GSA awards $2.28M purchase order for backcountry helmets, raising questions on competition and value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $2,285 ($2.3K)

Contractor: Tera Consulting Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2026-04-03

End Date: 2026-04-18

Contract Duration: 15 days

Daily Burn Rate: $152/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 82R-RD EXFIL SAR BACKCOUNTRY HELMET

Place of Performance

Location: LEVITTOWN, NASSAU County, NEW YORK, 11756

State: New York Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $2,285 to TERA CONSULTING INC. for work described as: 82R-RD EXFIL SAR BACKCOUNTRY HELMET Key points: 1. The contract's value is modest, but the lack of competition warrants scrutiny. 2. Limited competition may have led to a higher price than necessary. 3. The short duration of the contract suggests a specific, immediate need. 4. The product category, while specific, falls under a broad office supplies NAICS code. 5. The award to TERA CONSULTING INC. requires further investigation into their capabilities for this specialized item. 6. The firm fixed-price contract type offers cost certainty but doesn't mitigate potential overpricing due to limited competition.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The $2.28 million award for backcountry helmets appears high given the short 15-day performance period. Without a competitive bidding process, it's difficult to benchmark the price against market rates or similar government contracts. The General Services Administration (GSA) typically aims for competitive pricing, but this sole-source award suggests a potential lack of value for money. Further analysis of the specific helmet specifications and comparable commercial pricing is needed to definitively assess value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded as a sole-source purchase order, meaning it was not competed. This significantly limits the opportunity for multiple vendors to bid, which typically drives down prices and increases innovation. The absence of competition raises concerns about whether the government secured the best possible price and product. The justification for a sole-source award in this instance is not provided and would be crucial for understanding the procurement decision.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium for these helmets due to the lack of competitive bidding. Without a transparent competition, it's harder to ensure that federal funds are being used efficiently and effectively.

Public Impact

Federal employees or contractors requiring specialized backcountry safety equipment will benefit from this purchase. The helmets will be delivered in New York, indicating a potential regional operational need. The contract supports the GSA's mission to provide efficient and cost-effective procurement solutions for federal agencies. The specific end-users and their operational context are not detailed, limiting understanding of the broader public impact.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition for a significant purchase order.
Potential for overpayment due to sole-source award.
Short performance period may indicate rushed procurement or specific, unarticulated need.
Unclear justification for sole-source award.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Awarded through GSA, which has established procurement processes.
Specific product identified, suggesting a defined requirement.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the broader 'Office Supplies (except Paper) Manufacturing' NAICS code (339940), which is unusual for specialized safety equipment like backcountry helmets. The market for such equipment is typically served by specialized outdoor gear retailers and manufacturers. The GSA's role here is to facilitate procurement for federal agencies, but the specific sourcing strategy for this item, especially as a sole-source award, warrants examination within the context of the broader outdoor and safety equipment market.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it indicate any subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This means that opportunities for small business participation in fulfilling this contract are likely minimal. Without specific set-aside provisions or subcontracting goals, the direct economic benefit to the small business ecosystem from this particular award is negligible.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) generally has robust oversight mechanisms for purchase orders. However, the sole-source nature of this award necessitates a closer look at the justification and approval process. Transparency regarding the specific need for backcountry helmets and the rationale for not competing the award would enhance accountability. The Inspector General's office within GSA would be the relevant body for investigating any potential improprieties.

Related Government Programs

GSA Federal Acquisition Service
Specialty Safety Equipment Procurement
Federal Purchase Orders
Sole-Source Procurements

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential Overpricing
Unclear Justification for Sole Source
Contractor Capability Uncertainty
Unusual NAICS Code Classification

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $2,285 to TERA CONSULTING INC.. 82R-RD EXFIL SAR BACKCOUNTRY HELMET

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TERA CONSULTING INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $2,285.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-03. End: 2026-04-18.

What is the specific type and model of backcountry helmet being procured, and what are its key features and certifications?

The provided data does not specify the exact model or detailed features of the '82R-RD EXFIL SAR BACKCOUNTRY HELMET'. The 'SAR' designation likely refers to Search and Rescue capabilities, suggesting a high level of performance and safety features required for demanding environments. Certifications relevant to safety standards (e.g., ANSI, CE) would be critical for assessing the suitability and quality of the equipment. Without this detailed product information, it is challenging to evaluate if the procured item meets the necessary operational requirements or if it represents an over-specification for the intended use.

What is the justification for awarding this contract as sole-source rather than through a competitive process?

The data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' (Simplified Acquisition Procedures), and the award type is 'PURCHASE ORDER', suggesting it might have been processed under specific sole-source justifications. Common reasons for sole-source awards include unique capabilities of a single vendor, urgent and compelling needs where competition is not feasible, or when only one source is capable of meeting the requirement. Without explicit documentation from the GSA detailing the specific justification (e.g., citing FAR Part 13.5 or Part 12 for commercial items, or Part 6 for other sole-source procurements), it is impossible to definitively assess the validity of this decision. This lack of transparency is a significant concern for ensuring fair and competitive procurement.

How does the $2.28 million price for 15 days of performance compare to market rates for similar specialized helmets?

Benchmarking the $2.28 million price against market rates for specialized backcountry helmets is difficult without knowing the exact quantity and specific model. However, the total value for a 15-day performance period is substantial. If this represents a large quantity of high-end SAR helmets, the price might be justifiable. Conversely, if it's a smaller quantity or less specialized models, the price could be significantly inflated due to the lack of competition. A typical high-performance SAR helmet might range from a few hundred to over a thousand dollars commercially. Multiplying this by an estimated quantity would be necessary for a rough comparison, but the sole-source nature prevents a definitive value assessment.

What is TERA CONSULTING INC.'s track record and expertise in supplying specialized safety equipment like backcountry helmets?

Information regarding TERA CONSULTING INC.'s specific expertise in supplying specialized safety equipment, particularly backcountry helmets, is not provided in the data. Their inclusion under NAICS code 339940 ('Office Supplies (except Paper) Manufacturing') is also unusual for this type of product. A thorough review of the contractor's past performance, relevant certifications, and experience with similar government contracts would be necessary to ascertain their capability and suitability for this procurement. Without this background, the award raises questions about the vetting process for specialized equipment.

What is the historical spending pattern for this specific type of equipment by the General Services Administration or other federal agencies?

The provided data does not include historical spending patterns for '82R-RD EXFIL SAR BACKCOUNTRY HELMET' or similar items. To assess this contract's significance, one would need to analyze past GSA or agency procurements for specialized safety gear. Understanding whether this is a recurring need, an increase in demand, or a one-time purchase would provide crucial context. Analyzing historical data could reveal trends in pricing, competition levels, and preferred vendors for similar equipment, helping to evaluate the current award's value and necessity.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing › Office Supplies (except Paper) Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: OFFICE SUPPLIES AND DEVICES

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: 29 ELVES LN, LEVITTOWN, NY, 11756

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $2,285

Exercised Options: $2,285

Current Obligation: $2,285

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline