DoD Awards $63.6M Firm Fixed Price Contract for Afghan Construction, Full and Open Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $63,591,720 ($63.6M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2012-01-06

End Date: 2014-02-25

Contract Duration: 781 days

Daily Burn Rate: $81.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF-OT::IGF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE ANA 2/205 RCC/MP/TRANSIENT AND BASE ADDITIONS AT QALAT, ZABUL PROVINCE, AFGHANISTAN.

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $63.6 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: IGF-OT::IGF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE ANA 2/205 RCC/MP/TRANSIENT AND BASE ADDITIONS AT QALAT, ZABUL PROVINCE, AFGHANISTAN. Key points: 1. Contract awarded for construction in Afghanistan, highlighting significant infrastructure investment. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a robust price discovery process. 3. The contract value is substantial, necessitating close monitoring for cost efficiency. 4. Construction sector spending can be volatile; this project's execution is key.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $63.6 million is significant. Benchmarking against similar construction projects in active zones is difficult due to unique risk factors and logistical costs. The firm fixed price suggests cost certainty for the government, but the final cost relative to the scope needs careful evaluation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, which generally promotes competitive pricing. The undisclosed domestic awardees make it difficult to assess the breadth of competition and its impact on price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition aims to secure the best value for taxpayers. However, the undisclosed nature of the awardees raises questions about the transparency and ultimate cost-effectiveness achieved.

Public Impact

Taxpayer funds allocated for critical infrastructure in a high-risk operational environment. Project completion directly impacts military operational readiness and personnel support. Potential for cost overruns or delays in complex, remote construction projects. Transparency concerns regarding awardee identification and specific contract performance metrics.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Undisclosed awardees hinder transparency and competitive analysis.
High-risk operational environment in Afghanistan presents execution challenges.
Potential for scope creep or change orders impacting final cost.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed price contract provides cost certainty.
Full and open competition utilized.
Project addresses essential base infrastructure needs.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector. Spending in this sector, particularly for overseas military installations, is often driven by geopolitical needs and can be subject to significant cost premiums due to logistical complexities and security requirements.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that the awardees were domestic but undisclosed. There is no specific information provided regarding the participation or subcontracting opportunities for small businesses on this particular contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight of construction projects in overseas, high-risk environments is critical. The Department of the Army, through its contracting and inspection mechanisms, is responsible for ensuring contract compliance, quality, and timely delivery. Further review of IG reports or performance audits would be beneficial.

Related Government Programs

Commercial and Institutional Building Construction
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of transparency regarding awardee identity.
High-risk operational environment potentially leading to cost overruns.
Complexity of overseas construction projects.
Potential for undisclosed subcontractors impacting small business participation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $63.6 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). IGF-OT::IGF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE ANA 2/205 RCC/MP/TRANSIENT AND BASE ADDITIONS AT QALAT, ZABUL PROVINCE, AFGHANISTAN.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $63.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-01-06. End: 2014-02-25.

What was the specific scope of work for the 'ANA 2/205 RCC/MP/TRANSIENT AND BASE ADDITIONS' and how did it align with the awarded budget?

The specific scope involved design and construction of additions to existing facilities, including transient quarters and potentially command/control elements (RCC/MP) for the Afghan National Army (ANA) at Qalat. The firm fixed price of $63.6 million suggests a defined scope, but without detailed project specifications, it's difficult to definitively assess budget alignment. Post-award modifications or change orders would be key indicators of scope evolution.

Given the operational environment in Afghanistan, what specific risk mitigation strategies were employed to manage the $63.6 million contract and ensure taxpayer value?

Managing contracts in Afghanistan requires robust risk mitigation, including security protocols for personnel and materials, contingency planning for logistical disruptions, and stringent quality control measures. The firm fixed price contract shifts some cost risk to the contractor. However, the government must actively oversee contractor performance, monitor for potential fraud or waste, and manage any necessary change orders judiciously to protect taxpayer interests.

How effective was the full and open competition in achieving competitive pricing for this complex overseas construction project?

While full and open competition is the preferred method for maximizing competition, its effectiveness in achieving optimal pricing for overseas construction is context-dependent. Factors like the limited number of qualified contractors willing to operate in high-risk zones, logistical challenges, and security costs can inflate bids. The undisclosed nature of the awardees makes it impossible to assess the number of bids received or the competitiveness of the final price without further data.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W5J9LE12B0004

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $63,591,720

Exercised Options: $63,591,720

Current Obligation: $63,591,720

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline