I am back in Lawrence after a trip to the Washington area, where I spoke at the National HUBZone Conference. My conference presentation focused on the special rules for joint venturing and teaming on HUBZone set-aside contracts.
Thank you to Mark Crowley and the HUBZone Council for inviting me to be a part of this year’s National HUBZone Conference. Thank you also to the clients, old friends, and new connections who made the conference especially worthwhile. And thank you, too, to all those who attended my seminar and asked so many great questions.
After speaking at four government contracts conferences since August, I am beginning to feel a bit like a road warrior. My next conference travels will take me to Wichita, Philadelphia, and New Mexico. If we haven’t connected at an event yet this year, I hope to see you there.
An offeror was not entitled to hold itself out as having a Federal Supply Schedule contract by virtue of its relationship with an affiliated company that held the FSS contract.
In a recent bid protest decision, the Court of Federal Claims held that a FSS award was improper where the awardee’s affiliate–but not the awardee itself–held the proper FSS contract.
Government contractors who have attempted to recently register or re-register in the SAM database have been confronted with new questions asking about an “immediate owner” and a “higher-level owner.” These new SAM questions have caused some confusion about what information, if any, a contractor must provide in SAM with respect to an “immediate owner” or “higher-level owner.”
The new questions originate in a recent amendment to the FAR, which requires all SAM registrants, if owned by another entity, to identify that entity by legal name, CAGE code, and type of ownership. This blog post breaks down the new rule and explains when this rule will come into play.
A procuring agency reasonably required all members of a SDVOSB set-aside GSA Contractor Team Arrangement to possess a certain Federal Supply Schedule contract and Special Item Number.
In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO held that restricting CTAs to holders of a certain Schedule and SIN was appropriate because all of the supplies to be procured fell within the identified Schedule and SIN.
The co-owner of a Missouri construction company faces the likelihood of 51 months in jail after pleading guilty to SDVOSB fraud charges.
According to a Department of Justice Press release, Michael Parker admitted that he and his father, Warren Parker, falsely claimed that Warren was a service-disabled veteran in order to receive more than $7 million in SDVOSB contracts.
An agency has no obligation to consider outside information bearing on an offeror’s past performance when the offeror fails to include information in its proposal.
In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO concluded that an agency had no obligation in its past performance evaluation or cost evaluation to import and consider favorable information the offeror could have, but did not include in its proposal.
A GAO bid protest was dismissed as premature because the protest was filed before a statutorily-required debriefing was held.
In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO determined that the protest was premature even though the required debriefing had been delayed pending the resolution of a SBA size protest.