DoD's $36.6M Kingsolver Pierce School construction contract awarded to AWA Wilson JV shows fair competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $36,610,567 ($36.6M)

Contractor: AWA Wilson JV

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2014-02-20

End Date: 2017-02-10

Contract Duration: 1,086 days

Daily Burn Rate: $33.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF CONSTRUCTION OF THE KINGSOLVER PIERCE SCHOOL FT. KNOX, KY

Place of Performance

Location: FORT KNOX, HARDIN County, KENTUCKY, 40121

State: Kentucky Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $36.6 million to AWA WILSON JV for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF CONSTRUCTION OF THE KINGSOLVER PIERCE SCHOOL FT. KNOX, KY Key points: 1. Contract value of $36.6 million for school construction. 2. Awarded by the Department of the Army, highlighting defense infrastructure investment. 3. Utilized full and open competition after exclusion of sources, suggesting a deliberate procurement process. 4. Firm Fixed Price contract type indicates price certainty for the government. 5. Project duration of 1086 days points to a significant construction undertaking. 6. Located in Fort Knox, Kentucky, impacting local workforce and economy.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $36.6 million for the construction of the Kingsolver Pierce School appears reasonable for a project of this scale and complexity, especially given its location at Fort Knox. While direct comparisons are difficult without specific project details, construction costs for institutional buildings can vary widely based on materials, labor, and site-specific requirements. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract helps manage cost overruns, suggesting a degree of value for money if the project is completed on time and to specification. Benchmarking against similar military construction projects would provide a more precise assessment of pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources were initially excluded. This suggests a potential refinement of the bidder pool based on preliminary requirements or market research. With 7 bidders, the competition level was moderate, providing a reasonable basis for price discovery. However, the exclusion of certain sources warrants further investigation to ensure no viable competitors were unfairly barred.

Taxpayer Impact: A moderate number of bidders, even after source exclusion, generally benefits taxpayers by fostering competitive pricing. The exclusion of sources, however, could potentially limit the lowest price achievable if those excluded were capable and competitive.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are military families and personnel at Fort Knox, Kentucky, who will gain access to a new educational facility. The contract delivers essential infrastructure in the form of a school building, supporting the quality of life and readiness of the base. The geographic impact is concentrated in Hardin County, Kentucky, potentially stimulating local economic activity through construction jobs and material sourcing. The project implies a demand for skilled construction labor in the region, contributing to employment opportunities within the building trades.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost increases if the 'exclusion of sources' was not fully justified and limited competition.
Risk of schedule delays common in large-scale construction projects, impacting facility availability.
Ensuring the quality of construction meets military standards for durability and safety.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract type mitigates cost escalation risks for the government.
Moderate competition among 7 bidders suggests a competitive bidding environment.
Award to a joint venture (AWA Wilson JV) may indicate capacity to handle complex projects.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. The Department of Defense is a major client for construction services, particularly for infrastructure development on military installations. Spending in this sector is influenced by government funding priorities, military base needs, and economic conditions. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other military construction projects of similar size and scope, as well as general commercial building costs in the region.

Small Business Impact

The contract details indicate that small business set-asides were not utilized (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests the contract was not specifically targeted to small businesses. The prime contractor, AWA Wilson JV, is a joint venture, which can sometimes involve small businesses as partners, but this information is not explicitly provided. The absence of set-asides means that large businesses or joint ventures were likely the primary focus of the competition. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist but are not guaranteed by the contract's structure.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Army's contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified facility within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the procurement or execution phases.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction, Army
Family Housing Construction
School Construction
Department of Defense Infrastructure Projects
Federal Building Construction

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion.
Construction project risks (delays, cost overruns, quality issues).
Need for robust oversight to ensure adherence to military standards.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $36.6 million to AWA WILSON JV. IGF::OT::IGF CONSTRUCTION OF THE KINGSOLVER PIERCE SCHOOL FT. KNOX, KY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AWA WILSON JV.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $36.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-02-20. End: 2017-02-10.

