DoD's $60.5M Training Housing Compound Contract Awarded to Foreign Entities Lacks Competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $60,528,900 ($60.5M)
Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2010-08-16
End Date: 2018-01-15
Contract Duration: 2,709 days
Daily Burn Rate: $22.3K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: DESIGN & CONSTRUCT TRAINING & SUPPORT HOUSING COMPOUND
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $60.5 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: DESIGN & CONSTRUCT TRAINING & SUPPORT HOUSING COMPOUND Key points: 1. Significant spending on construction for training facilities. 2. Contract awarded to miscellaneous foreign awardees, raising questions about domestic industry engagement. 3. Lack of competition suggests potential for inflated costs and reduced value for taxpayers. 4. Construction sector spending, with a focus on institutional buildings.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The contract value of $60.5M for construction is substantial. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to assess if this price represents fair market value compared to similar construction projects domestically or internationally.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was not available for competition, indicating a limited source selection process. This lack of open competition hinders price discovery and may lead to less favorable terms for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competitive bidding means taxpayers may have paid more than necessary for the construction of the training and support housing compound.
Public Impact
Taxpayers may have overpaid due to the lack of competitive bidding. Questions arise regarding the selection of foreign awardees for a domestic construction project. The long duration of the contract (2010-2018) warrants scrutiny of project management and cost control.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition
- Award to foreign entities
- No small business participation indicated
Positive Signals
- Contract awarded for essential training infrastructure
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the commercial and institutional building construction sector. Benchmarks for similar projects are difficult to ascertain due to the limited competition and foreign awardee.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates no small business participation in this contract. This represents a missed opportunity to support domestic small businesses within the construction sector.
Oversight & Accountability
The 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' status suggests potential oversight gaps in ensuring competitive sourcing for government contracts. Further review is needed to understand the justification for this approach.
Related Government Programs
- Commercial and Institutional Building Construction
- Department of Defense Contracting
- Department of the Army Programs
Risk Flags
- Potential for overpayment due to lack of competition.
- Concerns regarding the selection of foreign awardees for construction.
- Absence of small business participation.
- Lack of transparency in the procurement process.
Tags
commercial-and-institutional-building-co, department-of-defense, definitive-contract, 10m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $60.5 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. DESIGN & CONSTRUCT TRAINING & SUPPORT HOUSING COMPOUND
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $60.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2010-08-16. End: 2018-01-15.
What was the specific justification for awarding this contract without competition, and were alternative competitive strategies considered?
The contract was designated as 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' implying a specific justification was provided, possibly related to unique capabilities, urgent needs, or national security concerns. However, without access to the detailed justification documentation, it's impossible to confirm the exact reasons or whether alternative competitive strategies were explored and deemed unsuitable.
How does the cost of this contract compare to similar construction projects awarded competitively, considering the foreign awardee status?
Direct cost comparison is challenging without competitive benchmarks. Awarding to foreign entities may introduce additional complexities and costs (e.g., logistics, compliance) not present in domestic contracts. A thorough cost-benefit analysis would be required to determine if the final price was reasonable relative to the value received, especially given the lack of competitive pressure.
What measures were in place to ensure the quality and timely completion of the training housing compound given the foreign awardees and lack of competition?
While the contract type is 'FIRM FIXED PRICE,' suggesting cost certainty, oversight mechanisms are crucial. The government likely had quality assurance representatives and contract specialists monitoring progress. However, the lack of competition and foreign awardee status could present unique challenges in oversight, potentially impacting the effectiveness of these measures.
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: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 2011 CRYSTAL DR STE 911, ARLINGTON, VA, 22202
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $60,528,900
Exercised Options: $60,528,900
Current Obligation: $60,528,900
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2010-08-16
Current End Date: 2018-01-15
Potential End Date: 2018-01-15 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2017-12-12
More Contracts from Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees
- Additional Services Mca-Funded — $1.4B (Department of Defense)
- {piin: W27p4a05c0002} Bottled Water — $480.1M (Department of Defense)
- {piin: W91gy007c0053} Rule of LAW — $372.4M (Department of Defense)
- {piin: W91gdw07d4021} Reconstruction Security Support Services (rsss) — $188.8M (Department of Defense)
- {piin: W91gxy06c0094} AL Qudas GAS Turbine Expansion — $169.5M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)