Analysis

This page summarizes FPDS Query results for International Agreement Federal Contracts. It shows how much federal contract value falls into this procurement pattern, how many awards match the filter, and which agencies and vendors account for the largest share of obligations in the current result set.

The available trend series runs from FY 1985 to FY 2018. This makes it possible to evaluate whether the pattern is stable across time, expanding, declining, or concentrated in specific fiscal periods.

Summary Query Logic

The headline metrics on this page come from dedicated KPI and share-of-total query blocks. These precomputed queries define the numeric baseline for the rest of the analysis.

Query Used — Summary Metrics

SELECT
     sum(content__award__dollarValues__obligatedAmount) AS total_obligated,
    count() AS award_count,
    sum(content__award__dollarValues__obligatedAmount) / nullIf(count(),
    0) AS avg_award_size 
FROM
     fpds.data 
WHERE
     contract_type = 1
    AND content__award__competition__reasonNotCompeted__description = 'INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT'
    AND content__award__relevantContractDates__signedDate != ''

Explanation

This query aggregates federal contract awards that are justified by the reason "INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT" and are classified as definite quantity contracts. It filters for contracts with valid signed dates to ensure the data reflects active and recorded obligations. The output table presents three key metrics: the total obligated amount representing the sum of funds committed under these contracts, the total count of awards issued, and the average award size calculated by dividing total obligations by the number of awards. Analysts should interpret these summary metrics as a high-level overview of the federal government's financial engagement under international agreements, providing insight into the scale and frequency of such contracts. This section supports decisions related to market analysis, budget planning, and identifying trends in international procurement, while also prompting follow-up questions about agency participation, vendor distribution, and year-over-year changes in obligations.

Query Used — Share of Total Spending

SELECT
     sumIf(content__award__dollarValues__obligatedAmount,
    content__award__competition__reasonNotCompeted__description = 'INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT') AS filtered_obligated,
    sum(content__award__dollarValues__obligatedAmount) AS total_obligated,
    filtered_obligated / total_obligated * 100 AS share_percent 
FROM
     fpds.data 
WHERE
     contract_type = 1
    AND content__award__competition__reasonNotCompeted__description IS NOT NULL
    AND content__award__competition__reasonNotCompeted__description != ''
    AND content__award__relevantContractDates__signedDate != ''

Explanation

This query aggregates total federal contract obligations for prime contracts where the reason for not competing the award is specifically justified as "INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT." It calculates the sum of obligated amounts for these contracts and compares it to the overall obligated amount for all prime contracts with a documented non-competition reason. The resulting output row quantifies the absolute dollar value of obligations awarded under international agreements, the total obligations for all such contracts, and the percentage share that international agreements represent within this subset. Analysts should interpret this section as a measure of how much federal spending is directed through international agreements relative to all non-competitive contract awards. This insight supports evaluating the scale and fiscal impact of international agreements in federal procurement, guiding decisions on market engagement strategies and compliance monitoring. It also prompts follow-up questions about which agencies, vendors, or years contribute most to this spending and how these agreements align with broader policy or trade objectives.

Trend Over Time

This section tracks how obligations and award counts move across fiscal years for the current competition or reason-not-competed filter.

Query Used

SELECT
     if(toUInt8(substring(content__award__relevantContractDates__signedDate,
    6,
    2)) >= 10,
    toUInt16(substring(content__award__relevantContractDates__signedDate,
    1,
    4)) + 1,
    toUInt16(substring(content__award__relevantContractDates__signedDate,
    1,
    4))) AS fiscal_year,
    sum(content__award__dollarValues__obligatedAmount) AS total_obligated,
    count() AS award_count 
FROM
     fpds.data 
WHERE
     contract_type = 1
    AND content__award__competition__reasonNotCompeted__description = 'INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT'
    AND content__award__relevantContractDates__signedDate != '' 
GROUP BY
     fiscal_year 
ORDER BY
     fiscal_year ASC

Explanation

This query aggregates federal contract awards where competition was not conducted due to international agreements, isolating only definite contract types with valid signed dates. Each row in the output represents a fiscal year, showing the total obligated dollar amount and the count of awards justified by international agreements for that year. Analysts can interpret these results as a year-by-year trend of federal spending and contract activity specifically tied to international agreement justifications, reflecting both the volume and scale of such awards over time. This section supports market researchers and contractors in identifying shifts or patterns in international agreement-based procurements, enabling assessment of government reliance on these agreements. It also informs strategic decisions about targeting agencies or preparing bids aligned with international obligations. Follow-up questions may include examining which agencies or vendors dominate these awards or how changes in international policy impact contracting trends.

Fiscal Year	Total Obligated	Award Count
1985	$23.43M	60
1986	$389.41M	361
1987	$275.23M	659
1988	$318.00M	325
1989	$79.18M	56
1990	$469.06M	52
1991	$342.25M	59
1992	$233.78M	50
1993	$69.86M	72
1994	$180.35M	67
1995	$41.10M	77
1996	$56.55M	85
1997	$137.93M	255
1998	$229.70M	190
1999	$114.12M	152
2000	$123.89M	90
2001	$1.01B	886
2002	$1.40B	1,782
2003	$4.03B	1,332
2004	$1.19B	1,076
2005	$1.56B	1,097
2006	$1.54B	1,402
2007	$2.31B	2,108
2008	$2.13B	2,002
2009	$3.80B	1,901
2010	$4.80B	2,305
2011	$2.71B	2,440
2012	$3.93B	2,675
2013	$5.39B	2,658
2014	$3.61B	2,942
2015	$5.00B	2,559
2016	$4.50B	2,486
2017	$4.58B	2,429
2018	$3.54B	1,302

Top Agencies

This section ranks federal agencies by total obligations under the current page filter.

Query Used

SELECT
     content__award__purchaserInformation__contractingOfficeAgencyID AS agency_id,
    anyHeavy(content__award__purchaserInformation__contractingOfficeAgencyID__name) AS agency_name,
    sum(content__award__dollarValues__obligatedAmount) AS total_obligated,
    count() AS award_count 
FROM
     fpds.data 
WHERE
     contract_type = 1
    AND content__award__competition__reasonNotCompeted__description = 'INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT'
    AND content__award__relevantContractDates__signedDate != '' 
GROUP BY
     agency_id 
ORDER BY
     total_obligated DESC 
LIMIT  10

Explanation

This query aggregates federal contract obligations and award counts by contracting agency for awards justified under the "INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT" reason for no competition. Each row in the output table represents a single agency’s total obligated dollars and the number of contracts awarded under this justification, restricted to standard procurement contracts with valid signed dates. Analysts should read the table as a ranking of agencies by their financial commitment to contracts awarded without competition due to international agreements, highlighting which agencies lead in this specific procurement category. This section supports analysis of agency-level spending patterns and contract volume related to international agreements, enabling market researchers and contractors to identify key federal buyers and assess the scale of non-competitive awards in this context. Follow-up questions may include examining the types of goods or services procured, the vendors involved, and trends over time to better understand strategic priorities and potential market opportunities within international agreement procurements.

#	Agency ID	Agency Name	Total Obligated	Award Count
1	5700	DEPT OF THE AIR FORCE	$30.15B	13,766
2	2100	DEPT OF THE ARMY	$14.18B	12,110
3	1700	DEPT OF THE NAVY	$12.11B	8,158
4	8000	NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION	$1.06B	500
5	97AS	DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY	$909.59M	65
6	97JC	MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY (MDA)	$728.41M	55
7	8900	ENERGY, DEPARTMENT OF	$347.09M	185
8	7008	U.S. COAST GUARD	$158.31M	418
9	4732	FEDERAL ACQUISITION SERVICE	$86.70M	50
10	9761	DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY (DTRA)	$68.87M	48

Top Vendors

This section ranks contractors by total obligations under the current page filter.

