GSA awards $6M+ for filing cabinets, highlighting potential overspending in office furniture procurement

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $6,075 ($6.1K)

Contractor: Alpha Safe and Vault, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2026-04-03

End Date: 2026-07-02

Contract Duration: 90 days

Daily Burn Rate: $68/day

Competition Type: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FILING CABINET

Place of Performance

Location: VIENNA, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22182

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $6,075.38 to ALPHA SAFE AND VAULT, INC. for work described as: FILING CABINET Key points: 1. The contract value of over $6 million for filing cabinets suggests a need for deeper analysis into unit pricing and potential for cost savings. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract, awarded under SAP, warrant scrutiny to ensure optimal price discovery and taxpayer value. 3. The duration of the contract (90 days) is relatively short, which may limit the ability to achieve significant economies of scale. 4. The specific product classification (NAICS 337214) indicates a focus on manufacturing, raising questions about direct sourcing versus reseller markups. 5. The award to ALPHA SAFE AND VAULT, INC. requires examination of their track record and pricing against industry benchmarks. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this was not specifically targeted to support small business growth.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value of $6,075,380 for filing cabinets appears high, especially given the relatively short 90-day duration. Without specific unit counts or detailed product specifications, it's difficult to benchmark precisely. However, typical government per-unit costs for standard filing cabinets can range from $100-$500 depending on size, material, and features. A $6M award for what is likely a large quantity of cabinets necessitates a thorough review of the pricing structure to ensure it aligns with market rates and avoids potential overpayment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was competed under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), indicating an expectation of a competitive process for awards under the micro-purchase threshold. The data shows 5 bids were received, suggesting a reasonable level of competition for this type of procurement. However, the specific details of the bidding process, including the number of qualified bidders and the range of bids submitted, are not provided, which limits a full assessment of price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process, even under SAP, is generally beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages multiple vendors to offer their best pricing, potentially leading to cost savings compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.

Public Impact

Federal agencies requiring office furniture, specifically filing and storage solutions, will benefit from this contract. The primary service delivered is the provision of filing cabinets, essential for record management and office organization. The contract is managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), indicating a centralized procurement approach for federal agencies. The geographic impact is likely nationwide, as GSA contracts typically serve federal entities across the United States.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for inflated pricing due to the nature of office furniture procurement, which can sometimes lack transparent unit cost breakdowns.
Risk of receiving standard or outdated models if the solicitation did not specify advanced features or modern designs.
The relatively short contract duration might lead to rushed delivery or higher per-unit costs if not managed efficiently.

Positive Signals

Awarded through a competed process, suggesting multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid and offer competitive pricing.
The contract is managed by GSA, an agency with established procurement processes and oversight mechanisms.
The fixed-firm price structure provides cost certainty for the government, mitigating risks of cost overruns.

Sector Analysis

The office furniture manufacturing sector (NAICS 337214) is a mature industry. Federal spending on office furniture, while not as large as major categories like IT or defense, represents a consistent expenditure for maintaining government workspaces. Benchmarking this contract against overall federal spending on office supplies and furniture would provide context, but specific data on filing cabinet procurement alone is scarce. The GSA plays a crucial role in consolidating demand and negotiating prices for common office goods.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus for this specific award, as the 'ss' (small business set-aside) flag is false. While the contract was competed, it does not appear to have been specifically set aside for small businesses. This means larger manufacturers or distributors likely competed. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans, so the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear, though opportunities may exist if the prime contractor utilizes small business suppliers.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), which has established oversight procedures for its procurements. As a competed contract under SAP, it is subject to standard federal acquisition regulations. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS. However, specific details on performance monitoring, quality assurance, and dispute resolution mechanisms are not provided in this summary. Inspector General oversight would typically apply if any issues of fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

GSA Schedule 71 II Part A - Office Furniture
Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts
Procurement of office supplies and equipment
Government office modernization initiatives

Risk Flags

High contract value for seemingly standard office supplies.
Potential for non-competitive pricing if BPA terms are outdated.
Lack of detailed unit cost information for benchmarking.
Short contract duration may limit efficiency gains.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $6,075.38 to ALPHA SAFE AND VAULT, INC.. FILING CABINET

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALPHA SAFE AND VAULT, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $6,075.38.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-03. End: 2026-07-02.

What is the typical unit cost for filing cabinets procured by the federal government, and how does this contract's implied unit cost compare?

Determining the exact implied unit cost requires knowing the quantity of filing cabinets. If we assume a large quantity, say 10,000 units, the implied cost per cabinet would be approximately $607. This is on the higher end of the typical range ($100-$500) for standard metal filing cabinets, suggesting potential for overpricing or the procurement of specialized, high-end models. Without quantity, precise comparison is impossible, but the total value raises a flag. Federal procurement data often shows significant variation in unit costs based on specifications, volume, and contract type. Further analysis would involve obtaining the specific quantity and detailed specifications from the contract award documents to perform a robust benchmark against GSA Schedule pricing or other comparable contracts.

What is ALPHA SAFE AND VAULT, INC.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly in office furniture?

ALPHA SAFE AND VAULT, INC. has been awarded federal contracts, including this one valued at over $6 million. A review of their contract history would reveal their performance on previous awards, including any instances of contract modifications, disputes, or terminations. Their specialization in 'Office Furniture (except Wood) Manufacturing' (NAICS 337214) suggests they are a direct manufacturer or a specialized supplier in this niche. Examining past performance ratings, if available, and comparing their pricing on similar items in previous contracts would provide insight into their reliability and cost-competitiveness. A deeper dive into their financial stability and operational capacity would also be prudent for a contract of this magnitude.

How does the 'COMPETED UNDER SAP' designation impact the potential for cost savings compared to other contract types?

Competing under Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP) is generally favorable for cost savings on smaller procurements (typically under $250,000, though thresholds can vary). For a contract valued at over $6 million, the 'COMPETED UNDER SAP' designation is unusual and might indicate a series of smaller calls against a larger agreement or a specific justification for using SAP. While SAP is intended to streamline procurement and encourage competition, it may not always yield the same level of aggressive pricing as full and open competition for large-value contracts, which often involves more extensive documentation and broader market outreach. The fact that 5 bids were received suggests some level of competition was achieved within the SAP framework.

What are the risks associated with procuring office furniture through a manufacturing-focused NAICS code like 337214?

Procuring through NAICS 337214 (Office Furniture Manufacturing) primarily targets manufacturers. Risks can include potentially higher prices if the government is not buying directly from the most cost-efficient source or if the manufacturer's overhead is significant. It might also limit options to manufacturers' standard product lines, potentially excluding innovative or more cost-effective solutions from specialized resellers or distributors. However, it can also ensure quality control and direct access to product expertise. The key risk is ensuring the government is obtaining the best value, which depends on the specific solicitation requirements, the number of manufacturers competing, and the negotiation process.

What is the significance of the BPA CALL award type for this contract?

A BPA CALL (Blanket Purchase Agreement Call) indicates that this contract was issued under an existing Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA). BPAs are flexible agreements established with vendors to streamline the purchase of commonly needed supplies or services. A 'call' is a specific order placed against that BPA. This suggests that GSA likely had a pre-negotiated BPA with ALPHA SAFE AND VAULT, INC., and this $6M+ award represents a significant call or series of calls against that BPA. The advantage is speed and efficiency, but the underlying pricing and terms were established when the BPA was initially negotiated, which may have been under different market conditions or competition levels.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: FURNITURE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1656 GELDING LN, VIENNA, VA, 22182

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $6,075

Exercised Options: $6,075

Current Obligation: $6,075

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47QSWA23A000R

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline