Fidelis-BBD, LLC awarded $6.8M contract for Morgan Mountain Road landslide repair in Arkansas

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $6,805,401 ($6.8M)

Contractor: Fidelis-Bbd, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2025-08-01

End Date: 2028-08-07

Contract Duration: 1,102 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: PROJECT AR ERFO FS 2020-1(1): THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF THE REPAIR OF A LANDSLIDE ON MORGAN MOUNTAIN ROAD, WITHIN THE OZARK NATIONAL FOREST. THE WORK INCLUDES GRADING, DRAINAGE, MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH RETAINING WALL, RIPRAP, AGGREGATE BASE CO

Place of Performance

Location: COMBS, MADISON County, ARKANSAS, 72721

State: Arkansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $6.8 million to FIDELIS-BBD, LLC for work described as: PROJECT AR ERFO FS 2020-1(1): THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF THE REPAIR OF A LANDSLIDE ON MORGAN MOUNTAIN ROAD, WITHIN THE OZARK NATIONAL FOREST. THE WORK INCLUDES GRADING, DRAINAGE, MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH RETAINING WALL, RIPRAP, AGGREGATE BASE CO Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition after exclusion of sources, indicating a competitive process. 2. The project involves significant civil engineering work, including grading, drainage, and retaining wall construction. 3. The definitive contract type suggests a flexible agreement for services over a defined period. 4. The firm fixed price structure aims to control costs for the government. 5. The project is located in the Ozark National Forest, highlighting infrastructure needs in protected areas. 6. The duration of the contract is over three years, suggesting a complex and lengthy repair process.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $6.8 million for landslide repair on Morgan Mountain Road appears reasonable given the scope of work, which includes grading, drainage, and the construction of a mechanically stabilized earth retaining wall. Benchmarking against similar large-scale civil engineering projects for road repair in challenging terrain would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. However, the firm fixed price contract type suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator 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 indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources were excluded prior to the solicitation. The number of bidders (5) suggests a moderate level of competition. The exclusion of sources might limit the pool of potential offerors and could potentially impact price discovery, though the presence of multiple bidders is a positive sign.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources warrants further investigation to ensure it did not unduly restrict competition and lead to a higher price for taxpayers. However, with five bidders, the competition likely provided some downward pressure on pricing.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are users of Morgan Mountain Road, including local residents, businesses, and tourists, who will benefit from restored and safer access. The project delivers essential infrastructure repair services, ensuring the continued functionality and safety of a critical transportation route. The geographic impact is localized to the Ozark National Forest in Arkansas, addressing a specific regional infrastructure challenge. The project will likely involve a workforce skilled in heavy civil construction, grading, and engineering, potentially creating temporary employment opportunities in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen geological conditions are encountered during excavation and construction.
Risk of project delays due to weather, especially in a national forest setting.
The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition method could indicate a less competitive environment than truly full and open competition.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed price contract structure shifts cost risk to the contractor.
The award to a single contractor (FIDELIS-BBD, LLC) suggests a clear point of accountability for project delivery.
The project addresses a critical infrastructure need, enhancing safety and accessibility.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction sector, a significant segment of the construction industry focused on public infrastructure. The market for such projects is often driven by government funding for transportation and maintenance. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the cost per mile or per unit of repair for similar landslide mitigation and road reconstruction projects across different regions and agencies.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus, as the contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). There is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary contractor, FIDELIS-BBD, LLC, will likely manage the project with its own resources or larger subcontractors, potentially limiting direct opportunities for small businesses in this specific contract's execution.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) within the Department of Transportation. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed price contract, requiring the contractor to complete the work within the agreed-upon budget. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would typically apply to investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

Federal Highway Administration - National Highway System
Department of Transportation - Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
Ozark National Forest - Public Lands Infrastructure
Highway and Road Construction Contracts
Landslide Mitigation Projects

Risk Flags

Competition Method: 'Exclusion of Sources' warrants scrutiny to ensure it did not unduly limit competition.
Project Complexity: Landslide repair in mountainous terrain carries inherent risks of unforeseen conditions.
Environmental Sensitivity: Work within a National Forest requires careful management to minimize ecological impact.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $6.8 million to FIDELIS-BBD, LLC. PROJECT AR ERFO FS 2020-1(1): THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF THE REPAIR OF A LANDSLIDE ON MORGAN MOUNTAIN ROAD, WITHIN THE OZARK NATIONAL FOREST. THE WORK INCLUDES GRADING, DRAINAGE, MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH RETAINING WALL, RIPRAP, AGGREGATE BASE CO

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FIDELIS-BBD, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $6.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-08-01. End: 2028-08-07.

What is the track record of FIDELIS-BBD, LLC in completing similar infrastructure repair projects on time and within budget?

Assessing the track record of FIDELIS-BBD, LLC requires a review of their past performance on federal and state contracts. Key indicators include on-time completion rates, adherence to budget, quality of work, and any history of disputes or contract modifications. Information from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) would be crucial. Without specific historical data on FIDELIS-BBD, LLC's performance on comparable landslide repair or major road construction projects, it is difficult to definitively assess their capability to execute this $6.8 million contract successfully. However, the award itself suggests they met the minimum qualifications and were deemed capable by the procuring agency.

How does the awarded amount of $6.8 million compare to the estimated cost for similar landslide repair projects in mountainous regions?

The $6.8 million cost for the Morgan Mountain Road landslide repair needs to be benchmarked against similar projects to assess value for money. Factors influencing cost include the scale of the landslide, the complexity of the terrain, the type of repair (e.g., retaining walls, drainage systems, regrading), and material costs. Projects involving significant earthwork, specialized engineering, and construction in remote or protected areas like a national forest tend to be more expensive. A comprehensive comparison would involve analyzing data from the Federal Highway Administration or state Departments of Transportation on projects with similar scopes, durations, and geographical challenges. Without such specific comparative data, it's challenging to definitively state if $6.8 million represents an excellent or questionable value, though it appears substantial for a single repair project.

What are the primary risks associated with this specific contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

The primary risks for this contract include unforeseen geological conditions during excavation, potential environmental impacts within the Ozark National Forest, weather-related delays, and potential cost overruns despite the firm fixed price structure if scope changes are necessary. Mitigation strategies likely involve thorough site investigations prior to and during construction, adherence to strict environmental protection protocols mandated by the Forest Service and FHWA, contingency planning for weather disruptions, and robust project management by FIDELIS-BBD, LLC. The firm fixed price contract itself is a risk mitigation tool for the government, placing the burden of cost control on the contractor. However, the 'exclusion of sources' in the procurement process could be a risk if it limited the competitive pressure to identify the most cost-effective solutions.

How effective is the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' method in ensuring fair pricing and quality for taxpayer-funded projects?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' method aims to balance the benefits of open competition with specific agency needs or circumstances that might necessitate excluding certain potential offerors. While it allows for a broader range of bidders than a sole-source or limited competition, the exclusion itself can be a point of concern. If the exclusion is based on justifiable technical requirements or past performance issues, it can lead to a more focused and potentially higher-quality pool of bidders. However, if the exclusion is arbitrary or overly restrictive, it can limit competition, potentially leading to higher prices and reduced innovation. The fact that five bids were received suggests a reasonable level of competition was maintained, but the specific reasons for excluding other sources are critical to understanding the overall fairness and effectiveness in achieving optimal value for taxpayers.

What is the historical spending pattern for landslide repair and road maintenance within the Ozark National Forest or similar protected areas?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for landslide repair and road maintenance within the Ozark National Forest and comparable protected areas is essential for context. This involves examining past contracts awarded by the Forest Service or FHWA for similar infrastructure work. Key metrics to consider include the average cost per project, the frequency of such repairs, and the types of solutions employed. Understanding these patterns helps in evaluating whether the current $6.8 million contract is an outlier, consistent with historical trends, or potentially inflated. Data from agencies like the Forest Service's Facilities Engineering or Public Roads departments, as well as FPDS, would be necessary to establish these benchmarks and assess the long-term investment in maintaining transportation infrastructure in ecologically sensitive regions.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge 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: 693C7325B000010

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3203 SW APPLEWOOD ST, ANKENY, IA, 50023

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $6,805,401

Exercised Options: $6,805,401

Current Obligation: $6,805,401

Actual Outlays: $1,113,123

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline