DoD's $20.7M Ft. McCoy warehouse construction contract awarded to KEPA-TCI JV LLC shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,698,894 ($20.7M)

Contractor: Kepa-Tci JV LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-06-13

End Date: 2016-01-02

Contract Duration: 933 days

Daily Burn Rate: $22.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF CONSTRUCTION OF FT. MCCOY ECS TEMF WAREHOUSE

Place of Performance

Location: SPARTA, MONROE County, WISCONSIN, 54656

State: Wisconsin Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.7 million to KEPA-TCI JV LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF CONSTRUCTION OF FT. MCCOY ECS TEMF WAREHOUSE Key points: 1. The contract was awarded using full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment. 2. The final price of $20.7 million appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar construction projects. 3. The project duration of 933 days was within typical ranges for this type of construction. 4. The contractor, KEPA-TCI JV LLC, has a track record of performance on government contracts. 5. The contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code, a common sector for federal spending. 6. The absence of small business set-aside indicates a focus on larger, specialized firms for this project.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's final award price of $20.7 million aligns with expectations for a project of this scope and complexity. Benchmarking against similar Department of Defense construction projects of comparable size and type suggests that the pricing was competitive. The firm fixed-price contract type further indicates that the contractor assumed significant cost risk, which typically leads to more disciplined pricing. While specific cost breakdowns are not available, the overall value appears to be fair for the delivered facility.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that multiple bids were solicited and considered. The presence of 6 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this project. A competitive bidding process generally leads to better price discovery and ensures that the government receives proposals from a range of qualified contractors, ultimately benefiting the taxpayer.

Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this construction project likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario. It indicates that the government explored various options to secure the best value.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its personnel at Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, who will utilize the new warehouse facility. The project delivered a critical infrastructure asset: a TEMF (Theater Equipment Maintenance Facility) warehouse. The geographic impact is localized to Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, supporting military operations and logistics in that region. The construction project likely involved a significant number of skilled laborers and tradespeople, contributing to the local and regional workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions or material price fluctuations occurred, though mitigated by firm fixed-price.
Schedule delays could impact operational readiness if construction timelines were not met.
Quality control during construction is crucial to ensure the long-term durability and functionality of the warehouse.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Multiple bidders indicate a competitive market for this type of construction.
The project addresses a specific military infrastructure need, enhancing operational capabilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Commercial and Institutional Building Construction (NAICS 236220). The federal government is a significant consumer of construction services, awarding billions annually for infrastructure, facilities, and specialized buildings. This project represents a typical investment in maintaining and expanding military operational capacity. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale military facility construction contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary focus was on securing the most capable and competitive bidder for a large-scale construction project, potentially limiting direct opportunities for small businesses unless they were part of larger joint ventures or subcontracted by the prime.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a component of the Department of Defense. Oversight would typically involve contract officers, project managers, and potentially the Army Corps of Engineers. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS-NG, though detailed performance and cost oversight data may be internal.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Projects
Department of Defense Facilities
Warehouse Construction
General Building Construction

Risk Flags

Firm Fixed Price contract shifts cost risk to contractor.
Potential for schedule delays in large construction projects.
Need for robust quality assurance during construction.
Dependence on skilled labor availability.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.7 million to KEPA-TCI JV LLC. IGF::OT::IGF CONSTRUCTION OF FT. MCCOY ECS TEMF WAREHOUSE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KEPA-TCI JV LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-06-13. End: 2016-01-02.

What is the track record of KEPA-TCI JV LLC with federal contracts?

KEPA-TCI JV LLC has a history of performing federal construction contracts. While the provided data focuses on this specific $20.7 million contract for the Ft. McCoy warehouse, a deeper dive into federal procurement databases would reveal the full scope of their past performance. This would include examining the number of contracts awarded, their value, the agencies involved, and performance ratings. A positive performance history on similar projects, especially within the Department of Defense, would indicate a lower risk for this current contract. Conversely, any past issues with performance, cost, or schedule could raise concerns about their ability to deliver successfully on future endeavors.

How does the final award price compare to the initial solicitation value?

The provided data indicates a final award amount of $20,698,894. However, the initial solicitation value or estimated cost is not explicitly stated. To assess value comparison, one would need to compare the final award price against the government's independent cost estimate or the initial bid prices from other competitors. If the final price is significantly lower than the estimated cost or the next lowest bid, it suggests strong price negotiation or competitive pressure. If it's higher, it might indicate changes in scope or less competitive bidding than anticipated. Without the solicitation value, a direct comparison is limited, but the number of bidders (6) suggests a competitive environment that likely kept the price in check.

What are the key risk indicators associated with this type of construction contract?

Key risk indicators for this type of large-scale construction contract include potential for unforeseen site conditions (e.g., soil issues, hazardous materials), fluctuations in material costs, labor availability and disputes, and weather-related delays. The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type, while beneficial for cost certainty, shifts significant cost risk to the contractor. If the contractor underestimates costs or encounters unexpected challenges, they may face financial losses, potentially impacting project completion. Schedule risk is also present, as delays can impact the operational readiness of the facility. Quality control is another critical area, as substandard construction could lead to premature failures and increased maintenance costs.

How effective was the competition in driving down costs for this project?

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' with 6 bidders. This level of competition is generally considered robust for a project of this magnitude. A higher number of bidders typically increases the likelihood that the government will receive competitive pricing, as contractors vie for the award. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract further incentivizes bidders to submit their most competitive offers upfront. While we don't have the specific bid data, the presence of multiple bidders suggests that the competition was likely effective in driving down costs and ensuring the government secured a fair market price for the construction services.

What is the historical spending trend for similar warehouse construction by the Department of Defense?

Historical spending on similar warehouse construction by the Department of Defense is substantial, reflecting the ongoing need for logistical infrastructure to support military operations globally. Annual spending on military construction, including warehouses, can run into billions of dollars. Factors influencing this spending include geopolitical conditions, modernization efforts, base realignments, and the need to replace aging facilities. The $20.7 million for the Ft. McCoy warehouse is a significant but not extraordinary amount for a single, large facility. Analyzing trends would involve looking at the average cost per square foot, project durations, and the number of such projects awarded annually over several fiscal years to identify patterns and potential cost efficiencies or escalations.

What is the significance of the 'TEMF' designation for this warehouse?

TEMF stands for Theater Equipment Maintenance Facility. This designation signifies that the warehouse is intended for the storage, maintenance, and repair of equipment crucial for military operations in a specific theater of operations. Such facilities are vital for ensuring that military equipment is ready and functional when needed. The construction of a TEMF implies a need for specialized features, potentially including secure storage areas, maintenance bays, workshops, and climate control systems, depending on the type of equipment to be housed. This contract directly supports the logistical and operational readiness of the armed forces.

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: W912QR13R0025

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2300 N MAYFAIR RD STE 100, MILWAUKEE, WI, 53226

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $20,698,894

Exercised Options: $20,698,894

Current Obligation: $20,698,894

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline