limits the ability to ascertain if it represents the best possible market price.

What are the specific risks associated with a sole-source award for this type of infrastructure project?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source award for infrastructure projects like the Camden generator replacement is the potential for paying a non-competitive price. Without multiple bidders vying for the contract, there is less pressure on the contractor to offer the lowest possible cost, potentially leading to taxpayer funds being used less efficiently. Additionally, sole-source awards can sometimes mask underlying issues or a lack of available qualified contractors, which could indicate broader market challenges. There's also a risk that the government may not receive the most innovative solutions or the best value if a broader pool of contractors isn't considered. Transparency in the justification for the sole-source award is critical to mitigating these risks.

What is the expected impact of this generator replacement on the operational effectiveness of the Mitchell H. Cohen US Courthouse & Annex?

The replacement of the emergency standby generator is critical for ensuring the continued operational effectiveness of the Mitchell H. Cohen US Courthouse & Annex. This system provides backup power during outages, which is essential for maintaining security, supporting IT infrastructure, and allowing court proceedings and other essential government functions to continue uninterrupted. An aging or malfunctioning generator poses a significant risk to these operations. Therefore, this project directly supports the facility's resilience and reliability, preventing disruptions that could have serious consequences for the administration of justice and government services housed within the building.

What has been the historical spending pattern for generator maintenance and replacement at GSA-managed facilities like the Camden courthouse?

Historical spending patterns for generator maintenance and replacement at GSA-managed facilities are not detailed in the provided data. However, it is generally understood that federal agencies like the GSA allocate significant budgets towards maintaining critical infrastructure, including backup power systems. Regular maintenance is crucial to extend the life of existing generators, while periodic replacement is necessary as they age or become obsolete. Understanding past spending on similar projects across GSA's portfolio could reveal trends in project costs, contractor performance, and the frequency of such replacements, providing context for the current $2.91 million award.

Are there any specific performance metrics or milestones defined in the contract to measure the success of the generator replacement project?

The provided data does not specify the performance metrics or milestones included in the contract for the Camden generator replacement project. Typically, federal contracts, especially those for construction and infrastructure, outline key performance indicators (KPIs), delivery schedules, quality standards, and acceptance criteria. These are essential for tracking progress, ensuring quality, and determining final payment. A firm fixed-price contract often ties payments to the achievement of specific milestones. Further review of the contract document itself would be necessary to identify the precise performance metrics and milestones governing this project.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR NONBUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: 47PD0224R0069

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 136 PENNSYLVANIA AVE, MALVERN, PA, 19355

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, 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: $2,914,260

Exercised Options: $2,914,260

Current Obligation: $2,914,260

Actual Outlays: $128,353

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline