DoD awards $362M for industrial building construction, with limited competition and a 2434-day duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $21,919,853 ($21.9M)

Contractor: Mandall Armor Design and Manufacturing, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-04-07

End Date: 2012-12-05

Contract Duration: 2,434 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.0K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE AWARD FEE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200607!601540!1700!N44255!ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVITY !N4425506C2103 !A!N! !N! ! !20060407!20060928!361987402!361987402!361987402!N!MANDALL ARMOR DESIGN&MANUFAC!901 E MADISON STREET !PHOENIX !AZ!85034!04105!035!53!BANGOR NAVAL SUBMARI!KITSAP !WASHINGTON!+000017191027!N!N!000017191027!Y199!OTHER MISCELLANEOUS BUILDINGS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !236210!A!B!3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !D!U!M!1!001!N!1G!D!Y!Z! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !A! !A!A!000!A!B!Y!S!N! ! !1700!N63402!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: SILVERDALE, KITSAP County, WASHINGTON, 98315

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $21.9 million to MANDALL ARMOR DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING, INC. for work described as: 200607!601540!1700!N44255!ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVITY !N4425506C2103 !A!N! !N! ! !20060407!20060928!361987402!361987402!361987402!N!MANDALL ARMOR DESIGN&MANUFAC!901 E MADISON STREET !PHOENIX !AZ!85034!04105!035!53!BANGOR NAVAL SUBMARI!KITSAP… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for industrial building construction services. 2. Significant duration of 2434 days suggests a long-term project. 3. Limited competition may impact pricing and value. 4. Contractor has a track record with the Department of Defense. 5. Geographic focus on Washington state. 6. Fixed Price Award Fee contract type indicates performance incentives. 7. No small business set-aside noted.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $361,987,402 for industrial building construction is substantial. Without specific details on the scope of work, it's challenging to benchmark against similar contracts. However, the long duration of 2434 days (approximately 6.7 years) suggests a complex and potentially high-value project. The contract type, Fixed Price Award Fee, implies that the contractor's fee is tied to performance, which can be a mechanism for value, but also introduces potential for cost overruns if not managed tightly. The lack of detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons makes a definitive value assessment difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was not competed on a full and open basis, indicating limited competition. The specific reasons for this limitation are not detailed in the provided data. Limited competition can sometimes lead to higher prices for the government as the contractor faces less pressure to offer the most competitive bid. The absence of multiple bidders means there is less opportunity for price discovery through a competitive bidding process.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may face higher costs due to the limited competitive nature of this award. Without a robust bidding process, the government may not have secured the best possible price for the construction services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, specifically the Department of the Navy, for enhanced industrial building capabilities. The contract delivers construction services for industrial buildings, likely supporting military infrastructure and operations. The geographic impact is concentrated in Washington state, where the construction will take place. The contract implies a need for a skilled construction workforce in the region, potentially creating jobs in trades and related fields.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and reduced value for taxpayer funds.
The extended contract duration of over six years could introduce risks related to scope creep, changing requirements, and inflation.
Lack of detailed performance metrics or cost breakdowns makes it difficult to assess the contractor's efficiency and effectiveness.
The 'NOT COMPETED' status requires further investigation into the justification for not pursuing a broader solicitation.

Positive Signals

The contractor, Mandall Armor Design and Manufacturing, Inc., has secured a significant contract, indicating a level of trust and capability recognized by the agency.
The Fixed Price Award Fee structure incentivizes the contractor to meet performance standards, potentially leading to successful project completion.
The contract is for a specific industrial need, suggesting a targeted investment in critical infrastructure.
The long duration allows for sustained focus and development of the required facilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Industrial Building Construction (NAICS code 236210). The market for large-scale industrial construction, particularly for government and defense applications, is significant. This contract represents a substantial investment within this niche. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large federal construction projects, especially those for military installations, to gauge cost-effectiveness and pricing norms.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). There is no information regarding subcontracting plans or their impact on the small business ecosystem. Given the 'NOT COMPETED' status and the nature of the work, it's possible that opportunities for small business participation were limited or not explicitly pursued.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. The Fixed Price Award Fee structure implies performance monitoring and evaluation to determine the award fee. Transparency regarding the specific oversight mechanisms, accountability measures, and any Inspector General involvement would require access to the full contract details and agency reporting. The long duration necessitates ongoing oversight to manage risks and ensure continued alignment with government objectives.

Related Government Programs

Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Contracts
Department of Defense Construction Projects
Industrial Facility Development
Fixed Price Award Fee Contracts
Long-Term Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited Competition
Long Contract Duration
Potential for Cost Overruns
Lack of Detailed Performance Metrics
Unclear Justification for Non-Competition

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $21.9 million to MANDALL ARMOR DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING, INC.. 200607!601540!1700!N44255!ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVITY !N4425506C2103 !A!N! !N! ! !20060407!20060928!361987402!361987402!361987402!N!MANDALL ARMOR DESIGN&MANUFAC!901 E MADISON STREET !PHOENIX !AZ!85034!04105!035!53!BANGOR NAVAL SUBMARI!KITSAP !WASHINGTON!+000017191027!N!N!000017191027!Y199!OTHER MISCELLANEOUS BUILDINGS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !236210!A!B!3! ! ! ! ! !99990

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MANDALL ARMOR DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $21.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-04-07. End: 2012-12-05.

What specific industrial building capabilities were being developed or enhanced with this contract?

The provided data identifies the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code as 236210, which corresponds to 'Industrial Building Construction.' This suggests the contract was for the erection or renovation of facilities intended for industrial purposes, such as manufacturing plants, warehouses, processing facilities, or other structures supporting industrial operations. The specific nature of these capabilities is not detailed in the abbreviated data, but it is reasonable to infer they are related to the operational needs of the Department of the Navy, potentially for shipbuilding, maintenance, repair, or logistical support infrastructure.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a 'NOT COMPETED' basis?

The data explicitly states the contract was 'NOT COMPETED.' Without further information, the specific justification remains unknown. Common reasons for non-competitive awards include urgent and compelling needs where only one source can fulfill the requirement, specific technical expertise possessed by only one contractor, or circumstances where a full and open competition would be detrimental to the government's interests. A detailed justification would typically be documented by the contracting agency and may be subject to review by oversight bodies.

How does the $362 million award compare to typical spending on similar industrial building construction projects by the Department of Defense?

Benchmarking this $362 million award requires comparing it to other large-scale industrial construction projects undertaken by the Department of Defense (DoD) or similar federal agencies. While the provided data doesn't offer direct comparisons, projects of this magnitude are generally reserved for significant infrastructure development, such as new base facilities, major upgrades to existing industrial complexes, or specialized construction supporting defense manufacturing or logistics. The duration of 2434 days (over 6.7 years) also suggests a project of considerable scale and complexity, which would naturally command a higher price point than shorter-term or smaller-scope construction contracts.

What are the potential risks associated with the 2434-day contract duration?

A contract duration of 2434 days, approximately 6.7 years, presents several potential risks. Firstly, there's the risk of 'scope creep,' where the project's requirements may evolve significantly over such a long period, potentially leading to cost increases and delays if not managed effectively. Secondly, economic factors like inflation could impact material and labor costs, especially if the contract's pricing structure doesn't adequately account for long-term fluctuations. Thirdly, contractor performance can degrade over extended periods, necessitating robust oversight. Finally, changes in agency priorities or technological advancements could render the completed facility less relevant or require costly modifications.

What does the 'Fixed Price Award Fee' contract type imply about contractor incentives and government oversight?

A Fixed Price Award Fee (FPAF) contract type signifies a hybrid approach. The 'Fixed Price' component establishes a ceiling cost for the work, providing the contractor with an incentive to control costs. The 'Award Fee' component means that a portion of the contractor's potential profit is contingent upon meeting or exceeding specific performance objectives defined by the government. This structure incentivizes the contractor to perform well beyond basic requirements. For the government, it necessitates clear, measurable performance criteria and diligent oversight to assess performance objectively and determine the appropriate award fee, balancing cost control with quality and timeliness.

What is the historical spending pattern for Mandall Armor Design and Manufacturing, Inc. with the Department of Defense?

The provided data indicates that Mandall Armor Design and Manufacturing, Inc. was awarded this specific contract by the Department of the Navy. While this demonstrates a past relationship, it does not provide a comprehensive view of their historical spending patterns with the entire Department of Defense. To assess their track record, one would need to examine a broader range of their contracts, including their value, duration, type, and performance history across different agencies within the DoD. This single award suggests they are capable of handling significant government contracts, but further analysis would be needed for a complete picture.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Industrial Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE AWARD FEE (M)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 901 E MADISON STREET, PHOENIX, AZ, 85034

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $21,919,853

Exercised Options: $21,919,853

Current Obligation: $21,919,853

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline