DoD's $25M Fort Campbell Barracks Project: A Look at Construction Value and Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $25,004,459 ($25.0M)

Contractor: Clark Caddell a Joint Venture

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-08-20

End Date: 2012-03-19

Contract Duration: 942 days

Daily Burn Rate: $26.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: TAS::21 2051::TAS WARRIOR IN TRANSITION BARRACKS, FT. CAMPBELL, KY

Place of Performance

Location: FORT CAMPBELL, CHRISTIAN County, KENTUCKY, 42223

State: Kentucky Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $25.0 million to CLARK CADDELL A JOINT VENTURE for work described as: TAS::21 2051::TAS WARRIOR IN TRANSITION BARRACKS, FT. CAMPBELL, KY Key points: 1. The contract awarded to Clark Caddell A Joint Venture for barracks construction at Fort Campbell represents a significant investment in military infrastructure. 2. Analysis of the contract's value and performance is crucial to understanding its effectiveness in delivering needed facilities. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests a defined cost structure, but actual value depends on execution and any change orders. 4. Competition dynamics for this project will shed light on pricing efficiency and the availability of qualified contractors in the region. 5. Assessing the contractor's past performance and the project's alignment with broader military construction goals provides performance context. 6. The project's sector positioning within the broader defense construction market warrants examination. 7. Risk indicators related to project duration and cost overruns should be monitored.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of approximately $25 million for barracks construction at Fort Campbell needs to be benchmarked against similar projects in the region and for the Department of the Army. Without specific cost breakdowns or comparisons to industry standards for construction per square foot or per bed, it is difficult to definitively assess value for money. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides some cost certainty, but the duration of the project (942 days) could introduce risks of cost escalation if not managed tightly. Further analysis would require data on the scope of work, square footage, and the number of personnel housed.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely solicited and considered. This competitive process is generally expected to drive down prices and ensure that the government receives fair market value. The fact that it was competed fully suggests a healthy market for this type of construction service. The number of bids received would provide further insight into the level of competition and its impact on the final award price.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more cost-effective contract awards and a wider pool of qualified contractors.

Public Impact

Service members at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, will benefit from improved living quarters, enhancing morale and readiness. The project delivers essential construction services, specifically the building of barracks, contributing to the modernization of military housing. The geographic impact is localized to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, supporting the base's operational capacity. The project likely involved a significant construction workforce, including skilled trades, contributing to local employment opportunities during its execution.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Project duration of 942 days (over 2.5 years) could indicate potential for delays or scope creep impacting final cost.
Lack of detailed cost breakdown makes it difficult to assess true value for money without further benchmarking.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can sometimes lead to reduced scope or quality if unforeseen cost pressures arise, though this is not evident here.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process and potential for competitive pricing.
Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government, assuming effective project management.
Project addresses a critical need for improved military housing, directly supporting service member welfare and readiness.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the commercial and institutional building construction sector, specifically serving the defense industry's infrastructure needs. The market for military construction is substantial, driven by the need to maintain and modernize facilities across numerous bases. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other barracks construction projects, military housing initiatives, or large-scale institutional building projects awarded by federal agencies. The size of this contract, approximately $25 million, positions it as a mid-sized project within the broader construction landscape.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). This means the contract was competed broadly, and while small businesses may have participated as subcontractors, there was no explicit requirement for them to be the prime contractor. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on subcontracting opportunities awarded by the prime contractor, Clark Caddell A Joint Venture. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the extent of small business involvement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Department of the Army contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and program managers within the Army Corps of Engineers or relevant installation command. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract structure, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS-NG. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction (MILCON)
Barracks Modernization Programs
Department of Defense Facilities Management
Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts
Federal Building Construction

Risk Flags

Long project duration
Potential for cost overruns despite FFP
Need for detailed value-for-money assessment

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $25.0 million to CLARK CADDELL A JOINT VENTURE. TAS::21 2051::TAS WARRIOR IN TRANSITION BARRACKS, FT. CAMPBELL, KY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CLARK CADDELL A JOINT VENTURE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $25.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-08-20. End: 2012-03-19.

What is the track record of Clark Caddell A Joint Venture with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

Clark Caddell A Joint Venture has been awarded federal contracts, including this significant $25 million project for barracks construction at Fort Campbell. To fully assess their track record, a deeper dive into their contract history with the Department of Defense and other federal agencies is necessary. This would involve examining past performance evaluations, any history of contract disputes or terminations, and their success in delivering similar types of construction projects on time and within budget. Understanding their experience with firm-fixed-price contracts and large-scale institutional building is also crucial for evaluating their capability and reliability on this specific project.

How does the awarded price of $25 million compare to similar barracks construction projects in the region or for the Department of the Army?

Benchmarking the $25 million award against similar projects is essential for assessing value for money. Factors such as square footage, number of beds, quality of materials, and specific site conditions at Fort Campbell would need to be considered. Without access to detailed cost breakdowns or a database of comparable projects with similar specifications, a precise comparison is challenging. However, the fact that it was awarded under full and open competition suggests that the price was deemed competitive at the time of award. Further analysis could involve researching recent Army Corps of Engineers construction awards for barracks or similar facilities in the southeastern United States.

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

The primary risk indicator for this contract is its substantial duration of 942 days (over 2.5 years). Long project timelines increase the potential for unforeseen issues, such as material cost fluctuations (though mitigated by FFP), labor availability challenges, and changes in project requirements. While the firm-fixed-price (FFP) structure aims to cap the government's cost exposure, it can also incentivize contractors to cut corners on quality or scope if they face significant cost overruns, although this is less common with reputable firms. Effective project management, rigorous oversight, and clear communication channels are critical to mitigating these risks throughout the project lifecycle.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in ensuring cost control for this specific barracks construction project?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective for cost control when the scope of work is well-defined and the risks are understood. For a construction project like barracks, where the design and requirements are typically established upfront, FFP provides the government with a ceiling on its financial liability. This shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor. However, the effectiveness hinges on the accuracy of the initial cost estimates and the contractor's ability to manage their own expenses. Any significant changes to the scope of work would likely require contract modifications, which could impact the overall cost and timeline.

What are the historical spending patterns for barracks construction at Fort Campbell or within the Department of the Army?

Historical spending patterns for barracks construction at Fort Campbell and across the Department of the Army reveal a consistent and significant investment in military housing infrastructure. These patterns are often driven by military readiness requirements, troop levels, and the need to replace aging facilities. Spending can fluctuate based on congressional appropriations, national security priorities, and specific modernization initiatives. Analyzing past budgets allocated to barracks construction, the number of projects awarded annually, and average project costs would provide context for the $25 million awarded here. This data can help identify trends in construction costs, project durations, and the types of contract vehicles utilized.

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

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2502 N ROCKY POINT DR, TAMPA, FL, 33607

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $25,004,459

Exercised Options: $25,004,459

Current Obligation: $25,004,459

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W9126G08D0051

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline