The SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals denied an SDVOSB-status protest recently where the protester’s main argument amounted to an allegation that the owner of a competitor failed to identify on social media that he had a service-related disability.
OHA called the allegation “completely without merit.”
Several years ago, we argued that VA’s rule, requiring a veteran to devote herself full time to an SDVOSB during normal working hours, unnecessarily handicapped SDVOSB start-ups seeking CVE verification. This same requirement–though now in a slightly different form–continues to impede new businesses from obtaining verification, a key credential for many SDVOSBs. Beyond that, CVE’s application of the managerial experience requirement also poses a potential hurdle for incipient SDVOSBs.
SBA’s socio-economic set-aside programs mandate compliance with multiple control requirements. An important one stipulates that a woman owner of a WOSB (or a veteran for a SDVOSB or a disadvantaged owner for an 8(a) business) must have the “managerial experience of the extent and complexity to run the concern.”
But what, exactly, does this requirement entail? A recent OHA case provides some important guidance.
Contracting officers are given significant discretion in choosing NAICS codes for procurements. But, as decision makers, they aren’t infallible. As a recent OHA case shows, using the NAICS Manual can help small business contractors challenge an incorrect NAICS code.
Common investment affiliation can arise when SBA believes that two individuals’ common investments in multiple entities may make the individuals in question act with a common purpose. As few as two common investments can form the basis for affiliation.
A recent SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals opinion examines the argument that the number of common investments should be counted the same way the number of entities is treated for tax purposes. OHA’s answer: Nope.
Updating your joint venture agreement is essential to maintaining compliance with SBA’s regulations and failing to update could cost you contracts.
In Stacqme, LLC, SBA No. SIZ-5976 (Dec. 10, 2018), the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals held that a mentor-protege joint venture’s failure to update its JV agreement caused the agreement to be non-compliant with the SBA’s rules, and meant that the joint venture was ineligible for an SDVOSB set-aside contract.