Graves’ GET Small Business Contracting Act would raise the small business prime contracting goal from the current 23 percent to 25 percent, while withholding bonuses from agency managers who fail to meet the goal. He estimates the 2 percent increase would bring $11 billion in new federal contracts to small businesses. The government spent about $535 billion in contracting in fiscal 2010, according to the Office of Management and Budget.

“Because the federal government spends half a trillion dollars on contracted goods and services, we owe it to the taxpayers to make sure their money is used wisely and efficiently,” Graves said in a statement. “Government contracting offers a unique opportunity to invest in small businesses while also stimulating our economy, considering small businesses create the majority of jobs — 65 percent over the last 17 years. Small businesses have proved time and time again that they can perform a service or produce goods for the government cheaper and often quicker than their larger counterparts; however, various bureaucratic impediments remain for small contractors.”

The Obama administration missed its small business contracting goal by 3 percent in 2010, according to Graves. His bill also would seek to use more small businesses as subcontractors, raising the goal from the current 35 percent of subcontracted dollars to 40 percent.

Graves is also offering a second bill, the Small Business Advocate Act, that would promote greater use of contractors, prime and sub, at each agency’s Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.

OSDBUs were created in 1978 to reserve some federal contracts for for-profit small business concerns in which socially and economically disadvantaged individuals own at least a 51 percent interest and manage and control daily business operations. Their director’s place in the hierarchy has varied by agency.

The Graves bill would elevate those directors to senior acquisition leaders and prohibit them from holding any other position “so they can concentrate on their advocacy responsibilities,” a statement said. “This legislation makes it easier for the OSDBU to advocate for small business contracts, focus on acquisition assistance, and fight insourcing and unjustified contract bundling.”

This bill would require directors to be GS-15s or members of the Senior Executive Service and their performance reviews to be done by agency heads. “Acting as the OSDBU director,” Graves said, “is often simply another assigned duty for a senior official that lacks the authority to challenge decisions made by the chief acquisition officer or senior procurement executive.”

In April 2010, President Obama set up a task force to boost small business contracting opportunities.

The Graves bills come on a day when President Obama is releasing a package of proposed tax breaks for small businesses, including elimination of taxes on capital gains for investments in small businesses.

– by Charles S. Clark, Government Executive, January 31, 2012, at http://www.govexec.com/contracting/2012/01/lawmaker-pushes-boost-contractor-work/41045

Rafael Borras, DHS’ management undersecretary, said Thursday the current submission process will be reformed so companies can focus on the bid and save money on paper costs.

At a DHS industry day in Washington, Borras said he directed officials to create web-based portals for contractors to submit bids. According to Federal Times, companies have said requirements are often unclear and they do not have enough time to ask questions before responding to a request for proposals.

Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, said requirements often need clarification and can be translated incorrectly when procurement officers write them in a contract, according to Federal Times.

Borras said DHS will hold forums for companies to ask questions on upcoming projects before DHS issues a request for proposals.

– reprinted from Executive Gov on Jan. 30, 2012 at http://www.executivegov.com/2012/01/dhs-going-paperless-for-contract-bids/

This year the event is scheduled on Apr. 19, 2012, and the location is the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, DC.

This unique one-day event annually attracts more than 3,000 people including:

• Over 500 government attendees representing 50 Federal, State and local agencies
• Prime Contractors with teaming and mentor-protégé opportunities
• Hundreds of small businesses, minority-owned businesses, women-owned businesses, Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Businesses, 8a businesses and HUB-Zone businesses

Participating firms will have the benefit of marketing their products and services to procurement representatives and small business specialists from federal agencies.   Companies may choose to set up an exhibit table to showcase their capabilities or simply come as an attendee.  The conference also includes educational conference sessions, procurement matchmaking, and a dynamic exhibitor showcase.

For more information or to register see; http://www.fbcinc.com/e/osdbu/default.aspx.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta planned to retire aging C5A and C130 transport aircraft while preserving adequate airlift capability. He would trim six tactical air squadrons from the current lineup of 60, and the Navy would retire seven older cruisers and two amphibious ships early. He would delay the next generation of ballistic missile submarines by two years, and he would “make adjustments” to the long-controversial Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, “slowing procurement to complete more testing and to develop changes before we buy in great quantities,” he said.

Programs left largely intact, he said, would be the Navy’s carrier air wings, the next generation of bombers and the aerial refueling tanker.

In a move likely to have the most direct effect on the acquisition community, Panetta said he would look to save $60 billion over five years by “improving business practices across the department.”  That would include “more aggressive and competitive contacting practices and reductions in contract services.”

Further savings might be found, according to a Pentagon fact sheet, in better use of information technology, better use of business and enterprise systems, streamlined staff, limitations on official travel, improved inventory management and deferral of some military construction.

Asked whether such efforts in the past have proved fruitful, Panetta said his predecessor, Robert Gates, “had made some progress with regard to going after duplication, overhead and waste, and tightening up on systems. This is a very big bureaucracy,” Panetta said.

He emphasized that a key element of the guidance released earlier this month is “protecting key investments to retain a decisive technological edge,” which includes scientific programs in such areas as cyberwarfare, unmanned aircraft and homeland missiles.  That means “maintaining the vitality of a healthy industrial base,” he added, “and avoiding imposing unacceptable risks on our critical suppliers.”

