SBA considering mandating set-asides on multiple award contracts
March 31, 2011 by cs
The federal government finally could reach its goal of awarding 23 percent of all contract dollars to small businesses by allowing, and possibly mandating, agencies to set aside orders against the General Services Administration’s Multiple Awards Schedule and other indefinite delivery-indefinite quantity contracts, according to a senior Small Business Administration official.
Currently, agencies are not required to, and they often are discouraged from setting aside small businesses task and delivery orders that are placed against multiple award contracts. But the Small Business Jobs Act, signed by President Obama in September 2010 instructs SBA and the Office of Federal Procurement Policy to develop guidance that would reverse that policy.
To further its policy deliberations, SBA met with hundreds of small business owners on Wednesday in Manhattan as part of its Small Business Jobs Act tour. The event, one of 13 scheduled in locations across the country in March and April, is designed to provide the public with information about the provisions in the legislation, including 19 focused on contracting.
Arguably the most important, and potentially difficult to implement, provision would dramatically alter how agencies use the GSA schedules and IDIQ contract vehicles, which now represent 28 percent of the federal procurement marketplace. In 1990, IDIQs represented just 14 percent of the total contracting dollars spent by agencies.
SBA and OFPP have held five outreach events in recent months seeking feedback from the public on the best way to implement this provision. The crux of the issue, according to Joe Jordan, associate administrator for government contracting and business development at SBA, is whether to mandate small business set-asides on multiple award and IDIQ contracts, or to allow agencies the discretion to use them.
“We need to get the ‘shall’ versus ‘may’ language right,” he said.
SBA’s decision could make the difference in whether the government finally meets its small business contracting goals. In fiscal 2009, small businesses won 21.9 percent of all small business contract dollars, amounting to $96.8 billion. To meet its 23 percent goal, agencies would have to spend roughly $5 billion more on small businesses, Jordan said.
Mandating small business set-asides could push agencies over that threshold. About $40 billion in contracts was awarded last year off GSA’s Multiple Awards Schedule, and another $150 billion was spent governmentwide through IDIQ contracts.
But the Obama administration also is weighing whether a mandate would discourage agencies from using these contracts, particularly the GSA Schedules. One possible solution, Jordan said, is developing a hybrid solution in which agencies could be required to set aside task-and-delivery orders if they do not meet their small business goals. The agencies that are meeting those goals then would be allowed, but not forced, to use the set-asides.
“The question is how to make this happen without taking away from the speed and efficiency” he said.
The jobs act also establishes a mentor-protégé program to assist small businesses owned by women, service-disabled veterans and those operating in Historically Underutilized Business Zones in competing for contract opportunities. The initiative would be modeled after the 8(a) mentor-protégé program and also take into account the staffing and resources SBA has devoted for these programs, Jordan said.
But these new joint ventures bring possible perils, including opening the door for mammoth contractors, such as Lockheed Martin Corp. and Boeing Co., to begin winning a high percentage of contracts that are intended for small businesses.
“How do we balance that?” Jordan asked. “These can’t be pass-throughs. We can’t let companies play that way.”
SBA expects to submit a proposed rule creating the mentor-protégé programs by the end of May.
Other job act contracting provisions include:
- Requiring OFPP to establish a governmentwide policy for contract bundling — a process in which several small contracts are consolidated and awarded to one firm, often out of the reach of small businesses. (Before bundling a contract, procurement officials would be required to conduct market research and to have a senior acquisition official sign off on the decision. The rationale for bundling then would be publicly disclosed, either on a federal database, or on the agency’s website. )
- Establishing a pilot program for collaboration and joint ventures involving small business contractors. (Under the five-year program, $5 million in federal grants will be awarded to nonprofit groups that would then collaborate with small business teams seeking to compete collaboratively for larger procurement contracts. Thus far, 80 to 90 grant proposals have been received, and SBA expects to choose from 10 to 20. Proposals must be received by April 11.)
- Mandating small businesses to recertify their size status annually. The law also establishes a governmentwide policy for prosecuting companies that fraudulently disclose themselves to be a small business. (The policy would allow an agency to keep the product or services the fraudulent company provided and still sue the business for the entire sum the agency paid through the contract.)
- Requiring SBA to re-examine its size standards in each of its business categories every five years.
– by Robert Brodsky – GovExec.com – March 30, 2011
New SBA rules affect small businesses in significant ways
March 21, 2011 by cs
Newly-published rules by the Small Business Administration (SBA) address the justification and approval process associated with large sole-source contract awards to 8(a) firms; address parity among 8(a), HUBZone, and SDVOSB firms; set a minimum for the amount of work an 8(a) firm must do when joint venturing with a large business; and propose increases in the small business size standards for some industries. Public comment is being solicited on the last item.
Specifically, the rules:
- Require federal agencies to issue a Justification and Approval prior to the award of 8(a) sole source contracts over $20 million;
- Clarify a contracting officer’s ability to use discretion when determining whether an acquisition will be restricted to small businesses participating in the 8(a), HUBZone or service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) programs;
- Quantify the amount of work that an 8(a) firm must perform when joint-venturing with a large business; and
- Propose increases in the small business size standards for dozens of service industries in NAICS codes 54 and 81. (The last major size standard changes took place 25 years ago.)
The first two rules were issued as interim rules by the SBA and the Federal Acquisition (FAR) Council, and are effective immediately. The third item is a proposed rule. All were published on March 16, 2011 in the Federal Register.
Here are the details on the rules.
Justification and Approval for 8(a) Sole-Source Awards Above $20M
The FAR Council issued an interim rule implementing Section 811 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Pub. L. 111-84), which requires federal agencies to issue a Justification and Approval (J&A) prior to awarding a sole-source contract over $20 million under the 8(a) program. The J&A must be approved by an appropriate official (as currently defined by FAR 6.304) and made public after award of the contract. Prior to the enactment of section 811, a sole-source award of a new contract made using the 8(a) contracting authority did not require a J&A, regardless of the dollar value. Under the interim rule, the J&A must document the reasons for making a sole-source award rather than a competitive award under the 8(a) program. The rule institutes no new requirements for sole-source 8(a) awards less than or equal to $20 million. Here is the full text of the rule: Justification and Approval of Sole-Source 8a Contracts 03.16.2011.
Parity Among 8(a), HUBZone, or SDVOSB Programs
The FAR Council issued an interim rule implementing Section 1347 of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-240) and clarifying that there is parity when a contracting officer selects among small businesses participating in the 8(a), HUBZone and SDVOSB programs. Under the interim rule, contracting officers will have the discretion to determine whether an acquisition will be restricted to one of these three programs. The full text of the rule is available here: Socioeconomic Program Parity 03.16.2011.
This interim rule also clarifies that:
- Although there is no order of precedence among the three programs, if a requirement has been accepted by SBA under the 8(a) program, it must remain in the 8(a) program unless SBA agrees to release it;
- For acquisitions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold (that is, contracts more than $150,000), contracting officers must consider a set-aside or sole source award to a small business under the 8(a), HUBZone, or SDVOSB programs before proceeding with a small business set-aside; and
- The small business set-aside requirement under FAR 19.502-2(a) does not preclude award of a contract to a participant in the 8(a), HUBZone, or SDVOSB programs. SBA regulations give contracting officers the authority to use these programs at dollar levels above the micro-purchase threshold and at or below the simplified acquisition threshold.
It is important to note that the interim rule does not address SBA’s new Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) program. The WOSB program will be addressed as a separate interim rule under FAR Case 2010-015 and implement the SBA’s WOSB Federal Contract Program final rule (75 FR 62258, October 7, 2010). The SBA rule provides for parity between WOSBs and other small business contracting programs.
Minimum Amount of Work 8(a) Firms Must Perform in Joint Ventures
To get access to set-aside contracts, large companies can joint venture with 8(a) companies. But SBA rules now say that the 8(a) firm must perform at least 40 percent of the work of each joint venture contract. Previously, the SBA required that the 8(a) company in a joint venture perform a “significant portion” of a contract’s work.
Service Industries – Small Business Size Standards
The SBA issued a proposed rule increasing the small business size standards for 35 industries and one sub-industry in North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 54, Professional, Scientific and Technical Services, and one industry in NAICS Code 81, Other Services. Many of the size standards would increase significantly under the proposed rule. For example, several of the NAICS code 54 size standards will increase from $4.5 million - $7 million, to $14 million - $19 million. It is estimated that SBA’s proposed size changes would let up to 9,450 additional firms be eligible for small-business contract preferences. The full text of the proposed rule is available here: Small Business Size Standards – Proposed – 03.16.2011.
The SBA is accepting public comments on the proposed changes to the small business size standards through May 16, 2011.
EPA to hold small business event April 27th
March 19, 2011 by cs
The Small Business Programs Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Region 4 is conducting a Small Business Conference on Wednesday, April 27, 2011.
This event will be held from 8:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. in Evans Hall on the campus of Agnes Scott College, located at 141 E. College Avenue, Decatur, GA 30030.
The objective of this conference is to provide an overview of federal contracting opportunities that are available for small businesses. Attendees will have the ability to dialogue with contracting officers, prime contractors, other federal agency partners and small business resource providers.
Admission to the conference is free; however, pre-registration is required. Conference space is limited to the first 80 attendees, so you are encouraged to register early. Due to limited space, only two representatives from each company will be allowed to register. Registration will be discontinued after the maximum participation has been reached and no on-site registration will be permitted.
To view the preliminary agenda, click on this link: EPA 04.27.2011 Small Business Conference Agenda (as of 03.18.2011)
To access the registration form, click on this link: EPA Small Business Conference 04.27.2011 Registration Form
GSA and Health & Human Services host industry fair April 13th
March 19, 2011 by cs
The U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS), along with the General Services Administration (GSA), are hosting a “Getting Back to Business” Atlanta Small Business Procurement Industry Fair on Wednesday, April 13, 2011. The event will be held in the beautifully-remodeled Martin Luther King Federal Building , located at 77 Forsyth Street, Atlanta, GA 30303. (This location is accessible via MARTA’s Five Points Rail Station.)
If you have interest in learning about contracting opportunities offered by HHS or GSA, this event represents a unique opportunity to met with decision-makers.
In addition, representatives from the Small Business Administration (SBA), the Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center (GTPAC), and large prime contractors will be on hand to offer advice and counsel on government contracting and subcontracting.
Space is limited, and pre-registration is a requirement. No walk-ins will be allowed. Registration information is available at: http://transparency.cit.nih.gov/osdbu/registration_2011-04-13.cfm.
SBA opens its review of small business regulations
March 18, 2011 by cs
Are you a small business owner frustrated with outdated and often cumbersome regulations from the Small Business Administration? Then SBA wants to hear your suggestions on whether those rules should be streamlined, expanded, or possibly withdrawn altogether.
On Monday, SBA published a notice in the Federal Register asking the public to weigh in on the impact of its regulations and the best way to improve them.
“The primary objectives of this review are to make SBA’s regulatory program more cost-effective and less burdensome on participants in the agency’s programs while continuing to promote economic growth, innovation and job creation,” the notice said. “SBA seeks public input on the design of a plan to use for periodic retrospective review of its regulations and an initial list of the rules to be reviewed under the plan.”
The proposal comes on the heels of President Obama’s January executive order calling for a governmentwide review of all federal regulations. The order said inefficient, out-of-date and burdensome regulations could be repealed if they were stifling private sector job growth.
The order instructs agencies to develop a plan for reviewing their regulations by mid-May. The plan, along with any supporting data, would then be made public, Obama wrote.
While the SBA notice did not cite specific regulations, it did say the retrospective review would focus on small business investment companies, surety bond guarantee, business loans, disaster loans, government contracting and Historically Underutilized Business Zones.
SBA recently concluded an exhaustive review of its 8(a) Business Development Program and now is examining size regulations. Neither will be subject to the new review.
The agency wants the public to comment not only on specific regulations, but also on how it should devise its preliminary plan “with a defined method and schedule for identifying certain significant rules that may be obsolete, unnecessary, unjustified, excessively burdensome, or counterproductive.” Comments also should address how SBA can best evaluate and analyze its regulations and obtain accurate and objective cost data.
Commenters should consider the economic burden the regulation imposes on small business entities and whether the rule is duplicative or overlapping; paperwork could be reduced by allowing electronic submissions; the regulation has been discredited by new scientific information; and the issue could be better handled by trade organizations without federal involvement.
“Comments should focus on regulations that have demonstrated deficiencies,” the notice said. “Comments that rehash debates over recently issued rules will be less useful. The public should focus on rule changes that will achieve a broad public impact, rather than an individual, personal, or corporate benefit.”
Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, encouraged the public to participate in the review.
“Excessive regulations are suffocating the entrepreneurial spirit of America’s almost 30 million small businesses and, regrettably, small firms with fewer than 20 employees bear a disproportionate burden of complying with these rules,” Snowe said in a statement. “To spur job creation and economic growth, it is incumbent upon every level of government to simultaneously pursue sound incentives and eliminate the laws and policies already on the books that are proven impediments to these objectives.”
Earlier this month, Snowe and Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., introduced the Small Business Regulatory Freedom Act, which would require agencies to calculate the direct and indirect economic impact of federal regulations. Small business review panels would be installed at all agencies and small businesses also would be allowed to challenge proposed regulations in court.
Comments for the SBA notice must be submitted by April 13. Comments can be submitted electronically at regulations.gov, or mailed to the SBA Office of the General Counsel, 409 Third Street SW., Washington, D.C., 20416.
The review plan, along with an initial list of regulations that will be evaluated, is expected to be complete by late May or early June and will be available on SBA’s Open Government Web page.
– by Robert Brodsky – GovExec.com -March 15, 2011
New GSA acquisition chief calls for government-contractor cooperation
March 17, 2011 by cs
The General Services Administration’s new acquisition chief is calling for greater cooperation and communication between the government and its industry contractors, echoing a familiar refrain from members of the Obama administration’s procurement team in recent months.
In an interview last week with Government Executive, new GSA Chief Acquisition Officer Mindy Connolly said the two sides should have better dialogue in the lead-up to contract awards and during the process of implementing Federal Acquisition Regulations. GSA, like all contracting agencies, is required to develop a vendor communication plan for its workforce and the public by June 30.
“If we want to have a government that is leaner and more transparent and ready for the 21st century, anything we can do to reduce that burden on industry is really to our advantage,” said Connolly, whose first day on the job at GSA was Feb. 28.
The administration has made it a priority of late to myth-bust the perception that contracting officers should not meet with vendors for fear of causing contract delays, or committing potential ethical violations.
Last month, Dan Gordon, administrator of federal procurement policy at the Office of Management and Budget issued a 13-page memorandum that addresses 10 of the most widely held misconceptions, including communicating with a bidder could result in a competing firm filing a protest.
Connolly has experienced the often arcane world of federal contracting from two perspectives, administering awards in both the public and private sectors. She has awarded contracts at NASA, Customs and Borders Protection, and the Treasury Department and was the Transportation Security Agency’s first contracting officer. She previously served as chief of contracting for Bureau of Land Management’s Western Region and held similar roles in industry, most notably as a contracting manager for Honeywell Defense and Space Electronics.
At GSA, Connolly plans to work with industry to clarify the impact of FAR rules so that industry is not left struggling for answers.
“Because of my experience both in government acquisition and in industry acquisition as the government customer, my interest is that it works better,” she said. “It works pretty well, but there are opportunities for it to work better through communications and doing a little different planning in our rule-making.”
Most recently, Connolly served as a senior procurement policy analyst at OFPP, where she led the office’s natural resources’ division on contracting policy matters, including implementing White House requirements for sustainable procurements and green building design.
She helped draft Obama’s October 2009 executive order requiring agencies to set a 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target, increase energy efficiency, reduce fleet petroleum consumption, and “leverage federal purchasing power to promote environmentally responsible products and technologies.”
The order states 95 percent of all new nonweapons contracts meet sustainability requirements, including being water and energy-efficient and safe for the environment, and containing recycled materials.
Connolly’s job is to take the broad-ranging policy for environmentally preferable products and services and sustainable technologies and make it executable through regulations in the FAR.
“Each agency would be able to look at how they can put [directives] into their specifications, or requirements for products,” she explained. “Some things are easy, like office paper. Other things are more challenging like a building, or a lease.”
– By Robert Brodsky – GovExec.com – March 14, 2011
Which words kill your best proposal?
March 16, 2011 by cs
Here are some terms and language to avoid when responding to an RFP.
Weak language and clichés can be the death knell for your proposal. According to Visible Thread, a company that specializes in software that analyzes word usage in documents, your bid and proposal team should know the language that weakens credibility, raises legal questions or affects the delivery of your solution.
If you are using the following words and phrases in your proposals, it might be time to call for a rewrite.
Credibility killers
Wishy-washy language to avoid:
- “Can provide.”
- “Might provide.”
- “May deliver.”
- “We are committed.”
- “We are pleased to.”
- “Uniquely qualified.”
Liability red flags
Terms that convey legal implications or suggest overcommitment:
- “Expert.”
- “We guarantee.”
- “Seamless.”
- “Best of breed.”
- “Best practices.”
- “State of the art.”
Delivery trap
Words and phrases that are difficult to verify or measure:
- “As appropriate.”
- “As necessary.”
- “Full service.”
- “Quality focused.”
- “Top-quality.”
- “Efficiently.”
Source: Visible Thread
Published by WashingtonTechnology.com – March 9, 2011
Corporate leaders advise government on personnel, contracting issues
March 16, 2011 by cs
President Obama’s Management Advisory Board, an independent panel of corporate leaders, suggested on Friday that the government must do more to incentivize its leadership and improve its operational management.
At its first meeting, the new board that was established to provide the White House with strategic advice on government management and operations, heard from administration officials on a range of topics, including the salaries of senior executives and the consolidated procurement efforts of federal agencies. Presentations also were delivered on information technology and federal customer service initiatives — each of which the group will tackle.
For example, John Berry, director of the Office of Personnel Management, explained how the difficulties of attracting — and then retaining — the best and brightest to work in the government instead of taking more lucrative private sector positions are exacerbated by charges that federal employees are overpaid.
Berry said the board could help dispel this notion because of its credibility in the business world. “When you carry that mission, it carries some weight,” he said.
The panel likely will focus on ways to better train and develop senior government leadership, recruit candidates from outside of government, improve the federal performance management system and reward high-performing employees.
There are limits to what the group can address, however. The administration does not have much flexibility in its compensation scale for its Senior Executive Service, with salaries generally ranging from $120,000 to $180,000, said W. Scott Gould, deputy secretary of the Veterans Affairs Department.
Removing poor-performing senior executives is on the table, but Gould, who has eliminated 20 such positions at VA in the past two years, suggested reform will not be easy. “It’s hard to do and takes a long time to go through the process,” he said.
The board also heard about the government’s efforts to improve its strategic sourcing of common commodities. The General Services Administration, which has developed blanket purchasing agreements that all agencies can use for the procurement of office supplies, plans to expand the practice in the future.
“Budget pressures are forcing agencies into these cooperative purchases,” GSA Administrator Martha Johnson said.
Dan Gordon, administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, said the government “struggles mightily” to define its acquisition requirements and is too dependent on contractors for core services. “We use contractors to write contracts for other contractors,” Gordon said.
Obama established the advisory board last April through an executive order to provide advice on how to implement best business practices on issues such as productivity, the application of technology and customer service.
The order called for the board, which is chaired by Jeffrey Zients, deputy director of management for the Office of Management and Budget, to include no more than 17 leaders from the private sector. On Thursday, Obama appointed 10 members to the board. An OMB spokeswoman said it’s possible that more board members will be named.
The board members are Greg Brown, president and chief executive officer of Motorola Solutions Inc.; Sam Gilliland, chairman and CEO of Sabre Holdings, a travel technology company; Jeffrey Kindler, former chairman and CEO of Pfizer Inc.; Debra Lee, chairwoman and CEO of BET Networks; Gail McGovern, president and CEO of the American Red Cross; Shantanu Narayen, president and CEO of Adobe Systems Inc.; Enrique Salem, president and CEO of Symantec Corp.; Elizabeth Smith, CEO of OSI Restaurant Partners LLC; Tim Solso, chairman and CEO of Cummins Inc.; and Ronald Williams, chairman of Aetna Inc.
The board, which is purely advisory, will operate for two years, unless the White House extends it.
– by Robert Brodsky – GovExec.com – March 11, 2011
Engineering’s future and why innovation matters are topics for April 7 forum
March 14, 2011 by cs
Amir Aghdaei, president of Tektronix, will deliver the annual James R. Carreker Lecture on April 7, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. in the Van Leer Auditorium on Georgia Tech’s midtown Atlanta campus. His lecture topic will be “The Future of Engineering and Why Innovation Matters.” This presentation will be delivered live to the Georgia Tech-Savannah and Georgia Tech-Lorraine campuses.
2011 marks the 65th anniversary of Tektronix. Amir Aghdaei, president of Tektronix, will visit the Georgia Tech campus to discuss how the engineer’s job is impacted by the technology trends driving our industry today. He will also share his view about the importance of technology and innovation to address the acceleration of those trends in the future.
Amir Aghdaei was appointed president of Tektronix in May 2009. He joined Danaher, the parent company of Tektronix, in October 2008 and completed immersion learning about the company culture and the Danaher Business System. Mr. Aghdaei has more than 20 years of experience in the test and measurement industry. Prior to joining Danaher, he was with HP/Agilent and held a variety of positions in life science and test/measurement businesses. During his tenure with HP/Agilent, Mr. Aghdaei lived in Pennsylvania, Germany, Holland, Colorado, and Singapore. His last position at Agilent was as the general manager/vice president of the Measurement Systems Division.
Most recently, Mr. Aghdaei worked at Credence as the senior vice president of sales and marketing in California. He was accountable for developing Credence’s short- and long-term strategy, refining/repositioning the company’s product portfolio, and developing/executing its worldwide channel strategy.
Mr. Aghdaei earned an M.B.A. from the University of Delaware, master’s of science from Georgia State University, and a bachelor’s of science degree in industrial engineering from the University of Iran.
The announcement may be found at http://www.ece.gatech.edu/jrc-lecture.
What’s DOD’s worst acquisition policy? Speak up!
March 14, 2011 by cs
Here’s your chance, defense contractors, to give the department a piece of your mind.
Defense Department officials want industry input on rules that provide little value while driving up costs.
In a notice in the 2/17/2011 Federal Register, DOD officials said they understand that the various reporting requirements and other acquisition practices make industry adopt processes and make investments that increase costs, especially overhead costs. At the same time, some of those requirements add little value to the overall work.
So, DOD wants to know the policies that industry believes fit that description. It will take submissions through March 31.
The request for industry’s comments is the next stage of DOD’s Better Buying Power Initiative, launched in 2010 by Ashton Carter, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics.
Industry sent defense officials more than 500 suggestions last summer, and Carter incorporated these comments into a Sept. 10 memo. The memo sets out 23 ways the government can improve its performance and incentivize better performance from industry. It is aimed at lowering prices without sacrificing quality.
“It is guidance from me to the acquisition workforce in the Defense Department on how we can get more without more,” Carter said in a Feb. 9 speech at the Cowen Investment Conference in New York, N.Y.
Under the new request for comments, DOD will use the suggestions as part of internal deliberations on the buying initiative, officials said. When contractors submit a suggestion on a costly policy, officials want to know the magnitude of the cost and have the recommendations identify the sources of the costs, backed by credible and convincing data.
“DOD’s goal is to develop a fact-based program to reform cost-inflating practices,” the Federal Register notice states.
With detailed suggestions, officials can evaluate and prioritize them. More specifically, they want to follow up on industry’s recommendations from 2010 on the thresholds related to the provisions in the Truth in Negotiations Act. In particular, they want to review audit practices and certain barriers to correctly balancing industry’s abilities as DOD’s buying shifts and moves based on demands, the notice states.
About the Author: Matthew Weigelt is acquisition editor for Federal Computer Week, published Feb. 17, 2011.