Department of Defense awarded $37M for enlisted dining facility construction to Whiting-Turner Contracting Company

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $37,056,155 ($37.1M)

Contractor: Whiting-Turner Contracting Company, the

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2018-07-03

End Date: 2022-04-04

Contract Duration: 1,371 days

Daily Burn Rate: $27.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF P-539, FY 17 MCON - ENLISTED DINING FACILITY

Place of Performance

Location: YUMA, YUMA County, ARIZONA, 85369

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $37.1 million to WHITING-TURNER CONTRACTING COMPANY, THE for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF P-539, FY 17 MCON - ENLISTED DINING FACILITY Key points: 1. The contract was awarded using full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The project duration of 1371 days indicates a significant construction timeline. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor. 4. The project is located in Arizona, impacting local construction workforce and economy. 5. The contract falls under commercial and institutional building construction, a common sector for federal spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging without comparable enlisted dining facility construction projects. However, the firm-fixed-price structure generally aims for cost control. The total award amount of $37 million for a project spanning over three years suggests a substantial investment in military infrastructure. Further analysis would require comparing per-square-foot costs or costs per occupant capacity against similar military construction projects.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The data shows 2 bids were received. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and better value for the government. With only two bids, the level of competition might be considered moderate, potentially limiting the downward pressure on price.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to bid, driving down costs. However, with only two bids, the potential for cost savings may have been less than if more competitors had participated.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are enlisted service members who will utilize the new dining facility. The service delivered is the construction of a new enlisted dining facility, enhancing quality of life. The geographic impact is concentrated in Arizona, potentially creating local jobs and economic activity. The project implies a need for skilled construction labor in the Arizona region during the contract period.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition with only two bids received could indicate potential for higher costs than a more robustly competed contract.
The long duration of the project (1371 days) increases the risk of cost overruns due to unforeseen issues or market fluctuations.

Positive Signals

The use of a firm-fixed-price contract transfers cost risk to the contractor, which can protect the government from unexpected price increases.
Awarding through full and open competition ensures a broad range of potential contractors could participate, theoretically leading to better value.

Sector Analysis

The construction sector is a significant area of federal spending, encompassing a wide range of projects from infrastructure to facilities. This contract for a military dining facility falls within the commercial and institutional building construction sub-sector. Federal spending in this area is often driven by the need to maintain and upgrade military bases and other government facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large-scale construction projects awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies for similar types of buildings.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary impact on small businesses would be through potential subcontracting opportunities with the prime contractor, Whiting-Turner Contracting Company. The extent of small business subcontracting is not detailed in the provided data, but it is a common practice in large construction projects.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and engineering divisions. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, which penalizes the contractor for cost overruns. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Projects
Department of Defense Facilities
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Contracts
Construction Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Moderate Competition
Long Project Duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $37.1 million to WHITING-TURNER CONTRACTING COMPANY, THE. IGF::OT::IGF P-539, FY 17 MCON - ENLISTED DINING FACILITY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is WHITING-TURNER CONTRACTING COMPANY, THE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $37.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-07-03. End: 2022-04-04.

What is the track record of Whiting-Turner Contracting Company with the Department of Defense?

Whiting-Turner Contracting Company has a significant history of working with the federal government, including the Department of Defense. While specific details on past performance for similar military construction projects are not provided in this data snippet, their extensive experience suggests a capacity to handle large-scale federal contracts. A deeper dive into their contract history with the DoD, including past performance reviews and any disputes or claims, would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and expertise in this sector. Their presence as a prime contractor on a $37 million project indicates a level of trust and proven capability.

How does the $37 million award compare to similar enlisted dining facility construction projects?

Direct comparison of the $37 million award for this enlisted dining facility is difficult without access to a database of similar projects with detailed cost breakdowns (e.g., cost per square foot, cost per occupant). However, large-scale institutional construction projects, especially those with specialized requirements like military facilities, can range widely in cost. Factors such as location, specific amenities, building codes, and material costs significantly influence the final price. The duration of the project (1371 days) suggests a complex build, which would naturally command a higher price point compared to simpler structures. Further benchmarking would require analyzing projects of similar size, scope, and location within the DoD or other federal agencies.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price construction contract?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract is that the contractor, Whiting-Turner Contracting Company, bears the financial burden of any cost overruns. While this protects the government from price increases, it can incentivize the contractor to cut corners on quality or safety to maintain profitability if unforeseen issues arise. Other risks include potential delays impacting the project timeline, contractor default, or disputes over contract scope. Given the long duration of the project (1371 days), risks related to material price volatility or labor availability are also present, though the FFP structure aims to mitigate the government's exposure to these.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring value for taxpayer money in large construction projects?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for taxpayer money in large construction projects. By allowing all responsible sources to bid, it fosters a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. However, the effectiveness is contingent on the number of bids received. In this case, only two bids were submitted, which is a moderate level of competition. While better than a sole-source award, a higher number of bidders typically leads to more aggressive pricing and a greater likelihood of securing the best value. Therefore, while the mechanism is sound, the outcome depends on market dynamics and contractor interest.

What is the historical spending pattern for enlisted dining facilities by the Department of Defense?

Historical spending on enlisted dining facilities by the Department of Defense is substantial, reflecting the ongoing need to provide adequate living and working conditions for service members. This spending fluctuates based on military readiness requirements, base modernization efforts, and budget allocations. Over the years, the DoD has invested billions in constructing and renovating facilities across its global installations. Analyzing specific historical spending patterns would require examining annual military construction budgets, specific program funding for barracks and dining facilities, and the number and scale of projects awarded over time. This particular $37 million contract represents one component of that broader historical investment.

What are the implications of the project's location in Arizona for workforce and local economy?

The construction of a $37 million enlisted dining facility in Arizona will have several implications for the local workforce and economy. It is expected to create numerous jobs for skilled and unskilled laborers, engineers, architects, and project managers during the project's duration (1371 days). This influx of work can stimulate local businesses, including suppliers of construction materials, equipment rental companies, and hospitality services catering to the construction workforce. Furthermore, the completed facility will serve military personnel stationed in Arizona, contributing to the operational readiness and quality of life at the base.

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

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N6247316R3201

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 300 E JOPPA RD, BALTIMORE, MD, 21286

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $37,056,155

Exercised Options: $37,056,155

Current Obligation: $37,056,155

Actual Outlays: $890,894

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6247317D0822

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline