DMC Construction awarded $18.5M for barracks upgrades, highlighting firm fixed-price contracts in institutional building construction

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $18,456,407 ($18.5M)

Contractor: DMC Construction, Incorporated

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-09-30

End Date: 2011-06-30

Contract Duration: 1,734 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: UPGRADE BARRACKS BUILDINGS 645, 646 AND 648 @ POM

Place of Performance

Location: MONTEREY, MONTEREY County, CALIFORNIA, 93940

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $18.5 million to DMC CONSTRUCTION, INCORPORATED for work described as: UPGRADE BARRACKS BUILDINGS 645, 646 AND 648 @ POM Key points: 1. Contract value of $18.5 million for barracks upgrades indicates significant investment in military infrastructure. 2. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests a defined scope and budget, potentially limiting cost overruns. 3. Competition was robust with 3 bidders, likely driving a competitive price for the services. 4. The project duration of 1734 days (approx. 4.75 years) points to a substantial and complex renovation effort. 5. The contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code, a common sector for government facilities. 6. Award to DMC Construction, Inc. suggests a capable contractor in the institutional building space.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The $18.5 million contract for upgrading three barracks buildings appears to be a significant investment in military housing. Without specific benchmarks for similar barracks renovations, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the contractor assumed the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the scope was well-defined. The number of bidders also suggests a competitive environment that likely influenced pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with three bids received. This level of competition is generally favorable as it allows a wide range of qualified contractors to participate, fostering a more dynamic marketplace and potentially leading to better pricing and service offerings for the government. The presence of multiple bidders suggests that the market for this type of construction service is sufficiently robust.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition with multiple bidders typically results in taxpayer savings by driving down prices through competitive bidding. This ensures that government funds are used efficiently and that the contract is awarded to the most capable and cost-effective provider.

Public Impact

Service members residing in barracks at the specified location will benefit from improved living conditions and updated facilities. The contract delivers essential construction and renovation services for critical military infrastructure. The geographic impact is localized to the base where the barracks are located, likely in California based on the 'SN' field. The project supports the construction workforce, including skilled trades and labor, within the relevant geographic area.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep in a long-duration construction project if not managed tightly.
Ensuring the quality of construction meets military standards over the multi-year duration.
Risk of contractor performance issues or financial instability over the extended project timeline.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition indicates a healthy market and likely competitive pricing.
Award to a single contractor suggests they were deemed most capable for this specific project.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the construction industry that includes the building and renovation of facilities like barracks, schools, hospitals, and government offices. Government spending in this sector is substantial, driven by the need to maintain and upgrade public infrastructure and facilities. Benchmarks for similar projects would typically involve comparing cost per square foot or cost per unit for barracks construction/renovation across different military installations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). While this specific award did not directly benefit small businesses through a set-aside, the prime contractor, DMC Construction, Inc., may engage small businesses as subcontractors. The extent of small business subcontracting would depend on the company's practices and the specific requirements of the contract, which are not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and their representatives within the Department of the Army. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the government's primary oversight concern would be ensuring the contractor adheres to the defined scope, schedule, and quality standards. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting, though detailed project-specific oversight mechanisms are internal to the agency.

Related Government Programs

Military Housing Construction
Barracks Renovation Projects
Department of Defense Facilities Management
General Building Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Long project duration increases risk of unforeseen issues.
Potential for quality compromises if contractor faces cost pressures.
Need for robust oversight to ensure adherence to military standards.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $18.5 million to DMC CONSTRUCTION, INCORPORATED. UPGRADE BARRACKS BUILDINGS 645, 646 AND 648 @ POM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DMC CONSTRUCTION, INCORPORATED.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $18.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-30. End: 2011-06-30.

What is the historical spending pattern for DMC Construction, Inc. with the Department of Defense?

Analyzing the historical spending for DMC Construction, Inc. with the Department of Defense requires access to a comprehensive federal procurement database. Without direct access to such data, we can infer that this $18.5 million contract represents a significant award. Typically, a review would involve examining the number of contracts awarded to the company, their total value over time, the types of services provided (e.g., construction, maintenance), and the specific agencies within the DoD that awarded these contracts. A pattern of successful, on-time, and within-budget completions on previous DoD contracts would indicate a strong track record, while frequent disputes, delays, or cost overruns might raise concerns about their performance reliability for future endeavors.

How does the cost per square foot for this barracks renovation compare to similar projects?

To compare the cost per square foot for this $18.5 million barracks renovation, we would need detailed information on the total square footage of the buildings being upgraded (Buildings 645, 646, and 648). Assuming these are substantial barracks, the total square footage could easily be tens of thousands. Without this figure, a direct cost-per-square-foot calculation is impossible. Furthermore, a meaningful comparison would require data on similar barracks renovation projects at other military installations, accounting for factors like the extent of renovation (e.g., gut renovation vs. cosmetic updates), age and condition of the existing structures, local labor costs, and material prices at the time of award. A preliminary assessment suggests the price is substantial, reflecting the complexity and scale of upgrading multiple large buildings.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract for a multi-year construction project?

The primary risk associated with a firm fixed-price (FFP) contract for a multi-year construction project like this barracks upgrade lies in the potential for the contractor to encounter unforeseen issues that significantly increase their costs. While the FFP structure shifts the financial risk of cost overruns to the contractor, it can incentivize them to cut corners on quality or materials if they are losing money, especially over a long duration (1734 days). Conversely, if the initial price was set too high due to overly conservative estimates by the contractor, taxpayers may have overpaid. Effective government oversight is crucial to ensure the contractor maintains quality standards and adheres to the contract's scope throughout the project's extended timeline.

What is the typical performance context for construction contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

Construction contracts awarded by the Department of the Army are typically characterized by large dollar values, long durations, and a focus on maintaining and upgrading extensive infrastructure across numerous installations. Performance context often involves adherence to strict military specifications, security requirements, and environmental regulations. The Army frequently utilizes various contract types, including firm fixed-price for well-defined scopes and cost-plus contracts for more uncertain projects. Success is often measured by timely completion, adherence to budget, quality of construction, and minimal disruption to base operations. Given the scale of Army construction needs, contractor performance is closely monitored, and past performance is a significant factor in future awards.

How does the number of bidders (3) impact price discovery for this contract?

Having three bidders for this construction contract provides a reasonable level of competition, which is generally beneficial for price discovery. Three bidders suggest that the opportunity was known and attractive enough for multiple firms to invest resources in preparing proposals. This number is often considered a good balance: enough to ensure competitive pressure and prevent a single bidder from dominating, but not so many that the evaluation process becomes overly burdensome or that bidders perceive the chance of winning as too low to justify a thorough bid. The pricing submitted by these three firms would likely reflect a competitive market assessment, allowing the Army to select the best value offer, balancing price and technical qualifications.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W9123806R0038

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2611 GARDEN RD, MONTEREY, CA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $18,456,407

Exercised Options: $18,456,407

Current Obligation: $18,456,407

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline