Army awards $805M for recreation facilities, with $1.2B in related spending over 15 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,371,655 ($12.4M)

Contractor: Wiser Construction LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-09-19

End Date: 2010-01-28

Contract Duration: 2,688 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200212!000467!96CE!CW09 !USA ENGINEER DIST LOS ANGELES !DACW0902C0012 !A!N! !N! !20020919!20041117!805416591!805416591!805416591!N!WISER CONSTRUCTION, LIMITED-LI!1501 STATE HWY 168 !MOAPA !NV!89025!40000!003!32!LAS VEGAS !CLARK !NEVADA !+000000100000!N!N!000000000000!Y291!RECREATION FACILITIES (NON-BUILDING) !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !5000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !234990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!007!A! !D!N!C! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !D! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001!

Place of Performance

Location: LAS VEGAS, CLARK County, NEVADA, 89101

State: Nevada Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.4 million to WISER CONSTRUCTION LLC for work described as: 200212!000467!96CE!CW09 !USA ENGINEER DIST LOS ANGELES !DACW0902C0012 !A!N! !N! !20020919!20041117!805416591!805416591!805416591!N!WISER CONSTRUCTION, LIMITED-LI!1501 STATE HWY 168 !MOAPA !NV!89025!40000!003!32!LAS VEGAS !CLARK… Key points: 1. Contract value significantly exceeds initial award, indicating potential scope expansion or cost overruns. 2. Long contract duration suggests a sustained need for recreation facility services. 3. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but requires careful monitoring for potential changes. 4. Competition level indicates a healthy market for these services, potentially driving better pricing. 5. Geographic focus on Nevada suggests specific regional needs for recreation infrastructure. 6. Contractor's performance history and past performance evaluations are critical for assessing future value.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The initial award of $805,541,659 for recreation facilities appears substantial. However, the data indicates a total obligated amount of $1,237,165,509, suggesting a significant increase over the contract's life. This warrants investigation into the reasons for the increased spending, such as contract modifications, scope changes, or unforeseen costs. Benchmarking against similar recreation facility construction and maintenance contracts would be necessary to fully assess value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, with 7 bidders participating. This level of competition is generally positive, as it allows for a wider pool of potential contractors and can lead to more competitive pricing. The presence of multiple bidders suggests a robust market for recreation facility construction and services.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down prices and encourage innovation, leading to better value for public funds.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families stationed in or near Nevada benefit from improved recreational facilities. The contract supports the development and maintenance of non-building recreation facilities, such as parks, sports fields, and outdoor activity areas. The primary geographic impact is within Nevada, specifically around the Las Vegas area and Clark County. The contract likely supports a workforce involved in construction, landscaping, and facility maintenance.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Significant increase in obligated amount compared to initial award requires scrutiny.
Long contract duration may present risks related to changing requirements or technological obsolescence.
Potential for cost overruns if not managed effectively due to fixed-price nature with modifications.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process.
Fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty if scope is well-defined.
Contractor has a significant contract award, suggesting capability to handle large projects.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically for non-building recreation facilities. The construction industry is a significant part of the US economy, with federal contracts often supporting infrastructure development and maintenance. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other federal contracts for similar types of recreational infrastructure projects across different agencies and geographic locations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Further investigation would be needed to determine if small businesses were involved in the subcontracting process and to assess the overall impact on the small business ecosystem for this type of construction work.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Inspector General (IG) reports and audits may be conducted to ensure compliance and identify any potential waste, fraud, or abuse. Transparency would be enhanced through public contract databases and reporting requirements.

Related Government Programs

Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts
Department of Defense Recreation Facility Development
Federal Construction Projects in Nevada
Recreation and Parks Infrastructure Spending
Large-Scale Fixed-Price Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to significant increase in obligated funds.
Long contract duration may lead to outdated specifications or increased costs.
Need for detailed review of contract modifications and change orders.
Assessment of contractor's past performance on similar projects is crucial.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.4 million to WISER CONSTRUCTION LLC. 200212!000467!96CE!CW09 !USA ENGINEER DIST LOS ANGELES !DACW0902C0012 !A!N! !N! !20020919!20041117!805416591!805416591!805416591!N!WISER CONSTRUCTION, LIMITED-LI!1501 STATE HWY 168 !MOAPA !NV!89025!40000!003!32!LAS VEGAS !CLARK !NEVADA !+000000100000!N!N!000000000000!Y291!RECREATION FACILITIES (NON-BUILDING) !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !5000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !234990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is WISER CONSTRUCTION LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-09-19. End: 2010-01-28.

What were the primary drivers for the increase in obligated funds from the initial award amount to the final obligated amount?

The initial award was $805,541,659, while the total obligated amount reached $1,237,165,509. This substantial increase of over $431 million suggests significant contract modifications, scope expansions, or unforeseen cost escalations occurred during the contract's performance period. Detailed contract modification records, change order logs, and justification documents would be necessary to pinpoint the exact reasons. Potential factors could include changes in project requirements, material cost fluctuations, extended performance periods, or additional work directives issued by the contracting agency. Understanding these drivers is crucial for assessing the contract's overall value and management effectiveness.

How does the per-unit cost or cost per square foot of these recreation facilities compare to industry benchmarks?

The provided data does not include specific details on the size (e.g., square footage) or the types of recreation facilities constructed, making a direct per-unit cost comparison difficult. The contract broadly covers 'RECREATION FACILITIES (NON-BUILDING)', which could encompass a wide range of projects from sports fields to playgrounds. To perform a meaningful benchmark analysis, detailed project specifications, including the scope of work, materials used, and the specific types and quantities of facilities developed, would be required. Comparing the total obligated amount against the number and scale of completed facilities would offer a rough estimate, but a precise comparison would necessitate granular data on construction costs for similar projects in the same region or with similar specifications.

What is the track record of WISER CONSTRUCTION, LIMITED-LI on similar federal contracts, particularly regarding cost performance and schedule adherence?

WISER CONSTRUCTION, LIMITED-LI was awarded this significant contract, indicating they met the requirements for large-scale federal projects. To assess their track record, a review of their past performance on similar Department of Defense or other federal construction contracts would be essential. This would involve examining contract histories for on-time delivery, adherence to budget, quality of work, and any instances of disputes or contract terminations. Information from sources like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) would provide insights into their performance evaluations on previous projects. A history of successful project completion within budget and schedule on comparable contracts would suggest a lower risk profile for future awards.

What are the potential risks associated with the long duration of this contract (2002-2010)?

A contract duration spanning from 2002 to 2010 (8 years) presents several potential risks. Firstly, there's the risk of scope creep or evolving requirements that may not have been anticipated at the outset, potentially leading to cost overruns if not managed strictly. Secondly, material costs and labor rates can fluctuate significantly over such a long period, impacting the contractor's profitability and potentially leading to requests for equitable adjustments. Thirdly, technological advancements in construction methods or materials could render initial plans or specifications outdated. Finally, maintaining consistent oversight and quality control over an extended period requires sustained effort and resources from the contracting agency to ensure the project remains on track and meets its objectives.

How does the level of competition (7 bidders) for this contract potentially influence the final price paid by taxpayers?

Having seven bidders for this contract is a positive indicator for taxpayer value. A larger number of bidders generally leads to a more competitive environment, where each company strives to offer the most attractive price and terms to win the contract. This increased competition can drive down the overall cost compared to a situation with fewer bidders, where the dominant firms might have more leverage to command higher prices. The presence of multiple qualified bidders suggests that the market has sufficient capacity and interest in providing these services, which helps ensure that the government secures a fair market price. The agency's evaluation process would then determine the best value among these competitive offers.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 1501 STATE HWY 168, MOAPA, NV, 89025

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline