In a recent notice for Tribal consultation and request for comments, as well as a published proposed rule, the SBA seems to be signaling an increase in oversight of Native or Tribally-owned entities who are 8(a) Participants. SBA has an apparent goal of enforcing more stringent repercussions for not fully adhering to some stipulations that exclusively pertain to Native or Tribally-Owned participants in the 8(a) Business Development Program. While not final yet, the SBA has placed these potential consequences, the reasoning behind them, and the proposed rule out in the public for discussion. As these actions may present some rather drastic changes for some 8(a) Participants, I have done a quick breakdown of them here.
Continue readingTag Archives: Alaska Native Corporations
SBA’s Oversight of ANC-Owned 8(a) Firms Has Come a Long Way, But Still Has a Long Journey Ahead, GAO Says
In its report published last week, GAO both commends and criticizes SBA for its handling of tribally affiliated 8(a) business development firms—particularly Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs) and ANC-owned businesses participating in the 8(a) program.
Continue readingGAO: Evaluation of Affiliate’s Past Performance is Optional
In its past performance evaluation, an agency typically can consider the past performance of an offeror’s affiliate, so long as the offeror’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the affiliate will affect contract performance.
But, as demonstrated in a recent GAO decision involving an Alaska Native Corporation subsidiary, ordinarily there is no requirement that an agency consider an affiliate’s past performance. In other words, unless the solicitation speaks to the issue, the agency’s consideration of an affiliate’s past performance is optional.
Past Performance Reference From Sister Company Was “Inherently Biased”
In its evaluation of past performance, an agency was permitted to disregard a past performance reference prepared by an offeror’s sister company–which also happened to be in line for a subcontracting role.
In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO upheld the agency’s determination that the sister company’s reference was “inherently biased” and need not be considered in the agency’s past performance evaluation.
No Ostensible Subcontractor Affiliation With ANC Parent & Sister Companies, Says SBA OHA
An Alaska Native Corporation subsidiary was not affiliated with its parent company and two sister companies under the ostensible subcontractor affiliation rule, even though the company in question would rely on the parent and sister companies for managerial personnel, financial assistance and bonding.
A recent decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals highlights the breadth of the exemption from affiliation enjoyed by ANC companies.
SBA OHA: No “Unfair Competitive Advantage” Appeals
The SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals lacks jurisdiction to consider whether an entity owned by an Indian tribe or Alaska Native Corporation has obtained a substantial unfair competitive advantage within an industry.
In a recent size appeal case, OHA acknowledged that an unfair competitive advantage is an exception to the special affiliation rules that tribally-owned companies ordinarily enjoy–but held that only the SBA Administrator has the power to determine that an Indian tribe or ANC has obtained, or will obtain, such an unfair advantage.
8(a) Program: SBA Final Rule Makes Important Changes
The 8(a) Program regulations will undergo some significant changes as part of the major final rule recently released by the SBA, and effective August 24, 2016.
Here at SmallGovCon, we’ve already covered big changes to the SDVOSB Program and HUBZone Program brought about by the new SBA rule. But the 8(a) program is affected by the new rule too, and important changes involving eligibility, the application process, sole source awards, NHOs, and more will kick in later this month.