Department of State awards $6,750 purchase order for office furniture to GREAT DREAMS INTERIOR DESIGN LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $6,750 ($6.8K)

Contractor: Great Dreams Interior Design LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of State

Start Date: 2026-04-02

End Date: 2026-04-02

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ---------- COMMENTS: ULT. DEST: NASSAU CMR SR. DESIGNER: STEPHANIE C. SHIFLER QUOTE DATE: 2026-03-17 QUOTE NUMBER: 3370 QUOTE PREPARED BY: ROYA AKBARI QUOTE EXPIRATION: 2026-06-17 OBO ATTACHMENTS: IT REQUEST STATUS: FALSE

Place of Performance

Location: POTOMAC, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20854

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of State obligated $6,750 to GREAT DREAMS INTERIOR DESIGN LLC for work described as: ---------- COMMENTS: ULT. DEST: NASSAU CMR SR. DESIGNER: STEPHANIE C. SHIFLER QUOTE DATE: 2026-03-17 QUOTE NUMBER: 3370 QUOTE PREPARED BY: ROYA AKBARI QUOTE EXPIRATION: 2026-06-17 OBO ATTACHMENTS: IT REQUEST STATUS: FALSE Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the small contract size and specific nature of the order. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a sole-source award, potentially limiting price discovery. 3. Risk indicators are low due to the small dollar value and short duration. 4. Performance context is limited to a single day delivery, suggesting a quick fulfillment need. 5. Sector positioning is within the general office supply and furnishings market.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $6,750 is relatively small, making direct comparison to larger contracts difficult. As a single-source award for office furniture, it's challenging to benchmark pricing without more detailed specifications or competitive bids. However, for a specific, likely urgent, furniture need, the price may be reasonable if it aligns with market rates for similar quality items.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), indicating it was likely awarded on a sole-source basis. The absence of competition means that multiple vendors were not solicited, and there is no information on the number of bidders. This limits the ability to assess if the government received the best possible price.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, a sole-source award means there's a higher risk of paying a premium compared to a fully competed contract, as competitive pressures that drive down prices are absent.

Public Impact

The Department of State benefits from the acquisition of necessary office furniture. Services delivered include the provision of office furniture, likely for a specific workspace or project. Geographic impact is localized to the Maryland region where the vendor is based. Workforce implications are minimal, primarily affecting the administrative functions of the State Department.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to suboptimal pricing for the government.
Limited information available on the specific furniture items procured, hindering detailed value assessment.

Positive Signals

Contract awarded to a small business (GREAT DREAMS INTERIOR DESIGN LLC).
Firm fixed price contract type provides cost certainty.
Short performance period suggests efficient fulfillment.

Sector Analysis

The office furniture market is a mature sector with numerous suppliers, ranging from large manufacturers to specialized retailers. Government procurement in this area typically involves competitive bidding for larger requirements. This specific contract, however, falls under a non-competitive award, suggesting a unique or urgent need that bypassed standard competitive processes. Benchmarking would typically involve comparing prices against GSA schedules or other government-wide contracts for similar furniture items.

Small Business Impact

The award to GREAT DREAMS INTERIOR DESIGN LLC, a small business, is a positive signal for the small business ecosystem. However, as a sole-source award, it does not represent a set-aside specifically for small businesses under competitive conditions. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans, so the broader impact on the small business subcontracting landscape is unclear.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this purchase order would typically fall under the Department of State's internal procurement regulations and financial management systems. Given the small dollar value and short duration, formal oversight mechanisms like Inspector General investigations are less likely unless specific red flags emerge. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive nature of the award.

Related Government Programs

General Services Administration (GSA) Office Furniture Schedules
Department of State Facilities Management Contracts
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 13 (Simplified Acquisition Procedures)

Risk Flags

Sole-source award bypasses competitive pricing.
Limited data on specific items procured hinders value assessment.
Vendor track record not detailed in provided information.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of State awarded $6,750 to GREAT DREAMS INTERIOR DESIGN LLC. ---------- COMMENTS: ULT. DEST: NASSAU CMR SR. DESIGNER: STEPHANIE C. SHIFLER QUOTE DATE: 2026-03-17 QUOTE NUMBER: 3370 QUOTE PREPARED BY: ROYA AKBARI QUOTE EXPIRATION: 2026-06-17 OBO ATTACHMENTS: IT REQUEST STATUS: FALSE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GREAT DREAMS INTERIOR DESIGN LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of State (Department of State).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $6,750.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-02. End: 2026-04-02.

What is the track record of GREAT DREAMS INTERIOR DESIGN LLC with federal contracts?

Information regarding the specific track record of GREAT DREAMS INTERIOR DESIGN LLC with federal contracts is not detailed in the provided data. As this appears to be a sole-source award under SAP, it might be one of their initial or infrequent federal engagements. A deeper dive into federal procurement databases like FPDS-NG or SAM.gov would be necessary to ascertain their history, past performance, and any prior awards or issues. Without this historical data, it's difficult to assess their reliability and experience in fulfilling government requirements.

How does the price of $6,750 for office furniture compare to market rates?

The provided data does not include specific details about the office furniture procured (e.g., type, quantity, quality, manufacturer). Therefore, a precise comparison of the $6,750 price to market rates is not feasible. Generally, office furniture prices can vary significantly. For a sole-source award, especially under SAP, the government relies on the vendor's pricing being fair and reasonable. To benchmark, one would need to identify comparable items on GSA Advantage or through commercial catalogs and compare unit prices. Given the small total value, it suggests a limited scope of furniture, possibly for a few workstations or a specific office area.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for office furniture?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source award is the potential for paying a higher price than would be achieved through competition. Without multiple bids, there's less incentive for the vendor to offer their most competitive pricing. Additionally, there's a risk of receiving lower quality products if the vendor is not adequately vetted or if the specifications were not sufficiently detailed to ensure a specific standard. For a small purchase like this, the risk is mitigated by the low dollar value, but the principle of obtaining best value through competition is compromised.

How effective is the Department of State in procuring office furniture through competitive means?

The provided data focuses on a single, non-competed contract, making it impossible to assess the overall effectiveness of the Department of State in procuring office furniture through competitive means. Typically, larger requirements for office furniture are procured through competitive processes, often utilizing GSA schedules or agency-specific solicitations. The effectiveness of these competitive processes would be measured by factors such as the number of bids received, the price savings achieved compared to baseline estimates, and the quality of the furniture delivered. This single data point suggests that for certain urgent or specific needs, non-competitive awards may be utilized.

What are the historical spending patterns for office furniture by the Department of State?

The provided data snippet is for a single purchase order and does not offer insights into historical spending patterns for office furniture by the Department of State. To analyze historical spending, one would need to examine procurement data over multiple fiscal years, looking at the total dollar amounts spent on office furniture, the methods of procurement used (competitive vs. sole-source), the primary contractors, and the types of furniture acquired. Such an analysis would reveal trends, identify major suppliers, and indicate the agency's reliance on competitive bidding versus other procurement methods for furniture.

What is the significance of the contract being a 'Purchase Order' versus other contract types?

A Purchase Order (PO) is a common document used to formalize an agreement to purchase goods or services. For smaller dollar amounts, especially those under the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT), POs are frequently used. They typically represent a firm commitment to buy and a promise to pay. In this case, it being a PO signifies a straightforward transaction for goods (office furniture). The 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' notation is crucial, indicating that even though it's a PO, it bypassed the standard competitive procedures typically associated with SAP, suggesting a sole-source justification was applied.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Office Furniture (including Fixtures) Manufacturing › Office Furniture (except Wood) Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: FURNITURE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 11904 WINTERSET TER, POTOMAC, MD, 20854

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Small Business, Sole Proprietorship, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $6,750

Exercised Options: $6,750

Current Obligation: $6,750

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline