GSA's $5.8M courthouse design contract awarded to Duvall Decker Architects, P.A. for Mississippi project

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $5,775,805 ($5.8M)

Contractor: Duvall Decker Architects, P.A

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2018-02-15

End Date: 2026-06-26

Contract Duration: 3,053 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 29

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF DESIGN OF A NEW US COURTHOUSE IN GREENVILLE, MS.

Place of Performance

Location: JACKSON, HINDS County, MISSISSIPPI, 39216

State: Mississippi Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $5.8 million to DUVALL DECKER ARCHITECTS, P.A for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF DESIGN OF A NEW US COURTHOUSE IN GREENVILLE, MS. Key points: 1. The contract value appears reasonable for architectural services on a new federal courthouse. 2. Full and open competition after exclusion of sources suggests a deliberate procurement strategy. 3. The definitive contract type with a firm fixed price indicates clear cost expectations. 4. The project duration of over 3000 days highlights the long-term nature of courthouse construction. 5. The contract is for architectural services, a critical component of public infrastructure development.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $5.8 million for architectural services for a new courthouse in Greenville, MS, seems within a reasonable range for such a significant public infrastructure project. Benchmarking against similar courthouse design projects would provide a more precise assessment, but the scale of the undertaking suggests this is a fair investment. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract helps control costs for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This specific procurement method implies that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources were initially excluded, possibly due to specific qualifications or prior involvement. The number of bidders (29) indicates a healthy level of interest, suggesting that the exclusion did not unduly limit the pool of qualified firms. This approach can sometimes be used to ensure specialized expertise is considered while still allowing for broad participation.

Taxpayer Impact: The level of competition, despite the exclusion of some sources, suggests that taxpayers likely received competitive pricing. The significant number of bidders indicates that multiple firms were vying for the contract, which generally drives down costs.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the citizens of Greenville, Mississippi, who will gain access to a new federal courthouse. The services delivered include essential architectural design for a critical piece of public infrastructure. The geographic impact is localized to Greenville, Mississippi, but the project contributes to the federal judicial system's infrastructure nationwide. The project will likely involve local and regional architectural and engineering firms, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in the design sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if design complexities are underestimated during the long project duration.
Risk of delays if unforeseen site conditions or regulatory hurdles arise during the design phase.
Dependence on the contractor's ability to maintain architectural quality and adherence to federal standards throughout the extensive design period.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
A significant number of bidders (29) suggests a competitive process that likely secured a qualified contractor.
The long duration allows for thorough design development and planning, potentially leading to a higher quality final product.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Architectural Services sector (NAICS code 541310), which is a key component of the broader Construction and Engineering industry. This sector is characterized by specialized firms providing design, planning, and oversight for various building projects. The market size for federal architectural services is substantial, driven by the continuous need for new facilities and renovations across government agencies. This courthouse design contract represents a typical investment in public infrastructure, aligning with government spending priorities for judicial facilities.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus for this specific contract, as the 'small business set-aside' flag is false. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses within the provided data. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular award appears limited, though the prime contractor may engage small businesses in their subcontracting efforts.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically the Public Buildings Service. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified design within the agreed-upon cost. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases and reporting requirements. The Inspector General of the GSA would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Federal Courthouse Construction Projects
General Services Administration (GSA) Facility Design Contracts
Architectural and Engineering Services for Public Infrastructure
Public Buildings Service Projects

Risk Flags

Long project duration may increase risk of scope creep or design obsolescence.
Procurement method 'after exclusion of sources' warrants scrutiny for potential impact on competition breadth.
Contractor's specific experience with federal courthouses needs verification for optimal project outcome.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $5.8 million to DUVALL DECKER ARCHITECTS, P.A. IGF::OT::IGF DESIGN OF A NEW US COURTHOUSE IN GREENVILLE, MS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DUVALL DECKER ARCHITECTS, P.A.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $5.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-02-15. End: 2026-06-26.

What is the track record of Duvall Decker Architects, P.A. in designing federal facilities?

Information regarding Duvall Decker Architects, P.A.'s specific track record in designing federal facilities is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their past performance on similar government contracts, including any federal courthouse projects or other public buildings. This would involve examining client feedback, project completion history, and any documented performance issues or commendations. Without this specific data, it's difficult to definitively assess their experience and suitability for designing a new federal courthouse.

How does the cost of this architectural design contract compare to similar federal courthouse projects?

Direct cost comparison is challenging without access to a database of similar federal courthouse design contracts, including their size, complexity, and location. However, the approximate $5.8 million value for a new courthouse design appears to be a significant investment, consistent with the scale and importance of such a project. Factors influencing cost include the square footage of the planned courthouse, the specific functional requirements (e.g., number of courtrooms, security features), and the prevailing architectural service rates in Mississippi. A detailed benchmark analysis would require comparing this contract's cost per square foot or cost per functional unit against a portfolio of comparable federal projects.

What are the primary risks associated with a long-duration architectural design contract for a federal courthouse?

The primary risks associated with a long-duration architectural design contract, such as this 3053-day project, include potential cost escalation if not managed tightly, scope creep where requirements evolve significantly over time, and the risk of design obsolescence if technology or building codes change substantially during the design phase. Contractor performance degradation over an extended period is also a concern. For the government, the risk lies in ensuring the design remains relevant and cost-effective throughout its development. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust contract management, phased reviews, and clear change order processes.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method in ensuring value for taxpayers?

The effectiveness of 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' in ensuring value for taxpayers is nuanced. On one hand, it aims to broaden the competitive pool beyond a very narrow initial set, potentially leading to better pricing and innovation. The fact that 29 bidders participated suggests a reasonably competitive environment. However, the 'exclusion of sources' aspect means that not all potentially capable firms were considered from the outset. If the excluded sources were highly competitive or offered unique value, taxpayers might have missed out on even better proposals. The ultimate value depends on how well the selected firm performs and whether the exclusion criteria were justified and transparent.

What is the historical spending pattern for architectural services by the General Services Administration?

Historical spending patterns for architectural services by the General Services Administration (GSA) typically show consistent investment in designing and overseeing the construction and renovation of federal buildings. The GSA is responsible for a vast portfolio of government real estate, necessitating ongoing expenditures on design and engineering. Annual spending can fluctuate based on major construction initiatives, infrastructure modernization programs, and specific agency needs. While the exact historical figures for GSA's architectural service spending are not provided here, it is generally understood to be a significant and recurring budget item, reflecting the continuous demand for federal facility development and maintenance.

What are the implications of a firm fixed-price contract for this courthouse design project?

A firm fixed-price (FFP) contract for this courthouse design project implies that the contractor, Duvall Decker Architects, P.A., assumes the primary risk for cost overruns. The agreed-upon price is fixed, regardless of the contractor's actual costs incurred during the design phase. This provides the government, and by extension taxpayers, with significant cost certainty. The GSA knows the maximum amount it will pay for the architectural services. However, for an FFP contract to be successful, the scope of work must be clearly defined and stable. If significant changes are required, they typically necessitate formal contract modifications, which can add administrative burden and potentially increase the overall cost if not managed carefully.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Architectural Services

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: ARCHITECT-ENGINEER FAR 6.102

Solicitation ID: GS-07-P-17-HH-C-0TBD

Offers Received: 29

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2915 N STATE ST, JACKSON, MS, 39216

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $5,775,805

Exercised Options: $5,775,805

Current Obligation: $5,775,805

Actual Outlays: $2,628,563

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline