GSA awards $323K for furniture densification, with Corporate Interiors Inc. securing the contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $323,606 ($323.6K)

Contractor: Corporate Interiors Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2025-08-14

End Date: 2026-08-19

Contract Duration: 370 days

Daily Burn Rate: $875/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: TAMPA FURNITURE DENSIFICATION PROJECT

Place of Performance

Location: TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH County, FLORIDA, 33602

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $323,605.94 to CORPORATE INTERIORS INC for work described as: TAMPA FURNITURE DENSIFICATION PROJECT Key points: 1. The contract value appears modest, suggesting a focused scope or a pilot program. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, indicating a potentially competitive bidding process. 3. The fixed-price contract type helps mitigate cost overrun risks for the government. 4. The contract duration of approximately one year provides a defined period for project completion. 5. The geographic location in Florida may indicate a specific regional need for furniture densification.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking this contract's value is challenging without more specific details on the scope of 'densification.' However, for a project involving furniture, $323,605.94 is a moderate amount. Comparing it to similar furniture procurement or office reconfiguration projects would be necessary to assess value for money. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests that the price was determined upfront, but the efficiency of the solution and its long-term impact on space utilization are key to true value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. This method is generally preferred as it maximizes the pool of potential offerors and can lead to better pricing and innovation. The number of bids received would provide further insight into the level of competition and its impact on price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and improve the quality of goods and services procured.

Public Impact

Federal employees in Florida will likely benefit from updated or reconfigured workspaces. The project aims to improve space utilization within federal facilities. The contract supports the furniture manufacturing and office supply sector. Workforce implications are minimal, likely involving installation and project management personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed scope for 'densification' makes it difficult to assess true value and potential for cost savings.
Limited information on the specific furniture items or services included in the $323K award.
The contract duration is relatively short, which might not allow for full realization of densification benefits.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a fair and accessible process.
Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty.
The project addresses a tangible need for space optimization in federal offices.

Sector Analysis

The furniture and fixtures manufacturing industry is a significant sector within the broader manufacturing economy. Federal spending in this area supports domestic production and office infrastructure. This contract, focused on densification, likely relates to optimizing existing office layouts or providing modular furniture solutions to increase workspace efficiency within federal buildings. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing annual federal outlays for office furniture, space planning services, and interior design.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary impact on small businesses would be through potential subcontracting opportunities if Corporate Interiors Inc. chooses to engage them. Without explicit subcontracting plans or goals, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically the Federal Acquisition Service. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability by fixing the cost. Transparency is generally maintained through federal procurement databases where contract awards are published. Inspector General oversight would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Office Furniture Procurement
Government Workspace Optimization Programs
GSA Schedule Contracts
Facilities Management Services

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep if 'densification' is not clearly defined.
Risk of employee dissatisfaction if space optimization leads to overcrowding.
Dependence on contractor's ability to accurately estimate costs for fixed-price contract.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $323,605.94 to CORPORATE INTERIORS INC. TAMPA FURNITURE DENSIFICATION PROJECT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CORPORATE INTERIORS INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $323,605.94.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-08-14. End: 2026-08-19.

What specific furniture items or services are included under the 'densification' project?

The provided data does not specify the exact furniture items or services encompassed by the 'densification' project. 'Densification' typically refers to strategies for increasing the number of people or workstations within a given office space, often through the use of modular furniture, shared workspaces, or optimized layouts. Without a detailed scope of work or product list, it is impossible to determine if this involves new furniture purchases, reconfiguration of existing furniture, or a combination of both. Further analysis would require access to the contract's statement of work or associated documentation to understand the specific deliverables and how they contribute to space optimization.

How does the $323,605.94 contract value compare to typical federal spending on office furniture or space optimization projects of similar scope?

Directly comparing the $323,605.94 contract value to typical federal spending is difficult without a precise definition of the 'densification' scope. However, for a project focused on furniture and space optimization, this amount represents a moderate investment. Larger federal agencies often spend millions on comprehensive office redesigns or large-scale furniture procurements. Smaller, targeted projects like this might focus on a specific building, floor, or a particular type of furniture solution. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify comparable contracts awarded by GSA or other agencies for similar services, considering factors like the number of workstations affected, the type of furniture (e.g., standard vs. ergonomic), and the complexity of the space reconfiguration.

What is the track record of Corporate Interiors Inc. in fulfilling federal contracts, particularly those involving furniture or space management?

Information regarding Corporate Interiors Inc.'s specific track record with federal contracts is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), the types and values of previous federal awards they have received, and their history of on-time delivery and adherence to contract terms. Companies that consistently receive positive performance reviews and have a history of successful contract completion are generally considered lower risk. Without this specific performance data, it's difficult to definitively assess their reliability for this particular densification project.

What are the potential risks associated with this contract, given its firm-fixed-price nature and the 'densification' objective?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price contract is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or service to maintain profitability if their initial cost estimates were too low or if unforeseen issues arise. For a 'densification' project, risks could include inadequate planning leading to inefficient space utilization, employee dissatisfaction with cramped workspaces, or furniture that does not meet ergonomic standards. There's also a risk that the chosen 'densification' strategy might not achieve the intended cost savings or productivity gains. The relatively short duration (approx. 1 year) could also pose a risk if the project requires significant lead times for furniture manufacturing or installation, potentially leading to delays.

How does the General Services Administration (GSA) typically oversee contracts awarded through its Federal Acquisition Service (FAS)?

The GSA's Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) oversees contracts through a combination of established procurement processes, contract administration policies, and performance monitoring. For contracts awarded under GSA Schedules or other competitive vehicles, FAS ensures adherence to acquisition regulations and fair competition. Contract officers are responsible for managing the contract lifecycle, including monitoring contractor performance, processing payments, and addressing any disputes or issues that arise. Transparency is facilitated through public contract databases. Furthermore, GSA has internal audit functions and is subject to oversight from the GSA Office of Inspector General (OIG) to ensure accountability and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: FURNITURE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 47QSMA25Q0056

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 223 LISA DR, NEW CASTLE, DE, 19720

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $323,606

Exercised Options: $323,606

Current Obligation: $323,606

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47QSMA23A0003

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline