GSA awards $4.6M for mop heads and handles, raising questions about competition and value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,574 ($4.6K)

Contractor: Kaufman Company, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2026-04-03

End Date: 2026-05-13

Contract Duration: 40 days

Daily Burn Rate: $114/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: MOP,WETOTTON STRING MOPHEAD, FOUR-PLY MINIMUM YARN, BLEACHED OR NOT BLEACHED;MOPHEAD 17.0 INCHES LONG,1.5 POUNDS MINIMUM; 60 INCH WOOD HANDLE; HANDLEDIAMETER 1 INCH

Place of Performance

Location: NORWOOD, NORFOLK County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02062

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $4,573.8 to KAUFMAN COMPANY, INC. for work described as: MOP,WETOTTON STRING MOPHEAD, FOUR-PLY MINIMUM YARN, BLEACHED OR NOT BLEACHED;MOPHEAD 17.0 INCHES LONG,1.5 POUNDS MINIMUM; 60 INCH WOOD HANDLE; HANDLEDIAMETER 1 INCH Key points: 1. The contract for mop heads and handles was not competed under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures, suggesting potential for better pricing through broader competition. 2. A single award was made, indicating a lack of competitive bidding which can lead to higher costs for taxpayers. 3. The contract duration is short (40 days), which may limit opportunities for long-term cost savings or performance improvements. 4. The specific product details (17-inch mop head, 60-inch handle) are standard, but the lack of competition makes it difficult to assess if the price reflects market value. 5. The award was a purchase order, a less formal contract type, which might imply less rigorous oversight compared to larger, competed contracts. 6. The contractor, KAUFMAN COMPANY, INC., has secured this award, but their track record and pricing competitiveness require further investigation.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The awarded price of $4,573.80 for 1 unit (presumably a lot or batch) of mop heads and handles is difficult to benchmark without knowing the exact quantity and specifications. However, the fact that this was not competed under SAP and awarded as a purchase order raises concerns about whether the government secured the best possible price. Without comparable bids or market analysis, it's hard to definitively state if this represents good value for money. Further analysis of unit pricing and comparison to similar GSA schedule purchases would be necessary.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: unknown

The contract was awarded as 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP,' which is unusual for a purchase of this value. This designation implies that the contract was not subject to the standard competitive procedures typically required for procurements under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP) threshold. It is unclear if this was a sole-source award, a limited competition, or if it was placed on an existing contract vehicle without re-competition. The lack of clarity on the competition method makes it impossible to assess the number of bidders or the effectiveness of price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: When contracts are not competed, taxpayers may be overpaying for goods and services. The absence of a competitive process means there was no pressure on vendors to offer their lowest possible prices, potentially leading to a less efficient use of federal funds.

Public Impact

Federal agencies requiring cleaning supplies will benefit from the availability of these mop heads and handles. The services delivered are the provision of basic janitorial equipment. The geographic impact is likely nationwide, as GSA procures for various federal entities across the country. Workforce implications are minimal, primarily affecting custodial staff who will use the equipment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 30 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment.
Awarded via purchase order, which may have less stringent oversight than larger contracts.
Unclear if this award represents the best value for taxpayer dollars due to limited competition.
Short contract duration limits potential for long-term cost efficiencies.

Positive Signals

Contract awarded to KAUFMAN COMPANY, INC., potentially supporting a specific business.
GSA's Federal Acquisition Service is involved, indicating adherence to established procurement processes, albeit with noted limitations.
The purchase order ensures the government receives necessary cleaning supplies.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader industrial supplies and equipment sector, specifically related to janitorial and maintenance supplies. The market for cleaning supplies is generally competitive, with numerous manufacturers and distributors. GSA's role is to leverage its purchasing power to obtain favorable pricing for federal agencies. However, the specific procurement method used here (not competed under SAP) suggests this contract may not fully capitalize on the potential for competitive savings within this sector.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and was not competed under SAP. It is unclear if KAUFMAN COMPANY, INC. is a small business. Without further information on the competition method, it's difficult to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem. If this was a limited or sole-source award to a larger entity, it would mean missed opportunities for small businesses to compete and secure this contract.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was awarded by the General Services Administration (GSA) through its Federal Acquisition Service. Oversight is typically managed through GSA's internal procurement regulations and contract administration processes. As a purchase order, oversight might be less intensive than for a large, complex contract. Transparency is limited due to the lack of competitive details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if fraud or mismanagement were suspected.

Related Government Programs

GSA Federal Supply Schedule
Janitorial and Cleaning Supplies Procurement
Purchase Orders
Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP)

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential for Overpricing
Limited Transparency
Non-Standard Procurement Path (Not Competed Under SAP)

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $4,573.8 to KAUFMAN COMPANY, INC.. MOP,WETOTTON STRING MOPHEAD, FOUR-PLY MINIMUM YARN, BLEACHED OR NOT BLEACHED;MOPHEAD 17.0 INCHES LONG,1.5 POUNDS MINIMUM; 60 INCH WOOD HANDLE; HANDLEDIAMETER 1 INCH

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KAUFMAN COMPANY, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $4,573.8.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-03. End: 2026-05-13.

What is the specific quantity of mop heads and handles being procured under this $4,573.80 purchase order, and how does the unit price compare to market rates for similar items?

The provided data does not specify the exact quantity of mop heads and handles included in the $4,573.80 award. The data lists '1' for the number of orders ('no': 1), which likely represents a single lot or batch rather than individual units. To assess the unit price and compare it to market rates, we would need to know the quantity (e.g., number of mop heads, number of handles, or number of kits). Without this information, a direct price comparison is impossible. However, given the lack of competition, it is plausible that the effective unit price is higher than what could be achieved through a competitive bidding process. Further investigation into GSA's internal documentation or public contract databases might reveal the quantity details.

Why was this contract not competed under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), and what was the justification for this approach?

The data explicitly states 'CT: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP'. This indicates that the procurement did not follow the standard competitive procedures typically required for purchases valued below the SAP threshold (currently $250,000). The justification for not competing under SAP is not provided in the data. Possible reasons could include an emergency situation, a specific exception to competition rules, or the contract being placed on an existing, previously competed contract vehicle where further competition was not mandated. However, without explicit documentation or a stated reason, this non-competitive approach raises concerns about potential missed savings and the principle of full and open competition.

What is KAUFMAN COMPANY, INC.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly with GSA, and have they previously supplied similar janitorial equipment?

Information regarding KAUFMAN COMPANY, INC.'s specific track record with federal contracts, especially with GSA, is not detailed in the provided data. To assess their performance, one would need to consult federal procurement databases like SAM.gov or FPDS. These databases could reveal past contract awards, performance evaluations, and any history of disputes or issues. Knowing their experience with supplying janitorial equipment would also provide context for their ability to fulfill this current order effectively and at a competitive price. Without this background information, it's difficult to gauge their reliability and pricing competitiveness beyond this single award.

How does the $4,573.80 award for mop heads and handles compare to historical GSA spending on similar janitorial supplies?

The provided data offers a single data point for this specific award ($4,573.80) and does not include historical spending patterns for similar janitorial supplies by GSA. To make a comparison, one would need to analyze GSA's past procurement data for mop heads, handles, and related cleaning equipment. This analysis should consider the quantity, specifications, and contract types (competed vs. non-competed) of previous awards. Without this broader context, it's challenging to determine if the current award amount is consistent with, higher than, or lower than typical spending levels for comparable items. The lack of competition in this instance suggests potential for higher costs compared to historically competed contracts.

What are the specific performance standards or quality requirements for the mop heads and handles, and how will compliance be monitored?

The data provides some specifications for the mop head ('MOPHEAD 17.0 INCHES LONG, 1.5 POUNDS MINIMUM; FOUR-PLY MINIMUM YARN, BLEACHED OR NOT BLEACHED') and the handle ('60 INCH WOOD HANDLE; HANDLE DIAMETER 1 INCH'). However, the level of detail regarding performance standards (e.g., absorbency, durability, material quality beyond 'four-ply') is limited. Monitoring compliance for a purchase order of this nature typically involves inspection upon receipt of goods. GSA's contract administration would oversee this process. The effectiveness of monitoring depends on the clarity of the specifications and the rigor of the receiving inspection process. Given the non-competed nature, it's crucial that the government ensures the delivered product meets all stated requirements.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Cutlery and Handtool Manufacturing › Saw Blade and Handtool Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MEASURING TOOLS

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: 19 WALKHILL RD, NORWOOD, MA, 02062

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $4,574

Exercised Options: $4,574

Current Obligation: $4,574

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline