Tag Archives: 8(a) eligibility

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

Posted on by

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 →

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

Posted on by

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 →

8(a) Fraud: Proposal Claimed Past Performance Of Fake NASA Contract

Posted on by

A proposal submitted on behalf of an 8(a) company claimed that the company had performed a $3 million NASA contract even though no such contract existed, according to a recent report issued by the SBA Office of Inspector General.  As alleged in the SBA OIG report, the same honesty-challenged 8(a) company claimed to have 33 employees, even though it never had more than two.

Perhaps it is little wonder that the company in question is alleged to have passed through nearly 100% of its work on several 8(a) set-asides to its non-8(a) subcontractor.

Continue reading →

No SBA Prior Approval of Teaming Agreement Leads to 8(a) Program Termination

Posted on by

In a case that ought to make 8(a) participants sit up and take notice, an 8(a) company was terminated from the 8(a) program for failing to obtain the SBA’s prior approval of its teaming agreement for an 8(a) contract–and the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals upheld the termination.

Continue reading →

8(a) Mentor-Protege Agreements Cannot Be Protested, Says SBA OHA

Posted on by

8(a) mentor-protege agreements cannot be protested by competitors, according to a recently-issued decision by the SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals.  In Size Appeal of Professional Performance Development Group, Inc., SBA No. SIZ-5398 (2012), SBA OHA held that the SBA’s decision to approve an 8(a) mentor-protege agreement is outside the scope of the SBA size protest process.

Continue reading →

Federal Court: 8(a) Program Is Constitutional–Kind Of

Posted on by

The good news for 8(a) Program participants (and applicants) is that the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled earlier this month that the 8(a) program is constitutional as a whole.  The bad news is that the same court found the 8(a) Program unconstitutional as applied to the plaintiff’s specific industry, military simulation and training.

For disadvantaged companies in the military simulation and training industry, the court’s decision in Dynalantic Corporation v. United States, No. 95-2301 (2012) is a major setback.  Already, the DoD has apparently suspended 8(a) contract awards under the Simulation, Training and Instrumentation Acquisition Center in the wake of the court’s ruling.  For 8(a) companies in other industries, the critical question now is what impact–if any–Dynalantic will have on 8(a) awards in other industries.

Continue reading →

8(a) Program: SBA OHA Holds Applicant May Work Second Full-Time Job

Posted on by

The 8(a) program regulations require the disadvantaged individual upon whom 8(a) program eligibility is based to manage the firm on a full-time basis, during normal working hours of firms in the same or similar line of business.  When 8(a) program applicants learn about 8(a) program’s “full time devotion” requirement, many ask: “can I work a second job?”

Maybe.  As seen in a recent decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals, an 8(a) program applicant may be able to engage in outside employment–even a second full-time job–so long as the applicant can demonstrate that the outside employment will not interfere with the applicant’s ability to manage the 8(a) firm full-time during normal working hours.

Continue reading →