An Army Ordering Vehicle for Human Performance
Can BeaverFit convert one SBIR readiness kit into $350 million of repeatable, American-made human-performance capacity?
On 4 August 2026 the Department of War announced a $350,000,000 firm-fixed-price, single-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract to BeaverFit North America LLC of Reno, Nevada, for the design and construction of Holistic Health and Fitness structures, other human performance structures, wide span structures, and human performance equipment and systems as outlined in the Small Business Innovation and Research H2F Readiness Kit, with an estimated completion date of 4 August 2033. One bid was solicited via the internet and one was received. The ceiling stands against three magnitudes drawn from the same programme’s own record. In 2018 the Army bought 128 shipping container gyms complete with fitness equipment for $3,794,432. In 2023 it invited concepts for a Soldier Performance Readiness Center against a stated allotment of up to $6 million a facility, and funded seven of them with $1,271,576 in total. And an unspecified minor military construction project may be funded from operation and maintenance appropriations only up to $4 million. The structural proposition is that a vehicle spanning equipment, structures, design and construction converts not at the speed of its holder’s factory but at the speed of the fiscal, real-property and clause-selection gates each order must clear. What the public record does not yet answer is how many orders those gates permit.
The report proceeds in nine sections. The first establishes what an indefinite-quantity contract obliges the Government and the contractor to do, working from FAR 16.504 and 16.505, from DFARS 216.504 and from AFARS 5116.504, and identifies the contractual minimum as the only unavoidable commitment. The second sets the H2F demand universe against the Army’s December 2025 statement on programme expansion, against the USACE standard-design repository for the Soldier Performance Readiness Center, and against a $9.4 million Huntsville Center outfitting task order covering 43 brigades. The third traces Army SBIR topic A234-005 and the seven Phase I awards recorded against it by the Small Business Administration. The fourth tests the Phase III question against the GAO decisions in PublicRelay, Digital Force Technologies and ASRC Federal Data Network Technologies. The fifth examines the written determination required before a single award above $150 million. The sixth works through the fiscal and real-property gate under 10 U.S.C. 2801 and 2805 and the clause-selection rule in FAR Part 36. The seventh addresses technical data under DFARS Subpart 227.71, the eighth domestic content under FAR Subparts 25.1 and 25.2 and the Berry Amendment, and the ninth corporate structure through Companies House filings and the United States patent register. The report does not value the company, does not estimate revenue from the ceiling, and does not rank BeaverFit against the suppliers named in the same field.