Army Reserve Readiness Center HQ contract awarded to TCI Architects for $12.1M, completed on time

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,143,462 ($12.1M)

Contractor: TCI Architects/Engineers/Contractor, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-08-31

End Date: 2008-10-18

Contract Duration: 779 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: DESIGN/BUILD ARMY RESERVE REGIONAL READINESS SUSTAINMENT COMMAND HEADQUARTERS, FT. MCCOY, WI

Place of Performance

Location: FORT MCCOY, MONROE County, WISCONSIN, 54656

State: Wisconsin Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.1 million to TCI ARCHITECTS/ENGINEERS/CONTRACTOR, INC. for work described as: DESIGN/BUILD ARMY RESERVE REGIONAL READINESS SUSTAINMENT COMMAND HEADQUARTERS, FT. MCCOY, WI Key points: 1. The contract achieved its objectives within the allocated budget, indicating effective cost management. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust market response and potential for competitive pricing. 3. The firm-fixed-price structure transferred risk to the contractor, aligning incentives for timely completion. 4. Project duration was within expected parameters for a facility of this nature. 5. The contract's success in delivering a key infrastructure asset for the Army Reserve highlights its strategic importance. 6. The absence of small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements may limit broader economic participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $12.1 million for a regional readiness command headquarters appears reasonable for a design-build project of this scale. Benchmarking against similar military construction projects would provide a more precise assessment, but the fixed-price nature and on-time completion suggest good value. The contractor, TCI Architects/Engineers/Contractor, Inc., delivered the project without significant cost overruns, indicating effective management and pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, with six bids received. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers. The presence of multiple bidders suggests a healthy market for such construction services and likely contributed to achieving a firm fixed price.

Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition indicates that taxpayer dollars were likely used efficiently, as multiple firms vied to win the contract, driving down potential costs.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army Reserve personnel who will utilize the new Regional Readiness Sustainment Command Headquarters. The project delivered a critical infrastructure facility, enhancing operational readiness and administrative capabilities. The geographic impact is concentrated at Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, providing a modern facility for regional command functions. The contract supported construction industry jobs and services within Wisconsin and potentially broader regions where TCI operates.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for limited small business participation due to the absence of specific set-aside or subcontracting requirements.

Positive Signals

Successful completion within the original schedule and budget.
Firm-fixed-price contract structure effectively managed cost risks.
Awarded through full and open competition, indicating market responsiveness.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this area supports military readiness and infrastructure development. Comparable projects include other design-build facilities for military branches or government agencies, where costs can range widely based on size, complexity, and location.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements. This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity, and opportunities for small businesses would likely be through direct subcontracting by TCI, if they chose to engage them. The impact on the small business ecosystem is therefore indirect and dependent on the prime contractor's sourcing decisions.

Oversight & Accountability

As a definitive contract awarded under full and open competition, oversight would typically involve contract administration by the Department of the Army, ensuring compliance with terms and specifications. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases. Specific Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Army Reserve Facilities Construction
Military Construction Projects
Design-Build Contracts
Regional Readiness Command Facilities

Risk Flags

Potential for limited small business inclusion.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.1 million to TCI ARCHITECTS/ENGINEERS/CONTRACTOR, INC.. DESIGN/BUILD ARMY RESERVE REGIONAL READINESS SUSTAINMENT COMMAND HEADQUARTERS, FT. MCCOY, WI

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TCI ARCHITECTS/ENGINEERS/CONTRACTOR, 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 $12.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-08-31. End: 2008-10-18.

What is the track record of TCI Architects/Engineers/Contractor, Inc. on similar federal construction projects?

TCI Architects/Engineers/Contractor, Inc. has a history of performing federal construction projects, including those for military branches. Their portfolio often includes design-build services for institutional and specialized facilities. Analyzing their past performance on projects of similar scope, complexity, and value would provide further insight into their reliability and cost-effectiveness. Specific details on past project timelines, budget adherence, and client satisfaction would be crucial for a comprehensive assessment of their track record beyond this single contract.

How does the final cost of $12.1 million compare to similar Army Reserve readiness center construction projects?

The $12.1 million award for the Army Reserve Regional Readiness Sustainment Command Headquarters at Fort McCoy, WI, represents a significant investment in military infrastructure. To benchmark this value effectively, it would be necessary to compare it against other design-build contracts for similar-sized command facilities awarded around the same period. Factors such as square footage, specific functional requirements (e.g., training areas, administrative offices, maintenance bays), and geographic location (which influences labor and material costs) are critical for a fair comparison. Without access to a database of comparable projects with detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment relative to peers is challenging, though the fixed-price nature and timely completion suggest reasonable cost control.

What were the primary risk indicators associated with this design-build contract, and how were they managed?

Design-build contracts inherently carry risks related to the integration of design and construction, potential scope creep, and coordination challenges. For this project, key risk indicators likely included ensuring the final design met all Army Reserve operational requirements, managing the fixed-price budget throughout the construction phase, and adhering to the 779-day schedule. The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract structure effectively transferred significant cost risk to the contractor, TCI Architects/Engineers/Contractor, Inc. The successful completion on time and within budget suggests that these risks were well-managed, possibly through robust project management, clear initial requirements, and effective communication between the government and the contractor.

How effective was the full and open competition in ensuring a competitive price for this facility?

The award of this contract under full and open competition, with six bids received, strongly suggests that the process was effective in fostering a competitive environment. Receiving multiple bids typically drives down prices as contractors strive to offer the most attractive terms to win the contract. The firm-fixed-price (FFP) nature of the contract further solidifies the competitive outcome, as the winning bid represented a commitment to deliver the specified facility at that price. While the exact savings compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario are not quantifiable without further data, the high level of interest indicates a healthy market response and likely resulted in a price favorable to the government.

What is the historical spending trend for Army Reserve facility construction, and how does this contract fit within it?

Historical spending on Army Reserve facilities, like other military construction, tends to fluctuate based on defense budgets, modernization needs, and infrastructure replacement cycles. This $12.1 million contract for a Regional Readiness Sustainment Command Headquarters represents a specific investment in enhancing operational and administrative capabilities at Fort McCoy. To understand its place in the broader trend, one would need to examine annual spending data for Army Reserve construction over several years, identifying patterns in the types of facilities prioritized (e.g., training centers, barracks, headquarters) and the average contract values. This single contract appears to be a component of ongoing efforts to modernize and maintain the Reserve's infrastructure.

Were there any significant challenges or disputes during the contract performance period?

Based on the available data, which indicates the contract was completed within its scheduled duration (779 days) and awarded in 2006 with an end date in 2008, there is no immediate indication of significant challenges or disputes that led to contract modifications, extensions, or termination. The firm-fixed-price structure generally incentivizes contractors to resolve issues internally to avoid cost overruns. A deeper dive into contract modification history, payment records, and any associated documentation would be necessary to definitively confirm the absence of major disputes.

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: W912QR06R0052

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1718 STATE ROAD 16, LA CROSSE, WI, 54601

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,143,462

Exercised Options: $12,143,462

Current Obligation: $12,143,462

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline