subcontracting | Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

GDIT hosting virtual business opportunity session March 18th

March 9, 2021 By Andrew Smith

Purpose: General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc. (GDIT), in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ Direct Access Program, is conducting a virtual business opportunity session on Thursday, March 18, 1:30 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. ET.

Discussion: GDIT seeks specific skills as the company grows its capacities to serve VA. Upcoming procurements and ongoing needs include professionals with experience in Microsoft Dynamics 365 (D365), fraud waste and abuse, software architecture and development (including agile methodologies), cybersecurity, robotic process automation, machine learning, data analytics, and cloud. In addition, existing work and strong qualifications from VA are also of interest.

Event Website where you can register:
https://vetbiz.va.gov/events/event-detail/?id=52cd5f0d-8678-eb11-a812-001dd8011447

Event-related details

Business Sectors:
Defense, Security & Justice
Federal Health
Civil Government
State & Local/Higher Education
Commercial

Applicable NAICS:

General IT NAICS Codes

NAICS DESCRIPTION

541511 Custom Computer Programming Services

541512 Computer Systems Design Services

541513 Computer Facilities Management Services

541519 Other Computer Related Services

Precision Medicine NAICS Codes
NAICS DESCRIPTION

339121 Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing

339113 Surgical Appliance and Supplies Manufacturing

621511 Medical Laboratories

254111 Medicinal and Botanical Manufacturing

Capabilities:
Precision Medicine
Artificial Intelligence
Cyber Security
Software-as-a-Service
Human Capital as a Service
Mobile Applications
Managed Services
Cloud Services

Agencies:
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
United States Army
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

Contract Vehicles:
OASIS SB
STARS II 8(a)
Alliant SB

Desired Federal Socio-Economic Classifications:
Economically Disadvantaged Women-Owned Small Businesses (EDWOSB)
Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB)
Historically Underutilized Business Zones (HUBZones)
Minority-owned (Black-owned; Native American, Native Alaskan, Native Hawaiian, etc.)

About GDIT

GDIT is supporting some of the most challenging and important government, defense, and intelligence missions across the country. At VA, its 500+ member team provides a variety of services from software architecture and development to technical service desk support to the digitization of Veterans claims records to providing technical training on a variety of VA software applications. As a recipient of the 2021 Military Friendly Employer and the 2020 U.S Veterans Magazine Top Supplier Diversity and Top Veteran-Friendly Companies, GDIT is always seeking new small business partners who can bring innovative IT solutions to help us grow and serve the VA Mission.

Further details can be found on the event website here: https://vetbiz.va.gov/events/event-detail/?id=52cd5f0d-8678-eb11-a812-001dd8011447

GAO: Agency requirement that past performance occur at specific contracting tier found unduly restrictive

February 5, 2021 By Andrew Smith

Procuring agencies have wide latitude in developing requirements for their solicitations. When provisions are challenged, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) merely evaluates whether the agency’s justification for the requirement at issue is rational and can withstand logical scrutiny. However, there are limits to the agency’s discretion. Agencies may not include requirements in solicitations that are unduly restrictive. Specifically, 10 U.S.C. § 2305(a)(1)(B)(ii) provides that agencies may include restrictive provisions “only to the extent necessary to satisfy the need of the agency or as authorized by law.”

A recent example of a challenge based upon that limitation is AES UXO, LLC, B419150, Dec. 7, 2020, in which an offeror challenged a solicitation’s relevant experience and past performance evaluation criteria. The solicitation at issue sought proposals for unexploded ordnance clearing services. The solicitation contained a provision that, as written, required that responding offerors must demonstrate previous experience at the prime contractor level or as a member of a joint venture. The solicitation precluded offerors from meeting the relevant experience and past performance requirements with work performed at the subcontractor level.

Continue reading at: Martindale

Do small businesses lack a voice in the federal marketplace?

July 25, 2019 By Andrew Smith

Small businesses contractors testified before Congress July 16, asking lawmakers to improve the Small Business Act, remove barriers to federal procurement marketplace entry and increase the use of subcontractors.

Witnesses told the House Small Business Subcommittee on Contracting and Infrastructure of challenges they faced, as well as opportunities for improvement. One major point was that subcontractors should be explicitly named in prime contractor’s subcontracting plans, to ensure that commitments and payments to small businesses are met. Without proper identification in contracts, subcontractors often lose the opportunity to work on projects, even after helping the prime contractor win a bid.

“We’ve all been to large contractor’s meetings, we’ve been invited on projects, and then all the sudden [another subcontractor] comes in and says, ‘I can do this,’” said Thomas J. Depace — CTS, C.O.O. and senior engineering manager of Advance Sound Company, testifying on behalf of the National Electrical Contractors Association.

“It really limits our ability to support local labor … to continue to grow in the marketplace — somebody just taking the scope and the specification documents that we’ve pined over for a long period of time and just putting a number to it,” Depace said. “Being named as a subcontractor from the start would be an advantage that would give us an opportunity to … make sure commitments are met.”

Continue reading at: Federal Times

Long-time GTPAC leader Chuck Schadl is a guest on the Risk GovCon podcast (Part 2)

July 17, 2019 By Andrew Smith

Prior to his retirement, Chuck Schadl, the long-time GTPAC Procurement Counselor and Group Manager of Government Contracting Services at Georgia Tech’s Enterprise Innovation Institute participated as a guest speaker on the Risk GovCon Podcast.

