Customer: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (District Philadelphia)
POP: 8-Mar-2013 to 15-Jul-2014
This IDIQ contract requires Burgos Group to provide rapid response for remediation of real property that included the maintenance, repair, and minor construction of Government facilities at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst. The Task Orders (TOs) varied in scope and project type and included all planning, programming, administration, management, design and construction necessary to complete the work described in the scope of work associated with each TO. Five TOs have been issued to date.
Task Order 1:
This design/build task order displayed Burgos Group’s ability to perform in an occupied facility without disrupting the occupants in addition to managing multiple diverse subcontractors. The scope of work entailed the design, repair, and conversion of three playgrounds at Child Development Centers (CDCs) on Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst to comply with ADA standards. We self-performed all design and management requirements, landscaping, minor carpentry, and concrete work of the project while subcontracting 100% of the specialized playground equipment construction.
This project needed special attention to schedule due to the fact construction revolved around children. Project schedules were officially updated bi-weekly rather than on a monthly basis, however, daily revisions were made around the children’s play and school activities. As the CDC’s are open year-round without breaks for summer vacations or extended holidays, our work crews did not have “free reign” at the playgrounds under construction. Construction was phased to not interfere with the learning and physical activities of the children. This included RFIs, design and submittal review, and any other feature of work that could negatively affect the progress of the schedule. Both the government and Burgos Group realized the need to communicate and make timely decisions and reviews in order to minimize disruption to the daily order of business of the CDCs.
One of the ways in which Burgos Group kept the project on schedule was by working with the government’s QA representative on submittals and other reviewable documents. Knowing the review period can be time consuming, Burgos Group aided the QA rep in reducing review time by hand delivering all submittals and documents, frequently reminded the QA rep of the deadlines, and proceeded with work on verbal approvals rather than waiting for formal signed transmittal sheets.
During the design phase there were some challenges in coordination due to the number of parties involved in the project. The USACE was the contract administrator; the USAF at Joint Base M-D-L managed the project; the Child Development Specialists (in Texas) oversaw CDC renovations across the country; and the CDC users were the end customer. At one point, Burgos Group’s Executive Management offered to fly to Texas to meet with the CDC Specialists to review the designs in person and help clarify concerns. Due to Burgos Group’s Quality Control processes, we were able to determine that the CDC specialists were referring to a different scope of work than what was included Burgos Group’s contract. Once the scope was clarified the designs were approved for construction.
Containing costs on a design build project can often be challenging. However, both the government and Burgos Group adhered to the design criteria put forth in the contract documents and held several design charrettes to ensure the product bid was the same thing being designed and delivered. After award, the design charrettes were instrumental in keeping the scope of work from deviating drastically from what was originally proposed in the RFP. By keeping the scope from expanding and aggressive subcontractor buyouts, Burgos Group was able to maintain pricing at the contract awarded amount.
There were five weeks of delay due to design and scope changes initiated by the government late into the contract. These changes resulted in one $3,700 modification of the original contract amount. Burgos Group was able to offer different design options to the government which would all meet their new objective, but came with different price levels. Ultimately, the government was able to choose an option that had minimal effect on the total cost to the contract.