Top 100 Contractors in PSC S114: Water Services, FY2025
Parent companies by net contract obligations Oct 1, 2024 – Sep 30, 2025 Code page on GovTribe
The top 10 won 71% of FY2025 PSC S114 contract dollars
Ranking facts
- Contract obligations
- $626,400,532 Net of deobligations, by contracts coded PSC S114
- Contractors
- 266 Parent companies with an obligation
- Largest contractor
- American Water Works Company Inc. $202 million, 29.8% of obligations
- Data as of
Contract actions from FPDS (SAM.gov). How the rankings work · Download all 100 rows as CSV
Full ranking
| Rank | Contractor | Net obligations | Share | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
American Water Works Company Inc.
|
$202,313,165 | ||
| 2 |
Fort Bliss Water Services Company
|
$86,781,211 | ||
| 3 |
Jacobs Government Services Company
Top agencies
|
$40,294,755 | ||
| 4 | $31,838,348 | |||
| 5 | $22,613,682 | |||
| 6 |
County of Hardin
Top agencies
|
$21,790,023 | ||
| 7 | $19,986,710 | |||
| 8 | $19,364,258 | |||
| 9 | $17,721,948 | |||
| 10 | $17,289,163 | |||
| 11 |
Base Utilities Inc.
Top agencies
|
$13,816,793 | ||
| 12 | $11,312,863 | |||
| 13 | $8,388,632 | |||
| 14 | $7,949,191 | |||
| 15 |
City of Aberdeen
Top agencies
|
$7,553,816 | ||
| 16 | $5,942,293 | |||
| 17 |
Tama City Hall
Top agencies
|
$5,592,009 | ||
| 18 | $5,478,978 | |||
| 19 | $5,226,990 | |||
| 20 | $5,014,867 | |||
| 21 |
City of Wildwood City Hall
Top agencies
|
$4,888,515 | ||
| 22 | $4,407,623 | |||
| 23 |
P D R Properties, Inc.
Top agencies
|
$4,197,641 | ||
| 24 | $3,714,679 | |||
| 25 | $3,572,815 | |||
| 26 | $3,357,861 | |||
| 27 | $3,240,821 | |||
| 28 | $2,278,000 | |||
| 29 |
Jungbu Water Supply Office
Top agencies
|
$2,167,878 | ||
| 30 |
City of Hopewell Hrwtf
Top agencies
|
$2,155,652 | ||
| 31 | $2,137,982 | |||
| 32 | $2,073,713 | |||
| 33 | $2,015,103 | |||
| 34 |
City of Aliceville
Top agencies
|
$1,979,163 | ||
| 35 | $1,742,900 | |||
| 36 | $1,335,660 | |||
| 37 | $1,270,006 | |||
| 38 |
Kyotango City
Top agencies
|
$1,212,466 | ||
| 39 |
Public Service Commission of Yazoo City
Top agencies
|
$1,154,472 | ||
| 40 | $1,109,206 | |||
| 41 | $1,095,944 | |||
| 42 |
County of Lee
Top agencies
|
$1,056,472 | ||
| 43 | $1,015,493 | |||
| 44 |
City of Welch
Top agencies
|
$1,009,308 | ||
| 45 | $953,836 | |||
| 46 | $845,995 | |||
| 47 |
Columbiana County
Top agencies
|
$822,547 | ||
| 48 |
City of El Reno
Top agencies
|
$764,488 | ||
| 49 |
Town of Alderson
Top agencies
|
$750,917 | ||
| 50 |
City of Danbury CT
Top agencies
|
$741,575 | ||
| 51 | $678,067 | |||
| 52 |
Woodway Water Authority
Top agencies
|
$670,122 | ||
| 53 | $637,600 | |||
| 54 |
The Navajo Nation Tribal Government
|
$625,348 | ||
| 55 |
City of Leavenworth
Top agencies
|
$594,896 | ||
| 56 |
City of Fort Worth
Top agencies
|
$566,500 | ||
| 57 | $565,173 | |||
| 58 |
County of Maui
Top agencies
|
$558,402 | ||
| 59 |
Contra Costa Water District Inc
Top agencies
|
$556,874 | ||
| 60 |
City of Manchester
Top agencies
|
$543,096 | ||
| 61 |
City of Greenville
Top agencies
|
$517,993 | ||
| 62 |
Tidewater Utilities Inc
Top agencies
|
$502,563 | ||
| 63 |
Fluid Handling LLC
Top agencies
|
$481,623 | ||
| 64 | $477,486 | |||
| 65 |
Daegu Metropolitan City
Top agencies
|
$463,909 | ||
| 66 | $455,835 | |||
| 67 |
Schwarz Construction LLC
Top agencies
|
$448,175 | ||
| 68 |
City of Del RIO
Top agencies
|
$444,743 | ||
| 69 |
Bradford City Water Authority
Top agencies
|
$419,450 | ||
| 70 |
Petro Trade Inc.
Top agencies
|
$416,400 | ||
| 71 |
Texas Water Utilities, L.P.
Top agencies
|
$387,846 | ||
| 72 |
City of Watervliet
Top agencies
|
$362,422 | ||
| 73 | $357,480 | |||
| 74 |
City of Berlin
Top agencies
|
$308,918 | ||
| 75 |
City of Florence
Top agencies
|
$294,154 | ||
| 76 |
City of Clarksburg
Top agencies
|
$263,368 | ||
| 77 | $258,489 | |||
| 78 | $256,646 | |||
| 79 |
City of Grand Coulee
Top agencies
|
$240,000 | ||
| 80 | $235,000 | |||
| 81 | $226,612 | |||
| 82 | $216,004 | |||
| 83 | $213,500 | |||
| 84 |
Seong Nam City Hall
Top agencies
|
$210,000 | ||
| 85 |
City of Lawrence
Top agencies
|
$197,979 | ||
| 86 | $189,528 | |||
| 87 | $187,829 | |||
| 88 |
Town of Front Royal
Top agencies
|
$186,000 | ||
| 89 | $182,396 | |||
| 90 | $176,215 | |||
| 91 | $175,573 | |||
| 92 | $167,472 | |||
| 93 | $152,750 | |||
| 94 |
Seattle Sewer Dept
Top agencies
|
$150,000 | ||
| 95 | $146,000 | |||
| 96 | $131,642 | |||
| 97 | $126,000 | |||
| 98 | $119,025 | |||
| 99 | $118,097 | |||
| 100 | $117,602 |
Show 75 more
100 of 266 contractors listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
How this ranking works
- Source: every contract action FPDS records (as published on SAM.gov) in the period, as GovTribe received it.
- Amounts are net obligations: what was obligated, less what was deobligated. Shares are of $678 million obligated before deobligations, so they never pass 100%.
- Parent companies: each action counts under the ultimate parent its award record names, or under the awardee when it names none, so no dollar counts twice. Parents of the same name (Inc., LLC and the like aside) count as one company, since FPDS records a company's parent under more than one UEI over time. GovTribe corrects a few parents and names by hand; see the corrections.
- Fiscal year 2025 ran Oct 1, 2024 – Sep 30, 2025. The Department of Defense reports its contract actions to FPDS about 90 days late, so a fiscal year is ranked once they're in, in February, and the list doesn't change after.
- Rank changes compare with FY2024. "New" marks a company outside that period's top 500, and "Returned" one of those that was on an earlier fiscal year's list.
- Rank lines show each company's rank on every fiscal year's list since FY2021, #1 at the top, on a scale that gives the top of the list more room. A dashed stretch spans years it wasn't on the list. The step from FY2024 takes the color of the rank change beside it.
- Placeholder recipients FPDS uses when it names no company ("Miscellaneous Foreign Contractors" and the like) aren't ranked.
Quick answers
Who were the top 10 PSC S114 contractors in FY2025?
1. American Water Works Company Inc. ($202M), 2. Fort Bliss Water Services Company ($86.8M), 3. Jacobs Government Services Company ($40.3M), 4. Oklahoma City Water Utilities Trust ($31.8M), 5. Augusta-Richmond County Government ($22.6M), 6. County of Hardin ($21.8M), 7. Emerald Coast Utility Services Inc. ($20M), 8. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission ($19.4M), 9. Foreign Utility Consolidated Reporting ($17.7M), 10. Fort Riley Utility Services, Inc. ($17.3M).
On GovTribe
Research every contractor on this list
- Every contract, task order and IDV they hold
- Their subsidiaries, teammates and competitors
- Open opportunities they're positioned for
- Alerts when they win new work