B2G is moving!
Blogs posted after May 22, 2015 will be located on Deltek's central blog page at
Just select the "B2G Essentials" blog to continue to receive this valuable content.
Surveillance: vendor trends

Earlier this month, Deltek blogged and produced a video about surveillance technologies and their use in crime prevention. The term “surveillance” covers numerous technologies, from red-light and speed cameras, to closed-circuit television (CCTV) systems. Due to the wide range of technologies under the surveillance umbrella, an abundance of vendors are participating in this market. The map below provides a visual representation of where these vendors are located.


The list of vendors used to create this map was taken from the Ultimate Guide for Sherriff’s on

Expectedly, larger states such as California, Texas and Florida have the greatest number of vendors. Virginia is also near the top, likely due to the state’s large defense community. This map aligns well with the red map below, which details the number of solicitations released for surveillance technologies in the last 12 months. California, Texas and Florida continue to lead the pack, showing that larger states, and states with several surveillance vendors, continue to invest in the technology.

While a major portion of this could be due to the significant need for surveillance in border states, there are other important factors to consider. One of the most noteworthy is the fact that many solicitations include a provision that allows agencies to provide additional bid-scoring points in favor of locally owned businesses. This means that vendors located within the state have an advantage over out-of-state vendors.

Analyst’s Take

The extreme correlation between the location of surveillance vendors and where solicitations were released offers vendors a strong indication of where solicitations are likely to be released in the future. The maps detailing released and awarded solicitations show that many surveillance projects are taking place in border states, which is likely to continue. States that recently implemented systems may also require maintenance in the near future, which vendors should keep in mind as the systems begin to age.

Most significantly, however, may be the states that did not procure any surveillance technologies in the last three years, such as Wyoming and South Dakota. Given the growing trend in utilizing surveillance technology, it is likely that cities in these states will soon look to utilize it as well. Vendors should take advantage of this prime opportunity to introduce themselves and make a push for their systems now.

Comments (Comment Moderation is enabled. Your comment will not appear until approved.)