01 / Vendor Profile
SYSCO CENTRAL ALABAMA INC Federal Contracts and Awards
UEI N8EKMHVDAA63 · CAGE 1VMQ2
Federal contract activity attributed to this vendor identity across FY 2019–FY 2025. Obligations are FPDS accounting transactions, not company revenue.
02 / Federal Business Size
Federal contract market at a glance
Measured consistently across FY 2019–FY 2025.
Across FY 2019–FY 2025, FPDS records attribute $138.80M in net contract obligations to SYSCO CENTRAL ALABAMA INC across 17,821 contract actions. Net obligations include positive obligations and later deobligations recorded during the same period.
03 / Spending Trend
SYSCO CENTRAL ALABAMA INC contract spending by year
Annual net obligations show whether recorded federal business expanded or contracted, while actions and customer counts show the breadth of that activity.
| Fiscal year | Obligations | Actions | Federal customers | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FY 2019 | $15.27M | 2,485 | 1 | — |
| FY 2020 | $14.86M | 2,218 | 1 | −2.6% |
| FY 2021 | $19.43M | 2,615 | 1 | +30.7% |
| FY 2022 | $21.21M | 2,754 | 1 | +9.1% |
| FY 2023 | $21.20M | 2,706 | 1 | −0.0% |
| FY 2024 | $21.30M | 2,594 | 1 | +0.5% |
| FY 2025 | $25.53M | 2,449 | 1 | +19.9% |
04 / Federal Customers
Which federal agencies buy from SYSCO CENTRAL ALABAMA INC?
Ranked by net obligations during FY 2019–FY 2025.
| Agency | Code | Obligations | Actions | Vendor share |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 97AS | $138.80M | 17,821 | 100.0% |
05 / Contracting Offices
Which contracting offices buy from SYSCO CENTRAL ALABAMA INC?
Ranked by net obligations during FY 2019–FY 2025.
| Office | Code | Agency | Obligations | Actions | Vendor share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPE300 | DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY | $138.64M | 17,819 | 99.9% | |
| SPE3SE | DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY | $157.5K | 2 | 0.1% |
06 / Top NAICS Industries
Which industries define this vendor’s federal work?
07 / Top Product and Service Codes
What products and services does the government buy from this vendor?
| PSC | Description | Obligations | Actions | Customers | Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8905 | MEAT, POULTRY, AND FISH | $116.45M | 12,884 | 1 | 83.9% |
| 8920 | BAKERY AND CEREAL PRODUCTS | $6.49M | 1,069 | 1 | 4.7% |
| 8910 | DAIRY FOODS AND EGGS | $5.35M | 1,268 | 1 | 3.9% |
| 8940 | SPECIAL DIETARY FOODS AND FOOD SPECIALTY PREPARATIONS | $4.28M | 740 | 1 | 3.1% |
| 8915 | FRUITS AND VEGETABLES | $2.81M | 688 | 1 | 2.0% |
| 8960 | BEVERAGES, NONALCOHOLIC | $1.42M | 357 | 1 | 1.0% |
| 8970 | COMPOSITE FOOD PACKAGES | $493.3K | 53 | 1 | 0.4% |
| 8930 | JAMS, JELLIES, AND PRESERVES | $356.0K | 44 | 1 | 0.3% |
| 8955 | COFFEE, TEA, AND COCOA | $348.2K | 132 | 1 | 0.3% |
| 8945 | FOOD, OILS AND FATS | $273.2K | 184 | 1 | 0.2% |
08 / Competition Pattern
How was SYSCO CENTRAL ALABAMA INC’s federal work competed?
Competition categories describe the procurement path recorded on the underlying contract actions.
09 / Recent Contract Awards
What contract actions were recorded most recently for SYSCO CENTRAL ALABAMA INC?
The latest recorded PIIDs connect this profile to the underlying federal award search.
| Award / PIID | Signed | Obligation | Agency / office | NAICS | PSC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPE30025FWH9Z | Sep 30, 2025 | $619 | DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY DLA TROOP SUPPORT | 311999 | 8905 |
10 / Interpreting the Profile
How should you evaluate SYSCO CENTRAL ALABAMA INC as a federal contractor?
Read obligations, customers, markets, competition, and individual awards together. A large historical total indicates federal scale, but it does not by itself describe current backlog, commercial revenue, profitability, or future opportunity.
Separate obligations from revenue
FPDS obligations are government accounting actions and may include later deobligations.
Follow customer concentration
Agency and office concentration reveals where the vendor’s federal relationships are strongest.
Test market overlap
NAICS and PSC shares show whether the vendor competes in the same markets as your company.
Inspect the awards
Open the PIIDs to verify dates, offices, classifications, and transaction history.