Tag Archives: small business set-asides

Small Business Set-Aside Decisions May Include Restrictive “Capability” Requirements

Posted on by

The small business set-aside “rule of two” is not satisfied unless the procuring agency has a reasonable expectation of receiving proposals from at least two small businesses capable of performing the work.

Although this sounds like a commonsense interpretation of the rule of two, it may give agencies leeway to define “capability” in manner that eliminates small businesses from participation.  In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO held that an agency appropriately issued a solicitation as unrestricted based on the agency’s determination that there were not two or more small businesses with at least five years of relevant experience. Of concern, the GAO did not require the agency to prove that five years of relevant experience was necessary to render a firm “capable” of performing the contract.

Continue reading →

GAO: “Rule of Two” Market Research Must Examine Capabilities

Posted on by

When conducting market research to determine whether a small business set-aside is appropriate under the “rule of two,” a procuring agency must do more than determine whether multiple small businesses are likely to submit proposals–it must also make reasonable efforts to ascertain whether those small businesses are capable of performing the work.

In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO held that an agency had improperly issued a solicitation as a small business set-aside because the agency’s market research did not reasonably consider whether the identified small businesses were capable of performing the contract requirements.

Continue reading →

GAO: No Set-Aside Challenge After Proposal Due Date

Posted on by

A prospective contractor has the right to file a GAO bid protest challenging an agency’s refusal to set aside a solicitation for small businesses–but only if the protest is filed before the proposal deadline.

In a recent protest decision, the GAO applied the longstanding rule that “alleged improprieties in a solicitation that are apparent prior to the closing time for receipt of initial proposals be filed before that time,” and held that an agency’s failure to issue a set-aside is an “alleged impropriety” to which the timeliness rule applies.

Continue reading →

Task Orders: Small Business Set-Asides Not Required, Says GAO

Posted on by

When issuing task order solicitations under unrestricted multiple award contracts, procuring agencies are not required to apply the so-called “rule of two” and set aside task orders for small businesses.

In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO–over the objections of the SBA–held that agencies “may,” but need not, set aside task orders under multiple-award contracts.  The GAO’s decision essentially overturns a 2008 decision in which the GAO held that the rule of two does require agencies to set aside task orders.

Continue reading →

Small Business Set-Asides Not Required For Simplified Acquisitions Outside U.S., Says GAO

Posted on by

Small business set-asides are not required for simplified acquisitions conducted outside the United States and its outlying areas, according to a recent GAO bid protest decision.

In Latvian Connection General Trading and Construction LLC, B-408633 (Sept. 18, 2013), the GAO rejected the protester’s contention–which was backed by the SBA–that simplified acquisitions must be set-aside whenever the “rule of two” is satisfied, notwithstanding the fact that the procurement is outside the United States.

Continue reading →

Strange But True: Small Business Protests Small Business Set-Aside

Posted on by

Recently, I brought you the story of a contractor protesting its own award.

Now, in the same “strange but true” category comes a GAO bid protest decision in which a small business argued that the procuring agency should not have set aside the procurement for small businesses.

Continue reading →

Federal Court: Small Business Set-Aside Threshold “Purposefully Low”

Posted on by

The FAR’s threshold for meeting the so-called “Rule of Two” for small business set-asides is “purposefully low,” according to a recent decision of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

In Adams & Associates, Inc. v. The United States, No. 12-731C (2013), the Court rejected a challenge to a small business set-aside, holding in part that a contracting officer need not conduct a thorough responsibility evaluation of prospective small business offerors before issuing a set-aside.

Continue reading →