We at SmallGovCon wanted to take a moment to wish everyone a happy and safe Independence Day! It’s always a great time to celebrate our nation and be with family and friends. But it’s also a time to reflect on the sacrifices made by those who came before us and those who have served our country in myriad ways. The citizens of a nation must always strive to improve its governance and civil participation. And federal contractors are a key part of how the government operates. Happy 4th of July!
The federal small business representation system relies in some part on self-certification and in some part on review by the Small Business Administration (SBA) and protests by competitors. The System for Award Management (SAM) is one key part of the federal procurement apparatus. Small businesses looking to take advantage of SBA’s socioeconomic programs must be registered in SAM, and crucially, must maintain up-to-date information in the system. Failure to do so can carry severe consequences, ranging from suspension and disbarment to civil and/or criminal penalties, including massive fines and even imprisonment. We’ve written before about some of the confusion contractors may have regarding self-reporting in SAM.
A recent General Services Administration (GSA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) report is a reminder to federal contractors about the importance of being accurate in representing small business status. It details several investigations into small business misrepresentations, and reminds contractors of the severe penalties that can result from misrepresentation. In this post we’ll highlight the examples provided by GSA OIG to show just what is at stake when a small business fails to update (or knowingly misrepresents) their status, and offer some clarification of the Federal Acquisition Regulations to help you avoid similarly extreme penalties.
Continue reading…Join federal government contracts attorney Greg Weber along with SBA representative, Sophia Chou, as they discuss the tips and pitfalls of subcontracting and teaming on this webinar hosted by the South Dakota APEX Accelerators. Topics covered will include:
Registration link here.
Please join John Holtz and me, for this informative webinar hosted by Texas El Paso APEX Accelerators as we discuss joint venture agreements and teaming. For large and small contractors alike, teaming agreements and joint venture agreements can be essential to winning and successfully performing federal government contracts. In this presentation, we will explain how to develop, negotiate and administer agreements that are both compliant and effective. The presentations will cover both the key rules (such as flow-downs and ostensible subcontractor affiliation) and best practices for agreements that go beyond the bare minimum legal requirements. Register here.
Good morning and happy Friday! After the heatwave and rain the tomatoes are starting to ripen here in the Midwest. It’s always fun to visit our local farmer’s market at this time of the year to take advantage of the abundant harvest. We hope you had a great week and have some fun things planned for the weekend.
This week in federal government contracting news, be sure to look at articles related to an overview of governmentwide contracting, thoughts about government buying forecasts, and potential AI rules for federal agencies.
Continue reading…There are multiple overlaps in SBA’s socioeconomic rules for the 8(a) Program, Women-Owned Small Business Program (WOSB), and the Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Program. One in particular has often caused some confusion for our clients: the full-time devotion requirement. This rule generally requires that the service-disabled veteran owner (or equivalent key owner in the other programs) work full time for the company with the SDVOSB status. But what does this mean in practice, especially for start-up companies where the owner may be working a second job. A recent SBA decision sheds some light on the full-time devotion rule.
Continue reading…We often see price realism in protests when the protester is making the claim that the awardee’s price, which was lower than the protester’s price, is low enough that the awardee would not be able to perform the work as solicited. Most often, GAO will determine that the agency’s price realism analysis was acceptable. However, in Criterion Corporation, B-422309 (Apr 16, 2024), the agency determined that the lowest priced offeror’s price was too low, and that the company could not possibly perform at the price offered. This led to the next lowest priced offeror receiving the award, and the lowest priced offeror protesting that decision, ultimately winning its argument.
Continue reading…