Department of the Army awarded $21M for architectural services, with 2 bidders competing under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $21,015,082 ($21.0M)

Contractor: Bundesamt F¿R Bauwesen UND Raumordnung

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-05-13

End Date: 2016-07-29

Contract Duration: 2,634 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: ABG 7.1.2-7.1.4 FEES

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $21.0 million to BUNDESAMT F¿R BAUWESEN UND RAUMORDNUNG for work described as: ABG 7.1.2-7.1.4 FEES Key points: 1. The contract value of $21 million over approximately 7 years suggests a significant investment in architectural services. 2. Full and open competition indicates a potentially robust market for these services, which can drive competitive pricing. 3. The definitive contract type with a firm fixed price suggests a clear scope and budget, mitigating cost overrun risks. 4. The duration of the contract (2634 days) points to a long-term need for these architectural services. 5. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests the primary contractor is likely a larger entity. 6. The NAICS code 541310 (Architectural Services) places this contract within a specific professional services sector.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $21 million for architectural services over nearly 7 years appears reasonable given the duration and scope implied by a definitive contract. Benchmarking against similar large-scale architectural projects for federal agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. However, the firm fixed-price structure suggests that the initial pricing was deemed acceptable and aimed to control costs throughout the contract's life. The number of bidders (2) in a full and open competition is on the lower side, which could warrant further investigation into market dynamics.

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 offers. With two bidders participating, the level of competition was present but could be considered moderate. While two bidders indicate some market interest, a higher number of bids often leads to more aggressive pricing and a wider range of innovative solutions. The agency's approach to soliciting offers and evaluating proposals would be key to understanding if this competition effectively drove value.

Taxpayer Impact: A moderate level of competition, while better than a sole-source award, may mean taxpayers did not benefit from the most aggressive pricing achievable with a larger pool of bidders. However, it still provides a basis for price comparison and ensures a degree of market responsiveness.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of the Army and its various installations requiring architectural design and planning services. The services delivered encompass architectural design, planning, and potentially related consulting for military facilities and infrastructure. The geographic impact is likely widespread, supporting Army projects across various bases and operational areas. Workforce implications include employment for architects, designers, drafters, and project managers within the winning contractor's organization and potentially subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition (2 bidders) could indicate potential market concentration or barriers to entry for other firms.
The long contract duration might lead to complacency or reduced incentive for innovation if not managed actively.
Lack of specific details on performance metrics makes it difficult to assess contractor performance beyond contract completion.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract type helps control costs and provides budget certainty for the agency.
Full and open competition, even with two bidders, ensures that multiple firms had the opportunity to compete.
The definitive contract structure implies a well-defined scope of work, reducing ambiguity.

Sector Analysis

The architectural services sector is a critical component of the construction and engineering industry, supporting both public and private sector development. Federal spending in this area is substantial, driven by the need for design, planning, and oversight of government facilities, infrastructure, and research projects. The market includes a wide range of firms, from large engineering conglomerates to specialized architectural boutiques. This contract, valued at $21 million over several years, represents a significant engagement within the federal architectural services market, likely supporting major construction or renovation initiatives.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the primary contract was awarded to a large business or that the competition was open to all responsible sources without specific small business preferences. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without this data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though larger prime contracts often have subcontracting opportunities that can benefit small and medium-sized enterprises.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program office within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract performance or closeout.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Facility Engineering Services
Architectural and Engineering Services
Department of Defense Facilities Management
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects

Risk Flags

Moderate competition level (2 bidders) may warrant further investigation into market dynamics.
Long contract duration requires diligent oversight to ensure continued performance and innovation.
Lack of small business participation data requires follow-up on subcontracting opportunities.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $21.0 million to BUNDESAMT F¿R BAUWESEN UND RAUMORDNUNG. ABG 7.1.2-7.1.4 FEES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BUNDESAMT F¿R BAUWESEN UND RAUMORDNUNG.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $21.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-05-13. End: 2016-07-29.

What is the typical cost per square foot for architectural services on similar federal projects?

Determining a precise per-square-foot cost for architectural services on federal projects is complex due to variations in project type, complexity, location, and the specific services included (e.g., design, planning, construction administration). However, industry benchmarks for architectural fees often range from 5% to 15% of total construction costs, depending on the project's nature. For federal projects, especially those involving military installations, the fees might be influenced by specific government regulations, security requirements, and the extensive documentation needed. Without knowing the total construction value or the specific scope of architectural work for this $21 million contract, a direct per-square-foot comparison is challenging. Further analysis would require details on the types of facilities being designed and their estimated construction costs.

How does the number of bidders (2) in this full and open competition compare to similar architectural service contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

The number of bidders in federal contract competitions can vary significantly based on the contract's value, complexity, and the specific market for the services. For architectural services contracts awarded by the Department of the Army, a full and open competition with only two bidders might be considered on the lower end of the spectrum. Many larger or more specialized architectural contracts can attract a dozen or more bids when competed broadly. However, for highly specialized or geographically specific projects, or when the pre-qualification process is stringent, fewer bidders might be expected. A review of historical data for similar-sized architectural contracts within the Army would be necessary to establish a definitive benchmark for the number of bidders.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract of this duration (nearly 7 years)?

Firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally favored for their cost control benefits. However, for a contract spanning nearly seven years, several risks can emerge. One primary risk is that the contractor may have less incentive to innovate or improve efficiency over time, especially if the initial pricing was set aggressively. Scope creep, if not managed meticulously through contract modifications, can also become a significant issue, potentially leading to disputes or cost overruns if the FFP structure is not strictly adhered to. Furthermore, market conditions or material costs could change drastically over such a long period, potentially impacting the contractor's profitability and, consequently, their motivation or ability to perform optimally. Robust contract management and clear communication channels are crucial to mitigate these risks.

Can we assess the contractor's track record based on the provided data?

The provided data does not include information about the specific contractor awarded this contract, nor does it offer details on their past performance, financial stability, or track record with federal agencies. To assess the contractor's track record, one would need to identify the awardee and then consult resources such as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), past performance reviews within the agency's procurement files, and potentially industry reputation databases. Without this information, it is impossible to evaluate the contractor's reliability, quality of work, or history of meeting contractual obligations.

How does the $21 million total award amount compare to annual federal spending on architectural services?

The $21 million awarded for this specific contract represents a single, albeit substantial, investment in architectural services over a multi-year period. Federal spending on architectural and engineering services is a significant component of the overall federal procurement budget, encompassing a wide array of projects across numerous agencies. Annual federal outlays for architectural and engineering services can range in the billions of dollars, supporting everything from minor renovations to major new construction and infrastructure development. Therefore, while $21 million is a considerable sum for one contract, it is a fraction of the total annual federal expenditure in this sector. A more meaningful comparison would involve looking at the average award size for similar types of architectural projects within the Department of Defense or the Army specifically.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Architectural Services

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Bundesamt FÜR Bauwesen UND Raumordnung (UEI: 332619535)

Address: DEICHMANNS AUE 31-37, BONN

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $21,016,544

Exercised Options: $21,016,544

Current Obligation: $21,015,082

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline