Department of the Army awards $19M construction contract to Far West Contractors Corp for Schafer Dam HQ Building

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $18,995,287 ($19.0M)

Contractor: FAR West Contractors Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-10-03

End Date: 2027-04-17

Contract Duration: 561 days

Daily Burn Rate: $33.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: SCHAFER DAM HQ BLDG - THIS IS A RE-AWARD DUE TO ISSUES IN ACWS. AWARD WAS PREVIOUSLY MADE AND ANNOUNCED TO CONGRESS ON 19 SEPTEMBER 2025.

Place of Performance

Location: PORTERVILLE, TULARE County, CALIFORNIA, 93257

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $19.0 million to FAR WEST CONTRACTORS CORP for work described as: SCHAFER DAM HQ BLDG - THIS IS A RE-AWARD DUE TO ISSUES IN ACWS. AWARD WAS PREVIOUSLY MADE AND ANNOUNCED TO CONGRESS ON 19 SEPTEMBER 2025. Key points: 1. Contract awarded as a re-award following prior issues, indicating potential performance risks. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract is a firm-fixed-price type, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 4. Project duration is 561 days, with an estimated completion in April 2027. 5. The contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code. 6. Awarded by the Department of the Army, indicating a defense-related infrastructure need.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $18.99 million for a headquarters building construction project requires benchmarking against similar projects. Without specific details on the scope of work, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the re-award status due to prior issues could imply increased costs or delays, potentially impacting overall value. Further analysis would involve comparing per-square-foot costs and construction complexity to similar DoD facilities.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' which is a specific type of full and open competition. This suggests that while the competition was broad, there might have been initial exclusions or specific criteria that narrowed the field before the final award. The presence of 2 bids indicates some level of competition, but the exact number of interested parties and the reasons for excluding other sources would provide a clearer picture of the competitive landscape.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging competitive pricing. However, the 'after exclusion of sources' clause warrants scrutiny to ensure no viable bidders were unfairly prevented from participating, which could have limited price discovery.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army personnel who will utilize the new headquarters building. The contract delivers essential infrastructure for military operations and administrative functions. The project is geographically located in California, potentially impacting the local construction workforce and economy. Construction activities will likely involve skilled trades and labor within the specified region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Re-award due to prior issues suggests potential contractor performance problems or contract disputes.
The 'exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type needs further investigation to ensure fairness and maximum competition.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can lead to disputes if the scope of work is not clearly defined, especially in construction.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition, even with exclusions, aims to achieve competitive pricing.
The contract is firm-fixed-price, providing cost certainty for the government once awarded.
The project is for essential infrastructure, supporting military readiness and operations.

Sector Analysis

The Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector is a significant part of the U.S. economy, encompassing a wide range of projects from office buildings to specialized facilities. Federal spending in this sector often supports critical infrastructure for government agencies. Benchmarking this $19 million project would involve comparing its cost per square foot and complexity to other government or private sector construction of similar scale and function, considering regional labor and material costs.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a primary focus for this specific award, as it was not set aside for small businesses and there's no explicit mention of subcontracting goals. This suggests that larger firms were likely the primary bidders. Further investigation into the subcontracting plans of Far West Contractors Corp would be necessary to determine any indirect impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. The Inspector General's office may also have jurisdiction, particularly given the mention of prior issues leading to a re-award. Transparency would be assessed by the availability of contract details, performance reports, and any public-facing documentation regarding the project's progress and any challenges encountered.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Department of Defense Facilities
General Building Construction

Risk Flags

Re-award due to prior issues
Potential for scope creep in construction projects
Limited number of bidders received (2)

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $19.0 million to FAR WEST CONTRACTORS CORP. SCHAFER DAM HQ BLDG - THIS IS A RE-AWARD DUE TO ISSUES IN ACWS. AWARD WAS PREVIOUSLY MADE AND ANNOUNCED TO CONGRESS ON 19 SEPTEMBER 2025.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FAR WEST CONTRACTORS CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-10-03. End: 2027-04-17.

What were the specific issues that led to the re-award of this contract?

The provided data indicates that the re-award was necessary 'due to issues in ACWS' (Acquisition Career and Workforce System). While the exact nature of these issues is not detailed, they likely pertain to problems encountered during the initial award process or with the original contractor's performance or compliance. This could range from bid protests, contractor default, or administrative errors in the initial solicitation or award. Understanding these specific issues is crucial for assessing the risk associated with the current award and the contractor's ability to rectify past problems.

How does the $18.99 million cost compare to similar Department of the Army headquarters construction projects?

Benchmarking this $18.99 million contract requires detailed project specifications, such as square footage, complexity, and specific construction elements (e.g., security features, specialized equipment). However, as a general comparison, large-scale government building construction projects can vary significantly in cost per square foot based on location, materials, and required amenities. Without more granular data on the Schafer Dam HQ Building's scope, a precise comparison is challenging. Typically, costs for such facilities can range from $300 to $700+ per square foot. Further analysis would involve obtaining the project's square footage and comparing it against historical data for similar DoD construction contracts.

What is the track record of Far West Contractors Corp with the Department of Defense?

Information on Far West Contractors Corp's track record with the Department of Defense (DoD) would require a review of their past contract awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any history of disputes or litigation. As this is a re-award, it suggests that the DoD has had prior dealings with this contractor, potentially including the contract that was previously awarded and subsequently addressed due to issues. A thorough assessment would involve examining the duration and value of previous contracts, the types of projects undertaken, and their overall performance ratings to gauge reliability and capability.

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

Firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally preferred for construction projects when the scope of work is well-defined, as they shift cost risk to the contractor. However, risks can arise if the project scope is not adequately detailed or if unforeseen conditions are encountered during construction. For this project, the prior issues leading to a re-award might indicate potential ambiguities in the original scope or unexpected site conditions. If the contractor underestimated costs or encountered unforeseen challenges, they might seek change orders, potentially increasing the final cost, or face financial strain if they cannot absorb overruns. Effective oversight is crucial to manage scope creep and ensure adherence to the original FFP terms.

How does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' procurement method impact price discovery?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method aims to balance broad competition with specific requirements. It means that while the solicitation was initially open to all responsible sources, certain sources were excluded based on pre-defined criteria (e.g., specific qualifications, past performance, or security clearances). This can limit the number of bidders compared to a pure 'full and open' competition. While it can ensure that only qualified contractors participate, it might also reduce the intensity of price competition if the excluded sources represented significant potential competitors. The number of bids received (2) suggests that the exclusions may have narrowed the field considerably, potentially impacting the final price achieved for taxpayers.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID

Solicitation ID: W9123825BA005

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1031 S MELROSE ST, PLACENTIA, CA, 92870

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Hispanic American Owned Business, HUBZone Firm, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $18,995,287

Exercised Options: $18,995,287

Current Obligation: $18,995,287

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline