DoD's $34.1M TBUP BLDG 5960 contract awarded to Harper Construction for building construction in Fort Sill, OK

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $34,142,465 ($34.1M)

Contractor: Harper Construction Company, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2014-09-08

End Date: 2016-09-09

Contract Duration: 732 days

Daily Burn Rate: $46.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 12

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF:: TBUP BLDG 5960 FT. SILL, OK

Place of Performance

Location: FORT SILL, COMANCHE County, OKLAHOMA, 73503

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $34.1 million to HARPER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF:: TBUP BLDG 5960 FT. SILL, OK Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the firm-fixed-price contract type and the duration of the project. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open competition with 12 bidders, suggesting a competitive pricing environment. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with a fixed-price contract potentially shifting some risk to the contractor. 4. Performance context is limited without specific project milestones or completion reports. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within the broader commercial and institutional building construction industry. 6. The contract's value is significant within its specific construction niche.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $34.1 million for building construction over approximately two years suggests a moderate per-year expenditure. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects would be necessary for a precise value assessment. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if managed effectively. However, without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to industry standards for similar facilities, a definitive value judgment is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with 12 bids received. This level of competition is generally positive, as it suggests that multiple qualified contractors had the opportunity to bid, which can drive down prices and improve the quality of proposals. The presence of numerous bidders indicates a healthy market for this type of construction service within the relevant geographic area.

Taxpayer Impact: A robust competition with 12 bidders is beneficial for taxpayers, as it increases the likelihood of securing the best possible price and value for the construction services rendered.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and military personnel stationed at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, who will gain access to a new or improved facility. The services delivered include commercial and institutional building construction, likely encompassing the erection or renovation of significant structures. The geographic impact is concentrated in Oklahoma, specifically at Fort Sill. Workforce implications include job creation for construction workers, engineers, architects, and related trades during the contract period.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract does not adequately account for unforeseen construction challenges.
Ensuring timely completion within the 732-day duration is critical to avoid operational disruptions.
Quality control and adherence to building codes and specifications require diligent oversight.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract structure incentivizes the contractor to manage costs efficiently.
Full and open competition with 12 bidders suggests a competitive market that likely yielded a fair price.
The contract is for a specific, tangible asset (building construction), providing clear deliverables.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically commercial and institutional building construction. This sector is characterized by large projects, significant capital investment, and varying levels of competition depending on specialization and location. Federal construction spending is a substantial component of the overall construction market, with agencies like the Department of Defense being major clients. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large military facility construction projects.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside (ss: false, sb: false). While this contract was competed broadly, there is no explicit information on subcontracting plans with small businesses. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether the prime contractor, Harper Construction Company, Inc., actively engages small businesses for specialized services or materials.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting office. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified building according to the contract terms. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed project progress and inspection reports may not be publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Projects
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Facilities
Department of Defense Facilities Management
General Services Administration (GSA) Public Buildings Service

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to fixed-price nature and long duration.
Risk of schedule delays impacting facility operational readiness.
Need for stringent quality assurance to ensure construction meets specifications.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $34.1 million to HARPER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF:: TBUP BLDG 5960 FT. SILL, OK

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HARPER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, 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 $34.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-09-08. End: 2016-09-09.

What is the track record of Harper Construction Company, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

Assessing Harper Construction Company, Inc.'s track record requires a review of their past federal contract awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any history of disputes or contract terminations. While this specific contract was awarded in 2014, a comprehensive analysis would involve examining their portfolio across various agencies and contract types. A history of successful project completion, adherence to schedules and budgets, and positive performance reviews would indicate a reliable contractor. Conversely, a pattern of performance issues or contract disputes could raise concerns about future project execution.

How does the awarded amount of $34.1 million compare to the estimated cost or benchmark for similar building construction projects at military installations?

To benchmark the $34.1 million award, one would need to compare it against the estimated cost at the time of award, the bids from other competitors, and the cost of similar construction projects at other military installations. Factors such as project scope, size, complexity, location, and specific requirements (e.g., security, specialized equipment integration) heavily influence construction costs. If the bids were tightly clustered and significantly below any independent government cost estimates, it might suggest a favorable price. Conversely, if the award was substantially higher than estimates or competitor bids, it could indicate potential overpricing or unique project demands.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with this firm-fixed-price construction contract?

The primary risk indicator for the government in a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract is the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or scope to maintain profitability if costs escalate unexpectedly. While FFP shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor, inadequate initial pricing or unforeseen site conditions can still lead to contractor financial distress or disputes. For the contractor, risks include underestimating costs, encountering unforeseen site conditions (e.g., soil issues, hazardous materials), labor shortages, or material price volatility. Effective risk mitigation relies on robust contract oversight, clear specifications, and diligent progress monitoring.

How effective was the full and open competition in ensuring competitive pricing for this project?

The fact that 12 bids were received under full and open competition strongly suggests that the process was effective in fostering a competitive pricing environment. A larger number of bidders generally increases the likelihood that the government receives proposals reflecting market rates and that the lowest priced, technically acceptable offer is secured. The spread between the highest and lowest bids, if available, would provide further insight into the degree of price competition. Without this granular data, we infer effectiveness from the number of participants.

What is the historical spending pattern for building construction at Fort Sill, OK, and how does this contract fit within that trend?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for building construction at Fort Sill requires accessing historical contract data for the installation. This would involve looking at the frequency, size, and types of construction contracts awarded over several years. Understanding this context helps determine if the $34.1 million award is an outlier, a typical expenditure for major projects, or part of a larger infrastructure investment cycle. It also informs whether spending has been consistent or fluctuating, potentially indicating shifts in military needs or funding priorities at the base.

What are the implications of the contract duration (732 days) on project management and potential cost escalation?

A duration of 732 days (approximately two years) for a $34.1 million construction project is substantial and necessitates robust project management. Longer durations increase the exposure to market fluctuations in material costs, labor availability, and inflation, which are risks primarily borne by the contractor under a fixed-price agreement. For the government, extended timelines can delay the operational use of the facility, impacting readiness or mission capabilities. Effective oversight is crucial to ensure progress remains on schedule and that any delays are managed proactively to minimize cost impacts and operational disruptions.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: TWO STEP

Solicitation ID: W912BV14R0029

Offers Received: 12

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2241 KETTNER BLVD STE 300, SAN DIEGO, CA, 92101

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: $34,778,403

Exercised Options: $34,142,465

Current Obligation: $34,142,465

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 287

Total Subaward Amount: $579,034,814

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline