Skip to content
Fonteum·Government Procurement EvidenceThe Leakage ReportQuestions

The Leakage Report

Federal contracts awarded during active exclusion periods

When a federal prime award is signed while its recipient holds an active SAM.gov exclusion, that co-occurrence is a matter of public record. This study reconstructs the active exclusion window for each confirmed entity and reports the awards whose signed date fell inside it — strictly as two dated facts.

On the currently ingested set, 112 distinct prime award(s) totalling $1,601,819 were signed during an active exclusion window for the same confirmed recipient, across 21 entities. Each is stated as two dated facts and is reproducible from the SQL below.

At a glance

112
Distinct awards signed during an active exclusion
$1,601,819
Obligated on those awards
21
Confirmed entities
115
Award × exclusion findings
Coverage note

This study reflects the awards and exclusions currently ingested — a bounded, partial set, not the full federal corpus. On the current set, 112 distinct prime award(s) totalling $1,601,819.41 were signed during an active exclusion window for the same confirmed recipient. Coverage expands as more of the confirmed-excluded recipient set is backfilled.

What a full backfill would add: Running the daily SAM exclusion snapshot plus the targeted USASpending award history for the confirmed-excluded recipient set (npm run seed:procurement:awards-for-excluded) lets the join surface every prime contract signed while its recipient held an active federal exclusion. A full historical backfill across all confirmed-UEI exclusions and the DATA-Act award corpus (FY2008 onward) is what turns the zero-coverage draft into the headline study.

By awarding agency

Awarding agencyAwardsObligatedFindings
Department of Defense36$1,231,66739
Department of Agriculture21$210,20821
Department of Veterans Affairs48$100,12648
Department of State1$16,2501
Department of the Treasury1$16,1781
Department of Homeland Security1$12,2321
Department of Justice1$9,6451
Department of the Interior3$5,5133

By exclusion type

Exclusion typeAwardsObligatedFindings
Prohibition/Restriction91$1,126,05491
Ineligible (Proceedings Pending)7$225,6257
Ineligible (Proceedings Complete)4$112,2034
Ineligible (Proceedings Completed)8$79,99211
Voluntary Exclusion2$57,9462

By award-signed year

Year signedAwardsObligated
20202$274,750
20233$225,998
20259$141,803
20127$138,900
20134$132,672
20244$128,491
20163$122,474
20072$69,292
20148$68,149
20193$61,416
20101$60,000
20156$48,993
200847$42,941
20094$26,921
20115$26,591
20221$16,250
20262$16,178
20171$0

Entities

EntityUEI / CAGEAwardsObligated
BONUS ENVIRONMENTAL LLCMF2EK7DVX8K314$781,825
MFA INCORPORATEDTJANTA2CN9T521$133,647
W. P. MAHON, INC.X2SYT2X38N914$111,772
KIT CONTRACTING LLCFWFKEFLA33J12$87,285
CFP GROUP, INC., THEJS4MKELAQMH61$80,874
TRI-STATE PLATING & POLISHING, INCFKW1BJJCCTH31$69,222
ACTON RENTAL & SALES COMPANYGRE2JG1EDDN92$67,450
A & S SKILL MACHINISTS, INC.DLDBNGNA7CB62$57,946
TARGET CORPORATIONW37AA8ZG6TN846$32,335
DUBAI ENTERPRISES COMPANYJECQDHMDCNM81$25,242
BELLA MIA DONNA LLCN2EDPB1SMN552$24,918
JS SDVO, LLCR8TJQ9KKLJJ71$21,874
PRESCIENT TECHNOLOGIES, LLCV6QDML49NW172$19,097
DEFENSE TECHNOLOGIES MANUFACTURING LLCF7TPLEDAU2V81$16,800
MA65JMMALKU5MA65JMMALKU51$16,250
KING ROX LLCDMPSJZMG62L11$16,178
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING, LLCD842MD8K3KT51$12,232
TAMMANY HOLDING CORPORATIONENDKDHKKEQH11$9,645
NH ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, INCMJ8SPL11N3Q31$9,130
ROBERTS CHEMICAL CO INCQCNSBL3VBJT44$6,551
CLEM DIRECT RETAIL LLCFZHNUCVNZPK43$1,547

Methodology

An award is reported as leakage if and only if its signed (action) date falls inside an exclusion's active window for the same confirmed entity: activation_date ≤ action_date AND (termination_date IS NULL OR termination_date > action_date). The join is on a confirmed exact key only — the recipient's UEI, or its CAGE for CAGE-keyed exclusion rows. Held / name-only / unmatched exclusions, and exclusions with no published activation date, never produce a finding.

Status is reproducible as of any past date: only the bitemporally-current version of each row participates (valid_to IS NULL), and substituting a valid-time predicate reproduces the picture as it stood on an earlier day. The computation is implemented as a pure, unit-tested function (src/lib/procurement/leakage.ts) that the published SQL mirrors exactly.

Full methodology & reproducibility →

Reproduce it

Re-derive every figure on this page from the published artifacts:

  • Reproducible SQL — the exact join, with expected-result comments.
  • Download CSV · Download JSON — the computed findings snapshot.

Limitations

  • Coverage is bounded to the awards and exclusions currently ingested — not the full federal corpus.
  • USASpending's keyless recipient search keys on UEI; confirmed-CAGE-only exclusions without a UEI are not reachable by that path and are reported as out-of-reach coverage.
  • Exclusion and award records change over time; this page reflects the committed snapshot date and is not a live read.
  • A co-occurrence of dated facts is not a determination of wrongdoing. Some awards signed during an exclusion window are lawful (e.g. pre-existing obligations or specific waivers); confirm each case at the source.

Sources

Federal public records (US Government Works). The exclusion spine is SAM.gov; award history is USASpending.gov (DATA Act public domain, preferred for pre-2022 fields to avoid the D&B/DUNS redistribution bar).

Source: SAM.gov exclusion extract, pulled 2026-06-18. Confirm current status at SAM.gov →

Source: USASpending.gov award record, pulled 2026-06-17.

Reviewed by the Fonteum Government Contracts Desk. Federal procurement records analysts. This study reports exact regulatory facts — an award's signed date and an exclusion's active window, each sourced to SAM.gov and USASpending.gov. It makes no determination of wrongdoing and assigns no score.
Published 2026-06-20 · methodology leakage/v1 · Fonteum.

Frequently asked questions

What does “awarded during an active exclusion” mean here?

It is a statement of two dated facts: a federal prime award has a signed (action) date, and the recipient had a SAM.gov exclusion whose active window — from its activation date until its termination date — contained that signed date. It is not a finding of fraud, illegality, or wrongdoing, and Fonteum assigns no score.

How is an award matched to an exclusion?

Only on a confirmed exact key: the recipient's Unique Entity ID (UEI) or CAGE code. Name-only or unconfirmed matches are held and never asserted against an entity. An exclusion with no published activation date is treated as indeterminate and never reported as active.

Is this the complete federal picture?

This study reflects the awards and exclusions currently ingested — a bounded, partial set, not the full federal corpus. On the current set, 112 distinct prime award(s) totalling $1,601,819.41 were signed during an active exclusion window for the same confirmed recipient. Coverage expands as more of the confirmed-excluded recipient set is backfilled.

How can I reproduce these numbers?

Every figure is re-derivable in Postgres from the published SQL (linked on this page) against the procurement_awards and procurement_exclusion_links tables. The same computation is implemented as a pure, unit-tested function in the open methodology.

How do I confirm a specific entity's current status?

Each record links to the entity on SAM.gov, the system of record. Exclusion and registration status can change; always confirm the current state at sam.gov before acting on any record.

Fonteum is a public-records evidence platform. This Government Procurement Evidence silo reports exact regulatory facts from federal public records (SAM.gov, USASpending.gov, FAPIIS). It assigns no risk score and makes no determination of wrongdoing; confirm current status at the official source.

Silo home · The Leakage Report · Questions · SAM.gov · USASpending.gov