Dormitory construction contract awarded to I. L. Fleming, Inc. for $15.86 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,861,957 ($15.9M)

Contractor: I. L. Fleming, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-08-19

End Date: 2010-02-12

Contract Duration: 542 days

Daily Burn Rate: $29.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: BASE BID- CONSTRUCT DORMITORY, 96 PN,

Place of Performance

Location: MOODY AFB, LOWNDES County, GEORGIA, 31699

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.9 million to I. L. FLEMING, INC. for work described as: BASE BID- CONSTRUCT DORMITORY, 96 PN, Key points: 1. Contract value of $15.86 million for dormitory construction. 2. Awarded by the Department of the Army. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type. 4. Duration of 542 days. 5. Construction project located in Georgia. 6. Full and Open Competition after exclusion of sources.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $15.86 million for constructing a 96-person dormitory appears within a reasonable range for such projects, though specific benchmarking is difficult without detailed scope and location comparisons. The firm fixed price structure suggests a defined cost expectation. However, the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' clause warrants further investigation into the rationale behind excluding certain sources, which could impact overall value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources.' This indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, specific sources were excluded from consideration. The number of bidders is not explicitly stated, but the exclusion suggests a potentially narrowed field compared to unrestricted full and open competition. This could limit price discovery and potentially lead to higher costs than if all qualified sources were allowed to bid.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have received less competitive pricing due to the exclusion of certain potential bidders. The rationale for exclusion needs to be transparent to ensure fairness and optimal use of funds.

Public Impact

Benefits military personnel by providing housing. Delivers construction services for a new dormitory. Geographic impact is localized to the project site in Georgia. Workforce implications include construction jobs during the project duration.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for reduced competition due to source exclusion.
Lack of transparency regarding the reasons for excluding specific sources.
Firm Fixed Price contracts can sometimes lead to contractor risk if unforeseen issues arise, potentially impacting quality or schedule if not managed well.

Positive Signals

Clear contract type (Firm Fixed Price) provides cost certainty.
Defined project duration (542 days) allows for scheduling and resource planning.
Awarded by a major federal agency (Department of the Army) suggests adherence to procurement standards.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector. This sector is characterized by a wide range of project sizes and complexities, from small renovations to large-scale new builds. Federal spending in this area often supports infrastructure development for military bases, government facilities, and public services. Benchmarking against similar dormitory construction projects for government entities would provide a clearer picture of value for money.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions for this contract, nor does it mention subcontracting goals. The award to I. L. Fleming, Inc. does not specify if they are a small business. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation, either as prime contractors or subcontractors, and its impact on the broader small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting command. Accountability measures are embedded in the Firm Fixed Price contract type, which holds the contractor responsible for delivering the project within the agreed-upon cost. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though the specific justifications for excluding sources in the competition process might require a Freedom of Information Act request.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Projects
Dormitory Construction Contracts
Federal Building Construction
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Competition may have been limited due to source exclusion.
Lack of detailed cost breakdown for value assessment.
Potential for contractor risk in Firm Fixed Price contract over extended duration.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.9 million to I. L. FLEMING, INC.. BASE BID- CONSTRUCT DORMITORY, 96 PN,

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is I. L. FLEMING, 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 $15.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-08-19. End: 2010-02-12.

What is the track record of I. L. Fleming, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly for construction projects of similar scale?

Information regarding the specific track record of I. L. Fleming, Inc. with federal contracts is not detailed in the provided data. To assess their performance, a review of their past federal contract awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any history of disputes or terminations would be necessary. Understanding their experience with similar dormitory construction projects, especially for the Department of Defense, would provide crucial context for evaluating their capability and reliability on this specific contract. Without this historical data, it's difficult to gauge their past success or potential risks associated with their performance.

How does the awarded price of $15.86 million compare to market rates for similar dormitory construction projects in Georgia during 2008-2010?

Benchmarking the $15.86 million award against market rates for similar dormitory construction in Georgia between 2008 and 2010 requires detailed cost data and project specifications. Factors such as square footage per person, material costs, labor rates, site preparation complexity, and specific amenity requirements significantly influence project costs. While the contract specifies a 96-person dormitory, the absence of these granular details makes direct comparison challenging. However, general construction cost indices for the period and region could offer a preliminary comparison. A more robust analysis would involve comparing cost per bed or cost per square foot against publicly available data for comparable institutional or military housing projects initiated around the same time.

What were the specific reasons for excluding certain sources in the 'Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources' process?

The rationale for excluding specific sources in a 'Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources' scenario is typically documented within the contract file. Common reasons include prior performance issues with certain contractors, specific technical requirements that only a limited number of firms could meet, or national security considerations. Without access to the contract file or agency justifications, the exact reasons remain unknown. Understanding these exclusions is critical because it directly impacts the level of competition. If exclusions were not well-justified or based on arbitrary criteria, it could suggest a lack of due diligence in maximizing competition and potentially lead to suboptimal pricing for the government.

What are the potential risks associated with a Firm Fixed Price contract for a construction project of this duration?

Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contracts place the majority of the risk on the contractor, as the price is set regardless of the contractor's actual costs. For a construction project with a 542-day duration, potential risks for the contractor include unforeseen increases in material costs, labor shortages or wage hikes, unexpected site conditions (e.g., soil issues, hazardous materials), or delays caused by factors beyond their control (e.g., weather, permitting). If these risks materialize and the contractor cannot absorb the increased costs, it could lead to pressure to cut corners on quality, disputes over contract scope, or even project abandonment. Conversely, for the government, the primary risk is that the contractor may have inflated the initial price to account for these potential risks, leading to a higher overall cost than a cost-reimbursable contract might have yielded if managed efficiently.

How does the $292,660 'br' value (likely bid range or difference) relate to the final award amount of $15,861,957?

The value labeled 'br' as 292,660 likely represents a bid range, a difference between bids, or perhaps a specific component of the bid. Without explicit definition, its exact meaning is unclear. If it represents the difference between the highest and lowest bids, it suggests a moderate level of competition. If it's a range provided by a single bidder, its relevance is limited. To understand its relationship to the $15,861,957 award, we would need to know what 'br' specifically quantifies. For instance, if it were the difference between the winning bid and the second-lowest bid, it could indicate how closely contested the award was. If it represents a percentage of the total contract value, it could offer insight into bid spread.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912HN07R0073

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 6228 E OGLETHORPE, MIDWAY, GA, 01

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Emerging Small Business, HUBZone Firm, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $15,861,957

Exercised Options: $15,861,957

Current Obligation: $15,861,957

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline