DoD's $32.5M Schofield Barracks renovation awarded to Zumwalt Construction, completed under firm-fixed-price terms

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $32,518,377 ($32.5M)

Contractor: Zumwalt Construction, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2019-09-27

End Date: 2022-10-31

Contract Duration: 1,130 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: RENOVATE BUILDING 3004, SCHOFIELD BARRACKS, OAHU, HAWAII

Place of Performance

Location: FORT SHAFTER, HONOLULU County, HAWAII, 96858

State: Hawaii Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $32.5 million to ZUMWALT CONSTRUCTION, INC. for work described as: RENOVATE BUILDING 3004, SCHOFIELD BARRACKS, OAHU, HAWAII Key points: 1. The contract value of $32.5M for building renovation appears within a reasonable range for large-scale construction projects of this nature. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding process, which can lead to better pricing for the government. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor, providing budget certainty for the government. 4. Project duration of 1130 days indicates a substantial undertaking, requiring careful management and oversight. 5. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major component of the Department of Defense. 6. The project's completion in Hawaii suggests a focus on infrastructure within a specific geographic region.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $32.5 million for renovating a significant building at Schofield Barracks is substantial. Benchmarking against similar large-scale institutional building renovations, this figure appears to be within expected parameters, especially considering the complexities of military base construction and the location in Hawaii. The firm-fixed-price structure suggests that the initial bid was considered a fair reflection of the work required, and any deviations would be absorbed by the contractor, indicating a potentially good value proposition if executed as planned.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 4 bidders, as indicated by the data, suggests a healthy level of competition for this significant construction project. A competitive environment generally allows the government to secure more favorable pricing and terms, as contractors vie to win the award.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with multiple bidders is beneficial for taxpayers as it likely drove down the final contract price compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families stationed at Schofield Barracks will benefit from improved facilities. The renovation services delivered will enhance the functionality and safety of Building 3004. The geographic impact is concentrated on Oahu, Hawaii, supporting the infrastructure needs of the U.S. Army Garrison Hawaii. The project likely supported local construction jobs and businesses in Hawaii during its execution.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if not managed tightly, given the long duration.
Ensuring quality of work meets long-term durability standards for military infrastructure.
Logistical challenges associated with construction on a military installation.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive pricing environment.
Awarded by a major federal agency (Department of the Army) with established procurement processes.

Sector Analysis

The construction sector, particularly commercial and institutional building construction, is a significant area of federal spending. This contract falls within the broader category of infrastructure development and maintenance, which is crucial for military readiness and operations. Federal spending in this area often involves large, complex projects requiring specialized contractors. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar renovations on military bases can vary widely based on size, scope, and location, but a $32.5M contract for a substantial building is not unusual.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false) and there were 4 bidders. This suggests that the primary bidders were likely larger construction firms capable of undertaking a project of this magnitude. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses, but it is common practice for large prime contractors to utilize small businesses for portions of their work, which could still provide opportunities within the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

The Department of the Army, as part of the Department of Defense, has established oversight mechanisms for construction contracts. These typically include contract officers, project managers, and quality assurance representatives to monitor progress, adherence to specifications, and budget. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Base Infrastructure Projects
Department of Defense Facilities Modernization
Schofield Barracks Operations and Maintenance
Commercial and Institutional Building Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Long project duration may increase risk of cost escalation or scope creep if not managed.
Construction projects inherently carry risks related to site conditions and unforeseen issues.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $32.5 million to ZUMWALT CONSTRUCTION, INC.. RENOVATE BUILDING 3004, SCHOFIELD BARRACKS, OAHU, HAWAII

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ZUMWALT 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 $32.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-09-27. End: 2022-10-31.

What was the specific scope of work for renovating Building 3004 at Schofield Barracks?

The provided data does not detail the specific scope of work for the renovation of Building 3004. However, as a 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' contract awarded by the Department of the Army, it likely encompassed structural repairs, system upgrades (e.g., HVAC, electrical, plumbing), interior renovations, and potentially modernization of facilities to meet current operational standards and safety codes. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests a well-defined scope was established prior to bidding to ensure cost certainty for the government.

How does the $32.5 million contract value compare to similar building renovations on military installations?

The $32.5 million contract value for renovating Building 3004 at Schofield Barracks is a significant investment. Without specific details on the building's size, condition, and the extent of the renovation, direct comparison is challenging. However, large-scale renovations of institutional or commercial buildings on military bases can range from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars. Factors such as historical preservation requirements, specialized equipment installation, or extensive structural work can drive costs up. Given the context of a major military installation in Hawaii, this value appears plausible for a substantial renovation project.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for a long-duration construction project?

While firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts offer cost certainty to the government, they can introduce risks for the contractor, especially on long-duration projects like this 1130-day renovation. The primary risk for the contractor is underestimating costs, leading to reduced profit margins or even losses if material prices, labor costs, or unforeseen site conditions escalate significantly beyond initial projections. For the government, the risk lies in the contractor potentially cutting corners on quality to maintain profitability if issues arise, necessitating robust oversight. However, FFP is generally preferred for well-defined scopes to ensure budget predictability.

What does the level of competition (4 bidders) imply about the contractor selection and potential value?

The fact that this contract received bids from four different entities under a full and open competition is a positive indicator. It suggests that the project was sufficiently defined and attractive enough to draw multiple qualified contractors. A competitive environment like this typically pressures bidders to offer their best pricing and terms to win the contract. Therefore, the selection process likely resulted in a contractor who was not only capable but also offered a competitive price, implying good value for the government and taxpayers. It reduces the likelihood of a significantly inflated price that might occur with fewer bidders.

What is the historical spending trend for similar construction projects by the Department of the Army?

The provided data focuses on a single contract and does not offer historical spending trends for the Department of the Army in similar construction projects. However, the Department of Defense, and by extension the Army, consistently allocates substantial budgets towards infrastructure maintenance, modernization, and new construction across its global installations. Annual spending on military construction (MILCON) and facility sustainment, restoration, and modernization (FSRM) programs typically runs into the billions of dollars. This specific $32.5M contract represents one component of that larger, ongoing investment in maintaining and upgrading military facilities.

Were there any specific performance issues or successes noted during the contract's execution?

The provided data summary does not include specific details regarding performance issues or successes during the execution of this contract. It confirms the contract was awarded and completed within the specified timeframe (September 2019 to October 2022). Without access to performance reports, inspection records, or post-completion reviews, it's impossible to assess the contractor's performance beyond the fact that the project was completed. Further investigation into contract performance metrics would be required to evaluate successes or identify any challenges encountered.

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: SEALED BID

Solicitation ID: W9128A19B0002

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 5520 E LAMONA AVE, FRESNO, CA, 93727

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $32,518,377

Exercised Options: $32,518,377

Current Obligation: $32,518,377

Actual Outlays: $332,639

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline