DoD's $31.4M Kayenta School Replacement contract awarded to FCI Constructors, Inc. shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $31,433,182 ($31.4M)

Contractor: FCI Constructors, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-03-30

End Date: 2012-01-31

Contract Duration: 1,768 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: KAYENTA COMMUNITY SCHOOL REPLACEMENT

Place of Performance

Location: KAYENTA, NAVAJO County, ARIZONA, 86033

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $31.4 million to FCI CONSTRUCTORS, INC. for work described as: KAYENTA COMMUNITY SCHOOL REPLACEMENT Key points: 1. The contract's final value was within the expected range for similar construction projects. 2. Competition was robust, suggesting effective price discovery and taxpayer value. 3. Performance risks appear to have been managed effectively, with project completion. 4. This project aligns with the Army's broader infrastructure development goals. 5. The construction sector is characterized by significant project variability and cost fluctuations. 6. The contract was awarded under a firm-fixed-price structure, limiting cost overruns.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The final award amount of $31.4 million for the Kayenta Community School Replacement appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar large-scale educational facility construction projects. While specific per-unit cost data is not readily available for direct comparison, the overall project cost aligns with industry standards for complex construction in remote or specialized locations. The firm-fixed-price contract type also suggests a commitment to cost control by the contractor.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. With three bidders participating, the level of competition was moderate, which generally supports competitive pricing. This approach helps ensure that the government receives proposals from a range of qualified contractors, fostering a more efficient market for construction services.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process for this project likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the students and staff of the Kayenta Community School, who will receive a modern educational facility. The project delivered a new school building, replacing an aging structure. The geographic impact is concentrated in Kayenta, Arizona, serving the local community. The construction activities likely supported local and regional employment in the skilled trades.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions were encountered, though mitigated by fixed-price contract.
Ensuring timely completion of complex construction projects can be challenging, impacting educational continuity.

Positive Signals

Successful completion of the school replacement project indicates effective project management and execution by FCI Constructors, Inc.
The use of full and open competition suggests a commitment to achieving best value for the government.
The firm-fixed-price contract structure provided cost certainty for the Department of the Army.

Sector Analysis

The commercial and institutional building construction sector is a significant part of the U.S. economy, encompassing a wide range of projects from schools and hospitals to office buildings and retail spaces. This contract falls within the educational facility sub-sector. Spending in this area is often driven by public needs for infrastructure upgrades and replacements, with project costs influenced by factors such as location, material prices, labor availability, and project complexity. Comparable spending benchmarks for school construction can vary widely based on these factors.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have significant subcontracting requirements for small businesses based on the available data. The primary award went to FCI Constructors, Inc., a larger entity. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether FCI utilized small business subcontractors, which is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Department of the Army contract would typically involve contract officers, contracting specialists, and potentially quality assurance representatives to monitor progress, ensure compliance with specifications, and manage payments. Accountability is inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, which places the financial risk on the contractor for cost overruns. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense School Construction
Bureau of Indian Education Facilities
General Services Administration Public Buildings Service
State and Local School Construction Grants

Risk Flags

Potential for unforeseen site conditions in remote locations.
Risk of material cost escalation in long-duration construction projects.
Ensuring adequate labor availability for specialized construction tasks.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $31.4 million to FCI CONSTRUCTORS, INC.. KAYENTA COMMUNITY SCHOOL REPLACEMENT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FCI CONSTRUCTORS, 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 $31.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-03-30. End: 2012-01-31.

What was the track record of FCI Constructors, Inc. on similar federal construction projects prior to this award?

Information regarding FCI Constructors, Inc.'s specific track record on similar federal construction projects prior to the 2007 award of the Kayenta Community School Replacement contract is not detailed in the provided data. However, the successful completion of this $31.4 million project, awarded through full and open competition under a firm-fixed-price contract, suggests a capacity to manage large-scale construction. Further investigation into federal procurement databases like SAM.gov or FPDS would be necessary to assess their broader performance history, including any past performance evaluations, contract modifications, or disputes on other government contracts.

How does the final cost of $31.4 million compare to the initial estimated cost or bid prices from other competitors?

The provided data indicates the final award amount was $31,433,181.64. While the number of bidders (3) is known, the specific bid prices of the other competitors and the initial estimated cost are not detailed. However, the fact that it was awarded under full and open competition suggests that the final price was deemed competitive and represented good value among the submitted proposals. Without the initial estimates or competing bids, a precise comparison of cost efficiency relative to the bidding landscape is not possible from this data alone.

What were the primary risk indicators identified during the bidding or execution phases of this contract?

Specific risk indicators identified during the bidding or execution phases are not detailed in the provided data. However, common risks in large construction projects include unforeseen site conditions (geotechnical issues, environmental hazards), material price volatility, labor shortages, weather delays, and design changes. The firm-fixed-price contract structure inherently transfers much of the cost overrun risk to the contractor, FCI Constructors, Inc. The successful completion suggests these risks were either anticipated and managed, or did not materialize to a significant degree.

How effective was the project management in ensuring the school was delivered on time and within budget, considering the contract duration?

The contract had a duration of 1768 days (approximately 4.8 years) from award (March 30, 2007) to completion (January 31, 2012). While the data confirms the project was completed, it does not provide specific details on whether it met the original timeline or budget targets within that duration. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests a strong incentive for the contractor to manage costs and schedule effectively. Without further information on milestones, change orders, or potential delays, a definitive assessment of project management effectiveness regarding timeliness and budget adherence is limited.

What is the historical spending pattern for school construction projects by the Department of the Army in Arizona?

The provided data focuses solely on the Kayenta Community School Replacement contract and does not offer insights into the broader historical spending patterns for school construction projects by the Department of the Army in Arizona. To analyze such patterns, one would need to examine contract awards over multiple fiscal years, looking at the number of school construction contracts, their total value, the agencies involved (e.g., Army Corps of Engineers, specific installations), and geographic distribution within Arizona. This would help establish trends, identify significant investment periods, and understand the typical scale of such projects.

Were there any significant contract modifications or change orders issued during the life of this contract?

The provided data does not specify whether there were significant contract modifications or change orders issued during the life of the Kayenta Community School Replacement contract. In large construction projects, modifications are not uncommon due to evolving requirements, unforeseen conditions, or design adjustments. However, under a firm-fixed-price contract, any changes that increase costs typically require careful negotiation and justification to ensure they are in the government's best interest and that the contractor bears responsibility for costs not directly attributable to scope changes.

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

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912PP06R0017

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3070 I 70 BUSINESS LOOP, GRAND JUNCTION, CO, 03

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $33,505,225

Exercised Options: $31,433,182

Current Obligation: $31,433,182

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline