Federal contractor · FORT WORTH, TX

EDUCATIONAL CATERING, INC.

EDUCATIONAL CATERING, INC. received $2.4M in federal contract obligations in FY2026, on 13 awards (−4.4% vs FY2025). Since FY2021: $9.3M. Its largest customer was Department of the Army ($2.4M).

Obligations · FY2026
$2.4M
New awards
13
Sole-source
0.0%
Single offer
0.0%
UEI
WZGTJSUKZNA3
Small businessHUBZone firm

Spending by fiscal year

Obligations per federal fiscal year (October–September).

  1. 15KFY2021
  2. 855.3KFY2022
  3. 1.3MFY2023
  4. 2.2MFY2024
  5. 2.5MFY2025
  6. 2.4MFY2026

Top buying agencies

Obligations in FY2026.

  1. 13 awards

What was bought · Where the work was performed

Obligations in FY2026.

What was bought

  1. Facilities & utilities$2.4M100%

Where the work was performed

Integrity signals

Shares of the year's obligations, next to the country's.

  • Low competition0.0%
    US 39% · $0
  • Sole-source awards0.0%
    US 30% · $0
  • Single-offer competitions0.0%
    US 8.8% · $0
  • Urgency justifications0.0%
    US 5.1% · $0

A signal is a reason to look closer, not evidence of wrongdoing: most sole-source awards are lawful and justified.

Largest awards

  1. Department of the Army· Pulaski County, AR· Facilities & utilities· Mar 4, 2025 – May 18, 2026· W912JF25CA007
  2. Department of the Army· Pulaski County, AR· Facilities & utilities· Apr 16, 2026 – Apr 16, 2026· W912JF26FA016
  3. Department of the Army· Pulaski County, AR· Facilities & utilities· Nov 24, 2025 – Mar 24, 2026· W912JF26FA005
  4. Department of the Army· Pulaski County, AR· Facilities & utilities· Jul 29, 2025 – Oct 29, 2025· W912JF25FA033
  5. Department of the Army· Monroe County, WI· Facilities & utilities· Mar 30, 2026 – Mar 30, 2026· W912J226FA009
  6. Department of the Army· Monroe County, WI· Facilities & utilities· Dec 22, 2025 – Jan 15, 2026· W912J226FA003
  7. Department of the Army· Monroe County, WI· Facilities & utilities· Mar 30, 2026 – Mar 30, 2026· W912J226FA008
  8. Department of the Army· Monroe County, WI· Facilities & utilities· May 29, 2026 – May 29, 2026· W912J226FA012

Competitors

Companies that win from the same buyers in the same markets: obligations by agency and industry compared over the last three fiscal years.

Compared on 1 market (agency × industry), FY2024–FY2026.

  1. BOSTON, MA · 93% of this company's obligations are in markets they both serveArmy · Special food services
  2. SYSCO WESTERN MINNESOTA, INC.$6.4M−4.6% in FY2026
    SAINT CLOUD, MN · 90% of this company's obligations are in markets they both serveArmy · Special food services
  3. BRENTWOOD, MD · 88% of this company's obligations are in markets they both serveArmy · Special food services

Showing the top 3 of 25 competitors. Open the profile for the full list.

Who sells to the same buyers in the same markets, not who wins against whom on a given contract. Prime contract obligations by the agency and NAICS code of each award; subawards are never added. A company is a family of legal entities, joined by parent UEI or, in part, by an AI reading of names.

Source: Federal contract transactions (Federal Procurement Data System) (U.S. Department of the Treasury, USAspending.gov), data current to Oct 6, 2026, loaded Oct 6, 2026 · FY2024–FY2026.

Source: Federal contract transactions (Federal Procurement Data System) (U.S. Department of the Treasury, USAspending.gov), data current to Oct 6, 2026, loaded Oct 6, 2026.