Query Used

SELECT
     content__award__vendor__vendorHeader__vendorName AS vendor_name,
    sum(content__award__dollarValues__obligatedAmount) AS total_obligated,
    count() AS award_count 
FROM
     fpds.data 
WHERE
     contract_type = 1
    AND content__award__competition__reasonNotCompeted__description = 'INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT'
    AND content__award__relevantContractDates__signedDate != ''
    AND content__award__vendor__vendorHeader__vendorName IS NOT NULL
    AND content__award__vendor__vendorHeader__vendorName != '' 
GROUP BY
     vendor_name 
ORDER BY
     total_obligated DESC 
LIMIT  10

Explanation

This query aggregates federal contract awards that are justified by the "INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT" reason for not competing, focusing exclusively on prime contracts with valid signed dates and non-empty vendor names. Each row in the output table represents a unique vendor, showing the total obligated amount awarded to that vendor under international agreements and the count of such awards. Analysts should interpret this section as a ranking of the top vendors by total contract obligations within the specified filter, highlighting which companies receive the largest share of federal funds under international agreement justifications. This information supports market research and competitive analysis by identifying dominant contractors in this niche procurement category. It also informs strategic decisions regarding potential partnerships, risk assessments, and opportunities for engagement in international agreement-related federal contracts. Follow-up questions might include examining contract types, agency distribution, or temporal trends to better understand vendor performance and market dynamics.

#	Vendor Name	Total Obligated	Award Count
1	LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION	$16.15B	4,531
2	RAYTHEON COMPANY	$6.28B	1,417
3	CANADIAN COMMERCIAL CORPORATION	$2.48B	540
4	BOEING COMPANY, THE	$2.20B	434
5	VINNELL ARABIA	$1.91B	145
6	LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION (3632)	$1.44B	1,720
7	NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION	$1.28B	764
8	GREENLAND CONTRACTORS I/S	$1.18B	563
9	GENERAL DYNMICS/FORT WORTH DIV	$1.02B	96
10	TEXTRON SYSTEMS CORPORATION	$1.02B	91

Raw KPI Values

Raw Total Obligated

$60,123,505,227.16

Raw Award Count

37,992

Raw Avg Award Size

$1,582,530.67

Raw Share Percent

1.00%

Overall Conclusion

Federal contracts justified by international agreements represent a distinct segment of the federal procurement landscape, totaling over $60 billion in obligated funds across nearly 38,000 awards. Despite accounting for only about 1% of overall federal contract spending, the average award size exceeds $1.5 million, indicating a focus on substantial, high-value procurements. The distribution of obligations is heavily concentrated among defense-related agencies, with the Department of the Air Force alone responsible for half of the total obligated amount, followed by the Departments of the Army and Navy. This concentration underscores the strategic importance of international agreements in supporting defense and aerospace priorities. Vendor participation is similarly concentrated, with a handful of major contractors such as Lockheed Martin and Raytheon receiving a significant share of awards, reflecting the specialized nature of these contracts. Historical trends from the mid-1980s to early 1990s show fluctuating but sustained levels of spending, suggesting that international agreement-based procurements have been a consistent component of federal contracting over time. For analysts, contractors, and procurement researchers, this page highlights the importance of understanding agency-specific priorities and the role of a limited vendor pool in shaping the market dynamics of international agreement contracts. The data also suggests that these contracts are strategically targeted and potentially linked to long-term international partnerships and defense collaborations.

Method Notes

This page is generated from a stored FPDS Query payload. The values shown here come from precomputed query blocks for KPI, share, yearly trend, top agencies, and top vendors.

Each analytical section can include the underlying query used together with an AI-generated explanation of what the result set represents and how it should be interpreted.

Use this page as a starting point for market structure review, then continue into deeper filtering and custom SQL in FPDS Query.

Use FPDS Query for deeper analysis

Move from this published page into full contract research with direct SQL access, broader filters, saved queries, and deeper procurement analysis across agencies, vendors, NAICS, PSC, and time windows.

Start 7-Day Trial Learn More