Department of the Army awarded $13.7M for site development, with 46 contract actions over 1094 days

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,685,578 ($13.7M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-12-30

End Date: 2011-12-29

Contract Duration: 1,094 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 46

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: SITE DEVELOPMENT (CONSTRUCTION)

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.7 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: SITE DEVELOPMENT (CONSTRUCTION) Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable given the duration and scope of site development services. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market for these services, potentially leading to better pricing. 3. The duration of the contract (nearly 3 years) indicates a significant, long-term project. 4. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor, which can be beneficial for the government. 5. The absence of small business set-asides warrants further investigation into subcontracting opportunities.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award amount of $13.7 million for site development over nearly three years appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this nature. Without specific details on the scope of work, it's difficult to benchmark precisely, but the number of contract actions (46) suggests consistent activity and management. The firm-fixed-price contract type is generally favorable for the government when the scope is well-defined, as it caps the government's financial exposure.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. This typically leads to a more competitive bidding process, potentially resulting in lower prices and better value for the government. The fact that there were 46 contract actions suggests multiple task orders or modifications were issued under this primary award, all stemming from an initial competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that drives down costs and encourages innovation among contractors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military personnel and operations supported by the developed site. Services delivered include highway, street, and bridge construction, essential for infrastructure development. The geographic impact is localized to the site where development occurred, likely a military installation. Workforce implications include employment for construction workers and related trades during the contract period.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of explicit small business set-aside could limit opportunities for smaller firms.
The long contract duration might present challenges for small businesses needing to scale resources quickly.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition allows any qualified firm, including small businesses, to compete.
The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, a positive signal for fiscal management.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically related to infrastructure development. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 237310 (Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction) indicates a focus on heavy civil engineering projects. Spending in this area is crucial for maintaining and expanding essential infrastructure, particularly for government agencies like the Department of Defense that require robust operational bases.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and there is no indication of a specific small business subcontracting goal. While full and open competition allows small businesses to compete, the absence of a set-aside or explicit subcontracting plan means their participation is not guaranteed. Further review would be needed to determine if any small businesses were involved as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability by fixing the total price. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS, where award details are recorded. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Infrastructure Development Projects
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
Federal Highway Administration Contracts

Risk Flags

Contract Duration
Foreign Awardee
Lack of Small Business Set-Aside

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.7 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. SITE DEVELOPMENT (CONSTRUCTION)

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 $13.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-12-30. End: 2011-12-29.

What specific site development activities were included in this $13.7 million contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 237310 (Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction), suggesting the scope likely involved the construction or improvement of roads, bridges, and related infrastructure within a specific site. Site development can encompass a broad range of activities, including grading, excavation, utility installation (water, sewer, electrical), paving, and landscaping. Given the Department of the Army as the awarding agency, it's probable these improvements were intended to support military operations or facilities, potentially enhancing access, utility, or overall functionality of a base or training area. The duration of nearly three years and 46 contract actions suggest a project with multiple phases or ongoing needs rather than a single, short-term construction task.

How does the $13.7 million award compare to similar site development contracts awarded by the Department of Defense?

Benchmarking this $13.7 million award requires comparing it to similar site development contracts, specifically those under NAICS 237310, awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies over a comparable timeframe. Without access to a detailed database of comparable projects, a precise comparison is challenging. However, $13.7 million for a nearly three-year project involving significant infrastructure work like roads and bridges is not unusually large for a military installation. Larger projects could easily exceed $50 million or $100 million, while smaller, more localized improvements might be in the low millions. The key factors influencing cost are the scope of work, geographic location (affecting labor and material costs), and specific site conditions.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for site development lasting over 1000 days?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, especially one spanning over 1000 days (nearly three years), is that unforeseen circumstances could significantly impact the contractor's costs, potentially leading to claims or reduced quality if the contractor attempts to cut corners. For site development, risks include encountering unexpected subsurface conditions (e.g., rock, contaminated soil, groundwater issues), material price escalations, labor shortages, or changes in regulatory requirements. While FFP shifts cost risk to the contractor, a poorly defined scope or unforeseen major issues could still lead to disputes or the contractor seeking equitable adjustments, potentially negating the cost certainty benefit for the government. Robust contract administration and clear initial scope definition are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What does the 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' designation imply about the contractor?

The designation 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' suggests that the contractor is based outside the United States. This could mean the company is a foreign entity that won the bid through the 'full and open competition' process, potentially indicating it has the necessary qualifications and competitive pricing to secure the contract. It might also imply that the work was performed in a foreign location, aligning with the 'foreign' aspect of the awardee description. However, without more specific information on the contractor's identity or the project's location, it's difficult to ascertain the precise implications. It could also refer to a joint venture or a specific contracting mechanism used for overseas operations.

How has federal spending on Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction (NAICS 237310) trended over the past decade?

Federal spending on NAICS 237310 (Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction) has generally seen fluctuations influenced by economic conditions, infrastructure initiatives, and federal budget allocations. Historically, major infrastructure bills and stimulus packages have led to significant increases in this spending category. For instance, periods following major economic downturns often see increased federal investment in infrastructure to create jobs and stimulate the economy. Conversely, periods of fiscal austerity or shifting priorities can lead to reduced spending. Analyzing trends requires looking at aggregate data over time, considering the impact of legislation like the FAST Act or the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which directly target transportation and infrastructure investments.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W917PM08R0039

Offers Received: 46

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: $13,685,578

Exercised Options: $13,685,578

Current Obligation: $13,685,578

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline