These are the Georgia companies who won federal contracts in May 2014

June 2, 2014 by

Ever wonder who’s winning federal contracts in Georgia?

Wouldn’t this information be helpful if you are looking for subcontracting prospects?  Or when you’re trying to figure out who your competitors are?  Or when considering who might be a good partner on an upcoming bid proposal?

Each month, the Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center (GTPAC) publishes a list of federal contracts awarded to Georgia businesses.  The list comes complete with point-of-contact information on the awardees, the name of the awarding agency, the dollar value of the contract, and much more.

Download details on the award winners for May 2014 right here: FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARDS IN GEORGIA – MAY 2014

Winners of federal contracts earlier this year may be found at the links below:

For information on Georgia businesses that won federal contracts in 2013, click here.

Companies seeking government contracts may turn attention to state and local markets

May 20, 2014 by

As competition for contracts with U.S. federal government agencies increases, companies that seek to maintain or increase their government sales may set their sights on states instead.

Indeed, this may already be happening: for one thing, more than 500 people attended the “How to Market to State Governments” conference held in March by the National Association of State Procurement Officials (“NASPO”), a record for the event.

While seeking new business opportunities is generally a good thing, contractors accustomed to the way things work at the federal level should understand that state-level procurements can be a very different game. Bid protests at the state level can be especially tricky, not only for disappointed bidders, but for awardees as well. Contractors should take certain proactive measures when participating in state-level procurements to secure their chances for award.

According to a 2012 NASPO survey, only six states had at that time completely adopted the Model Procurement Code developed by the American Bar Association.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/310810/Government+Contracts+Procurement+PPP/StateLevel+Procurements+Youre+Not+In+Kansas+Any+More+Unless+You+Happen+To+Be+Selling+To+Kansas&email_access=on

President’s budget request yields clues for contractors to follow

May 14, 2014 by

Analysis of the president’s budget request typically yields some interesting clues for anyone willing to go deep enough into the data to reveal them. The numbers reveal shifting agency priorities as well as hints to the sea changes that could affect the potential $608 billion in fiscal 2015 contract spending.

There are a number of areas that contractors should consider as they navigate the remainder of fiscal 2014 and plan for 2015:

1. Put on your game face for recompetes.

2. Keep an eye on the shelf life on IT funding.

3. Take advantage of 2014 to gain footing for 2015.

4. Expect more contractor scrutiny.

5. Follow the (Defense) money.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/deltek-budget-request-yields-clues-for-contractors-to-follow/2014/05/09/e249e1a0-d479-11e3-95d3-3bcd77cd4e11_story.html

The government’s duty of good faith and fair dealing

May 8, 2014 by

The long-standing principle that the federal government had the same implied duty of good faith and fair dealing as any commercial buyer was put in jeopardy by a 2010 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Precision Pine & Timber, Inc. v. U.S., 596 F.3d 817 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

There a panel of the court adopted a narrow rule seemingly limiting application of the principle to situations where a government action was “specifically targeted” at the contractor or had the effect of taking away one of the benefits that had been promised to the contractor.

Although the decision concerned a timber sales contract not a procurement contract, when I wrote it up in the May 2010 Nash & Cibinic Report (24 N&CR ¶ 22), I expressed the fear that the reasoning would be subsequently applied to procurement contracts.

My fear was realized in a construction contract case, Metcalf Construction Co. v. U. S., 102 Fed. Cl. 334 (2011). In that decision, the judge described eggregious conduct on the part of the government officials that would have been held to be a breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing under many earlier cases.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.wifcon.com/discussion/index.php?/blog/47/entry-3042-the-governments-duty-of-good-faith-and-fair-dealing/ 

SBA: Women 8(a) applicants don’t need “smoking gun” bias evidence

May 6, 2014 by

A woman does not need to provide the SBA with “smoking gun” evidence of bias in order to be considered socially disadvantaged for purposes of her company’s application to the 8(a) program.

In a recent decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) sharply criticized the SBA’s evaluation of a woman-owned small business’s 8(a) application, holding that the SBA had improperly discounted evidence of bias, needlessly demanded that the woman provide irrelevant details, and made several other errors.

SBA OHA’s decision in Matter of Bartkowski Life Safety Corp., SBA No. BDPE-516 (2014) involved Bartkowski Life Safety Corporation’s 8(a) application.  Bartkowski initially applied to the program in January 2012.  Bartkowski asserted that its owner, Lauren Sustek, was socially disadvantaged on the basis of gender.

Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/8a-program/women-8a-applicants-dont-need-smoking-gun-evidence-of-bias-says-sba-oha/

These are the Georgia companies who won federal contracts in April 2014

May 1, 2014 by

Ever wonder who’s winning federal contracts in Georgia?

Wouldn’t this information be helpful if you are looking for subcontracting prospects?  Or when you’re trying to figure out who your competitors are?  Or when considering who might be a good partner on an upcoming bid proposal?

Each month, the Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center (GTPAC) publishes a list of federal contracts awarded to Georgia businesses.  The list comes complete with point-of-contact information on the awardees, the name of the awarding agency, the dollar value of the contract, and much more.

Download details on the award winners for April 2014 right here: FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARDS IN GEORGIA – APRIL 2014

Winners of federal contracts earlier this year may be found at the links below:

For information on Georgia businesses that won federal contracts in 2013, click here.

Civil litigation can sink contractors

April 22, 2014 by

Most people picture high stakes civil litigation taking place in a courtroom where a party has the chance to persuade a judge or jury to validate or reject huge claims for damages.

But envision a different picture, one that takes place in a United States attorney’s office, where only an investigator is running the show, along with a prosecutor, a court reporter and a company’s ex-employee who was “in the know.”

Law enforcement is questioning this former worker under oath, on the record, about claims against a company in a sealed complaint. And this testimony could lead to treble damages. The company doesn’t know about this meeting or even that there is a complaint against it.

Welcome to the new front in high stakes False Claims Act litigation: civil investigative demands, or CIDs.

While the second scenario is not necessarily common place — usually companies eventually learn about an investigation or a whistleblower lawsuit — it can, and does, happen. Use of CIDs in False Claims Act investigations is increasing and defense contractors need to recognize the risks and implement best practices in the event a CID is served on one of its employees.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2014/April/Pages/CivilLitigationCanSinkContractors.aspx

Business owner says soliciting government business worth the hassle

April 14, 2014 by

[Note: This article was written by Michelle Shoultz, president of Florida-based Frazier Engineering.]

For more than 20 years, Frazier Engineering had a strong commercial and municipal/county government customer base that comfortably sustained our small business.

But as the economy changed, we knew we had to change.

We decided to pursue unique certifications that would enable us to compete for federal work in a smaller competitive pool certifications such as 8(a), Disadvantaged Business Enterprise/DBE and Minority Business Enterprise/MBE).

Through the Small Business Administration 8(a) program, we were given opportunities that we would not have had before. However, if we did not already have the knowledge and manpower to support the requirements of those opportunities, our certification would only have been as good as the paper it was printed on. Our success to date has been the result of a solid team, being financially and technically sound, having a strong work history, and being actively responsive.

I’d like to share some lessons we’ve learned over time.

As a small-to-midsize, growing business leader, I would definitely recommend the time and effort involved in pursuing government contracts.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.floridatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/04/01/business-money-edge-chamber/7146529/ 

 

A checklist for negotiating government cloud service contracts

April 7, 2014 by

Government agencies at the federal and state level are lured to cloud computing by the promise of cost savings and expanded services. But there are also risks associated with moving operations and applications to the cloud.

A recent report by researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill looks at contracting issues that government agencies face with adopting cloud services. The report was written for the IBM Center for the Business of Government.

“As with any form of government contracting, there are risks to be considered,” notes an article at Governing. “Do governments lose control over their data? Do they risk losing access to it? Are they locked into a single vendor? The key to success is writing and negotiating a strong contract.”

Keep reading this article at: http://www.fiercecio.com/story/checklist-negotiating-government-cloud-service-contracts/2014-02-28 

GAO: Price revisions allowed in final price revisions unless expressly limited

April 4, 2014 by

According to the GAO, an offeror may revise its price as part of a final proposal revision, unless the procuring agency expressly limits the scope of proposal revisions.

In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO held that the agency properly accepted the awardee’s revised price because agency had not limited the scope of discussions so as to exclude price revisions.

The GAO’s decision in Medical Receivables Solution, B-409358 (Mar. 19, 2014) involved a Army 8(a) set-aside solicitation for medical records coding services.  Award was to be made to the lowest-priced, technically acceptable (LPTA) offeror.

After evaluating initial proposals, the Army established a competitive range of six offerors.  The Army then conducted written discussions with offerors concerning the specific weaknesses and deficiencies in their proposals.  The Army’s discussion letter asked each offeror to address its identified weaknesses and deficiencies and submit a final proposal revision, highlighting all changes.

Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/gaobidprotests/gao-price-revisions-allowed-in-fprs-unless-expressly-limited/