Department of the Army awarded $12.8M for miscellaneous foreign awardees in building construction

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,788,360 ($12.8M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-11-18

End Date: 2008-10-15

Contract Duration: 697 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 11

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: BARRACKS

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.8 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: BARRACKS Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The awardee is categorized as 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES', indicating a non-US-based entity. 3. The contract type is 'DEFINITIVE CONTRACT' with a 'FIRM FIXED PRICE' payment term. 4. The duration of the contract was 697 days, spanning from November 2006 to October 2008. 5. The contract falls under the 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' product service code. 6. The agency is the Department of Defense, with the Department of the Army as the specific service. 7. The contract value of approximately $12.8 million is a significant investment in construction services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific details on the construction services rendered and the geographic location. However, a $12.8 million contract for building construction over a two-year period suggests a substantial project. The firm fixed-price nature implies that the contractor bore the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the price was competitive. Without comparable contract data for similar foreign-based construction projects, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 11 bids suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for this requirement. A higher number of bidders generally leads to better price discovery and potentially lower prices for the government, as contractors vie to win the award.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more competitive price for taxpayers, as multiple firms were incentivized to offer their best terms.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of the Army and its personnel who will utilize the constructed facilities. The services delivered involve commercial and institutional building construction, which could include new builds, renovations, or infrastructure development. The geographic impact is tied to the location of the construction project, which is not specified but is implied to be in a foreign location due to the awardee's designation. Workforce implications would include employment opportunities for construction workers and related trades, both domestically and potentially internationally, depending on the contractor's sourcing.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific geographic location for the construction project limits understanding of local economic impact.
Details on the specific type of building construction are absent, making it hard to assess complexity and potential risks.
Information on the contractor's past performance and track record is not provided, which is a key risk indicator.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition with 11 bidders, indicating a competitive environment.
Firm fixed-price contract structure shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
The contract duration of nearly two years suggests a project of significant scale and importance.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. This is a broad category encompassing a wide range of projects from office buildings to educational facilities and healthcare centers. The market for such services is global, with significant government spending allocated to infrastructure and facility development worldwide. The $12.8 million award is a moderate-sized contract within this sector, and its foreign awardee designation highlights the international reach of the construction industry and government procurement.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false). There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or their impact on the small business ecosystem. Given the 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' designation, it is unlikely that significant subcontracting opportunities would flow to U.S. small businesses unless specified in the contract terms.

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 firm fixed-price contract type, which penalizes cost overruns for the contractor. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, where this award is recorded. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Foreign Military Sales Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Construction
General Services Administration (GSA) Public Buildings Service

Risk Flags

Foreign Awardee Designation
Lack of Specific Project Details
Unknown Contractor Performance History

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.8 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. BARRACKS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-11-18. End: 2008-10-15.

What specific type of building was constructed and for what purpose?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under the 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' (NAICS 236220) category. However, it does not specify the exact type of building (e.g., barracks, administrative facility, training center) or its intended purpose. This information is crucial for understanding the scope of work, the complexity of the project, and its strategic importance to the Department of the Army. Without this detail, it's difficult to fully assess the project's impact or benchmark its cost-effectiveness against similar specialized construction endeavors.

What was the geographic location of the construction project?

The awardee is identified as 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES,' strongly suggesting the construction project took place outside of the United States. However, the specific country or region is not detailed in the provided data. Knowing the location is vital for assessing logistical challenges, compliance with local regulations, geopolitical risks, and the economic impact on the host nation or region. Foreign construction projects can also involve different cost structures and security considerations compared to domestic projects.

What is the track record of 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' with the Department of Defense?

The designation 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' is a broad category and does not refer to a specific company with a readily available track record. It implies that the award went to one or more foreign entities that do not fit into more specific awardee classifications. To assess the contractor's track record, further investigation would be needed to identify the actual entity or entities that received the award and then examine their past performance on government contracts, including project completion, quality of work, and adherence to schedule and budget. Without this specific identification, assessing past performance is impossible.

How does the $12.8 million cost compare to similar foreign construction projects undertaken by the DoD?

Comparing the $12.8 million cost requires identifying comparable projects based on size, scope, type of construction, and geographic region. Since the specific location and building type are unknown, a direct comparison is difficult. However, for context, major military construction projects abroad can range from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars. A $12.8 million project over two years suggests a significant but not exceptionally large undertaking. Benchmarking would ideally involve analyzing the cost per square foot or cost per unit (if applicable) against similar projects in similar economic and security environments.

What were the key performance metrics and deliverables outlined in the contract?

The provided data specifies the contract type (Definitive Contract, Firm Fixed Price) and duration (697 days), but not the specific performance metrics or deliverables. Key performance indicators (KPIs) for construction contracts typically include adherence to project timelines, quality of workmanship, safety standards, and compliance with architectural and engineering specifications. Deliverables would encompass the completed structure(s) meeting all contractual requirements. Without these details, assessing the contractor's performance and the ultimate success of the project is limited.

Were there any significant challenges or disputes during the contract performance period?

The provided summary data does not contain information regarding contract challenges, disputes, or modifications. Such details are typically found in contract modification histories or performance reports, which are not included here. Significant challenges could include unforeseen site conditions, material shortages, labor issues, or changes in requirements. The absence of reported disputes could indicate a smooth execution, but it could also mean that issues were resolved informally or were not significant enough to be formally recorded in this summary data.

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

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W917PM06R0069

Offers Received: 11

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2011 CRYSTAL DR STE 911, ARLINGTON, VA, 22202

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,788,360

Exercised Options: $12,788,360

Current Obligation: $12,788,360

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline