Women-Owned Small Business sole source contracts have moved one step closer to becoming a reality.
Today, the SBA issued a proposed rule implementing the WOSB sole source authority contained in the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act. The relative speed with which the proposed rule was issued suggests that WOSBs could begin receiving sole source awards later this year.
Teaming and joint venturing are essential components of success for many small government contractors, and the emphasis on teaming is increasing in light of the SBA’s proposed rule allowing “similarly situated entities” to join together to pursue prime contracts. But teaming and joint venturing are not without risks–there are many unique rules that must be followed, and many pitfalls for the unwary.
That is why I am very pleased to announced that I am joining with the Government Contractors Resource Network to present a three-part webinar series on compliant and effective teaming. Directed at small contractors, this series will begin with an overview of the rules and regulations governing teaming. The series will continue with a discussion of how to prepare effective and compliant teaming agreements, subcontracts, and joint venture agreements. The series will wrap up with an in-depth discussion of federal mentor-protege programs, including the SBA’s new proposed “universal” mentor-protege program.
The first webinar will broadcast on June 19, and the others will follow on June 23 and 25. To register, or for more information, visit the GCRN website. I hope to see you (virtually, anyway) this summer.
Under the SBA’s affiliation rules, the so-called “inter-affiliate transactions” exception applies only where the companies in question would be eligible to file a consolidated tax return.
In a recent size appeal decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals held that the inter-affiliate transactions exception does not apply when affiliated companies are ineligible to file a consolidated tax return–a result that seems to authorize “double counting” of affiliated companies’ revenues in the context of SBA size determinations.
Even if the VA Center for Verification and Evaluation has found that a service-disabled veteran “unconditionally” controls a SDVOSB, the SBA may nonetheless determine that other individuals or entities also control the company within the meaning of the SBA’s affiliation rules.
As demonstrated by a recent decision of the SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals, VA CVE verification does not shield a SDVOSB from an adverse SBA affiliation determination, even if that determination is based on a finding that non-veterans control the company.
An 8(a) contract was properly awarded on a sole source basis to a tribally-owned entity, even though the contract was a follow-on to a competitive 8(a) set-aside award.
In a recent decision, the GAO deferred to the SBA’s interpretation of the 8(a) program regulations–which, according to the SBA, allow such sole source awards.
A procuring agency was entitled to evaluate proposals during the course of a pre-award GAO bid protest without violating the automatic stay provision of the Competition in Contracting Act.
According to a recent federal court decision, CICA merely prohibits the award of a contract during the course of a GAO protest, but does not prevent an agency from continuing to evaluate proposals.
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.