HHS awarded $33.2M for building renovations, with CWR Construction Inc. securing the contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $33,210,489 ($33.2M)

Contractor: CWR Construction, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2015-09-24

End Date: 2019-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,467 days

Daily Burn Rate: $22.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF BLDG 14 AND 53A RENOVATION

Place of Performance

Location: JEFFERSON, JEFFERSON County, ARKANSAS, 72079

State: Arkansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $33.2 million to CWR CONSTRUCTION, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF BLDG 14 AND 53A RENOVATION Key points: 1. The contract value of $33.2 million for building renovations appears to be within a reasonable range for the scope of work. 2. The procurement method, 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' suggests a competitive process, though the specifics of the exclusion warrant review. 3. The duration of 1467 days (approximately 4 years) indicates a long-term project, potentially exposing it to scope creep and cost overruns if not managed diligently. 4. The contract type 'Firm Fixed Price' generally offers cost certainty but can limit flexibility if unforeseen issues arise. 5. The award to CWR Construction, Inc. represents a significant investment in facility maintenance and upgrades for the Food and Drug Administration. 6. The geographic location of the work in Arkansas (AR) may have implications for local economic impact and workforce utilization.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the $33.2 million cost against similar large-scale commercial and institutional building renovation projects is challenging without more detailed project specifications. However, the firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests an attempt to control costs. The duration of the contract (nearly four years) could indicate a complex project, and the final cost should be evaluated against the initial scope and any change orders.

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 for specific reasons. The number of bidders is not explicitly stated, but the 'limited' competition level suggests that the exclusion may have narrowed the field, potentially impacting price discovery and the ultimate value achieved.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of certain sources, even if justified, could mean that taxpayers did not benefit from the potentially lower prices that a broader competitive field might have generated.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and its personnel, who will operate in improved facilities. The services delivered include comprehensive renovation of Buildings 14 and 53A, likely encompassing structural, mechanical, electrical, and aesthetic upgrades. The geographic impact is concentrated in Arkansas, where the FDA facilities are located, potentially creating local employment opportunities during the renovation period. Workforce implications may include the need for skilled construction labor in Arkansas, contributing to the local economy.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'exclusion of sources' in a 'full and open' competition needs clear justification to ensure fairness and prevent potential favoritism.
The long contract duration (1467 days) increases the risk of cost escalation due to unforeseen site conditions or changes in material costs.
Firm Fixed Price contracts can be disadvantageous if the scope is not perfectly defined, leading to costly change orders.
Lack of specific details on the scope of 'renovation' makes it difficult to assess if the $33.2M represents good value.
The absence of small business participation flags (sb: false) suggests limited opportunities for smaller firms in this large contract.

Positive Signals

The use of 'Full and Open Competition' aims to ensure a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing.
The 'Firm Fixed Price' contract type provides cost certainty for the government, assuming the scope is well-defined.
The contract is awarded to a specific entity (CWR CONSTRUCTION, INC.), indicating a clear point of accountability for the project's completion.
The project addresses necessary infrastructure improvements for critical government facilities (FDA).

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant part of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this area supports the maintenance and modernization of government facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be derived from large-scale renovation projects for public or commercial buildings, considering factors like square footage, complexity of systems being upgraded, and regional labor costs.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false). The large contract value of $33.2 million suggests it was likely beyond the scope of typical small business set-asides. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans, so the extent to which small businesses might participate indirectly through subcontracts is unknown. This lack of direct set-aside or clear subcontracting information may limit opportunities for the small business ecosystem in this specific procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Health and Human Services' internal procurement and project management offices. The Food and Drug Administration, as the agency utilizing the facilities, would also have oversight responsibilities. Given the contract's duration and value, it's likely subject to regular reviews and potentially oversight from the HHS Office of Inspector General, especially if any performance or financial irregularities arise. Transparency would be enhanced by public reporting of project milestones and expenditures.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Renovations
Public Facility Construction
Health and Human Services Infrastructure
Food and Drug Administration Facilities Management
Commercial Building Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to long contract duration.
Risk associated with 'exclusion of sources' potentially limiting competition.
Scope definition clarity for Firm Fixed Price contract.
Lack of explicit small business subcontracting requirements.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $33.2 million to CWR CONSTRUCTION, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF BLDG 14 AND 53A RENOVATION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CWR CONSTRUCTION, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (Food and Drug Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $33.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-09-24. End: 2019-09-30.

What specific renovations were undertaken for Buildings 14 and 53A, and how do they align with the FDA's operational needs?

The provided data does not detail the specific scope of renovations for Buildings 14 and 53A. However, as these are FDA facilities, renovations likely focused on modernizing laboratory spaces, upgrading HVAC and safety systems to meet stringent health and environmental standards, improving office infrastructure, and ensuring compliance with current building codes and accessibility requirements. The alignment with operational needs would depend on the FDA's strategic priorities for these specific buildings, such as expanding research capacity, enhancing security, or improving energy efficiency. A thorough review would require access to the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and any subsequent modifications.

How did the 'exclusion of sources' in the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' procurement process impact the final contract price?

The procurement method 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' implies that while the competition was generally open, specific potential bidders were intentionally excluded. The reasons for exclusion are not provided but could range from unmet pre-qualification criteria, past performance issues, or specific technical requirements that only a subset of contractors could meet. Without knowing who was excluded and why, it's difficult to definitively state the impact on the final price. Ideally, even with exclusions, sufficient competition should remain to drive competitive pricing. If the exclusions significantly limited the number of viable bidders, it's possible the final price was higher than it might have been under a truly unrestricted full and open competition.

What is the historical spending pattern for building renovations at the FDA, and how does this $33.2 million contract compare?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for FDA building renovations requires access to historical contract databases and budget allocations. Without that specific data, a direct comparison is difficult. However, $33.2 million is a substantial amount for a single renovation project, suggesting it was a major undertaking, possibly involving significant structural, mechanical, or system-wide upgrades rather than cosmetic improvements. To assess its comparability, one would need to examine the size (square footage) and scope of previous renovation projects, the duration, and the contract types used. Large-scale renovations of institutional buildings can easily run into tens of millions of dollars, so this figure might be within the expected range for significant facility modernization.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this renovation contract, and has CWR Construction, Inc. met them?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. Typically, for construction projects of this nature, KPIs would include adherence to schedule (completion by the `ed` date of 2019-09-30, though the `dur` suggests a longer planned period), adherence to budget (the awarded amount of $33.2M), quality of workmanship (meeting building codes and specifications), safety compliance, and minimal disruption to ongoing operations. Assessing whether CWR Construction, Inc. met these KPIs would require reviewing project close-out reports, inspection records, and any post-completion evaluations. The contract's end date is listed as 2019-09-30, suggesting it has concluded, but performance details are absent.

Are there any identified risks associated with CWR Construction, Inc.'s performance on this or similar federal contracts?

The provided data does not contain specific risk flags or performance history details for CWR Construction, Inc. on this or other federal contracts. To assess performance risks, one would need to consult databases like the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), which tracks contractor performance issues, past disputes, and adverse actions. Without access to such information, it's impossible to identify specific risks related to the contractor's track record. General risks for a project of this scale include potential delays, cost overruns (especially if the fixed price scope is not perfectly defined), and quality control issues, regardless of the contractor's history.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: 15223SOL00107

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1312 MAIN ST, NORTH LITTLE ROCK, AR, 72114

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $33,210,489

Exercised Options: $33,210,489

Current Obligation: $33,210,489

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline