UNSPSC 10161813: Diverse agave plant

Ornamental plant of the agavaceae family. Notable for its dark green leaves with cranberry and yellowish borders.

UNSPSC 10161813 Diverse agave plant (Commodity) shows minimal recent state and local procurement activity aligned with its nominal scope. The code's name suggests ornamental or landscaping agave species, yet the recent solicitations tagged under this code track predominantly to general plant and shrub procurement, landscape installation, and invasive species removal—work that does not center on agave procurement. The recent opportunities instead reflect broader horticultural goods and services: the City of McKinney (Texas) seeks interior plants (live or faux) for City Hall under ITB 26-42, the City of Fairburn (Georgia) requests median landscaping with shrubs and groundcover under IFB 26-013, and Collier County (Florida) has issued multiple plant and dune-restoration solicitations spanning ornamental shrubs, native Florida species, and coastal dune stabilization plants. Only the Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division opportunity (ITB 26-8667, due July 8, 2026) directly names agave-type plants, but even that RFQ treats diverse plant species generically across 78 line items sourced from Florida-licensed nurseries to a three-year, as-needed contract with historical annual spend near $300,000.

Geographic activity clusters in Florida and Texas, with secondary participation from Georgia. Florida jurisdictions (Collier County, Monroe County) dominate the recent plant procurement landscape, with repeated coastal dune-restoration and right-of-way beautification work. The Texas education service center Region 7 Purchasing Cooperative has issued a renewable catalog-discount cooperative vehicle (EDACT2628, due July 30, 2026) for educational activities and supplies with $40.677 billion estimated two-year volume, though that procurement is unlikely to emphasize agave plants. The source contains no recent solicitations specifically requesting diverse agave plant species, and the code's alignment with actual state and local buying patterns remains unclear; procurement under this code appears dormant or misaligned with issuing-body tagging practices.