DoD's $34.5M miscellaneous construction award to foreign entities raises value and competition questions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $34,497,732 ($34.5M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-06-19

End Date: 2011-03-11

Contract Duration: 995 days

Daily Burn Rate: $34.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: ANA GARRISON DELARAM

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $34.5 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: ANA GARRISON DELARAM Key points: 1. The contract's value proposition is unclear given the lack of detailed performance metrics. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a potentially limited market for specialized foreign construction services. 3. Risk indicators include the extended duration and the foreign location of the awardee. 4. Performance context is limited, making it difficult to assess the effectiveness of the construction services. 5. The contract falls within the broad 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' sector. 6. Oversight of foreign-based contracts can present unique challenges. 7. The fixed-price nature of the contract shifts some risk to the contractor.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this $34.5 million contract is challenging due to the limited public information on the specific services rendered and the geographic location of the awardee. Without comparable domestic projects or detailed cost breakdowns, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing represents good value for the Department of Defense. The firm-fixed-price structure suggests an expectation of defined scope, but the broad 'miscellaneous' category hinders granular cost analysis.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were theoretically considered. However, the award to a 'Miscellaneous Foreign Awardee' suggests that the pool of qualified and willing bidders for this specific type of work, potentially in a foreign location, may have been limited. The presence of 7 bidders, as indicated, is a positive sign for competition, but the nature of the awardee warrants further scrutiny into the competitive landscape.

Taxpayer Impact: While full and open competition was utilized, the specialized nature or location of the work might have restricted the number of truly competitive bids, potentially impacting the final price achieved for taxpayers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely entities within the Department of Defense requiring construction services in specific foreign operational areas. Services delivered include commercial and institutional building construction, though the exact nature is unspecified. The geographic impact is concentrated in the foreign location where the construction took place. Workforce implications are not detailed but would involve construction labor, potentially both local and expatriate.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Foreign awardee location may complicate oversight and logistical support.
The broad 'miscellaneous' category hinders detailed cost and scope analysis.
Extended contract duration (995 days) increases exposure to changing conditions.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a broad search for qualified bidders.
Firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
The Department of the Army is the specific agency, indicating a clear end-user.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the broad Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector. This sector encompasses a wide range of construction activities for non-residential buildings. Federal spending in this area often supports infrastructure development, facility upgrades, and operational support for various government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without knowing the specific type and location of the construction, but the DoD is a significant investor in global infrastructure.

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 performance. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal, as the primary awardee is categorized under 'Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees'.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) and potentially the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), especially given the foreign location. Accountability measures are tied to the firm-fixed-price contract terms. Transparency is limited by the publicly available data, which lacks detailed project scope and performance reports. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

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

Risk Flags

Limited performance data
Foreign awardee location
Broad contract scope ('miscellaneous')
Potential challenges in oversight

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $34.5 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. ANA GARRISON DELARAM

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 $34.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-06-19. End: 2011-03-11.

What specific types of commercial and institutional buildings were constructed under this contract, and where were they located?

The provided data classifies this contract under 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' (na: 236220) and notes the awardee as 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' (co). However, it does not specify the exact nature or location of the construction projects. This lack of detail makes it impossible to determine if the buildings were barracks, administrative facilities, training centers, or other types of structures, or their precise geographic deployment. Understanding the specific scope and location is crucial for assessing the contract's necessity, risk, and value.

How did the 'full and open competition' process result in an award to a 'miscellaneous foreign awardee' for construction services?

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition' (ct), meaning proposals were solicited from all responsible sources. The fact that the award went to a 'miscellaneous foreign awardee' (co) suggests that either the required construction services were needed in a foreign location where foreign firms are permitted and competitive, or that domestic firms were either unwilling or unable to bid on the specific requirements. With 7 bidders (no), the competition process itself appears to have been engaged, but the outcome points to a specialized or geographically constrained market for these particular construction needs.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or deliverables associated with this $34.5 million construction contract?

The available data does not specify any key performance indicators (KPIs) or detailed deliverables for this contract. The contract type is 'FIRM FIXED PRICE' (pt), which implies a defined scope of work and deliverables are expected. However, without access to the contract's statement of work (SOW) or performance reports, it is impossible to assess whether the contractor met expectations, adhered to quality standards, or completed the project on time and within budget relative to the agreed-upon price. This lack of performance data hinders a thorough value-for-money assessment.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar 'miscellaneous foreign awardee' construction contracts by the Department of Defense?

The provided data focuses solely on this single contract awarded on June 19, 2008, for $34.5 million (a). It does not offer insights into historical spending patterns for similar contracts awarded to 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' (co) within the Department of Defense (ag). To establish a pattern, one would need to analyze a broader dataset encompassing multiple contracts over several fiscal years, looking at awardees, contract types, dollar values, and the nature of the construction services provided. Without this broader context, it's difficult to determine if this award is an anomaly or part of a recurring procurement strategy.

Are there any specific risks associated with awarding construction contracts to 'miscellaneous foreign awardees', particularly concerning quality control and security?

Yes, awarding construction contracts to 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' can introduce specific risks. Quality control may be more challenging due to distance, differing regulatory standards, and potential difficulties in conducting site inspections. Security risks can also be elevated, depending on the geographic location and the nature of the facility being constructed. Ensuring compliance with U.S. standards, labor laws, and security protocols requires robust oversight mechanisms, which can be more complex and costly to implement when dealing with foreign entities and locations. The firm-fixed-price nature helps mitigate cost overruns but does not inherently address quality or security assurance.

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: W917PM08R0041

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2011 CRYSTAL DR STE 911, ARLINGTON, VA, 08

Business Categories: Category Business, Foreign Owned, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $40,109,732

Exercised Options: $34,497,732

Current Obligation: $34,497,732

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline