Department of the Army contract for construction services awarded to K.O.O. CONSTRUCTION, INC. for over $27.4 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $27,428,453 ($27.4M)

Contractor: K.O.O. Construction, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-06-07

End Date: 2009-10-15

Contract Duration: 861 days

Daily Burn Rate: $31.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCT DGS-2

Place of Performance

Location: BEALE AFB, YUBA County, CALIFORNIA, 95903

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $27.4 million to K.O.O. CONSTRUCTION, INC. for work described as: CONSTRUCT DGS-2 Key points: 1. The contract value of over $27.4 million represents a significant investment in construction services. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a potentially competitive bidding process. 3. The firm fixed-price contract type indicates that the contractor assumes the risk for cost overruns. 4. The contract duration of 861 days points to a substantial construction project. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 categorizes this as Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. 6. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major federal agency. 7. The contract was awarded in California, indicating a specific geographic focus for the construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific construction contract is challenging without detailed project specifications and market conditions at the time of award. However, a contract value exceeding $27 million for commercial and institutional building construction suggests a large-scale project. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract shifts cost risk to the contractor, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the contractor is experienced and the scope is well-defined. Further analysis would require comparing the final cost against the initial bid and any change orders.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 3 bids indicates a degree of competition, though the exact level of competition and its impact on pricing would depend on the number of potential bidders and the specific requirements of the project. A higher number of bids generally leads to more competitive pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best possible price through a wide range of offers. The fact that three bids were received suggests that the government received multiple options, potentially driving down costs compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army, which receives the constructed facility, and K.O.O. CONSTRUCTION, INC., the awarded contractor. The services delivered include commercial and institutional building construction, likely resulting in a new or renovated facility for military or related operations. The geographic impact is concentrated in California, where the construction project is located. Workforce implications include job creation for construction workers, engineers, and project managers involved in the project.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the firm fixed-price contract was not adequately scoped.
Risk associated with the contractor's past performance and ability to deliver on time and within budget.
The limited number of bids (3) might suggest less intense competition than ideal for maximizing taxpayer value.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating an effort to solicit broad market interest.
Firm fixed-price contract type, which transfers cost risk to the contractor.
The contract was awarded to a specific company, K.O.O. CONSTRUCTION, INC., suggesting they met the required qualifications.

Sector Analysis

The construction industry is a significant sector for federal spending, encompassing a wide range of projects from infrastructure to facility development. Contracts like this, for commercial and institutional buildings, are common across various federal agencies. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous firms capable of undertaking large-scale projects. Benchmarking this contract's value would require comparison to similar-sized construction projects awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal entities during the same period, considering regional construction cost variations.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without specific set-aside goals or subcontracting requirements, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular contract is likely minimal, though the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors at their discretion.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the project management team within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, which penalizes the contractor for cost overruns. Transparency is generally provided through contract award databases, though detailed project-specific oversight reports may not be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Federal Building Construction
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Contract Duration
Number of Bids Received
Contractor Past Performance (Unknown)

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $27.4 million to K.O.O. CONSTRUCTION, INC.. CONSTRUCT DGS-2

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is K.O.O. CONSTRUCTION, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $27.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-06-07. End: 2009-10-15.

What was the specific type of commercial and institutional building constructed under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 236220, which is 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction.' However, the specific type of building (e.g., barracks, administrative facility, training center, hospital wing) is not detailed in the summary data. To determine the exact nature of the facility, one would need to consult the contract's statement of work or project description. This information is crucial for understanding the project's scope, complexity, and its ultimate utility for the Department of the Army.

How did the final cost compare to the initial awarded amount for K.O.O. CONSTRUCTION, INC.?

The provided data shows the awarded amount ('a') as $27,428,453.4. To assess the final cost comparison, access to the contract's completion records, including any modifications or change orders, would be necessary. Since this was a firm fixed-price contract, the expectation is that the final cost would align closely with the awarded amount, unless significant, unforeseen issues necessitated contract modifications. A review of the contract's modification history and final payment records would reveal if the final cost deviated from the initial award and the reasons for any such deviations.

What is the track record of K.O.O. CONSTRUCTION, INC. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of the Army?

The provided data identifies K.O.O. CONSTRUCTION, INC. as the contractor but does not offer details on their historical performance or track record with federal agencies. A comprehensive assessment would require accessing federal procurement databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) to review their past contract awards, performance evaluations (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any history of disputes or terminations. Understanding their experience with similar-sized projects and their performance history with the Department of the Army would provide valuable insight into their reliability and capability.

Were there any significant delays or issues encountered during the execution of this contract?

The data indicates a contract duration of 861 days (approximately 2.36 years) from the start date of 2007-06-07 to the end date of 2009-10-15. While this duration is provided, information regarding specific delays, issues, or performance problems during the contract's execution is not included in the summary data. Such details would typically be found in contract performance reports, agency correspondence, or potentially in Inspector General reports if significant problems arose. Without this additional information, it's impossible to assess if the project encountered significant hurdles.

How does the awarded amount of over $27.4 million compare to typical construction contracts of similar scope and type awarded by the Department of the Army?

Comparing this $27.4 million contract to typical Department of the Army construction contracts requires access to historical spending data and project databases. The 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' category is broad. To make a meaningful comparison, one would need to identify similar projects in terms of building type, size, complexity, and location, awarded around the same time period (2007-2009). Factors like regional construction costs, material prices, and labor rates at the time would also be critical. Without this comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether this contract represented a particularly high or low value.

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: W9123807R0014

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2510 BOATMAN AVE, WEST SACRAMENTO, CA, 07

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, HUBZone Firm, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $27,429,553

Exercised Options: $27,429,553

Current Obligation: $27,428,453

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline