8(a) Mentor Protege Agreements And Shared Employees: A Risk Of Affiliation?

Can an SBA 8(a) program mentor and protege be affiliated, notwithstanding their 8(a) mentor-protege arrangement, if the firms engage in extensive employee sharing?

Maybe.

In a recent decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals suggested that extensive employee sharing between an 8(a) protege and its mentor might be outside the bounds of protected “assistance” under the 8(a) mentor-protege program.  And in the same case, SBA OHA raised an interesting question: does a mentor-protege relationship protect the mentor from affiliation, as well as the protege?

Continue reading

NAICS Code Appeal Cannot Be Based On Sources Sought Notice

A NAICS code appeal cannot be based on a sources sought notice, according to a recent NAICS appeal decision issued by the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals.

In NAICS Appeal of Integrated Laboratory Systems, Inc., SBA No. NAICS-5406 (2012), SBA OHA held that under the FAR and SBA’s regulations, a viable NAICS code appeal cannot be filed until the solicitation itself is issued.

Continue reading

SBA Improperly Evaluated Disabled Individual’s 8(a) Program Application, Says SBA OHA

The SBA failed to properly evaluate the 8(a) Program application of a small business owned by a disabled individual, according to a recent decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals.

SBA OHA’s decision in Striker Electric, SBA No. BDPE-465 (2013) comes on the heels of a December 2012 case in which SBA OHA held that the SBA had improperly evaluated the 8(a) Program application of a woman-owned business.  Together, the two decisions may suggest that SBA OHA is holding the SBA to a higher standard than may previously have been the case when it comes to the SBA’s evaluation of the “social disadvantage” factor.  If so, it is good news indeed for 8(a) applicants.

Continue reading

Ostensible Subcontractor Rule: Lessons Learned From SBA OHA

Avoiding affiliation under the SBA’s ostensible subcontractor rule can be difficult, especially since the ostensible subcontractor rule itself, 13 C.F.R. § 121.103(h)(4), does not provide many examples of the factors that may cause ostensible subcontractor affiliation.

A recent decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals, Size Appeal of InGenesis, Inc., SBA No. SIZ-5436 (2013), demonstrates that even when a proposed subcontractor will play a major role in the procurement, ostensible subcontractor affiliation may be avoided if the parties carefully structure their relationship.

Continue reading

SBA Improperly Denied Woman’s Gender-Based 8(a) Application, Says SBA OHA

Anyone who works with SBA 8(a) program applications will tell you that it can be very difficult for a woman to demonstrate gender bias to the extent necessary to gain admission to the program.

But for a woman-owned small business business, the road to SBA 8(a) program admission may have just gotten a little easier, as the result of a recent decision by the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals.  In Strategygen Co., SBA No. BDPE-460 (2012), SBA OHA held that the SBA’s 8(a) admissions office had repeatedly erred in evaluating a woman’s claims of gender bias, and ordered the woman-owned firm admitted to the 8(a) program.

Continue reading

Ostensible Subcontractor Rule: SBA 8(a) Mentor-Protege “Shield” Does Not Apply

The SBA 8(a) mentor-protege affiliation “shield” does not prevent a mentor and protege from being affiliated under the so-called ostensible subcontractor rule, according to a recent decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals.

In Size Appeal of InGenesis, Inc., SBA No. SIZ-5436 (2013), SBA OHA held that the broad exception from affiliation for 8(a) proteges and their mentors does not prevent the SBA from deeming the companies affiliated under the ostensible subcontractor rule.

Continue reading

Unpaid SBA Loan Leads to 8(a) Program Termination

A construction company with cash flow problems did not make payments on its SBA loan–and was terminated from the 8(a) program as a result.

The decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals in C.J. Hearne Construction Co., SBA No. BDP-449 (2012) is an important reminder that unpaid debts to Uncle Sam can be the kiss of death for 8(a) program participation.

Continue reading