DoD's $5.7M contract for building construction in Hawaii awarded to Allied Pacific Builders Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $5,715,903 ($5.7M)

Contractor: Allied Pacific Builders Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2021-12-22

End Date: 2023-10-29

Contract Duration: 676 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: X006 #1668538 REPLACE ASTS BUILDING 794 PCP AND BUILDING 6890 HALSEY TERRACE

Place of Performance

Location: PEARL HARBOR, HONOLULU County, HAWAII, 96860

State: Hawaii Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $5.7 million to ALLIED PACIFIC BUILDERS INC for work described as: X006 #1668538 REPLACE ASTS BUILDING 794 PCP AND BUILDING 6890 HALSEY TERRACE Key points: 1. Value for money appears reasonable given the scope of construction services. 2. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with a fixed-price contract type mitigating cost overrun risks. 4. Performance context is within the commercial and institutional building construction sector. 5. This contract fits within the broader defense infrastructure spending category. 6. The duration of the contract is substantial, indicating a significant project timeline.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $5.7 million for building construction services appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this nature, especially considering it involves multiple buildings and a significant duration. Benchmarking against similar commercial and institutional building construction contracts within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies would provide a more precise assessment of value. However, the firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the initial price was determined through negotiation and competition, aiming for cost certainty.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' which implies that while the competition was open, certain sources may have been excluded based on specific criteria. The presence of 5 bidders indicates a degree of competition. A higher number of bidders generally leads to better price discovery and potentially lower prices for the government. The specific exclusion of sources warrants further investigation to understand its impact on the competitive landscape and final pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition, even with exclusions, is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to solicit the best value from a broad range of qualified contractors, potentially leading to cost savings.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its personnel stationed in Hawaii, who will gain improved or new facilities. The services delivered include the construction and renovation of buildings, enhancing military infrastructure. The geographic impact is localized to Hawaii, specifically impacting military installations where the buildings are located. Workforce implications include job creation for construction workers and related trades in the region during the contract period.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for limited competition due to exclusion of sources, which could impact price.
The long contract duration (676 days) increases the risk of unforeseen issues or changes in market conditions.
Fixed-price contracts can sometimes lead to contractors cutting corners if not adequately overseen.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a broad search for qualified bidders.
Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contractor, Allied Pacific Builders Inc., has a track record that can be reviewed for performance history.
The contract is for essential infrastructure improvements, supporting military readiness.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the construction industry. Federal spending in this sector supports infrastructure development across various government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other DoD construction contracts or large-scale building projects awarded by agencies like GSA or other military branches. The market size for federal construction is substantial, with significant annual outlays.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus for this contract, as the 'sb' (small business set-aside) flag is false. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that the contract was not specifically designed to benefit small businesses, and their involvement would likely be through direct subcontracting opportunities offered by the prime contractor, Allied Pacific Builders Inc.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily be managed by the Department of the Navy, a component of the Department of Defense. Accountability measures would include contract performance monitoring, adherence to specifications, and quality control. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Military Construction
General Services Administration (GSA) Building Construction
Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Contracts
Federal Buildings Fund Projects

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion.
Long contract duration increases risk exposure.
Need for detailed review of contractor's past performance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $5.7 million to ALLIED PACIFIC BUILDERS INC. X006 #1668538 REPLACE ASTS BUILDING 794 PCP AND BUILDING 6890 HALSEY TERRACE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALLIED PACIFIC BUILDERS 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 $5.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-12-22. End: 2023-10-29.

What is the track record of Allied Pacific Builders Inc. on similar federal contracts?

To assess the track record of Allied Pacific Builders Inc., a review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those with the Department of Defense or for similar construction projects, would be necessary. This would involve examining contract completion history, any past performance evaluations, instances of contract modifications, disputes, or terminations. A positive history of timely completion, adherence to budget, and quality delivery would indicate a reliable contractor. Conversely, a history of issues could signal potential risks for this current contract. Without specific past performance data readily available in this summary, further investigation into their contract database history is recommended.

How does the awarded price compare to similar construction projects in Hawaii?

Comparing the awarded price of approximately $5.7 million for this building construction project to similar projects in Hawaii requires access to a database of comparable construction contracts within the same geographic region and for similar types of facilities. Factors such as building size, complexity, materials used, and specific site conditions significantly influence costs. Benchmarking against projects of comparable scope and scale, ideally those also awarded by the federal government or state of Hawaii, would provide a clearer picture of whether this contract represents good value. The firm fixed-price nature suggests the price was set competitively, but external benchmarking is crucial for a definitive value assessment.

What are the specific risks associated with the 'exclusion of sources' in the competition process?

The 'exclusion of sources' in a 'full and open competition' scenario means that while the competition was broadly open, certain potential bidders were intentionally not considered. The specific risks depend on the reasons for exclusion. If sources were excluded based on objective, justifiable criteria (e.g., lack of specific certifications, past performance issues), the risk to the government might be minimal. However, if the exclusion criteria were subjective or potentially biased, it could limit competition, potentially leading to higher prices or reduced innovation. It also raises questions about whether the government received the absolute best value possible by not considering all qualified entities. A thorough review of the exclusion rationale is needed to fully understand the associated risks.

What is the expected impact of this contract on military readiness or operational capabilities in Hawaii?

This contract is expected to enhance military readiness and operational capabilities in Hawaii by providing improved or new building facilities. These facilities could support various functions, such as housing, training, command and control, or logistical operations. Modern, well-maintained infrastructure is crucial for the effective functioning of military bases and the well-being of service members. The specific impact will depend on the type and purpose of the buildings being constructed or renovated. Upgraded facilities can lead to increased efficiency, better morale, and enhanced security, all contributing to overall operational effectiveness.

How does historical spending on building construction by the Department of the Navy in Hawaii compare to this contract?

To assess how this $5.7 million contract compares to historical spending by the Department of the Navy in Hawaii, one would need to analyze past contract data for similar construction projects in that specific geographic area. This analysis would involve looking at the total dollar amount spent on building construction over several fiscal years, the number and types of contracts awarded, and the average contract values. Understanding the historical spending patterns can help determine if this contract is an outlier, consistent with trends, or represents a significant investment. It also helps in identifying any fluctuations in demand or budget allocation for construction projects in the region.

What are the potential implications of the 676-day duration on project costs and quality?

A contract duration of 676 days (approximately 22 months) for building construction is substantial and carries several implications. For costs, a longer duration increases the risk of inflation affecting material prices and labor rates, although the firm fixed-price contract aims to mitigate this for the government. It also means prolonged mobilization and overhead costs for the contractor. For quality, a longer timeline can allow for more thorough execution and attention to detail, potentially leading to higher quality. However, it also increases the window for potential delays due to weather, unforeseen site conditions, or supply chain disruptions, which could impact the final delivery and potentially strain contractor resources if not managed effectively.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N6247817R4034

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2045 LAUWILIWILI ST STE 1302, KAPOLEI, HI, 96707

Business Categories: Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, HUBZone Firm, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $5,715,903

Exercised Options: $5,715,903

Current Obligation: $5,715,903

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6247820D4033

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline