Russell Construction Co. Inc. awarded $14.27M for building construction at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,271,003 ($14.3M)

Contractor: Russell Construction CO Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-09-28

End Date: 2012-07-25

Contract Duration: 1,031 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: BUILDOUT BLDG 68 FOR FIRST ARMY, RIA IL

Place of Performance

Location: ROCK ISLAND, ROCK ISLAND County, ILLINOIS, 61201

State: Illinois Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.3 million to RUSSELL CONSTRUCTION CO INC for work described as: BUILDOUT BLDG 68 FOR FIRST ARMY, RIA IL Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the scope of a large building construction project. 2. Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process, potentially leading to better pricing. 3. Project duration of over 1000 days indicates a complex and lengthy build-out. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor. 5. Location in Illinois places the project within a region with established construction infrastructure. 6. The project falls under the broad category of commercial and institutional building construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $14.27 million for the build-out of Building 68 at Rock Island Arsenal seems within a reasonable range for a significant construction project of this nature. Benchmarking against similar large-scale government construction contracts would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests that the contractor assumed the primary cost risk, which can be beneficial for the government if managed effectively. However, without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to private sector construction of equivalent scale and complexity, a definitive value assessment is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 10 bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this project. A competitive bidding process generally allows for price discovery and can lead to more favorable pricing for the government compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios. The number of bidders provides some assurance that the market was adequately engaged.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition for this construction project likely resulted in a more competitive bid landscape, potentially saving taxpayer dollars through lower pricing than if the contract had been awarded through a less competitive process.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army and its personnel at the Rock Island Arsenal, who will gain improved facilities. The project delivers essential infrastructure improvements, specifically the build-out of Building 68. The geographic impact is localized to Rock Island, Illinois, supporting the regional economy through construction activities. The project likely involved a significant construction workforce, providing employment opportunities in the Illinois region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise during the extended construction period, despite the fixed-price nature.
Ensuring the quality of construction meets all federal and military specifications over the multi-year duration.
Managing the logistical complexities of a large construction project at an active military installation.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure transfers significant cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition with 10 bidders suggests a robust market response and potential for competitive pricing.
The project addresses a specific facility need for the First Army at Rock Island Arsenal, indicating clear strategic alignment.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Government construction projects, particularly those for defense installations, often represent substantial investments. The market for large-scale federal construction is competitive, with numerous firms capable of undertaking such projects. Spending in this sector is influenced by infrastructure needs, modernization efforts, and national security requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large military facility construction contracts.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and there is no explicit mention of small business subcontracting goals. This suggests that the primary award went to a large business, and the potential for small business participation would likely be through subcontracting opportunities managed by Russell Construction Co. Inc. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Army contracting office responsible for the Rock Island Arsenal. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified build-out within the agreed price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization
Rock Island Arsenal Projects
Department of Defense Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Extended project duration may increase risk of cost escalation or delays.
Fixed-price contract requires diligent oversight to ensure quality standards are met.
Potential for contractor to face unforeseen site conditions over a long build-out period.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.3 million to RUSSELL CONSTRUCTION CO INC. BUILDOUT BLDG 68 FOR FIRST ARMY, RIA IL

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RUSSELL CONSTRUCTION CO 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 $14.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-09-28. End: 2012-07-25.

What is the track record of Russell Construction Co. Inc. in performing similar large-scale federal construction projects?

Russell Construction Co. Inc. has a history of performing various construction projects, including those for government entities. To assess their track record specifically for large-scale federal projects comparable to the $14.27 million build-out at Rock Island Arsenal, a review of their past federal contract awards would be necessary. This would involve examining contract values, project types (e.g., military facilities, institutional buildings), performance ratings, and any history of disputes or contract modifications. A detailed analysis would look for patterns of successful project completion, adherence to schedules and budgets, and positive past performance information from agencies like the Department of Defense.

How does the per-square-foot cost of this build-out compare to similar government construction projects?

Determining the per-square-foot cost requires knowing the total square footage of Building 68 that was built out. Without this specific data point, a direct comparison is not possible. However, once the square footage is known, it could be compared against benchmarks for similar government construction projects, particularly those involving military installations or institutional facilities. Factors such as the complexity of the build-out (e.g., specialized equipment, security features), prevailing labor and material costs in Illinois, and the overall scope of work would influence whether the per-square-foot cost is considered high, low, or average relative to market rates and other federal contracts.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract for a project spanning over 1000 days?

While a firm fixed-price (FFP) contract shifts cost risk to the contractor, extended project durations like the 1031 days for this build-out introduce specific risks. The primary risk for the government is that the contractor may cut corners on quality to maintain profitability if unforeseen cost increases occur, or if the initial pricing was too aggressive. For the contractor, the risk lies in accurately estimating all costs over such a long period, including potential fluctuations in material prices, labor availability, and unforeseen site conditions. Effective government oversight is crucial to ensure quality is maintained and that the contractor manages risks appropriately throughout the project lifecycle.

What is the historical spending pattern for building construction at the Rock Island Arsenal?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for building construction at the Rock Island Arsenal would involve reviewing contract data over several fiscal years. This would reveal the frequency and value of similar construction projects, the types of contractors typically awarded work, and the prevailing contract types and competition levels. Understanding this history can help contextualize the $14.27 million award, indicating whether it represents a typical investment or an outlier. It can also highlight trends in facility needs and modernization efforts at the arsenal, providing insights into future spending projections and potential opportunities.

How effective were the competition dynamics in ensuring a fair market price for this construction project?

The fact that this contract was awarded under full and open competition with 10 bidders suggests that the competition dynamics were likely effective in promoting a fair market price. A larger number of bids generally leads to more competitive pricing as contractors vie for the award. To definitively assess effectiveness, one would ideally compare the winning bid against the bids of other competitors and analyze if the final price aligns with independent cost estimates or market benchmarks. However, the presence of robust competition is a strong indicator that the government received a price reflective of market conditions.

What are the potential long-term implications of this facility build-out for the First Army's operational capabilities?

The long-term implications of the build-out of Building 68 for the First Army's operational capabilities depend heavily on the intended use of the facility. If the new or renovated space is designed to enhance command and control, provide modern training facilities, improve logistical support, or offer better administrative functions, it could significantly boost operational effectiveness. Conversely, if the facility does not meet the evolving needs of the First Army or becomes outdated quickly, its impact could be limited. A thorough understanding of the building's purpose and its integration into the First Army's strategic objectives is necessary to fully assess its long-term operational impact.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912QR09R0073

Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4600 E 53RD ST, DAVENPORT, IA, 01

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,271,003

Exercised Options: $14,271,003

Current Obligation: $14,271,003

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline