Earlier this month, the GAO sustained two protests filed by Latvian Connection LLC–one on a State Department procurement and one on a Department of Interior procurement–because Latvian Connection’s FedBid usage had been suspended. The GAO held that this was improper because the matter had not been referred to the SBA under the SBA’s Certificate of Competency program.
Yesterday, I appeared on In Depth With Francis Rose to discuss the Latvian Connection cases. Please follow this link to listen to the audio of my interview, and don’t forget to tune in to Federal News Radio every weekday from 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. for Francis’s top-notch show.
A small business and its owner have agreed to pay $250,000 to resolve HUBZone fraud allegations, including a claim that the company’s HUBZone office was a “virtual” location where no employees actually worked.
According to a Department of Justice press release, Air Ideal, Inc. and its majority owner have also agreed to pay the government five percent of the company’s gross revenues over the next five years.
The GAO has sustained a second protest based upon FedBid’s suspension of a contractor from its system.
For the second time in less than one week, the GAO held that the contractor’s suspension from FedBid–and resulting inability to bid on a contract–was improper because the matter was not referred to the SBA under the SBA’s Certificate of Competency procedures.
For an invoice to be considered a claim under the Contract Disputes Act, thereby giving the U.S. Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction to consider an appeal of the government’s failure to pay, the contractor must establish that the invoice was in dispute at the time it was submitted to the government.
As demonstrated in a recent Court decision, ordinary, undisputed invoices are not “claims” under the Contract Disputes Act.
I am back in Lawrence after a great trip to the Des Moines area, where I participated in the Iowa Vendor Conference. My conference presentation focused on prime/subcontractor teaming on federal set-aside contracts.
Many thanks to Pam Russenberger, Jodi Essex, Beth White, Julie Fagle, and the rest of the Iowa Procurement Technical Assistance Program Team for sponsoring this great event. And a big “thank you” to all of the contractors and industry professionals who attended my presentation, asked great questions, and (mostly) didn’t boo when I happened to bring up the glorious results of the previous night’s basketball game.
If you are in Iowa but weren’t able to make it to the Iowa Vendor Conference, I will be back in the area for the Midwest Small Business Government Contracting Symposium in June. I hope to see you there!
The U.S. Court of Federal Claims has jurisdiction to hear challenges to the SBA’s SDVOSB determinations.
In a recent case, the Court held that it had the power to review a decision issued by the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals, in which OHA deemed a company ineligible to receive a SDVOSB set-side contract.
A large business was tossed out of a government competition because the company’s small business subcontracting goal was substantially below the agency’s stated goal.
In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO held that the agency acted reasonably when it rated the large business as “unacceptable” for failing to propose a sufficiently high small business subcontracting goal.