What is the track record of AWA Wilson JV in executing similar large-scale construction projects for the federal government?

Information regarding the specific track record of the joint venture 'AWA Wilson JV' in executing similar large-scale construction projects for the federal government is not directly available in the provided data snippet. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing past performance evaluations, contract history, and project completion records for both AWA and Wilson, as well as their joint venture activities. Federal procurement databases and past performance information systems would be the primary sources for such an analysis. Understanding their experience with firm fixed-price contracts, project timelines, and budget adherence on comparable projects is crucial for evaluating their capability to successfully deliver the Kingsolver Pierce School.

How does the awarded price of $36.6 million compare to the estimated cost or budget for the Kingsolver Pierce School project?

The provided data indicates the awarded contract value is $36.6 million. However, it does not include information about the government's estimated cost or the initial budget allocated for the Kingsolver Pierce School project. To assess value for money, this awarded price needs to be compared against the government's independent cost estimate (ICE) or the baseline budget. If the awarded price is significantly below the ICE, it might indicate strong competition or potentially underestimated costs. Conversely, if it's at or above the ICE, it suggests the price is in line with expectations. Without the government's estimate, a definitive comparison of value is challenging.

What are the specific risks associated with constructing a school on a military installation like Fort Knox?

Constructing a school on a military installation like Fort Knox presents several specific risks. Security protocols and access restrictions can complicate logistics, material delivery, and workforce access, potentially leading to delays and increased costs. Environmental considerations unique to military bases, such as unexploded ordnance (UXO) or specific soil conditions, may require specialized surveys and mitigation efforts. Furthermore, the need to coordinate construction activities with ongoing base operations and minimize disruption to military personnel and families adds a layer of complexity. Compliance with stringent military construction standards and regulations, which may differ from civilian codes, also poses a risk if not meticulously followed.

How effective has the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' strategy been in similar DoD construction procurements?

The effectiveness of 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' can be variable and depends heavily on the justification for excluding specific sources. When used appropriately, it can streamline the procurement process by focusing on vendors with demonstrated capabilities relevant to unique project requirements, potentially leading to better-qualified bidders and more tailored proposals. However, if sources are excluded without a strong, defensible rationale, it can limit competition, potentially leading to higher prices and reduced innovation. For the DoD, this strategy might be employed for specialized construction needs where only a subset of the market possesses the required expertise or security clearances. Analyzing past DoD procurements using this method would reveal trends in cost savings, project success rates, and bidder satisfaction.

What is the historical spending trend for school construction projects at Fort Knox or similar Army installations?

Historical spending trends for school construction projects at Fort Knox or similar Army installations are not detailed in the provided data. To analyze this, one would need to examine past contracts awarded by the Department of the Army or relevant agencies for educational facilities on military bases over several fiscal years. Key metrics to track would include the number of projects, average contract values, duration, and types of contractors involved. Understanding these trends can help contextualize the $36.6 million award for the Kingsolver Pierce School, identifying whether it represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of investment in such infrastructure. This analysis would also reveal patterns in procurement strategies and potential cost fluctuations over time.

What are the potential long-term maintenance and operational costs associated with the new Kingsolver Pierce School?

The provided contract data focuses solely on the construction phase and does not include information regarding the long-term maintenance and operational (O&M) costs of the Kingsolver Pierce School. These costs would typically be borne by the entity responsible for operating the school post-construction, likely the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) or a similar body. Factors influencing O&M costs include building materials, energy efficiency of the design, HVAC systems, roofing, and general upkeep requirements. A comprehensive lifecycle cost analysis, which should ideally be conducted during the design phase, would estimate these future expenses. Without such analysis or data on similar facilities, predicting the exact O&M burden is speculative.

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: W912QR13R0033

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 700 W PETE ROSE WAY STE. 464, CINCINNATI, OH, 45203

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, SBA Certified 8 a Joint Venture, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $36,818,567

Exercised Options: $36,610,567

Current Obligation: $36,610,567

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline