Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

Georgia DOAS to hold 4th Annual Georgia Procurement Conference April 21-23, 2020

By

The 4th Annual Georgia Procurement Conference (GPC 2020) will be held April 21-23, 2020 at the Jekyll Island Convention Center.  GPC 2020 will provide excellent opportunities to foster business partnerships between state and local government entities, exhibitors, statewide contractors and small businesses.

This year’s conference will give government procurement professionals the opportunity to:

  • Learn new techniques and best practices directly from state and national procurement industry experts
  • Attend training sessions to strengthen procurement knowledge and earn recertification credits
  • Build and strengthen relationships with DOAS State Purchasing Division (SPD) staff
  • Network with fellow procurement professionals

The conference will also showcase a dynamic Exhibitor Expo, where attendees can network with scores of exhibitors and suppliers from across the state.

Learn more about the conference at:  Georgia Department of Administrative Services (DOAS) website

Small business subcontracting for cloud computing gets easier

By

In response to widespread interest in allowing more small business participation in opportunities involving cloud computing, the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) has decided to exclude cloud computing from the limitation on subcontracting rule calculation, in certain circumstances.  Thus, beginning December 30, 2019, small businesses are no longer limited in their ability to subcontract out cloud computing services to larger companies, in connection with performing a Government contract set aside for small businesses, where the small business will perform other services that are the primary purpose of the acquisition.

The limitation on subcontracting rule provides that a small business may not subcontract more than 50% of the prime contract amount, under a services contract, to businesses that are other than small. 13 C.F.R. 125.6; 48 C.F.R. 52.219-14.  In the cloud computing context, this limitation has had the effect of reducing small business participation in IT service contracts with a substantial cloud computing component.  Typically, a small business is not able to commit to a procurement in which it (together with other small businesses, if needed) will provide more than 50% of the services under these contracts.  Certainly not where the cloud computing market is currently dominated by juggernauts who are far larger than “small.”

Continue reading at:  Government Contracts and Investigations Blog

A guide to labor and employment obligations for federal contractors

By

Companies doing business with the federal government must comply with a litany of complex laws and regulations that affect their day-to-day business operations.  To assist government contractors, this guide discusses some of the labor and employment laws and regulations that should be considered when pricing and performing a government contract.

Continue reading at:  JD Supra

Who pays for CMMC certification?

By

Last week, DOD announced the release of CMMC Version 1.0.  CMMC Version 1.0 is a comprehensive certification process featuring 171 cybersecurity best practices to ensure that contractors secure their information systems.  The question on everyone’s mind is who is going to pay for the certification and all of the work necessary to comply.

DOD has been less than clear on how contractors are expected to pay for CMMC certification. But what is clear is that the costs associated with obtaining CMMC certification will be significant.  It is unclear whether contractors can seek reimbursement for these costs.  They may be able to claim costs as an allowable indirect cost.  We suspect that the cost of certification itself will be covered, but that the greater costs associated with becoming compliant will not be covered as a reimbursable direct cost.

Continue reading at:  Fox Rothschild

Dr. Abdallah testifies on U.S. competitiveness, research, STEM pipeline at Congressional hearing

By

On Jan. 29, Chaouki Abdallah, Georgia Tech’s executive vice president for Research, testified before a U.S. House of Representatives committee about the cooperative United States research and development (R&D) enterprise, including the threat of falling behind other nations in critical technologies, investment in the nation’s institutions of higher education, and the future of the STEM talent pipeline.

Along with Abdallah, the hearing brought together expert testimony from representatives from federal and industry perspectives, including Diane Souvaine, chair of the National Science Board, and Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google and founder of Schmidt Futures.

In his testimony to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Abdallah stressed the importance of maintaining the U.S. position of leadership in R&D, and the importance of the collaboration between the federal government, higher education, and the private sector.

“The mission, alignment, and cooperation of these three actors have historically made the U.S. research landscape the most productive and admired in the world … and made the U.S. safer, healthier, and wealthier.”

Continue reading at:  Georgia Tech News Center

Long awaited changes to WOSB/EDWOSB regulations expected this summer

By

Big news for women-owned businesses!  It’s certainly been a long time coming, but self-certification for women-owned small businesses is finally on its way out.  For those of you unfamiliar with this issue, here’s a little background.

When the Small Business Administration (SBA) created the Women-Owned Small Business program in 2011, the regulations allowed women owned small businesses (WOSBs) and economically disadvantaged women owned small business (EDWOSB) to self-certify for participation in the program.  Compare this to the SBA’s 8(a) program, for example, which does not allow self-certification and instead requires a company to go through a rigorous application process.  During that application process, the SBA ensures that all of the eligibility criteria are, in fact, satisfied.  Because the WOSB/EDWOSB program allowed women to self-certify without going through an arduous application process, many women-owned businesses did just that.  Others chose to use third-party certifiers.  (Though not required, third-party certification offers the added benefit of conferring eligibility under certain state-run women-owned business programs.)

Over time, criticism of WOSB self-certification mounted.  Various reports from the GAO and other governmental watchdogs noted high levels of fraud, and industry insiders began lobbying for change.  Legitimate WOSBs wanted a more robust review process, to eliminate fraudulent “front” companies from the program.  In response, Congress passed the 2015 NDAA, which eliminated self-certification for WOSBs and EDWOSBs.  The NDAA directed the SBA to modify its regulations, abolish self-certification, and create an application process to vet potential participants.  A year later, the SBA published a notice, indicating that it did plan on drafting the regulations Congress ordered . . . but no regulations were forthcoming.  In 2016, the SBA set up a new online portal – certify.sba.gov – through which WOSB status could be managed.  But, again, no actual changes to the regulation were proposed, let alone completed.  A 2017 GAO report found that “[a]s a result of inadequate monitoring and controls, such as not implementing a full certification program, potentially ineligible businesses may continue to incorrectly certify themselves as WOSBs.”  Still…crickets from the SBA.

Continue reading at:  GovCon Examiner

The CMMC has arrived: DoD publishes version 1.0 of its new cybersecurity framework

By

On January 31, 2020, the Department of Defense (“DoD”) publicly released Version 1.0 of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (“CMMC”) framework.  The CMMC is a certification framework developed by DoD that measures a defense contractor’s ability to safeguard Federal Contract Information (“FCI”) and Controlled Unclassified Information (“CUI”) handled in the performance of DoD contracts.  By FY 2026, CMMC certification will be a requirement for any company doing business with DoD, either as a prime contractor or lower-tier subcontractor.  Version 1.0 of the CMMC fills in several gaps from the earlier drafts, which we assess in prior articles.  Additionally, the public briefing that accompanied the release of Version 1.0 included new insights into DoD’s rollout of the CMMC framework.  This alert walks through the CMMC framework, highlights updates from prior drafts, summarizes DoD’s proposed rollout, and provides considerations for companies during CMMC implementation.

Continue reading at:  K&L Gates

Other transaction agreements: Where does an unsuccessful bidder go?

By

A recent decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona highlights the complexity of jurisdictional issues faced by unsuccessful offerors that challenge government awards of “other transaction” (OT) agreements.  Over the past few years, OT agreements have grown significantly in popularity due to their immunity from the regulatory provisions that typically govern government procurement contracts, including those that address intellectual property rights, cost accounting, and other key terms.  By some reports, Department of Defense (DoD) spending on OT agreements has grown from $2.3 billion in Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 to, by some accounts, more than $7 billion in FY 2019.  It is no wonder that companies not selected for an OT agreement have at times attempted to challenge their exclusion in various judicial fora.

Continue reading at:  Hogan Lovells

Knowledge is power, if you know how to use it

By

Discussions with an agency prior to submitting a final proposal can lead to a more well-informed submission by an offeror; however, such is not always the case.  The Government Accountability Office (GAO) decision in Quality Control International, LLC (QCI), B-417984 (December 20, 2019) provides guidance as to how offerors should rely on information supplied by the agency in crafting their best, most competitive bid.

Continue reading at:  Government Contracting Matters

EAJA provides relief to construction contractor for government’s bad actions

By

In Vet4U, LLC v. Department of Veterans Affairs, the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals awarded costs and attorney fees to the small business contractor that won its appeal pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 5 U.S.C. § 504, after finding the government’s position was not substantially justified.  The EAJA is a useful tool for small contractors who prevail against the government and were subjected to particularly difficult contracting circumstances.

As a reminder, the EAJA has five basic requirements that the applicant must meet in order to recover: (1) have been a prevailing party in a proceeding against the United States; (2) if a corporation, have had not more than $7,000,000 in net worth and five hundred employees at the time the adversary adjudication was initiated; (3) submit its application within thirty days of final disposition in the adjudication; (4) state the amount sought and include an itemized statement of costs and attorney fees; and (5) allege that the position of the agency was not substantially justified.  See 5 U.S.C. § 504(a)(1), (b)(1)(B); Vet4U, LLC v. Department of Veteran Affairs, CBCA 6612-C (5387).

Continue reading at:  Government Contracting Matters

Contracting News

Read More

Contracting Tips

Read More

GTPAC News

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Read More