There are many federal contracting opportunities specifically designed to support and benefit small businesses. Most people are already familiar with small business set-aside competitions and direct awards, SBA’s Mentor-Protégé Program, and SBA’s socioeconomic small business contracting programs (i.e., the SDVOSB/VOSB, WOSB/EDWOSB, HUBZone, and 8(a) Programs). But there is still another–albeit less well-known–government contracting program that offers significant benefits to small businesses, particularly those in field of research-and-development (R&D). Indeed, the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program provides federal funding to small business for their R&D endeavors, helping them grow promising technological innovations into full-fledged revenue cornerstones for small businesses and major contributors to government efficiency and progress.
Continue readingCategory Archives: Back to Basics
Back to Basics: Price Realism vs. Price Reasonableness
As part of federal contracting, the total price of each award is disclosed. This is of course a great way to promote trust and transparency in federal contracting and in the handling of taxpayer dollars. But it also leads to other contractors scrutinizing an awardee’s price and thinking one of two things: (1) “That price is too low to do this work”; or (2) “that price is too high for this work.” Naturally contractors will consider protesting on one of those pricing intuitions, but often mix up how to properly frame or phrase that pricing concern. Thus, they find themselves at the crossroad of “price realism” vs. “price reasonableness.” This installment of our Back to Basics series will help you learn which is which and why that matters.
Continue readingBack to Basics: The Two-Year Rule
Something we get asked about a lot with regards to joint ventures is the two-year rule (not to be confused with the “Rule of Two,” which concerns contract set-asides). We have explored this rule in the past on a few occasions, however, it has been a little while since the last such post and it’s been a perennial issue for contractors that we talk to. As such, it would be helpful to have a refresher on this rule, which may help clear up some of those questions.
Continue readingBack to Basics: Requests for Equitable Adjustment
As any contractor knows, there is no amount of preparation that can ensure a project goes exactly as planned. And unfortunately, when the unexpected happens, contractors may face increased costs, schedule delays, and other obstacles outside of their control. A request for equitable adjustment (or REA) affords contractors the opportunity to seek compensation or additional time for unforeseen conditions. This post will explore REAs and when to consider using such an approach.
Continue readingBack to Basics: GSA CTAs
A “GSA CTA” is a special type of Contractor-Teaming Arrangement (CTA) used only for performing Government Services Administration (GSA) Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) contracts. As detailed in FAR subpart 8.4, Federal Supply Schedules (FSS), GSA CTAs provide a unique teaming opportunity solely for MAS contract-holders and a unique teaming structure somewhere in between FAR subpart 9.6‘s two standard federal contract teaming options: subcontracting and joint venturing. Let’s take a closer look.
Continue readingBack to Basics: Covenant Against Contingent Fees
Federal contractors are generally familiar with the many FAR provisions listed in a solicitation or contract. So, it can be tempting to simply gloss over these pages of the solicitation, absentmindedly checking off the right box or signing off on the required representations without familiarizing yourself with each provision–or the consequences that come if each is violated. But naturally, we don’t recommend a cursory review. And one important FAR provision contractors should definitely familiarize themselves with is the Covenant Against Contingent Fees (FAR 52.203-5)–as the consequences of violating that one can be rather grave.
Continue readingBack to Basics: Brand Name or Equal
In some circumstances, it is in the best interest of the government customer to require a specific item made by a specific manufacturer. Though it doesn’t use this technique often, the government can achieve this by soliciting the contract using a “brand name or equal” basis. But the government can’t just decide that it wants a Hoover over a Bissel vacuum. No, there is a process that must be followed, and circumstances must warrant such a requirement.
Continue reading