GSA awards $3,760 for abrasive disks, highlighting potential for better pricing on handtools

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,760 ($3.8K)

Contractor: MAY Tool Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2026-04-03

End Date: 2026-04-24

Contract Duration: 21 days

Daily Burn Rate: $179/day

Competition Type: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: DISK,ABRASIVE

Place of Performance

Location: PARAMOUNT, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 90723

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $3,760 to MAY TOOL INC for work described as: DISK,ABRASIVE Key points: 1. Spending on abrasive disks is relatively low, suggesting a niche market. 2. May Tool Inc. secured the contract, indicating potential competition in handtool manufacturing. 3. The short duration of the contract (21 days) may limit long-term price discovery. 4. Sector focus on Saw Blade and Handtool Manufacturing (NAICS 332216).

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $3,760 is small, making direct price comparisons difficult. However, the benchmark for similar handtool contracts suggests this award is within a reasonable range, though not exceptionally low.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was competed under Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), which typically involves limited competition. This method may not achieve the best possible price discovery compared to full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The direct taxpayer impact is minimal due to the small contract value, but it represents a missed opportunity for potentially greater savings if more robust competition were pursued.

Public Impact

Small businesses may have limited access to compete on larger contracts within this sector. The availability of specific abrasive disk types could be impacted by supplier concentration. Government reliance on SAP for smaller purchases can streamline processes but may reduce cost savings.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition under SAP
Short contract duration
Lack of detailed cost breakdown

Positive Signals

Awarded to a specific vendor
Clear product identification

Sector Analysis

The Saw Blade and Handtool Manufacturing sector (NAICS 332216) is characterized by a mix of large and small manufacturers. Government spending benchmarks for this sector vary widely based on product complexity and volume.

Small Business Impact

While this specific contract does not indicate small business participation, the broader handtool manufacturing sector includes many small businesses. Future opportunities could be structured to encourage greater SMB involvement.

Oversight & Accountability

The Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) oversees this purchase. Oversight is likely focused on compliance with SAP procedures rather than deep cost analysis due to the low value.

Related Government Programs

Saw Blade and Handtool Manufacturing
General Services Administration Contracting
Federal Acquisition Service Programs

Risk Flags

Potential for overpayment due to limited competition
Lack of transparency in pricing
Short contract duration limits long-term cost analysis
No clear indication of small business participation

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $3,760 to MAY TOOL INC. DISK,ABRASIVE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MAY TOOL INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $3,760.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-03. End: 2026-04-24.

What is the typical profit margin for abrasive disk manufacturers in this sector?

Profit margins for abrasive disk manufacturers can vary significantly based on production scale, material costs, and market competition. While specific data for this contract is unavailable, industry averages suggest margins can range from 10% to 25%. Further analysis would require access to the vendor's cost structure and market intelligence on comparable sales.

What are the risks associated with relying on limited competition for handtool procurement?

Relying on limited competition, especially under SAP, increases the risk of paying higher prices than necessary. It can also stifle innovation and reduce the incentive for vendors to offer their best pricing. Furthermore, it may inadvertently exclude capable small businesses that could offer competitive solutions, potentially impacting long-term supply chain resilience.

How effective is the current procurement strategy in ensuring value for money for abrasive disks?

The current strategy's effectiveness in ensuring value for money is questionable for this specific award. While SAP streamlines the process for small purchases, the limited competition and short duration suggest that optimal pricing may not have been achieved. A more robust competitive process or longer-term contract could yield better value.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: HAND TOOLS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 15145 ILLINOIS AVE, PARAMOUNT, CA, 90723

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Manufacturer of Goods, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $3,760

Exercised Options: $3,760

Current Obligation: $3,760

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline