DoD's $16.3M Amarillo construction contract awarded to Anthony and Gordon Construction Company, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $16,327,117 ($16.3M)

Contractor: Anthony and Gordon Construction Company, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-07-13

End Date: 2012-11-15

Contract Duration: 1,221 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: AMARILLO, TX AFRC PROJECT NO 143565

Place of Performance

Location: AMARILLO, POTTER County, TEXAS, 79101

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $16.3 million to ANTHONY AND GORDON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. for work described as: AMARILLO, TX AFRC PROJECT NO 143565 Key points: 1. The contract value of $16.3 million represents a significant investment in infrastructure. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open bidding process, suggesting potential for competitive pricing. 3. The duration of 1221 days (over 3 years) suggests a complex project with substantial execution requirements. 4. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Army, this contract aligns with broader defense infrastructure needs. 6. The project is located in Amarillo, Texas, impacting local economic activity and workforce.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific project details or comparable construction projects in the Amarillo area. However, the total award amount of $16.3 million for a multi-year construction project is substantial. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the price was set competitively. Further analysis would require understanding the scope of work and comparing it to similar construction projects undertaken by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies in similar geographic regions.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 9 bidders indicates a healthy level of interest and competition for this project. A higher number of bidders generally suggests a more competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and value for the government. The fact that multiple companies vied for this contract implies that the initial solicitation was well-defined and attractive to the market.

Taxpayer Impact: A robust competition level like this one typically benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces, ensuring the government receives the best possible value for its investment.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its personnel, who will utilize the completed construction. The contract delivers essential construction services, likely related to facilities or infrastructure at a military installation. The geographic impact is concentrated in Amarillo, Texas, potentially creating local jobs and stimulating the regional economy. The project likely involved a significant number of construction workers, tradespeople, and support staff, contributing to local employment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the firm-fixed-price contract did not adequately account for all project complexities.
Risk of delays in project completion impacting the operational readiness of the facility.
Quality control issues could arise if oversight is insufficient during the extended construction period.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor, potentially saving taxpayer money.
Full and open competition with 9 bidders suggests a competitive award and potentially good value.
The long duration indicates a comprehensive project, likely addressing significant infrastructure needs.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a vital part of the broader construction industry. This sector encompasses the building of non-residential structures such as government facilities, offices, and industrial buildings. The Department of Defense is a major consumer of construction services, frequently awarding large contracts for base infrastructure, housing, and specialized facilities. The market size for federal construction is substantial, with significant annual spending allocated to maintaining and expanding military installations and other government properties.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). While the prime contractor, Anthony and Gordon Construction Company, Inc., is not explicitly identified as a small business in this data, the absence of set-aside provisions means that subcontracting opportunities for small businesses would depend on the prime contractor's own subcontracting plan and adherence to federal small business goals. Without specific subcontracting data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though large federal construction projects often create downstream opportunities for specialized small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and engineering divisions. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified construction within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction may be involved if allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's performance or closeout.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
Department of Defense Facilities Management
Federal Building Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of cost escalation or scope creep if not managed tightly.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can lead to contractor default if bid too aggressively without adequate contingency.
Construction projects are inherently subject to unforeseen site conditions and weather delays.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $16.3 million to ANTHONY AND GORDON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.. AMARILLO, TX AFRC PROJECT NO 143565

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ANTHONY AND GORDON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, 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 $16.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-07-13. End: 2012-11-15.

What specific type of building or facility was constructed under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 236220, which is for Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. This broad category suggests the project involved the construction of a non-residential building. However, the specific nature of the facility (e.g., barracks, administrative building, training facility, hangar) is not detailed in the available information. Further investigation into the contract details or associated project documentation would be necessary to ascertain the exact type of structure built. Such information is crucial for understanding the project's purpose and its contribution to the Department of Defense's operational capabilities.

How does the $16.3 million contract value compare to similar construction projects awarded by the Department of the Army in Texas during the same period?

Comparing the $16.3 million contract value requires access to a broader dataset of Department of the Army construction contracts awarded in Texas between 2009 and 2012. Without this comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether this project was high, low, or average in cost. However, for a multi-year construction project awarded under full and open competition, $16.3 million is a substantial sum, suggesting a project of significant scope and complexity. Factors influencing cost include the type of facility, specific site requirements, material costs, and labor rates prevalent in the Amarillo region during that timeframe. A detailed benchmark analysis would involve identifying comparable projects based on square footage, facility type, and project duration.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or milestones outlined in the contract, and how was the contractor's performance measured?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or milestones for this contract. However, as a firm-fixed-price contract with a duration of 1221 days (approximately 3.3 years), it is highly probable that the contract included phased milestones tied to different stages of construction (e.g., foundation, structural completion, interior finishing, final inspection). Performance measurement would typically involve regular site inspections by government representatives (e.g., contracting officer's representatives, engineers), progress reports submitted by the contractor, and adherence to the project schedule and quality standards. Failure to meet milestones or quality requirements could result in penalties or contract modifications, depending on the specific terms.

What is the track record of Anthony and Gordon Construction Company, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

The provided data identifies Anthony and Gordon Construction Company, Inc. as the awardee of this $16.3 million Department of Defense contract. To assess their track record, one would need to examine historical contract data for this company. This would involve searching federal procurement databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) for previous awards, contract values, agencies served, and performance history. A company with multiple successful federal contracts, especially with the DoD, generally indicates a proven ability to meet government requirements. Conversely, a history of contract disputes, terminations, or poor performance ratings would raise concerns. Without access to this broader historical data, it's impossible to definitively assess their track record beyond this single award.

Were there any significant challenges or disputes encountered during the execution of this contract?

The provided summary data does not contain information regarding challenges or disputes encountered during the execution of this contract. Contract performance issues, such as delays, cost disputes, or quality problems, are typically documented in contract modification histories, performance reports, or legal filings, none of which are included here. To determine if there were significant challenges, one would need to access more detailed contract files, such as contract award narratives, modification logs, or any associated litigation records. The duration of the contract (over 3 years) increases the likelihood of encountering some level of challenge, but whether these were 'significant' is not evident from the summary.

How did the final cost compare to the initial awarded amount, and were there any significant contract modifications?

The provided data shows an 'Award Amount' (a) of $16,327,117.13. There is no information available in this summary data regarding the final cost or any contract modifications that may have occurred during the contract's performance period (2009-2012). For firm-fixed-price contracts, the goal is for the final cost to match the awarded amount, barring any approved modifications. Modifications typically arise due to changes in scope, unforeseen site conditions, or adjustments to contract terms. To determine if the final cost deviated from the awarded amount or if modifications were issued, a review of the contract's official modification history and final payment records would be necessary.

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: W912QR09R0031

Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: HZE

Contractor Details

Address: 616 LUTTRELL ST, KNOXVILLE, TN, 02

Business Categories: Category Business, Emerging Small Business, HUBZone Firm, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $16,327,117

Exercised Options: $16,327,117

Current Obligation: $16,327,117

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline