GSA awards $17.9M for security containers, with 8 bidders indicating competitive market

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,952 ($18.0K)

Contractor: Hamilton Products Group, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2026-04-03

End Date: 2026-05-03

Contract Duration: 30 days

Daily Burn Rate: $598/day

Competition Type: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SECURITY CONTAINER

Place of Performance

Location: MILFORD, CLERMONT County, OHIO, 45150

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $17,952.4 to HAMILTON PRODUCTS GROUP, INC. for work described as: SECURITY CONTAINER Key points: 1. Contract awarded to Hamilton Products Group, Inc. for security containers. 2. The contract was competed under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP). 3. A total of 8 bids were received, suggesting a healthy level of competition. 4. The contract has a firm fixed price, providing cost certainty. 5. The contract duration is 30 days, indicating a short-term need. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 332999 for 'All Other Miscellaneous Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing'.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $17.9 million for security containers appears reasonable given the nature of the product and the number of bidders. Without specific per-unit cost data or direct comparisons to similar recent procurements for identical items, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the presence of 8 bidders suggests that pricing was likely competitive, and the firm fixed-price structure limits the government's exposure to cost overruns.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was competed under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), which allows for a broader range of competition for procurements under the federal micro-purchase threshold. The receipt of 8 bids indicates a robust competitive environment for these security containers. This level of interest suggests that multiple vendors were aware of and capable of fulfilling the requirement, contributing to price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The strong competition among 8 bidders likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario. This ensures that government funds are used efficiently by leveraging market forces.

Public Impact

Federal agencies requiring secure storage solutions will benefit from the availability of these security containers. The services delivered involve the manufacturing and provision of specialized fabricated metal products. The contract is geographically focused on Ohio (st: OH, sn: OHIO), where the contractor is located. The contract supports jobs within the fabricated metal product manufacturing sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for price increases in future, longer-term contracts if competition diminishes.
Dependence on a single contractor for a critical need if follow-on contracts are not competed broadly.

Positive Signals

Competitive bidding process indicates potential for good value.
Firm fixed-price contract provides cost predictability.
Contract awarded to a company with a presence in Ohio.

Sector Analysis

The security container market falls within the broader fabricated metal product manufacturing sector. This sector is characterized by a wide range of products, from basic metal components to highly specialized items like security containers. The General Services Administration (GSA) often procures such items to meet the needs of various federal agencies. Benchmarking spending in this specific niche is difficult without more granular data, but the overall fabricated metal products industry is substantial.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was competed under SAP and awarded to Hamilton Products Group, Inc. There is no explicit information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans for this specific award. Further investigation would be needed to determine if small businesses were involved as subcontractors or if this procurement was part of a larger strategy that includes small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) is responsible for overseeing this contract. As a large federal agency, GSA has established procurement regulations and oversight mechanisms to ensure fair and transparent contracting. The contract's details, including its firm fixed-price nature and competitive award, suggest adherence to standard procurement practices. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS.

Related Government Programs

Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts for office supplies and equipment
General Services Administration (GSA) procurement vehicles
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) supply contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for price escalation in future procurements if competition is not maintained.
Contract duration is short (30 days), suggesting a specific, immediate need rather than a long-term strategic acquisition.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $17,952.4 to HAMILTON PRODUCTS GROUP, INC.. SECURITY CONTAINER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HAMILTON PRODUCTS GROUP, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $17,952.4.

What is the period of performance?

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

What is the historical spending by the General Services Administration on security containers?

Historical spending data for security containers by the General Services Administration (GSA) can provide valuable context for the current $17.9 million award. Analyzing past awards, including contract values, quantities, and contractor performance, can reveal trends in pricing, demand, and market dynamics. For instance, if GSA has consistently awarded similar contracts in the $15-20 million range over the past five years, it would suggest that the current award is within historical norms. Conversely, a significant deviation could warrant further investigation into the reasons behind the change, such as increased demand, inflation, or changes in product specifications. Accessing detailed procurement data from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would be necessary to conduct a thorough historical analysis.

How does the per-unit cost of these security containers compare to similar items procured by other federal agencies?

A direct comparison of the per-unit cost for these security containers against similar items procured by other federal agencies is crucial for assessing value for money. This analysis requires identifying comparable contracts based on product specifications, material, size, security ratings, and quantity. For example, if the current contract's unit price is significantly higher than what the Department of Defense or the Department of Justice paid for comparable security containers within the last year, it could indicate potential overpricing or a less competitive outcome. Conversely, a lower unit price would suggest a favorable deal. Without specific unit cost data and detailed specifications for this contract, such a comparison remains speculative. Accessing and analyzing data from FPDS for similar procurements across agencies is essential for this benchmarking.

What is the track record of Hamilton Products Group, Inc. in fulfilling federal contracts, particularly for security containers?

Assessing the track record of Hamilton Products Group, Inc. is vital for understanding the reliability and performance associated with this $17.9 million contract. Reviewing their past federal contract awards, including the types of goods or services provided, contract values, and on-time delivery performance, can offer insights. Specifically, examining their history with security containers or similar fabricated metal products would be most relevant. Data from FPDS can reveal if they have a history of successful contract completion, any instances of contract disputes, terminations, or performance issues. A contractor with a consistent record of satisfactory performance and timely delivery is generally a lower risk, contributing positively to the overall assessment of the contract's value and the agency's ability to meet its requirements.

What are the specific security features and certifications required for these containers, and how do they influence cost?

The specific security features and certifications mandated for these containers directly impact their cost and are a critical factor in evaluating the $17.9 million award. Requirements such as Underwriters Laboratories (UL) ratings for fire resistance, burglary resistance (e.g., RSC, TRTL), or specific locking mechanisms (e.g., combination locks, electronic locks) add complexity and expense to manufacturing. Higher security ratings and more sophisticated features generally translate to higher per-unit costs. Understanding these specifications allows for a more informed comparison with market prices and other federal procurements. If the contract specifies advanced security features or rare certifications, the higher price point may be justified. Conversely, if the requirements are standard, a higher price could indicate less competitive pricing or inefficiencies.

What is the anticipated usage and deployment of these security containers across federal agencies?

Understanding the anticipated usage and deployment of these security containers provides context for the $17.9 million contract value and its significance. Are these containers intended for widespread use across multiple agencies and locations, or are they for a specific, high-demand program? For example, if they are destined for secure storage of sensitive documents or equipment in numerous federal facilities nationwide, the large contract value is more easily understood. Conversely, if the deployment is limited to a few specific sites or a single agency, the value might warrant closer scrutiny regarding the quantity and unit pricing. Information on the intended beneficiaries and the scope of deployment helps in assessing the strategic importance and justification of the contract's size.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing › All Other Miscellaneous Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: FURNITURE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1030 ROUND BOTTOM RD, MILFORD, OH, 45150

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Foreign Owned, Foreign-Owned and U.S.-Incorporated Business, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $17,952

Exercised Options: $17,952

Current Obligation: $17,952

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47QSSC25T0003

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline