DoD's $14.4M construction contract for Mississippi facilities awarded to Z-Corp/Lee Tech

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,376,828 ($14.4M)

Contractor: Z-Corp/Lee Tech

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-04-30

End Date: 2009-06-09

Contract Duration: 771 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: LUMP SUM FOR ENTIRE WORK

Place of Performance

Location: STENNIS SPACE CENTER, HANCOCK County, MISSISSIPPI, 39529

State: Mississippi Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.4 million to Z-CORP/LEE TECH for work described as: LUMP SUM FOR ENTIRE WORK Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the scope of commercial and institutional building construction. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market with potential for competitive pricing. 3. Contract duration of 771 days indicates a significant project requiring substantial oversight. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor, potentially impacting final cost. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Navy, this contract falls under defense sector spending. 6. The contract was awarded in 2007, providing historical context for current spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $14.4 million for commercial and institutional building construction seems within a reasonable range for a project of this nature and duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure suggests that the initial bid was expected to cover all costs, but it's important to monitor for any change orders or claims that could increase the final expenditure.

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 considered. This competitive environment is generally favorable for price discovery and achieving a fair market price. The presence of multiple bidders suggests a robust market for such construction services, allowing the government to select from a range of qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition as it typically drives down prices through market forces, ensuring that the government is not overpaying for services rendered.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and its personnel, who will utilize the improved facilities. The contract delivers essential construction and renovation services for commercial and institutional buildings. The geographic impact is localized to Mississippi, where the construction work was performed. The project likely supported local construction jobs and related industries in Mississippi during its execution.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise during construction, despite the fixed-price nature.
Ensuring timely completion within the 771-day duration is crucial to avoid extended disruption.
Quality of construction must meet stringent federal standards to ensure long-term durability and safety.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process.
Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Contract awarded to a joint venture (Z-Corp/Lee Tech), potentially leveraging combined expertise.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader construction sector, specifically commercial and institutional building construction. The federal government is a significant consumer of construction services, awarding billions annually for infrastructure, facilities, and specialized buildings. This contract represents a portion of the Department of Defense's investment in maintaining and upgrading its physical assets. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale military construction projects or similar institutional building contracts across federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting goals is not explicitly provided in the data. As this was a full and open competition, it's possible that small businesses could have participated as prime contractors or subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine if any small business participation requirements were included or met.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Department of the Navy, ensuring adherence to contract terms, quality standards, and timelines. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price structure, which incentivizes the contractor to manage costs effectively. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though specific project details and performance metrics may vary.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Construction
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Contracts
Military Construction Projects
Federal Building and Infrastructure Projects

Risk Flags

Contract duration exceeds one year, requiring sustained oversight.
Fixed-price contract type may expose government to claims if unforeseen issues arise.
Construction projects inherently carry risks related to site conditions and material costs.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.4 million to Z-CORP/LEE TECH. LUMP SUM FOR ENTIRE WORK

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is Z-CORP/LEE TECH.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-04-30. End: 2009-06-09.

What was the specific nature of the commercial and institutional building construction performed under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' (ND code 236220) awarded by the Department of the Navy. While the exact scope isn't detailed, this classification typically encompasses the construction of non-residential buildings such as administrative facilities, barracks, training centers, maintenance buildings, or other structures supporting military operations. The project duration of 771 days (over two years) suggests a substantial undertaking, likely involving new construction, significant renovation, or expansion of existing facilities rather than minor repairs.

How does the $14.4 million contract value compare to similar construction projects by the Department of Defense?

Without specific details on the project's scope (e.g., square footage, type of facility, complexity), a direct comparison of the $14.4 million value is challenging. However, for large-scale military construction projects, this figure represents a moderate investment. The Department of Defense undertakes numerous construction contracts annually, ranging from smaller facility upgrades to multi-hundred-million-dollar base developments. To benchmark effectively, one would need to compare this contract against projects of similar scale, type (e.g., barracks, administrative buildings), and geographic region, considering inflation and market conditions at the time of award (2007).

What are the potential risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract for a construction project of this duration?

A firm fixed-price (FFP) contract shifts the majority of cost risk to the contractor. For a project lasting 771 days, potential risks include the contractor underestimating costs, facing unexpected site conditions (e.g., soil issues, hazardous materials), or experiencing significant material price escalation. While the FFP aims for cost certainty for the government, it can lead to contractor claims for changes or delays if scope is altered or unforeseen circumstances arise. Conversely, if the contractor manages risks effectively, the government benefits from a predictable final price. The government's risk is primarily related to ensuring the contractor has the capability to absorb potential cost overruns or deliver the project as specified.

What does the 'full and open competition' designation imply for the contractor selection and pricing?

The 'full and open competition' designation signifies that the Department of the Navy solicited proposals from all responsible sources and conducted a full and open bidding process. This implies that multiple contractors had the opportunity to compete for the contract, and the award was made to the contractor offering the best value (considering price and other factors). This level of competition is generally expected to result in more competitive pricing for the government compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios. It also suggests a sufficient number of qualified contractors were available in the market for this type of construction work.

How has federal spending on commercial and institutional building construction evolved since this contract was awarded in 2007?

Federal spending on construction, including commercial and institutional buildings, has fluctuated significantly since 2007, influenced by economic conditions, infrastructure initiatives, and defense spending priorities. Following the 2008 recession, stimulus spending may have temporarily boosted construction activity. Defense construction spending is subject to budget cycles and geopolitical events. Analyzing aggregate federal spending data for NAICS code 236220 (Commercial and Institutional Building Construction) from 2007 to the present would reveal overall trends, including periods of increase or decrease, and highlight shifts in agency priorities and budget allocations for construction services.

What is the significance of the 'MS' (Mississippi) state code and 'DCA' award type?

The 'MS' code indicates that the contract's performance location or primary area of work was Mississippi. This suggests the construction project was situated within the state, potentially benefiting the local economy through job creation and subcontractor utilization. The 'DCA' award type likely stands for 'Design-Build Construction Award' or a similar designation indicating the contractor was responsible for both the design and construction phases of the project. This approach can streamline project delivery and potentially improve coordination between design and execution, though it requires careful oversight to ensure the design meets all requirements.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N6945007R0060

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 6001 MILLER STORE RD, NORFOLK, VA, 03

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Emerging Small Business, Minority Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,376,828

Exercised Options: $14,376,828

Current Obligation: $14,376,828

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline