Robins AFB modular facility contract awarded to First Choice Gov, Inc. for over $23.4M

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,469,533 ($23.5M)

Contractor: First Choice GOV, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2011-09-28

End Date: 2017-06-14

Contract Duration: 2,086 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.3K/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: DESIGN/BUILD MODULAR TEMPORARY FACILITY AT ROBINS AFB

Place of Performance

Location: ATHENS, CLARKE County, GEORGIA, 30605

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $23.5 million to FIRST CHOICE GOV, INC for work described as: DESIGN/BUILD MODULAR TEMPORARY FACILITY AT ROBINS AFB Key points: 1. Contract awarded for design and build of temporary modular facilities. 2. The contract was a definitive contract with a firm fixed price. 3. Competition was full and open after exclusion of sources. 4. The contract duration was 2086 days. 5. The contractor is First Choice Gov, Inc. 6. The award was made by the Department of the Army. 7. The facility is located in Georgia.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total contract value of $23.47 million for a design/build modular facility at Robins AFB appears to be within a reasonable range for such projects, though specific benchmarking is difficult without detailed scope and material cost data. The firm fixed-price structure shifts risk to the contractor, which can be beneficial for cost control if the scope is well-defined. However, the lack of detailed cost breakdowns makes a precise value-for-money assessment challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' which suggests that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources may have been excluded based on certain criteria. The number of bidders (4) indicates some level of competition, but the 'exclusion of sources' clause warrants further investigation to understand its impact on the competitive landscape and potential price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition, even if 'full and open' with exclusions, may have resulted in a higher price for taxpayers than a truly unrestricted open competition. Understanding the rationale for source exclusion is key to assessing if taxpayer funds were optimally utilized.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and personnel at Robins AFB, who will receive temporary modular facilities. The services delivered include the design and construction of these facilities. The geographic impact is localized to Robins AFB in Georgia. Workforce implications would include construction jobs during the build phase and operational support roles once the facilities are in use.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the 'exclusion of sources' limited competitive pricing.
Scope creep could be an issue given the long duration and fixed-price nature.
Quality control of modular construction needs to be rigorously monitored.
Long-term maintenance costs for temporary facilities are not detailed.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Design/build approach can streamline the construction process.
Modular construction can offer faster deployment times.
Award to a single contractor simplifies management.

Sector Analysis

The construction sector, specifically commercial and institutional building construction, is a significant area of federal spending. This contract falls under the broader category of facility construction and upgrades, which are essential for military bases and government operations. Benchmarking this contract against similar modular construction projects for government facilities would provide further context on its cost-effectiveness.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus, as the 'small business' flag is false. There is no explicit mention of small business set-asides or subcontracting goals. This suggests that the prime contractor is likely a large business, and the impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether First Choice Gov, Inc. utilizes small business subcontractors, which is not detailed in this data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight would typically be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the contracting officer (CO) within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified facilities. Transparency is generally provided through contract award databases, but detailed project progress and cost performance data may be less accessible to the public.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Facilities
Temporary Structures Procurement
Department of Defense Facilities Management

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
Lack of detailed cost breakdown for value assessment.
Potential for scope creep in long-term fixed-price contracts.
Unclear long-term maintenance and facility lifespan.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $23.5 million to FIRST CHOICE GOV, INC. DESIGN/BUILD MODULAR TEMPORARY FACILITY AT ROBINS AFB

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FIRST CHOICE GOV, 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 $23.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2011-09-28. End: 2017-06-14.

What was the specific rationale for excluding certain sources in this 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' award?

The specific rationale for excluding certain sources in this 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' award is not detailed in the provided data. Typically, such exclusions might be based on factors like past performance, technical capabilities, security clearances, or specific requirements outlined in the solicitation that only a subset of potential offerors could meet. Without further documentation from the solicitation or award justification, it's impossible to definitively state why sources were excluded. This lack of transparency can raise questions about whether the exclusion unduly limited competition and potentially impacted the final price paid by the government.

How does the cost per square foot of this modular facility compare to similar government construction projects?

A precise cost per square foot comparison is not feasible with the current data, as the total contract value ($23.47 million) does not include the facility's size (square footage). To conduct such a comparison, the square footage of the modular facility would need to be obtained. Once known, this figure could be divided into the total contract value to derive a cost per square foot. This metric could then be benchmarked against historical data for similar government modular construction projects, particularly those for military bases or institutional buildings, to assess if the pricing is competitive or indicates potential overspending.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract and the delivered facilities?

The provided data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. However, for a design/build modular facility contract, typical KPIs would likely include adherence to the project schedule (original end date: 2017-06-14), meeting all design specifications and quality standards, successful completion of inspections and testing, and ensuring the facility is fit for its intended purpose at Robins AFB. The firm fixed-price nature implies that meeting these performance requirements within the agreed budget is paramount. Post-occupancy evaluations of functionality and durability would also be relevant KPIs.

What is the track record of First Choice Gov, Inc. in delivering similar design/build modular construction projects for the federal government?

The provided data indicates that First Choice Gov, Inc. was awarded this $23.47 million definitive contract for the design and build of modular temporary facilities. However, it does not offer details on their broader track record, such as the number of similar projects completed, their performance history on those projects (e.g., on-time delivery, budget adherence, quality ratings), or any past issues or commendations. A comprehensive assessment of their track record would require reviewing their contract history across various federal agencies, including past performance evaluations and any debriefings or disputes associated with previous awards.

Were there any significant cost changes or modifications to the contract after its initial award?

The provided data summarizes the initial award details, including the total obligation amount of $23,469,532.96 and the contract dates (2011-09-28 to 2017-06-14). It does not contain information about any contract modifications, change orders, or amendments that may have occurred during the contract's performance period. To determine if there were significant cost changes, one would need to access the contract's official modification history, which is typically available through federal procurement data systems like FPDS or SAM.gov, detailing any adjustments to the scope, schedule, or price.

What is the expected lifespan and maintenance plan for these temporary modular facilities post-construction?

The data describes the contract as being for 'MODULAR TEMPORARY FACILITY' and specifies an end date of June 14, 2017. However, it does not provide details on the expected lifespan beyond the contract's operational phase or outline a specific maintenance plan. 'Temporary' can imply a range of durations, from a few years to a decade or more, depending on the design and materials. A comprehensive understanding would require reviewing the facility's design specifications and any associated operations and maintenance (O&M) agreements or government-provided information regarding the facility's intended service life and upkeep requirements.

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: W912QR11R0062

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 337 S MILLEDGE AVE STE 227, ATHENS, GA, 30605

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $34,716,535

Exercised Options: $32,371,292

Current Obligation: $23,469,533

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline