Navy awards $5.67M for Guam architectural services, with 2,209 days for design completion

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $5,671,987 ($5.7M)

Contractor: Rmaa-Api Joint Venture, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2019-11-19

End Date: 2026-11-30

Contract Duration: 2,568 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONTRACT NO. N6274217D0006, TASK ORDER NO. N6274220F0302,P-305 PDA (0-35% DESIGN).

Place of Performance

Location: HAGATNA, GUAM County, GUAM, 96910

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $5.7 million to RMAA-API JOINT VENTURE, LLC for work described as: CONTRACT NO. N6274217D0006, TASK ORDER NO. N6274220F0302,P-305 PDA (0-35% DESIGN). Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in architectural design services for naval facilities. 2. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs, but requires careful monitoring of scope creep. 3. A long performance period suggests a complex project with phased development or extensive design iterations. 4. The contract is positioned within the broader defense construction and infrastructure sector. 5. Competition dynamics will be crucial in ensuring value for taxpayer dollars over the contract's life.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $5.67 million for architectural services appears reasonable given the extended performance period of 2,568 days (approximately 7 years). Benchmarking against similar large-scale architectural design contracts for military installations, particularly in overseas locations like Guam, suggests this pricing is within expected ranges. The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty, but the long duration necessitates diligent oversight to manage potential changes and ensure the final price reflects the initial scope and market conditions.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely solicited and evaluated. The presence of a competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government. While the exact number of bidders is not specified, the 'full and open' designation suggests a robust competition that should have yielded a competitive price.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces, ensuring the government receives the best value for its investment in architectural services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and its personnel stationed in Guam, who will receive updated and potentially improved facilities. The contract delivers essential architectural design services, specifically for PDA (0-35% design), which is a critical early stage in the construction lifecycle. The geographic impact is concentrated in Guam, supporting military infrastructure development in the Pacific region. The contract will likely involve architects, engineers, and related technical professionals, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in the architectural services sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long performance period (2568 days) increases risk of scope creep and cost escalation if not managed tightly.
Firm-fixed-price with a long duration could lead to contractor claims if unforeseen conditions arise.
Reliance on a single joint venture (RMAA-API JOINT VENTURE, LLC) for a critical design phase warrants close monitoring of their capacity and performance.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment.
Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract is for a critical early-stage design process (0-35% design), laying the groundwork for future construction.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Architectural Services (NAICS 541310) sector, a segment of the broader Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry. The market for architectural services supporting government infrastructure, particularly defense facilities, is substantial. Spending in this sector is often driven by modernization efforts, new construction, and facility upgrades. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically look at per-square-foot design costs or percentage of construction value for similar projects, though specific data for overseas military bases can vary.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the prime contractor is a joint venture, which may or may not include small business participation. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities exist for small businesses within the architectural or related professional services required for this design task order. The absence of a small business set-aside suggests the primary focus was on securing the most capable large business or joint venture for this specific requirement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily reside with the Department of the Navy's contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified design services. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Contracts
Department of Defense Design and Engineering Services
Guam Military Construction Projects
Architectural and Engineering Services for Federal Agencies
Pacific Region Defense Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Long contract duration increases risk of scope creep and cost escalation.
Potential for contractor claims due to unforeseen conditions over extended performance period.
Need for robust oversight to ensure quality and adherence to evolving requirements.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $5.7 million to RMAA-API JOINT VENTURE, LLC. CONTRACT NO. N6274217D0006, TASK ORDER NO. N6274220F0302,P-305 PDA (0-35% DESIGN).

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RMAA-API JOINT VENTURE, LLC.

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: 2019-11-19. End: 2026-11-30.

What is the track record of RMAA-API JOINT VENTURE, LLC in performing similar large-scale architectural design contracts for the Department of Defense?

Assessing the track record of RMAA-API JOINT VENTURE, LLC is crucial for understanding their capability to deliver on this significant contract. As a joint venture, its performance history would be a composite of its member companies' experiences and any prior joint projects. Information on past performance, including successful completion of similar design phases (0-35% design), adherence to schedules, budget management, and client satisfaction, would be sought from federal contract databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) and past performance questionnaires. A lack of extensive, relevant past performance could indicate a higher risk for project delays or quality issues, necessitating closer government oversight.

How does the $5.67 million contract value compare to industry benchmarks for architectural design services for similar-sized military facilities in overseas locations?

Benchmarking the $5.67 million contract value requires comparing it against industry standards for architectural design services, particularly for military installations in high-cost overseas locations like Guam. Key metrics include the cost per square foot for design services or the design fee as a percentage of the estimated construction cost. While specific data for this project is limited, general benchmarks suggest that design fees can range from 5% to 15% of construction costs, depending on project complexity and location. Given the 2,568-day performance period, the value appears to account for extensive design development. A detailed comparison would involve analyzing the scope of work against similar NAVFAC or DoD projects to ascertain if the pricing is competitive and reflects fair market value.

What are the primary risks associated with the long performance period (2,568 days) for this architectural design contract?

The extended performance period of 2,568 days (approximately 7 years) for this architectural design contract introduces several key risks. Firstly, there is an increased likelihood of scope creep, where the requirements may evolve or expand beyond the initial agreement, potentially leading to cost overruns if not managed through formal change orders. Secondly, market conditions, such as material costs or labor rates, can fluctuate significantly over such a long timeframe, impacting the feasibility of the design and potentially leading to contractor claims if the contract type doesn't adequately account for these changes. Thirdly, maintaining consistent quality and engagement from the contractor over several years can be challenging. Finally, the long duration increases the risk of design obsolescence if technology or operational needs change substantially before construction begins.

What is the significance of the '0-35% Design' phase (PDA) in the context of this contract and future construction?

The '0-35% Design' phase, often referred to as preliminary design or conceptual design, is a critical foundational stage in any construction project. This phase involves defining the project's scope, requirements, basic layout, and overall concept. For this contract, completing the 0-35% design means establishing the fundamental parameters for the facility, including its size, function, major systems, and aesthetic considerations. This phase is crucial because decisions made here significantly influence subsequent design stages (e.g., 35-65%, 65-95%, 95-100% design) and the overall construction cost and timeline. A well-executed preliminary design ensures that the project aligns with the Navy's needs in Guam and provides a solid basis for detailed engineering and eventual construction.

How does the firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type mitigate or introduce risks given the long duration and the nature of design services?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type aims to provide the government with cost certainty, as the price is set and generally not subject to adjustment based on the contractor's actual costs. For this $5.67 million contract with a 2,568-day duration, the FFP structure places the risk of cost overruns primarily on the contractor, RMAA-API JOINT VENTURE, LLC. This incentivizes the contractor to manage their resources efficiently and control costs. However, the long duration introduces a risk that unforeseen circumstances (e.g., significant changes in market conditions, regulatory requirements, or discovery of unexpected site conditions during design development) could make the fixed price unfeasible for the contractor, potentially leading to requests for equitable adjustments or claims, especially if the contract language doesn't adequately address such contingencies. Diligent contract administration is key to managing these risks.

What are the potential implications of awarding this contract to a joint venture for the small business ecosystem?

Awarding this contract to a joint venture, RMAA-API JOINT VENTURE, LLC, has mixed implications for the small business ecosystem. On one hand, joint ventures are often formed to combine the capabilities of different companies, potentially including small businesses teaming with larger ones to pursue contracts they might not otherwise qualify for. This can provide opportunities for small businesses to gain experience and build past performance. On the other hand, if the joint venture is structured primarily with large business partners, or if there are no specific subcontracting goals mandated for small businesses, the direct benefit to the broader small business ecosystem might be limited. The government's small business subcontracting plan requirements, if applicable, would be the primary mechanism to ensure small business participation.

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

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1150 S KING ST 8TH FLR, HONOLULU, HI, 96814

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $5,671,987

Exercised Options: $5,671,987

Current Obligation: $5,671,987

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6274217D0006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline