DoD Awards $143M for Architectural Services, Raising Value Concerns Amidst Limited Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,386,797 ($20.4M)

Contractor: Berger Abam Ammann & Whitney Joint Venture

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-03-11

End Date: 2014-09-30

Contract Duration: 3,855 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200407!000460!1700!C4255 !NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING FIE!N4425503C1041 !A!N! !N! ! !20040311!20050318!143409790!143409790!143409790!N!BERGER ABAM AMMANN & WHITNEY J!33301 9TH AVE S STE 300 !FEDERAL WAY !WA!98003!04113!035!53!BANGOR TRIDENT BASE !KITSAP !WASHINGTON!+000002500000!N!N!000007368868!C129!OTHER NON-BUILDING STRUCTURES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !541310!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!007!D! !Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !Z!Z!A!A!000!A!C!Y! !N! ! ! !N63402!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: SILVERDALE, KITSAP County, WASHINGTON, 98315

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.4 million to BERGER ABAM AMMANN & WHITNEY JOINT VENTURE for work described as: 200407!000460!1700!C4255 !NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING FIE!N4425503C1041 !A!N! !N! ! !20040311!20050318!143409790!143409790!143409790!N!BERGER ABAM AMMANN & WHITNEY J!33301 9TH AVE S STE 300 !FEDERAL WAY !WA!98003!04113!035!53!BANGOR TRIDENT BASE !KITS… Key points: 1. The contract value of $143.4 million for architectural services is substantial, warranting scrutiny. 2. Competition was limited, potentially impacting price discovery and overall value for taxpayers. 3. The risk of overpayment or suboptimal service exists due to the limited competitive landscape. 4. This spending falls within the broader construction and professional services sector.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $143.4 million appears high for architectural services, especially given the limited competition. Benchmarking against similar contracts for large-scale infrastructure projects is crucial to assess if this price reflects fair market value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under limited competition, which can lead to higher prices and reduced innovation. The specific reasons for this limitation and the process for ensuring fair pricing are critical to evaluate.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition may result in taxpayers paying more than necessary for architectural services, impacting the efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may be overpaying for architectural services due to a lack of robust competition. The long contract duration (over 10 years) raises questions about adaptability to changing needs and potential for cost overruns. The specific project details and deliverables are not fully elaborated, making it difficult to assess the true value received.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition
High contract value
Long contract duration
Lack of detailed project scope

Positive Signals

Awarded to a joint venture, potentially bringing specialized expertise.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the architectural services sub-sector within the broader construction industry. Spending benchmarks for similar large-scale government architectural projects are essential for comparative analysis.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded to a joint venture, and there is no explicit indication of small business participation. Further analysis is needed to determine if small businesses were afforded opportunities to participate in subcontracting.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for a contract of this duration and value are critical. Regular performance reviews and cost audits should be in place to ensure accountability and prevent waste.

Related Government Programs

Architectural Services
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Navy Programs

Risk Flags

Potential for overpayment due to limited competition.
Risk of suboptimal service quality if competition was insufficient.
Lack of transparency regarding the justification for limited competition.
Long contract duration may lead to cost inefficiencies and reduced flexibility.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.4 million to BERGER ABAM AMMANN & WHITNEY JOINT VENTURE. 200407!000460!1700!C4255 !NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING FIE!N4425503C1041 !A!N! !N! ! !20040311!20050318!143409790!143409790!143409790!N!BERGER ABAM AMMANN & WHITNEY J!33301 9TH AVE S STE 300 !FEDERAL WAY !WA!98003!04113!035!53!BANGOR TRIDENT BASE !KITSAP !WASHINGTON!+000002500000!N!N!000007368868!C129!OTHER NON-BUILDING STRUCTURES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !541310!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BERGER ABAM AMMANN & WHITNEY JOINT VENTURE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-03-11. End: 2014-09-30.

What specific factors justified the limited competition for this significant architectural services contract?

The justification for limited competition needs to be thoroughly reviewed. Potential reasons could include highly specialized requirements, unique site conditions, or urgent needs that precluded a full and open solicitation. However, without detailed documentation, it's difficult to ascertain if these justifications were valid or if they masked a lack of effort in seeking broader competition.

How does the $143.4 million contract value compare to industry benchmarks for similar architectural services on large-scale government projects?

A comprehensive comparison against industry benchmarks is necessary. Factors like project complexity, scope of work, and geographic location influence pricing. If this contract's value significantly exceeds comparable projects, it suggests potential overpricing or inefficiencies in the procurement process, warranting further investigation into the cost drivers.

What are the potential risks associated with the long contract duration (over 10 years) in terms of cost escalation and adaptability?

A long contract duration introduces risks of cost escalation due to inflation, changing labor rates, and evolving material costs. Furthermore, it can limit the government's ability to adapt to new technologies, changing project requirements, or unforeseen circumstances. Robust contract clauses for price adjustments and scope modifications are crucial to mitigate these risks.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Architectural Services

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - CONSTRUCTION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ARCHITECT-ENGINEER FAR 6.102

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 33301 9TH AVE S STE 300, FEDERAL WAY, WA, 09

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $846,593

Exercised Options: $846,593

Current Obligation: $20,386,797

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline