Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

Agencies agree to do more to identify contractors with tax debts

By

A sizable portion of the “tax gap” of revenues that go uncollected by the Internal Revenue Service is attributable to current and would-be federal contractors.

Though the IRS is prohibited from sharing such information with agency procurement staff, contracting officers are supposed to examine the self-reporting of tax debts from the companies to which they give awards.  That is not always occurring, according to a Government Accountability Office report released on Wednesday addressed to leaders of the House Oversight and Reform and the Ways and Means committees.

“Considering prospective contractors’ reported qualifying federal tax debt—in accordance with federal regulations—helps ensure federal agencies comply with federal appropriations law, supports the integrity of the contracting process, and protects the interests of the government,” GAO noted in its summary of a two-year review of five agencies’ handling of selected contracts in fiscal 2015-2016.

Continue reading at:  Government Executive

5 tips for making winning bids

By

After spending 30 years in the software business, Greg Mills was seeking a new challenge. That’s why two years ago, he acquired a brass and metal-fixtures manufacturer near Phoenix and renamed it M3 metals. He’s spent the majority of that time seeking ways to modernize and streamline the company, so it can find new customers in the increasingly competitive construction industry.

He isn’t alone. In fact, 34 percent of construction companies said their biggest challenge in their first through fourth years in business was finding new customers, according to a Kabbage® study. That’s more than the 30 percent combined who said they were most concerned with managing cash flow, dealing with regulations, and finding and retaining employees.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.constructiondive.com/news/5-tips-for-making-winning-bids/530192/

Proposals are only as strong as their weakest link

By

The GAO recently denied Leidos Innovations Corporation’s protest of a determination that Leidos was ineligible to receive a $272 million award by the U.S. Army despite Leidos having both the highest-rated technical proposal and the lowest evaluated cost.

The GAO decision, which affirmed the agency’s determination that Leidos was non-responsible because one of Leidos’ subcontractors did not have the necessary base access, is an important reminder that prime contractors should thoroughly vet their subcontractors to ensure, to the extent possible, all necessary qualifications are satisfied for the associated contract.

In February 2016, Leidos was one of six contractors that responded to a request for task order execution plan (RTEP) to provide operational and sustainment logistics support for U.S. Special Operations Command’s Tactical Airborne Multi-Sensor Platform. The RTEP noted that some of the work may take place at U.S. government facilities in the U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) Area of Responsibility (AOR). Contractors were also on notice that they were subject to parts of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement, including a provision requiring contractors to comply with directives from the Combatant Commander of USCENTCOM.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=40117ba6-744c-41ae-80f7-abbe1635226a

DOE rescinds $5 billion award due to contractor sale after bid submission

By

GAO-GovernmentAccountabilityOffice-SealA string of recent decisions have found the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) struggling with the impact of corporate transactions on pending proposals.

  • FCi Federal, Inc., B-408558.7, B-408558.8, Aug. 5, 2015, 2015 CPD ¶ 245 (overturning award where “as a result of the sale . . . the original proposal, upon which the award decision was based, no longer reflects the intended approach to performance”).
  • Wyle Labs., Inc., B-408112.2, Dec. 27, 2013, 2014 CPD ¶ 16 (overturning award where the awardee had recently engaged in a corporate reorganization).
  • IBM U.S. Federal, B-409806 et al., Aug. 15, 2014, 2014 CPD ¶ 241 (noting that a corporate reorganization did not appear “to have any significant cost or technical impact on performance of the requirements”).

These decisions have led to significant uncertainty as to what best practices should be adopted by contractors in significant transactions.

Continuing this confusion is yet another case where an apparently successful offeror has lost its contract because of a transaction.  Last week, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) rescinded the award of a nearly $5 billion contract to a Lockheed Martin company—Nevada Site Science Support and Technologies Corporation (NVS3T)—after learning that the company had been sold to Leidos Innovations Corporation after submission of the bid.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=526492

Government releases final rule implementing ‘blacklisting’ law

By

The final rule and guidance implementing the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order, signed by President Barack Obama in July 2014 and finally published on August 25, 2016, remain almost as burdensome and problematic as they were when originally proposed. They will impact many federal contractors and require immediate attention to ensure full compliance, which for some will be required as soon as October 2016.

President Barack Obama signs the "Fair Pay and Safe Workplace" executive order in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building South Court Auditorium, July 31, 2014. The President is joined on stage by Labor Secretary Thomas Perez as well as employers who support fair labor practices, workers who have seen firsthand the effects of workplace violations, and advocates who have worked to improve fair pay and safety standards. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
President Barack Obama signs the “Fair Pay and Safe Workplace” executive order in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building South Court Auditorium, July 31, 2014. The President is joined on stage by Labor Secretary Thomas Perez as well as employers who support fair labor practices, workers who have seen firsthand the effects of workplace violations, and advocates who have worked to improve fair pay and safety standards. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Often referred to as the “blacklisting” law, the Executive Order requires prospective and existing contractors to disclose violations of 14 federal labor laws plus state equivalents, requires them to provide certain information each pay period to enable workers to verify the accuracy of their pay, and prohibits certain contractors from using pre-dispute arbitration agreements to address sexual assault and civil rights claims.

The rule from the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. General Services Administration and NASA) and guidance from the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL) are designed to assist agencies in implementing the Executive Order. They detail procedures for making the disclosures, assessing violations, developing conditions for further consideration of bids, and providing required notices to workers.

The final rule and guidance remain burdensome and problematic for several reasons.  First, they create a publicly available repository of contractor violations. They also require the contracting officer to determine whether a contractor is a “responsible source” based on violations that may not be final or are subject to appeal. Moreover, contracting officers wield the power to require bidders with records deemed less-than-satisfactory to commit to a labor compliance agreement in order for their bids to be considered. Although some minor changes were made to the proposals between the initial release and ultimate finalization, the overall effect remains the same.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/523316/employee+rights+labour+relations/Government+Releases+Final+Rule+Implementing+Blacklisting+Law

IRS falls short in tracking tax-delinquent contractors

By

Pay TaxesDespite past admonitions, the Internal Revenue Service still has a ways to go in preventing the award of agency contracts to firms that owe back taxes, an agency watchdog has found.

“The IRS tax check process was not effective in identifying tax-delinquent contractors,” wrote the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration in a report dated July 20, 2016 but released last week. The IG called for “significant improvements” to the process.

In a sampling of 73 awards among 336 contracts of $250,000 or more from September 2012 through August 2014, auditors found that 21, or 29 percent, “did not have evidence that the contracting officer performed the required tax check on the winning bidders.” What’s more, contracting officers handling all 73 contracts documented no tax checks on competing bidders.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.govexec.com/oversight/2016/08/irs-falls-short-tracking-tax-delinquent-contractors/130723

These are nervous times for contractors

By

US DoD logoSpeaking to a room of government contractors recently, Defense Department officials insisted that there is no witch-hunt.

Contrary to industry perception, government overseers are not hammers looking for nails, said Deputy General Counsel for Contractor Responsibility at the Department of the Air Force, Rodney A. Grandon.

Grandon made a case that contractor policing is changing. The emphasis is not on trying to rack up the numbers of suspensions and debarments, he said, but on working preemptively with companies to make sure they have vigorous ethics and compliance programs.

“The focus today is no longer on numbers. The focus today is on contractor responsibility,” he told a federal procurement conference last month in McLean, Virginia, organized by the consulting firm BDO USA.

It is a fact of life that misconduct will occur, so the government is paying more attention to what companies are doing to prevent and respond in such situations, said Grandon. He commended federal contractors that have “invested in very robust advocacy and compliance programs.” The government counts on companies to self-police, he said. “Contractors must have in place procedures and willingness to engage government to take immediate steps when misconduct occurs. Our role is to buy down the risk for our acquisition community so they don’t have to worry that the contractor they’re dealing with has a lack of integrity or past performance problems.”

Keep reading this article at: http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=2172

What does it take to be a ‘responsive bidder’?

By

In a previous article we discussed the requirement that, if it awards a public works contract, a public entity in the State of Georgia must award the contract to the “lowest responsible and responsive bidder,” unless an exception to this requirement applies.

This article addresses what it means to be a “responsive bidder.”  While responsibleness focuses on the bidder or proposer, responsiveness focuses on the bid or proposal.  Specifically, responsiveness requires that a bid or proposal respond and conform to the requirements of the invitation for bids or request for proposals (the “Bid Documents”).

Any deviation from the requirements of the Bid Documents may be considered non-responsive.  But public entities have the discretion to waive minor deviations from the requirements of the Bid Documents.  Minor deviations are a matter of form and not of substance, or they pertain to some immaterial or inconsequential defect or variation from the exact requirement of the Bid Documents.  For example, a minor deviation may occur where a bidder fails to initial a price change, or to write the solicitation number, date, and time of bid opening on its bid envelope, or to provide incidental information requested in the bid documents, such as information about its affiliates, or to include a unit price where the unit price can be calculated by dividing the line item total by the estimated quantity.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=463746

Cracking the code on past performance

By

Would you hire contractors to fix your house’s sagging porch without first verifying not only that they could swing a hammer, but that they were competent carpenters whose work had stood the test of time?

Past PerformanceProbably not — and neither should the government. Knowledge of a worker’s — and a company’s — past performance is the grease on the wheels of commerce in the federal acquisition process.

Over the years, the federal government has institutionalized past performance in its deliberations over contracts big and small — so much so that it has become a complicated, sometimes bewildering and utterly integral part of the acquisition environment.

By federal mandate, agencies must have an intricate understanding of a company before they sign a contract with it. It’s a laudable goal, but it has also produced daunting electronic and paper trails that contractors must navigate.

Keep reading this article at: http://fcw.com/articles/2015/07/30/bookshelf_performance.aspx

 

Federal contractors to be burdened with additional disclosure requirements if Government has its say

By

The U.S. Labor Department (DOL) and three federal agencies (the Department of Defense, the General Services Administration and NASA) recently issued two proposed documents relating to the implementation of Executive Order 13673, better known as the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order.

If enacted, these proposals would be problematic and burdensome for federal contractors; those who wish to have their voices heard on the matter have a July 27, 2015 deadline to submit comments on both documents.

The FARThe three contracting agencies issued a proposed rule amending the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) intending to ensure federal agencies contract with only those contractors that they find to be “responsible sources,” i.e. those with a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics. Under the proposed rule, affected contractors and subcontractors will be required to:

  1. disclose labor law violations within the past three years;
  2. notify workers performing under the contract how their pay is being calculated each pay period;
  3. notify independent contractors that they are being treated as such; and
  4. refrain from entering into certain pre-dispute arbitration agreements with employees or independent contractors.

The document also outlines how contracting officers, in consultation with “agency labor compliance advisors” – new positions created by the Order – will determine whether a contractor is a “responsible source.” If not, the proposal provides rules on how they can become one (e.g., requiring certain remedial measures, including a compliance agreement) or whether the contractor will instead be referred for suspension and debarment.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/404154/

Contracting News

Read More

Contracting Tips

Read More

GTPAC News

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Read More