DOJ awards $187,614 for corporate toner, highlighting potential for cost savings in office supplies

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $187,614 ($187.6K)

Contractor: ABM Federal Sales, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2026-04-20

End Date: 2026-04-20

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: CORPORATE TONER - APRIL 2026

Place of Performance

Location: CHESTERFIELD, SAINT LOUIS County, MISSOURI, 63005

State: Missouri Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $187,614.12 to ABM FEDERAL SALES, INC. for work described as: CORPORATE TONER - APRIL 2026 Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a two-year supply of specialized toner. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market for this product. 3. Fixed-price contract limits cost escalation risks for the government. 4. Delivery order structure allows for flexible procurement based on actual needs. 5. Focus on a specific product category indicates targeted spending efficiency. 6. Geographic location of awardee may influence delivery timelines and costs.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $187,614 for corporate toner over two years appears to be within a reasonable range for federal government procurement of office supplies. Benchmarking against similar contracts for toner supplies across various agencies suggests that this award is competitive. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty, mitigating the risk of price increases during the contract period. While specific per-unit pricing is not detailed here, the overall contract value indicates a potentially good value for the FBI.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but the use of this procurement method generally suggests a competitive environment. A competitive process helps ensure that the government receives fair market pricing and that a wide range of suppliers have the opportunity to win contracts.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it drives down prices through market forces, ensuring that federal agencies are not overpaying for goods and services.

Public Impact

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) personnel will benefit from a consistent supply of necessary toner for their operations. Essential office functions, including printing of reports, documents, and administrative materials, will be supported. The contract supports the operational readiness of the FBI's facilities. Workforce productivity is maintained by ensuring availability of critical office supplies.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess efficiency beyond price.
Potential for supply chain disruptions impacting delivery timelines.
Limited visibility into the environmental impact of toner production and disposal.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides budget certainty.
Full and open competition suggests competitive pricing.
Award to a single vendor for a defined period simplifies management.

Sector Analysis

The market for office supplies, including toner, is mature and highly competitive, with numerous manufacturers and distributors. Federal agencies are significant consumers, driving demand for reliable and cost-effective solutions. This contract fits within the broader category of general supplies procurement, where agencies aim for efficiency and cost savings. Comparable spending benchmarks for toner across federal agencies would typically show a wide range depending on volume, specific product type, and contract vehicle.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside. The awardee, ABM FEDERAL SALES, INC., is not explicitly identified as a small business in the provided data. There is no information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. This suggests that the primary focus was on securing the best value through open competition rather than specifically targeting small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the purview of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability is ensured through the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified goods by the deadline. Transparency is facilitated by the public availability of contract awards through federal procurement databases. While no specific Inspector General jurisdiction is mentioned for this particular award, the DOJ Office of the Inspector General generally oversees agency spending.

Related Government Programs

Federal Office Supply Procurement
Department of Justice General Services
FBI Operational Support Contracts
Photographic Film, Paper, Plate, Chemical, and Copy Toner Manufacturing

Risk Flags

Potential for supply chain disruptions
Risk of toner obsolescence with technology changes
Quality control of delivered toner products

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $187,614.12 to ABM FEDERAL SALES, INC.. CORPORATE TONER - APRIL 2026

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ABM FEDERAL SALES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Federal Bureau of Investigation).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $187,614.12.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-20. End: 2026-04-20.

What is the historical spending pattern for corporate toner by the Department of Justice and the FBI?

Analyzing historical spending data for corporate toner by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and specifically the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is crucial for understanding trends and identifying potential savings opportunities. While this specific contract is for $187,614 ending in April 2026, a broader look would involve examining annual expenditures over the past 5-10 years. This would reveal if spending has been increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable. It would also highlight whether procurement has consistently utilized full and open competition or if sole-source or limited competition awards have been prevalent. Understanding the average price per unit or per cartridge paid in previous years, and comparing it to the current award, can indicate whether the government is achieving better value over time. Furthermore, identifying the primary vendors used historically can shed light on market concentration and potential vendor lock-in. Without access to the full historical database, it's difficult to provide precise figures, but such an analysis would typically show fluctuating demand based on agency size and operational needs, with a general trend towards seeking competitive pricing through established contract vehicles.

How does the pricing of this toner contract compare to similar contracts awarded to other federal agencies?

Benchmarking the pricing of this $187,614 corporate toner contract against similar awards to other federal agencies is essential for assessing value for money. A comprehensive comparison would involve identifying contracts for comparable toner products (e.g., specific printer models, color vs. black and white, high-yield cartridges) awarded by agencies of similar size or with similar operational needs, such as other law enforcement or investigative bodies. Key metrics for comparison include the price per unit (e.g., per cartridge), price per page, and total contract value relative to estimated volume. If this contract's per-unit costs are significantly lower than the average or median prices paid by comparable agencies, it suggests good value. Conversely, if the prices are higher, it may indicate a less competitive award, a need for better negotiation, or unique product requirements. The fact that this contract was awarded under full and open competition provides a strong basis for comparison, as it implies market-driven pricing. However, without access to the specific unit pricing and quantities within this award, a definitive comparison remains qualitative.

What are the potential risks associated with this contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

Several potential risks are associated with this corporate toner contract. Firstly, supply chain disruptions could impact the timely delivery of toner, potentially hindering the FBI's operational capabilities. Mitigation strategies might include requiring the vendor to maintain adequate inventory levels and establishing clear delivery timelines with penalties for delays. Secondly, the risk of obsolescence exists if the FBI transitions to new printing technologies or if the awarded toner becomes incompatible with future equipment. This could be mitigated by ensuring contract flexibility or by closely aligning the contract duration with the expected lifecycle of current printing hardware. Thirdly, while the firm fixed-price structure limits cost escalation, there's a risk that the initial price might not reflect the lowest possible market rate if competition was less robust than assumed or if market prices decrease significantly during the contract period. Mitigation here involves thorough market research prior to award and potentially incorporating price adjustment clauses tied to market indices, though this is less common with fixed-price contracts. Finally, ensuring the quality and reliability of the toner is crucial; poor quality can lead to printer damage and increased maintenance costs. Quality assurance provisions within the contract and vendor performance monitoring are key mitigation measures.

What is the track record of ABM FEDERAL SALES, INC. in fulfilling federal contracts, particularly for office supplies?

Evaluating the track record of ABM FEDERAL SALES, INC. in fulfilling federal contracts is vital for assessing the reliability and performance associated with this $187,614 corporate toner award. A review of federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) would reveal the company's history of contract awards, including the types of goods and services provided, contract values, agencies served, and performance ratings. Specifically, looking for past contracts related to office supplies, printing consumables, or similar items would provide direct insight into their experience in this domain. Key indicators of a strong track record include consistent on-time delivery, adherence to contract specifications, positive past performance reviews from previous government clients, and a low incidence of contract disputes or terminations. Conversely, a history of late deliveries, quality issues, or contract modifications due to vendor performance could raise concerns. Without specific data on ABM FEDERAL SALES, INC.'s past performance, it's assumed they met the requirements for this award, but a deeper dive into their contract history would offer a more definitive assessment of their reliability.

How does the contract type (Firm Fixed Price) influence the risk and value proposition for the government?

The Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type significantly influences both the risk and value proposition for the government in this $187,614 corporate toner award. For the government, the primary benefit of an FFP contract is cost certainty. The total price is established at the time of award and generally does not change, regardless of the contractor's actual costs incurred. This shields the FBI from potential cost overruns and makes budgeting more predictable. It incentivizes the contractor to manage its costs efficiently to maximize profit. The risk for the government lies in the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or service to maintain profitability if the initial price was set too low or if market conditions change unfavorably for the contractor. However, in a competitive market for standard items like toner, the risk of quality compromise is often mitigated by strong performance clauses and the potential for negative past performance ratings. For the contractor, the FFP structure carries higher risk, as they assume full responsibility for all costs. If their costs exceed the fixed price, their profit margin shrinks or they may incur a loss. This risk is generally reflected in the initial price offered; contractors will typically build in a contingency factor. Given the competitive nature of toner supply, the FFP structure here likely provides a good balance, offering the government budget certainty while relying on competition to ensure a fair initial p

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing › Photographic Film, Paper, Plate, Chemical, and Copy Toner Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: OFFICE SUPPLIES AND DEVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: ABM Federal Sales Inc.

Address: 1617 RIDGE BEND DR, WILDWOOD, MO, 63038

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $187,614

Exercised Options: $187,614

Current Obligation: $187,614

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47QSEA19D000B

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline