GAO: VA’s Market Research Improperly Compared Apples to Oranges, Violated Rule of Two

Under the VA’s Rule of Two, the VA is required to set aside solicitations for veteran-owned businesses if there is a reasonable expectation of receiving offers from two or more such businesses capable of performing the required work at a fair and reasonable price. But how reasonable does the VA’s expectation have to be in a given procurement?

GAO recently reviewed the reasonableness of VA’s efforts and found them lacking.

Continue reading…

SmallGovCon Week In Review: March 2 – March 6, 2020

We’ve been enjoying some spring-like weather in these parts lately with highs in the 60s. But March is not just the start of spring, it’s also peak government contracts season.

Here are some interesting stories from the last week in federal government contracting, among them when the first CMMC training course for auditors will come out, e-commerce platforms rumblings, and securing the government’s technology supply chain.

Continue reading…

Prime Contractor Can Sponsor Subcontractor’s Claim to Government

Let’s say you’re a subcontractor to a prime contractor, which holds a construction contract with the Government. And you run into problems which need to be solved by submitting a claim to the contracting officer.

But, as the subcontractor, you don’t have a contractual relationship (privity of contract, in legal speak) with the Government. Can you still submit the claim?

Continue reading…

Corrective Action Following Dismissal Request Doesn’t Mean Protester Gets Costs Reimbursed, Says GAO

While GAO’s bid protest process is designed to achieve the laudable goal of providing a less costly process for procurement disputes, pursuing a GAO protest is nevertheless expensive. To offset these expenses, successful GAO protesters may be reimbursed for some of their expenses incurred pursuing a protest.

But what constitutes a successful protest that would entitle a protester to costs? In a recent request, GAO concluded that successfully defending against a motion to dismiss was not enough to entitle a party to costs, despite the fact that the agency subsequently took corrective action.

Continue reading…