DoD's $29.3M SCIF Construction Contract Awarded to CF2 Construction for 34-Month Duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $29,285,134 ($29.3M)

Contractor: CF2 Construction

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-10-15

End Date: 2025-08-22

Contract Duration: 1,042 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: AFLCMC-WAG, B9201 SCIF CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION AT TAFB

Place of Performance

Location: OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA County, OKLAHOMA, 73145

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $29.3 million to CF2 CONSTRUCTION for work described as: AFLCMC-WAG, B9201 SCIF CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION AT TAFB Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is a firm-fixed-price definitive contract, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 3. The project involves SCIF construction and renovation, a specialized area requiring specific security clearances and expertise. 4. The award is for a significant duration of 1042 days, indicating a complex and lengthy project. 5. The contractor, CF2 Construction, has been awarded this contract, with further performance context needed. 6. The contract is managed by the Department of the Army, a component of the Department of Defense. 7. The project is located in Oklahoma, potentially impacting local construction workforce and businesses.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $29.3 million contract for SCIF construction and renovation is challenging without specific details on the scope of work and comparable projects. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the price was determined upfront, but it's unclear if this represents good value compared to similar SCIF construction projects. Further analysis would require comparing the per-square-foot cost, complexity of security requirements, and duration against industry standards and other government contracts for similar facilities.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' which is a less common competition type. It implies that while the initial intent was full and open competition, certain sources were excluded, possibly due to specific security requirements or pre-qualification criteria for SCIF construction. The number of bidders (3) is relatively low, which could indicate a specialized market or stringent pre-qualification. This limited competition might have implications for price discovery and potentially higher costs compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition, despite being categorized as 'full and open after exclusion,' means taxpayers may not have benefited from the widest possible pool of bidders, potentially leading to a less competitive price than could have been achieved otherwise.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its personnel who will utilize the enhanced SCIF facilities. The contract delivers critical infrastructure upgrades for secure intelligence and operational activities. The geographic impact is concentrated in Oklahoma, potentially creating local construction jobs and economic activity. Workforce implications include the need for skilled construction labor, potentially with security clearances, and specialized trades for SCIF construction.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition may have restricted price negotiation, potentially increasing costs for taxpayers.
The 'exclusion of sources' aspect of the competition requires further scrutiny to ensure fairness and necessity.
The long duration of the contract (1042 days) increases the risk of cost overruns or schedule delays if not managed effectively.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can sometimes lead to contractors cutting corners on quality if not adequately overseen.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor, providing budget certainty for the government.
Awarding to a single contractor for a specialized task like SCIF construction can ensure focused expertise and project continuity.
The contract is managed by the Department of the Army, a major entity with established procurement processes.
The project addresses a critical need for secure facilities within the Department of Defense.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically focusing on specialized secure facilities (SCIFs). The market for SCIF construction is niche, requiring contractors with specific security clearances, expertise in sensitive compartmented information facility standards, and experience with government contracting. The total federal spending on construction is substantial, but SCIF-specific contracts represent a smaller, highly specialized segment. This contract's value of approximately $29.3 million is significant for a single project within this niche, reflecting the complexity and security demands of SCIFs.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large-value construction project involving specialized security requirements, it is unlikely that small businesses would be the primary awardees unless through subcontracting. Further analysis would be needed to determine if CF2 Construction has a subcontracting plan that includes small businesses, which is a common requirement for larger federal contracts to foster small business participation in the federal marketplace.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures are typically embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards, delivery schedules, and payment milestones. Transparency is facilitated through federal procurement databases like FPDS, where contract awards are recorded. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Construction Contracts
Secure Facility Construction
Intelligence Community Infrastructure
General Building Construction Services
Federal Real Property Management

Risk Flags

Limited competition identified
Long contract duration
Specialized construction requirements (SCIF)
Potential for cost escalation over extended period

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $29.3 million to CF2 CONSTRUCTION. AFLCMC-WAG, B9201 SCIF CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION AT TAFB

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CF2 CONSTRUCTION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $29.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-10-15. End: 2025-08-22.

What is the track record of CF2 Construction with similar SCIF construction projects for the federal government?

Assessing CF2 Construction's track record with similar SCIF projects requires a deep dive into their past performance on federal contracts. This would involve reviewing contract databases for previous awards related to secure facility construction, particularly SCIFs, for agencies like the Department of Defense, intelligence agencies, or other federal bodies. Key metrics to examine would include on-time delivery, adherence to budget, quality of work, and any reported performance issues or disputes. A history of successful, high-security construction projects would indicate a lower risk for this current contract. Conversely, a lack of relevant experience or a history of performance problems would raise concerns about CF2 Construction's ability to meet the demanding requirements of SCIF construction.

How does the $29.3 million cost compare to similar SCIF construction projects awarded by the government?

Comparing the $29.3 million cost of this SCIF construction and renovation project requires identifying comparable federal contracts based on scope, size (square footage), complexity of security requirements, and geographic location. Benchmarking would involve analyzing the cost per square foot, the level of security integration (e.g., TEMPEST, blast resistance), and the duration of similar projects. Without access to detailed project specifications and cost breakdowns, a precise comparison is difficult. However, if similar, less complex SCIFs have been built for significantly less, or if this project's cost per square foot exceeds established benchmarks for high-security construction, it could indicate potential value concerns. Conversely, if the complexity and security features justify the cost relative to market rates and other government awards, it may represent fair value.

What are the specific risks associated with the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' award method for this contract?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' award method presents specific risks. While it aims for broad competition, the 'exclusion of sources' implies that certain pre-qualified or otherwise eligible contractors were deliberately not considered. This exclusion must be justified, often due to highly specialized requirements, security clearances, or unique capabilities essential for SCIF construction. The risk lies in whether this exclusion was truly necessary and competitively sound. If the exclusion unnecessarily narrowed the field, it could lead to reduced price competition, potentially higher costs for taxpayers, and a risk that the best possible solution wasn't identified. It also raises questions about the transparency and fairness of the pre-qualification or exclusion process itself, potentially leading to protests or perceptions of favoritism if not managed rigorously.

What is the expected effectiveness of the completed SCIF facility in supporting DoD's operational or intelligence missions?

The effectiveness of the completed SCIF facility hinges on its design, construction quality, and adherence to stringent security standards mandated for Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities. A well-executed SCIF is crucial for enabling secure communication, data processing, and collaboration on classified information vital to national security missions. Its effectiveness will be measured by its ability to provide a secure environment that meets all accreditation requirements, supports the specific operational needs of the end-users (e.g., intelligence analysts, operational planners), and integrates seamlessly with existing command and control systems. Successful completion, on time and within budget, by CF2 Construction, and subsequent accreditation by the relevant authorities, will be key indicators of its effectiveness in supporting DoD's missions.

How does the historical spending on SCIF construction by the Department of Defense compare to this contract's value?

Analyzing historical spending on SCIF construction by the Department of Defense (DoD) provides context for the $29.3 million award. The DoD, along with other intelligence community agencies, consistently invests in secure facilities due to the nature of their operations. Historical data would reveal trends in contract values, typical project durations, and the average cost per square foot for SCIFs. If this contract's value is in line with or below the average for similar-sized and complex SCIF projects undertaken by the DoD in recent years, it suggests consistent market pricing. However, if it represents a significant increase without clear justification (e.g., enhanced security features, inflation), it might warrant closer scrutiny regarding value for money. Understanding this historical context is crucial for assessing the reasonableness of the current expenditure.

What are the potential implications of the 1042-day duration on project risk and cost for this SCIF construction?

A contract duration of 1042 days (approximately 2.85 years) for SCIF construction introduces several significant risks and cost implications. Extended project timelines increase the exposure to market fluctuations, such as rising material costs, labor rate changes, and potential economic downturns, even with a firm-fixed-price contract. There's also a heightened risk of schedule slippage due to unforeseen site conditions, design changes, or contractor performance issues. For the government, a longer duration means funds are committed for a longer period, potentially impacting budget planning and cash flow. Furthermore, the longer the facility is under construction, the longer the operational need it's intended to fulfill is potentially unmet or met with less adequate temporary solutions. Robust project management and oversight are critical to mitigate these risks over such an extended period.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912BV22R0029

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10838 E MARSHALL ST # 220D, TULSA, OK, 74116

Business Categories: Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $29,933,570

Exercised Options: $29,285,134

Current Obligation: $29,285,134

Actual Outlays: $5,763,872

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 8

Total Subaward Amount: $67,179,415

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline