DoD awards $19M firm-fixed-price contract for Porterville, CA facility construction to Far West Contractors Corp

Contract Overview

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

Contractor: FAR West Contractors Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-09-19

End Date: 2027-03-13

Contract Duration: 540 days

Daily Burn Rate: $35.2K/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: SHAFER DAM HEADQUARTERS BUILDING AND MAINTENANCE SHOP DESIGN BID BUILD CONSTRUCTION - PORTERVILLE, CA

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: SHAFER DAM HEADQUARTERS BUILDING AND MAINTENANCE SHOP DESIGN BID BUILD CONSTRUCTION - PORTERVILLE, CA Key points: 1. Contract awarded to a single, established contractor, suggesting potential for streamlined execution but limited price negotiation. 2. The firm-fixed-price structure shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor, which is typical for construction projects. 3. Project duration of 540 days indicates a significant construction undertaking. 4. The contract is for a headquarters building and maintenance shop, critical infrastructure for the Army. 5. Geographic focus on Porterville, CA, implies local economic impact and workforce utilization. 6. No small business set-aside noted, potentially limiting opportunities for smaller firms in this contract.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $18.99 million for a headquarters building and maintenance shop appears within a reasonable range for a project of this scope and complexity. Benchmarking against similar federal construction projects for institutional buildings in California would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests that the initial bid was competitive, and the government has secured a defined cost for the work, assuming no significant change orders.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating that while competition was sought, certain sources were excluded. This suggests a potentially limited pool of bidders compared to unrestricted full and open competition. The presence of two bids, as indicated by 'no': 2, further supports a limited competition scenario. This level of competition may result in less aggressive pricing than a broader competition.

Taxpayer Impact: A limited competition means taxpayers may not benefit from the most aggressive pricing achievable through a wider bidding process. However, the exclusion of sources might be justified by specific technical requirements or past performance considerations.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army, which will receive a new headquarters building and maintenance shop. The contract will deliver essential construction services, creating a physical facility for military operations. The project's geographic impact is concentrated in Porterville, California, potentially boosting the local economy. Workforce implications include job creation for construction laborers, tradespeople, and project management professionals in the Porterville area.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition may lead to higher costs for taxpayers.
Exclusion of sources without clear justification could raise concerns about fairness and optimal resource allocation.
The firm-fixed-price contract, while shifting risk, could lead to disputes if unforeseen site conditions or design changes arise.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Award to an established contractor like Far West Contractors Corp. may indicate a focus on reliability and timely completion.
The project addresses a clear need for critical infrastructure for the Department of the Army.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this sector often supports military infrastructure, government facilities, and public works. The market size for federal construction is substantial, with agencies like the Department of Defense being major clients. This project aligns with typical government procurement strategies for facility development and maintenance.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a primary consideration, as 'sb' is false and there is no mention of small business set-asides. This suggests that opportunities for small businesses may be limited to subcontracting roles, if any, and that the prime contract was not specifically targeted towards them. The impact on the small business ecosystem will depend on whether Far West Contractors Corp. utilizes small business subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army officials. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified facility within the agreed-upon cost and schedule. Transparency is generally maintained through federal procurement databases like FPDS, where contract awards are reported. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Projects
Department of Defense Facilities
General Building Construction
Design-Bid-Build Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition raises concerns about potential overpricing.
Exclusion of sources requires clear justification to ensure fairness.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can lead to disputes if unforeseen issues arise.
Performance history of the contractor needs verification for risk assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $19.0 million to FAR WEST CONTRACTORS CORP. SHAFER DAM HEADQUARTERS BUILDING AND MAINTENANCE SHOP DESIGN BID BUILD CONSTRUCTION - PORTERVILLE, CA

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: 2025-09-19. End: 2027-03-13.

What is the track record of Far West Contractors Corp. with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

A review of federal procurement data would be necessary to fully assess Far West Contractors Corp.'s track record. Key metrics to examine would include the number of previous federal contracts awarded, their total value, performance ratings (if available), and any history of contract disputes or terminations. Understanding their experience with similar-sized construction projects, especially for institutional or government facilities, would provide crucial context for evaluating their capability to execute this Porterville project successfully. Specific attention should be paid to their performance within the Department of Defense, as agency-specific requirements and oversight can vary.

How does the awarded amount of $18.99 million compare to similar federal headquarters and maintenance shop construction projects in California?

Benchmarking this contract against similar projects requires access to a database of federal construction awards. Factors to consider include the square footage of the facility, specific functional requirements (e.g., specialized maintenance capabilities), and the prevailing construction costs in the Porterville, CA region during the bid period. A comparison would involve identifying projects of comparable size and purpose awarded by agencies like the Army Corps of Engineers or other federal entities in similar geographic areas. If this contract's cost per square foot or per functional unit is significantly higher or lower than comparable projects, it would warrant further investigation into the reasons, such as unique design elements, site challenges, or market conditions.

What are the specific reasons for excluding certain sources in this 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' award?

The justification for excluding specific sources in a 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' award typically stems from documented reasons related to the unique requirements of the procurement. These could include specialized technical capabilities, proprietary processes, essential security clearances, or a demonstrated need for specific past performance that only a limited number of contractors can meet. Without access to the specific solicitation documents and pre-award justifications, it is difficult to ascertain the precise reasons for exclusion in this case. However, federal acquisition regulations require agencies to document and justify such exclusions to ensure fair and open competition to the maximum extent practicable.

What is the anticipated effectiveness of the new headquarters building and maintenance shop in supporting Army operations in the region?

The effectiveness of the new facility will be directly tied to its design, construction quality, and its alignment with the operational needs of the Army units it will serve. A well-designed headquarters building should enhance command and control, administrative efficiency, and personnel support. A functional maintenance shop is critical for ensuring the readiness and operational availability of equipment and vehicles. The project's success in supporting Army operations will depend on factors such as the adequacy of the facilities provided, the integration of modern technology, and the overall capacity to meet current and future mission requirements. Post-occupancy evaluations would be the best measure of its effectiveness.

What has been the historical spending pattern for similar facility construction projects by the Department of the Army in California over the last five years?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for similar projects requires querying federal procurement databases for contracts awarded by the Department of the Army (or its components like the Army Corps of Engineers) for facility construction in California over the past five years. This analysis would involve identifying contracts for headquarters, maintenance facilities, or similar institutional buildings, noting their award values, contract types, and durations. Trends in spending, average contract values, and the prevalence of different contract types (e.g., firm-fixed-price vs. cost-plus) could reveal patterns in how the Army procures such infrastructure in the state. This historical context can help assess whether the current $18.99 million award is consistent with past investment levels or represents a significant deviation.

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