DoD's $30.2M Family Housing Phase 3 contract awarded to Woo Jung Construction for heavy engineering
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $30,215,027 ($30.2M)
Contractor: WOO Jung Construction CO., Ltd.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2005-05-11
End Date: 2008-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,238 days
Daily Burn Rate: $24.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 15
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: FAMILY HOUSING PHASE 3
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $30.2 million to WOO JUNG CONSTRUCTION CO., LTD. for work described as: FAMILY HOUSING PHASE 3 Key points: 1. Contract awarded for heavy and civil engineering construction services. 2. The contract was competed under full and open competition. 3. The contract duration was 1238 days. 4. The contract was awarded by the Department of Defense. 5. The contract was awarded to Woo Jung Construction Co., Ltd. 6. The contract type was Fixed Price.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of $30.2 million for heavy and civil engineering construction is moderate. Without specific benchmarks for similar family housing projects of this scale and complexity, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the contractor assumed a significant portion of the cost risk. Further analysis would require comparison with similar DoD family housing construction projects to determine if the pricing was competitive.
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 15 bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this project. A robust competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more competitive price for taxpayers, as multiple companies vied for the contract. This process helps ensure that government funds are used efficiently.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are military families who will be provided with housing. The contract supports the construction and delivery of family housing units. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around the military installation where the housing is being built. The project implies a need for construction labor and related trades, impacting the local workforce.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if fixed-price contract does not adequately account for all construction variables.
- Risk of delays in project completion impacting family housing availability.
- Quality control issues could arise if not rigorously managed throughout the construction process.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process.
- Fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
- The contract was awarded to a specific company, indicating a clear point of accountability.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the heavy and civil engineering construction sector, specifically related to building infrastructure for military families. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 237990 covers other heavy and civil engineering construction. Spending in this sector is crucial for maintaining and expanding military base infrastructure, with significant government investment typically allocated to such projects.
Small Business Impact
The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity, and the direct impact on the small business ecosystem through this specific contract may be limited unless the prime contractor engages in significant subcontracting.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting command. Accountability measures are inherent in the fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified housing within the agreed budget. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed project-specific oversight reports are not always publicly available.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction, Family Housing
- Department of Defense Construction Projects
- Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction Contracts
Risk Flags
- Contract awarded to a single entity.
- Fixed-price contract type may not fully account for unforeseen construction complexities.
- Limited public data on specific performance metrics or quality outcomes.
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, heavy-and-civil-engineering, family-housing, fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, infrastructure
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $30.2 million to WOO JUNG CONSTRUCTION CO., LTD.. FAMILY HOUSING PHASE 3
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is WOO JUNG CONSTRUCTION CO., LTD..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $30.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2005-05-11. End: 2008-09-30.
What is the track record of Woo Jung Construction Co., Ltd. with federal contracts, particularly in heavy and civil engineering?
Woo Jung Construction Co., Ltd. has a history of engaging with federal contracts, primarily within the Department of Defense. Their involvement in projects like the 'FAMILY HOUSING PHASE 3' indicates experience in construction and infrastructure development for military installations. Analyzing their past performance on similar projects, including contract values, completion timeliness, and any reported disputes or modifications, would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and expertise in executing large-scale civil engineering endeavors. A review of their contract history would reveal the types of projects undertaken, their success rates, and any patterns of performance issues or commendations.
How does the $30.2 million contract value compare to similar family housing construction projects by the DoD?
Benchmarking the $30.2 million contract value against similar family housing construction projects by the Department of Defense requires access to a broader dataset of comparable contracts. Factors such as the number of units built, the scope of work (e.g., new construction vs. renovation), location, and specific amenities can significantly influence project costs. Without this comparative data, it is difficult to definitively state whether this contract represents excellent, fair, or questionable value. However, given the scale, a moderate value suggests it falls within a typical range for substantial infrastructure development, assuming the scope was commensurate.
What were the primary risks identified for this 'FAMILY HOUSING PHASE 3' contract, and how were they mitigated?
While specific risk mitigation strategies for this contract are not detailed in the provided data, common risks in heavy and civil engineering construction projects include unforeseen site conditions, material cost fluctuations, labor shortages, weather delays, and design changes. For a fixed-price contract like this one, the primary risk is borne by the contractor, Woo Jung Construction Co., Ltd., to manage these variables within the agreed-upon price. Mitigation would typically involve thorough site investigations, detailed planning, robust supply chain management, contingency planning for weather, and strict change order control processes. The government's role would involve diligent oversight to ensure compliance and address any issues promptly.
What is the historical spending pattern for family housing construction within the Department of the Army over the last decade?
Analyzing the historical spending patterns for family housing construction within the Department of the Army over the last decade would reveal trends in investment in military family accommodations. This would likely show fluctuations based on military readiness needs, budget allocations, and infrastructure modernization initiatives. Spending could be influenced by factors such as the number of military personnel requiring housing, the age and condition of existing housing stock, and broader defense spending priorities. A detailed analysis would require aggregating contract data for family housing construction projects awarded by the Army over the specified period to identify average contract values, total annual spending, and the types of construction services most frequently procured.
How effective was the full and open competition in ensuring competitive pricing for this contract?
The fact that this contract was awarded under full and open competition with 15 bids suggests a strong likelihood that competitive pricing was achieved. A larger number of bidders generally correlates with more aggressive pricing strategies as companies strive to win the contract. The government's procurement process aims to solicit the best value, and a competitive environment is key to this. While the raw data doesn't provide the bid prices of all competitors, the high number of bids indicates that the market was receptive and that Woo Jung Construction's winning bid was likely competitive among the offers received. Further analysis could involve comparing the winning bid to the average bid or the next lowest bid, if available.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering 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: W912UM05R0013
Offers Received: 15
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 97-7, NONHYUN-DONG, KANGNAM-GU, SEO, SEOUL
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $37,919,855,962
Exercised Options: $37,919,855,962
Current Obligation: $30,215,027
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2005-05-11
Current End Date: 2008-09-30
Potential End Date: 2008-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2015-11-17
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)