The SBA ostensible subcontractor affiliation rule has long confused contractors and their attorneys alike because its standards were not very clear. It was based on whether, in a small business contract, a subcontractor performs the “primary and vital requirements of a contract” or the prime contractor was “unusually reliant” on the subcontractor. SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals filled in the gaps on these terms. But in 2023, SBA updated its definition for these rules, declaring that if a small business prime contractor (other than under a general construction contract) met the limitations on subcontracting, it basically was not violating the ostensible subcontractor rule. A recent case looked at a circumstance where a small business prime contractor was not meeting the limitations on subcontracting.
Continue readingTag Archives: ostensible subcontractor rule
Ostensibly OK: SBA Decision on Ostensible Subcontractor Rule Gives Contractors Some Clear Guidelines
In a recent post, we looked at the implications of BA OHA’s reasoning in In & Out Valet Co., SBA No. VSBC033-P, 2024 (June 12, 2024) on the full-time devotion requirement. Today we look at the impact of that case on another of SBA’s rules that has implications for both small businesses and for companies in the 8(a) Program, Women-Owned Small Business Program (WOSB), and the Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Program (SDVOSB)–the ostensible subcontractor rule. The rule requires contractors not to rely too heavily on a subcontractor in the performance of a contract set aside under an SBA socioeconomic program. In practice, this standard may be confusing to a lot of hopeful contractors. What, after all, constitutes “undue reliance?” How reliant is too reliant? OHA’s reasoning in this recent decision helps clarify their application of the regulations, with results that may have far-reaching implications.
Continue readingNew Defenses to the Ostensible Subcontractor Rule are Coming
You may have noticed that SBA issued a final rule last week that created sweeping changes to the SBA’s 8(a) Program regulations, but along with that, SBA made sure to slip in a change to the ostensible subcontractor rule that has been a sticking point for many contractors when facing affiliation concerns. With this final rule, SBA will update the regulations to provide contractors certain ways to defend against potential ostensible subcontractor rule affiliation, depending on the type of contract at issue. This represents a shift in thinking, related to how to combat allegations brought under this affiliation rule and could present some new wrinkles for contractors to consider when setting up subcontracting arrangements.
Continue readingSBA Final Rule Relaxes Change of 8(a) Program Ownership, Allows Limited Populated Joint Ventures
SBA has issued a final rule updating some of its rules relating to the 8(a) Program. The final rule will have an impact on some aspects of ownership and control requirements for the 8(a) Program, including providing some flexibility for change of ownership and making some 8(a) set-aside processes a little cleaner. The rule would also allow for populated joint ventures between similarly situated joint venture members.
We wrote about the proposed rule last year. Below are some of the key takeaways from the final rule and any changes from the proposed rule.
Continue readingBack to Basics: Teaming Agreements
Teaming agreements are a great tool for establishing the prime-subcontractor relationship to jointly pursue government contracts. They can protect the parties’ rights, set performance expectations, demonstrate regulatory compliance, and reduce the likelihood of disputes down the line. But no matter how common teaming agreements have become, many still find them to be a bit of a mystery. This is probably because teaming agreements are neither required nor defined by SBA’s regulations or the FAR; and they have no regulatory-required content. But that doesn’t stop procuring agencies from requiring submission of teaming agreements with proposed teaming partners (especially where the offeror requests consideration of its proposed subcontractor’s past performance, experience, and/or capabilities). So, it is beneficial to know some of the “basics” of teaming agreements: what they are, why you should have one, and what should be included.
Continue readingSBA to Small Businesses: Be Careful with Ostensible Subcontractors on SBIR Awards
In a recent decision, the Small Business Administration (SBA) Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) examined a company that received two Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grant awards. The SBA Area Office had determined that the awardee was not an eligible small business due to ostensible subcontractor affiliation and other reasons. This decision is an important reminder for SBIR candidates on how they should structure subcontracting teams, as SBA will examine SBIR awardee eligibility.
Continue readingOHA Remands Size Determination Because Area Office Failed to Provide Due Process to Protested Concern
SBA’s Office of Hearing and Appeals (OHA) recently said that the SBA Area Office should have informed the protested concern of the issues its adverse size determination focused on before ruling against the concern’s size eligibility on that basis. In addition to its lesson on due process, OHA also took this opportunity to distinguish totality of the circumstances affiliation (the basis on which the Area Office found affiliation here) from ostensible subcontractor affiliation (the basis for affiliation alleged in the size protest). OHA vacated and remanded the Area Office’s decision.
Continue reading