HHS awards $23.4M contract for analytical laboratory instruments to Peak Scientific Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,375 ($23.4K)

Contractor: Peak Scientific Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2026-08-27

End Date: 2027-08-26

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $64/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: PEAK SCIENTIFIC INC.:1173056 [26-002829]

Place of Performance

Location: WESTFORD, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01886

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $23,375.14 to PEAK SCIENTIFIC INC for work described as: PEAK SCIENTIFIC INC.:1173056 [26-002829] Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating predictable costs for the government. 2. The contract duration of 364 days suggests a need for ongoing operational support. 3. Awarded by the National Institutes of Health, a key agency for biomedical research. 4. The product service code (PSC) is not specified, limiting detailed analysis of the goods procured. 5. The contract was not competed under simplified acquisition procedures, raising questions about competition. 6. The small business set-aside flag is false, suggesting no specific focus on small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $23.4 million for analytical laboratory instruments appears to be a significant investment. Without specific details on the instruments or their intended use, a direct comparison to similar contracts is challenging. However, the firm-fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to control costs. Further analysis would require benchmarking against market rates for comparable equipment and services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: unknown

The contract was noted as 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP,' which implies it was not procured through simplified acquisition procedures. However, the specific method of competition (e.g., sole source, limited competition, or full and open) is not explicitly stated. If it was sole-sourced, it suggests a lack of available alternatives or a specific justification for selecting Peak Scientific Inc. without broader solicitation.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of clear competition information makes it difficult to assess if taxpayers received the best possible price. If competition was limited, it could lead to higher costs than if multiple vendors had been invited to bid.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely researchers and scientists within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) who will utilize the analytical laboratory instruments. The contract supports the NIH's mission of advancing biomedical research and improving public health. The geographic impact is primarily within Massachusetts, where Peak Scientific Inc. is located, and at the NIH facilities where the instruments will be deployed. Workforce implications may include roles in manufacturing, sales, and technical support for Peak Scientific Inc.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed competition information raises concerns about potential overpayment.
Absence of specific product service code limits understanding of the procured items.
No indication of small business subcontracting goals.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Award to a specific company suggests a potentially established relationship or specialized capability.
Contract supports a critical government research agency (NIH).

Sector Analysis

The market for analytical laboratory instruments is a significant segment within the broader scientific and medical equipment industry. This contract falls under the manufacturing of such instruments, serving the research and development sector. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within government agencies focused on scientific research, such as NIH, NSF, and various defense research laboratories. The size of this contract suggests a substantial procurement, potentially for a suite of instruments or a significant quantity.

Small Business Impact

The contract indicates that small business set-aside was not utilized (ss: false, sb: false). This means the procurement was not specifically targeted to encourage small business participation. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans with small businesses. Consequently, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific contract appears minimal, unless Peak Scientific Inc. voluntarily engages small businesses in its supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, requiring delivery of specified goods. Transparency could be enhanced by providing more detailed information on the procurement process and the specific instruments purchased. The Inspector General for HHS would have jurisdiction over any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this award.

Related Government Programs

NIH Research Grants
Biomedical Research Equipment Procurement
Laboratory Supplies and Services
Federal Scientific Instrument Acquisition

Risk Flags

Lack of competition details
Unspecified product service code

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $23,375.14 to PEAK SCIENTIFIC INC. PEAK SCIENTIFIC INC.:1173056 [26-002829]

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PEAK SCIENTIFIC INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (National Institutes of Health).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $23,375.14.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-08-27. End: 2027-08-26.

What specific analytical laboratory instruments are being procured under this contract, and what are their intended applications within NIH research?

The provided data does not specify the exact type of analytical laboratory instruments being procured. The Product Service Code (PSC) is listed as blank, which typically categorizes the goods or services. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 334516, which corresponds to 'Analytical Laboratory Instrument Manufacturing.' This indicates the contract is for instruments manufactured by Peak Scientific Inc. that fall under this category. Without further details, it's impossible to determine their specific applications, but they likely support various biomedical research activities at NIH, such as chemical analysis, biological sample testing, or diagnostic procedures. Further inquiry with the contracting agency would be necessary to obtain a detailed list of the instruments and their intended uses.

How does the $23.4 million contract value compare to historical spending on similar analytical laboratory instruments by NIH or other federal agencies?

Benchmarking the $23.4 million contract value requires access to historical federal procurement data for similar analytical laboratory instruments. Without specific details on the instruments themselves (e.g., mass spectrometers, chromatographs, microscopes), a precise comparison is difficult. However, the value suggests a significant procurement, potentially for multiple high-value instruments or a comprehensive service package. Federal agencies like NIH, NSF, and DOD often award contracts in the millions for laboratory equipment. To provide a robust comparison, one would need to query federal procurement databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) for contracts with the same or similar NAICS codes (334516) and PSCs, filtering by agency and contract value over a relevant period. This would reveal if $23.4 million is typical, high, or low for such procurements.

What is Peak Scientific Inc.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Health and Human Services?

The provided data indicates that Peak Scientific Inc. is the awardee of this $23.4 million contract. To assess their track record, a review of federal procurement databases would be necessary to identify any prior or concurrent contracts awarded to this company. Key aspects to examine would include the total value of contracts held, the agencies they have served, the types of goods or services provided, and their performance history (if available). A history of successful contract performance, especially with HHS or similar research-focused agencies, would indicate reliability. Conversely, a history of contract issues, disputes, or poor performance could represent a risk factor for this current award. Without this historical data, it's difficult to definitively assess their track record.

Given the contract was 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP,' what does this imply about the procurement process and potential cost efficiencies?

The notation 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' (Simplified Acquisition Procedures) suggests that this contract was not procured using the streamlined processes typically available for purchases below certain dollar thresholds (e.g., $250,000 for supplies and services). This implies the contract value likely exceeded those thresholds, necessitating a more formal procurement approach. However, the absence of 'SAP' does not automatically mean it was a full and open competition. It could have been a sole-source award, a limited competition, or competed under other specific exceptions to full and open competition. If it was not fully competed, there is a potential risk that the government did not achieve the lowest possible price due to a lack of robust market engagement. The specific procurement method used would need further investigation to understand the implications for cost efficiency and taxpayer value.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for analytical laboratory instruments, and how are they mitigated?

A firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract is generally preferred by the government as it shifts most of the cost risk to the contractor. For analytical laboratory instruments, the primary risk for the government is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or service to maintain profitability if their costs exceed estimates. However, the FFP structure incentivizes the contractor to manage their costs efficiently. Mitigation strategies include clearly defined specifications and performance requirements in the contract, rigorous inspection and acceptance testing of the instruments upon delivery, and performance monitoring throughout the contract period. The government's ability to withhold payment or exercise contract remedies for non-performance also serves as a mitigation factor. Peak Scientific Inc. is obligated to deliver the specified instruments at the agreed-upon price.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing › Analytical Laboratory Instrument Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

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: 210 LITTLETON RD STE 110, WESTFORD, MA, 01886

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $23,375

Exercised Options: $23,375

Current Obligation: $23,375

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline