GSA's $139M Mary E. Switzer Building modernization contract awarded to Grunley Construction

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $139,086,078 ($139.1M)

Contractor: Grunley Construction CO., Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2005-09-28

End Date: 2020-12-31

Contract Duration: 5,573 days

Daily Burn Rate: $25.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: MODERNIZATION OF THE MARY E. SWITZER BUILDING

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20407

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $139.1 million to GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. for work described as: MODERNIZATION OF THE MARY E. SWITZER BUILDING Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in federal building infrastructure. 2. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs for the government. 3. A single award for a large-scale project may indicate specialized contractor requirements. 4. The contract duration of over 5,500 days suggests a complex, multi-phase renovation. 5. Performance in Washington D.C. highlights the importance of federal facilities in the capital. 6. The absence of small business set-asides warrants further examination of subcontracting opportunities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total contract value of approximately $139 million for the modernization of the Mary E. Switzer Building is substantial. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale federal building renovations is challenging without more specific project scope details. However, the firm-fixed-price nature of the contract suggests an attempt to establish a clear cost ceiling. The contract's duration of over 15 years (from award to estimated completion) implies a long-term commitment and potential for cost escalation if not managed meticulously. Without comparable project data, a definitive value-for-money assessment is difficult, but the scale suggests a significant public investment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified contractors had the opportunity to bid. The fact that there were 5 bidders suggests a reasonably competitive environment for this type of large-scale construction project. Full and open competition is generally expected to drive down prices and encourage innovation by allowing the government to select the best value offer. The presence of multiple bidders is a positive sign for price discovery and ensuring taxpayer funds are used efficiently.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition helps ensure that taxpayers receive competitive pricing and that the government selects the most capable contractor for a significant infrastructure project.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are federal agencies housed within the Mary E. Switzer Building, who will gain improved facilities. The project delivers modernization and upgrades to a significant federal building. The geographic impact is concentrated in Washington D.C., the nation's capital. The contract supports jobs in the construction sector, including skilled trades and project management.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration increases risk of cost overruns and scope creep.
Lack of explicit small business participation may limit broader economic impact.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can be challenging to manage for complex, long-term projects.
Potential for unforeseen site conditions in an older building requiring additional funding.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process and potential for best value.
Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Award to a single contractor implies specialized capabilities for a complex project.
Modernization efforts will likely improve building efficiency and functionality.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically focusing on the modernization of a large federal facility. The General Services Administration (GSA) is a major player in federal real estate, managing a vast portfolio of buildings. The market for large-scale public building construction is characterized by significant capital investment, stringent regulatory requirements, and a need for experienced contractors. This project represents a substantial portion of spending within this specific niche of federal construction.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that the primary award went to a large business. While full and open competition was utilized, the absence of specific small business provisions means that opportunities for small businesses to participate in this large project may be limited to those that can secure subcontracts directly from the prime contractor. Further investigation into the prime contractor's subcontracting plan would be necessary to assess the full impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) typically has robust oversight mechanisms for its construction projects, including the Public Buildings Service (PBS). Oversight would likely involve regular site inspections, progress reviews, and adherence to contract specifications. Accountability is managed through the firm-fixed-price contract terms, with penalties for non-performance or delays. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and public reporting, although detailed project-specific oversight reports may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Modernization Programs
GSA Capital Investments
Public Infrastructure Projects
Large-Scale Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may indicate potential for delays and cost overruns.
Lack of explicit small business subcontracting goals.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can be challenging for complex, long-term renovations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $139.1 million to GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.. MODERNIZATION OF THE MARY E. SWITZER BUILDING

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION 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 $139.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-09-28. End: 2020-12-31.

What was the initial estimated cost of the Mary E. Switzer Building modernization project before the award?

The provided data does not include the initial estimated cost of the project. It only shows the awarded contract value of approximately $139 million. To assess the bidding environment and potential cost savings, comparing the awarded amount to pre-solicitation estimates would be beneficial. Without this information, it's difficult to determine if the competition resulted in significant savings against an anticipated budget or if the awarded price was close to initial projections.

How does the per-square-foot cost of this modernization compare to similar federal building projects?

The provided data does not include the square footage of the Mary E. Switzer Building, making a per-square-foot cost comparison impossible. To benchmark effectively, we would need the total building area and the total modernization cost. Additionally, comparing costs requires understanding the scope of work (e.g., structural upgrades, MEP systems, interior finishes, LEED certification requirements) and the geographic location, as construction costs vary significantly by region. Without these details, a meaningful per-square-foot analysis against comparable projects cannot be performed.

What specific modernization activities are included in the $139 million contract?

The provided data summary does not detail the specific modernization activities covered under the $139 million contract for the Mary E. Switzer Building. It only indicates the contract is for 'MODERNIZATION OF THE MARY E. SWITZER BUILDING' and falls under NAICS code 236220 (Commercial and Institutional Building Construction). A comprehensive understanding would require reviewing the contract's statement of work (SOW), which would outline the scope, specifications, and deliverables, such as upgrades to HVAC, electrical, plumbing, structural repairs, facade improvements, or interior renovations.

Has Grunley Construction Co., Inc. previously worked on similar large-scale federal building modernization projects?

The provided data indicates Grunley Construction Co., Inc. as the awardee but does not offer details on their past performance or track record with similar federal projects. To assess their suitability and experience for this $139 million modernization, a review of their past federal contracts, project history, and client references would be necessary. Information on their experience with projects of comparable size, complexity, and type (e.g., historic building renovations, large institutional facilities) would provide context for their capability to execute this contract successfully.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and milestones for this contract?

The provided data summary does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or milestones for the Mary E. Switzer Building modernization contract. Typically, such large and long-duration contracts would include detailed milestones related to design completion, procurement, construction phases, inspections, and final handover. Performance would be measured against adherence to schedule, budget, quality standards, and safety regulations. Without access to the contract's SOW or performance work statement (PWS), these specific metrics remain unknown.

How has federal spending on building modernization, particularly by GSA, trended in recent years?

The provided data focuses on a single contract and does not offer historical spending trends for federal building modernization or GSA's overall capital investments. To analyze trends, one would need access to GSA's budget appropriations, contract award databases (like FPDS or USASpending.gov), and reports from oversight bodies like the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) or the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Such data would reveal patterns in funding levels, types of projects prioritized, and overall investment strategies in federal infrastructure over time.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 15020 SHADY GROVE RD STE 500, ROCKVILLE, MD, 20850

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $139,086,078

Exercised Options: $139,086,078

Current Obligation: $139,086,078

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NOT OBTAINED - WAIVED

Timeline