None of the actions comes as a surprise, said Stan Soloway, president and chief executive officer of the Professional Services Council, a contractors trade group. “They’ve long been signaling a need to drive more efficiency into the system, and you can only take so much out of each area,” he said. “The force structure reductions are going to happen, but it will take a while to achieve savings.”

He said people may look more carefully at the proposed new round of BRAC cuts. “We know it requires an up-front investment and takes several years to realize the savings, so it’s not impactful in the near term,” he said.

Marion C. Blakey, president and CEO of Aerospace Industries Association, asked how the Defense cuts will affect national security. “These cuts will have real consequences on our military and industrial base,” Blakey said.

– by Charles S. Clark – cclark@govexec.com – January 26, 2012 – http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=49871&dcn=e_gvet

Rep. Bill Owens (D-N.Y.) introduced the Small Business Growth and Federal Accountability Act (H.R. 3779) Jan. 18, saying the government’s annual 23-percent small-business contracting goal is regularly ignored by agencies.

He said his bill would “ensure that Washington lives up to its promise to foster an environment of success for small businesses.”

Owens, a member of the Small Business Committee, said federal agencies typically fail to meet their small-business contracting goals and they currently face no penalties for the shortfalls.

Under his bill, if an agency misses the set small-business contracting goal, their budget would decrease by 10 percent in the following fiscal year, with that percentage of funds going to pay down national debt.

“It is critical that federal agencies be held accountable,” Owens said.

The bill also would offer agencies more authority to give “preference” to small companies when awarding contracts. The term “preference” is not defined in the bill.

The bill has been sent to the Small Business Committee for consideration.

It is true that the government struggles to meet its annual 23-percent contracting goal. In the most recent scorecard from the Small Business Administration, the government reached 22.7 percent in fiscal 2010.

That year, agencies awarded a total of nearly $100 billion in contracts to small businesses. However, it was an increase in prime contract dollars going to small businesses for the second year following four years of decline.

SBA gave the government a B on the scorecard for its efforts in contracting with specific types of small businesses, such as those owned by a service-disabled veteran or located in an economically depressed area.

Owens’ bill could have several repercussions though.

In a post on the Government Contracts Legal Forum blog, Tiffany Wynn, an associate at the Crowell and Moring law firm, said agencies may decide to reduce their contracting goals to avoid the 10-percent penalty.

As a result of the bill, officials would have to weigh the penalties for missing the small-business goal against awarding a contract to a large company if the agency could save money.

Wynn also questioned whether this legislation would lead to penalties on companies that don’t meet their own annual small business subcontracting goals.

A sequestration causes automatic, indiscriminate, across-the-board budget cuts. The failure of the so-called supercommittee to find $1.2 trillion dollars in savings over a decade triggered the cuts. They’re set to take effect Jan. 2, 2013.

As a result, contractors too “are hostages in a showdown between the president and Congress over fundamental decisions on taxing and spending,” said John Cooney, former general counsel at the Office of Management and Budget and now a partner at the Venable law firm.

He spoke Jan. 17 at a panel discussion hosted by the Professional Services Council that looked at sequestration in detail. Cooney broke down the possible routes federal officials may take to deal with the cuts.

Cooney expects agencies to:

• Try to avoid terminating contracts. Instead, officials will reduce the amount of money obligated under their contracts.
• Become less willing to extend contracts into their option years.
• Obligate money for one fiscal year at a time on task order and services contracts.
• Possibly use the prospect of the sequester’s cuts to renegotiate contracts.

He also said agency officials will more often decide to not award new contracts.

“This will be a common agency practice in year one of a sequester. Procurements that can be put off will be put off,” he said during the discussion.

With available money, agency officials will maximize contracts that meet their agency’s core duties, said Alan Chvotkin, executive vice president and counsel for the Professional Services Council, who spoke on the panel as well.

Meanwhile he expects agencies to look for more flexibility to avoid hard-and-fast commitments, such as fixed-price contracts and minimum revenue guarantees. And on the other hand, officials may use more time-and-materials contracts, which are based on labor hours and materials.

However, Chvotkin said there are some policy constraints as the Obama administration has railed against this type of contract, which places a lot of risk on the government.

IDIQs and the General Services Administration’s Multiple Award Schedules program may become more attractive to agencies. They allow for more negotiations at the task order level, he said.

Cooney had several suggestions for companies in light of what may happen. Advocate for the importance of a program and stay in close contact with a contracting officer. Realize though that the officer may not know the fate of a program until very late in the process.

Businesses should also emphasize what they can do for the agency, including the options the company is willing to agree to that may even decrease its revenue, Chvotkin said.

He recommended checking the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). The information needs to be correct, and it should reflect as favorably as possible on the company’s performance.

Federal CIO Steven VanRoekel made the announcement Jan. 13 when delivering a speech about federal mobility at a luncheon hosted by the Association for Federal Information Resources Management.

BusinessUSA.gov,  which VanRoekel said will launch in “a few weeks,” pools information and services from the government into one integrated network for U.S. business owners and entrepreneurs.

The main focus of the website is to help U.S. business succeed and grow, VanRoekel said. The website will provide entrepreneurs with relevant information from one consolidated source instead of having them navigate through several different options, he said.

The Association’s mission is to educate and promote its members, to advocate favorable legislation policies, and to serve and support the effectiveness and continuance of the 8(a) program.

The agenda for the conference can be found at http://www.national8aassociation.org/forms/n8a-2012-winter.pdf.

Registration information is at http://8awinter2012.eventbrite.com/.