Government contractors often assume that a foreign-owned company cannot qualify as a small business under the SBA’s government contracting size rules.
Not so. As demonstrated by a recent SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals size appeal decision, a foreign-owned entity can qualify as a small business, provided that it has a physical location in the United States and contributes to the U.S. economy.
Last week, the SBA released a proposal to overhaul the HUBZone Program. The proposed rule will make major changes to almost all aspects of the HUBZone Program, and my colleague Ian Patterson is covering those changes in a series of two posts on SmallGovCon.
But while the proposed HUBZone Program rule changes will garner most of the headlines, the SBA also has used the proposed rule as an opportunity to clear up a few very common HUBZone Program misconceptions–such as the notion that so-called “jobsite employees” don’t count toward the 35% HUBZone residency requirement.
Here are three of the most important clarifications SBA offered in the proposed HUBZone rule.
The SBA’s All Small Mentor-Protégé program offers a tremendous opportunity for participants to pursue set-aside contracts as joint venture partners. But misunderstandings and misconceptions about how SBA mentor-protégé joint ventures work are pervasive.
One very common misconception is that the SBA must pre-approve a mentor-protégé joint venture. In most cases, that’s not so. In a recent bid protest decision, even the GAO appeared a little confused, repeatedly mentioning SBA approval of a joint venture even though no such approval was required for the contract in question.
I was unexpectedly out of the office Friday afternoon, so I didn’t get a chance to post our weekly look at the latest and greatest in government contracting. But better late than never! It’s time for a slightly-delayed version.
In last week’s edition of SmallGovCon Week In Review, we have articles about House representatives requesting investigation of the JEDI contract, a report that suggests the 8(a) program is full of ineligible participants (with commentary by Koprince Law LLC partner Matthew Schoonover), GSA creates new a Solicitation Review Tool to better ensure contract compliance, and much more.
When the federal government awards a contract, the government must ensure that the price it pays is “fair and reasonable.” In other words, the government cannot pay a price that is too high.
If a contract is awarded on the basis of competitive proposals, an agency may be able to establish price reasonableness by comparing the prices proposed by competing offerors. But as demonstrated in a recent GAO bid protest decision, competition alone doesn’t mean that the prices received are reasonable–the government still must compare offerors’ prices to determine reasonableness.
The Air Force’s large NETCENTS-2 IDIQ vehicle did not require orders to be set-aside under the small business pool, except for orders valued between the micro-purchase threshold and simplified acquisition threshold.
In a recent decision, the GAO held that although the NETCENTS-2 contract in question says that Contracting Officers “should” perform a “rule of two” small business set-aside analysis for orders valued over the simplified acquisition threshold, it does not require that such an analysis be performed–meaning that Contracting Officers can validly award such orders to large businesses, even if two or more small business NETCENTS-2 holders exist.
As the workweek comes to a close, our thoughts are with everyone who has been affected by Hurricane Michael.
In government contracts news, there was plenty happening this week. In the latest SmallGovCon Week in Review, three people have been indicted on charges relating to procurement fraud, a new study creates a “sweetheart index” to analyze whether political donations affect government contract awards, IBM is the second company to file a pre-award protest against the Pentagon’s cloud contract, and much more.
Have a great weekend!