In government contracting—as in life—it’s important to be honest. And in our experience, most government contractors are honest. Where a contractor is dishonest or untruthful, it can face significant sanctions.
So it was in a recent SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals decision, in which the OHA considered the cancellation of an entity’s SDVOSB status. In CVE Appeal of Afily8 Government Solutions, LLC, SBA No. CVE-125-A (2019), the OHA affirmed the cancellation of Afily8’s SDVOSB verification based on concerns that Afily8 did not provide truthful information to the VA’s Center for Verification and Evaluation.
In a recent decision, GAO determined an agency could reasonably amend a solicitation for a task order issued under a set-side base contract to require offerors to recertify their size and SDVOSB status at the task order level.
As we’ve written about on the blog, SDVOSB regulations were consolidated under the SBA’s rules beginning October 1, 2018, and those changes included some good and bad changes. We recently noticed a single letter in one of the changes that, while most likely a typo, could potentially affect the meaning of one part of the new regulation.
The Small Business Administration Office of Hearings and Appeals has denied a protest of the service-disabled veteran-owned small business status of a company seeking to perform work for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
The decision was not particularly controversial or otherwise notable in and of itself. What is notable is that this was the first VA-status SDVOSB protest decision ever issued by OHA.
I’ve long predicted that Congress would eventually adopt a formal, Government-wide SDVOSB certification program (or “verification” program, if you prefer). Maybe my crystal ball is finally right. As my colleague Matt Schoonover wrote last week, a new bill introduced in the House of Representatives would do just that.
The full text of the bill has now been published. Here are some of the key details of the Government-wide SDVOSB certification proposal.
Recently, the GAO issued a report discussing the VA’s Veterans First Program, made at the request of several members of Congress. The report focused on addressing ongoing implementation challenges regarding compliance with the Rule of Two following the Kingdomware decision.
One of the key challenges facing the VA is ensuring that SDVOSBs comply with the limitations on subcontracting. According to the GAO, the VA’s oversight needs improvement.
New, consolidated SDVOSB eligibility regulations kicked in on October 1. The new regulations replace the old VA and SBA rules, which provided separate eligibility standards for SDVOSBs.
Veterans have long been confused by the fact that the Government operated two separate SDVOSB programs, each with its own standards. The consolidated rule will eliminate that confusion, and that’s a very good thing. There are also several other pieces of the new SDVOSB eligibility rule that veterans should like–but also some that aren’t so great, or that require further clarification as to how they’ll be applied.
My colleague Matt Schoonover provided a broader overview of the new regulations earlier last week. Now it’s time for me to get on my soapbox. Without further ado, here’s my list of the good, bad, and the downright ugly from the new SDVOSB regulations.