In Part 2 of his two part appearance, which is available for download here, Chuck discusses what prime contractors look for in subcontractors, being procurement ready, resources available to small businesses seeking to do business in the government space, market research, and the limitations on subcontracting rules applicable on small business set-aside contracts. Part 1 of the two part series is available here.

Credit for lower-tier subcontracts toward small business subcontracting goals

July 4, 2019 By Andrew Smith

It has been a long time coming, but it appears that the government will (finally) amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to align with prior changes by the Small Business Administration (SBA) concerning credit for lower-tier small business subcontracting.

The propose rule addresses changes to FAR 19.704 and 52.219-9 to marry the regulation up with SBA’s amendments.

We first covered this issue back in 2016 when SBA issued a final rule amending the small business subcontracting plan regulations. SBA’s amendment allows large prime contractors on federal jobs to receive credit for lower-tier subcontracting awards to small businesses and other socio-economically disadvantaged firms. That is, rather than limit credit to first-tier subcontracts, prime contracts may count the awards their first-tier subcontractors make to small businesses towards their subcontracting goals.

Continue reading at: Fox Rothschild LLP

Here are the Georgia businesses who won federal contracts in April 2019

May 1, 2019 By Andrew Smith

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?

federal-contract-award-winners-in-georgia Each and every month, the Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center (GTPAC) compiles and 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 federal contract award winners in Georgia during APRIL 2019 right here: FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARDS IN GEORGIA – APRIL 2019

Here are the Georgia companies who won federal contracts in earlier months of 2019:

January 2019 award winners: FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARDS IN GEORGIA – JAN. 2019
February 2019 award winners: FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARDS IN GEORGIA – FEB. 2019
March 2019 award winners: FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARDS IN GEORGIA – MARCH 2019

Contract winners from previous years are archived below:

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2018, see: https://gtpac.org/2019/01/02/here-are-the-georgia-businesses-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2018

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2017, see: http://gtpac.org/2018/01/01/here-are-the-georgia-businesses-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2017

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2016, see: http://gtpac.org/2017/01/02/here-are-the-georgia-businesses-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2016

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2015, see: http://gtpac.org/2016/01/04/here-are-the-georgia-businesses-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2015

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2014, see: http://gtpac.org/2015/01/here-are-the-georgia-companies-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2014

Subcontractor who failed to follow the FAR finds that ‘fair’ and ‘just’ are not synonymous

April 12, 2019 By Andrew Smith

Inscribed over the doors of the U.S. Supreme Court are the words “Equal Justice Under Law.” It’s a reminder that judicial decisions should be just. That doesn’t necessarily mean fair.

In Aspic Engineering and Construction Company v. ECC Centcom Constructors, LLC, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, Case No. 17-16510 (January 28, 2019), the 9th Circuit overturned an arbitration decision in favor of a local Afghani subcontractor seeking termination costs after it was terminated for convenience by a U.S.-based general contractor. This, despite the arbitrator’s finding that the subcontract was “clearly drafted to give every advantage to” the general contractor, that the local Afghani subcontractor’s “experience with government contracting [was] not nearly as extensive as that of” the general contractor, and “that the normal business practices and customs of subcontractors in Afghanistan were more ‘primitive’ than those of U.S. subcontractors experienced with U.S. Government work.”

Background

Local Afghani subcontractor Aspic Engineering and Construction Company was awarded two subcontracts by ECC Centcom Constructors, the general contractor, on two projects in Afghanistan overseen by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The first subcontract involved construction of various buildings in the Badghis province of Afghanistan. The second subcontract involved the construction various buildings Sheberghan province of Afghanistan. Both subcontracts included clauses from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), which were incorporated by reference, and included flow-down provisions obligating Aspic to ECC in the same manner that ECC was obligated to the U.S. government.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/federal-subcontractor-who-failed-to-43185/

Here are the Georgia businesses who won federal contracts in Mar. 2019

April 1, 2019 By Andrew Smith

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?

Download details on the federal contract award winners in Georgia during MARCH 2019 right here: FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARDS IIN GEORGIA – MARCH 2019

Here are the Georgia companies who won federal contracts February 2019:

January 2019 award winners: FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARDS IN GEORGIA – JAN. 2019
February 2019 award winners: FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARDS IN GEORGIA – FEB. 2019

Contract winners from previous years are archived below:

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2018, see: https://gtpac.org/2019/01/02/here-are-the-georgia-businesses-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2018

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2017, see: http://gtpac.org/2018/01/01/here-are-the-georgia-businesses-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2017

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2016, see: http://gtpac.org/2017/01/02/here-are-the-georgia-businesses-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2016

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2015, see: http://gtpac.org/2016/01/04/here-are-the-georgia-businesses-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2015

To see award winners in Calendar Year 2014, see: http://gtpac.org/2015/01/here-are-the-georgia-companies-who-won-federal-contracts-in-2014

The definition of a subcontractor, and why it matters

March 19, 2019 By Andrew Smith

What is a subcontractor?

The answer to this question seems obvious – a subcontractor is a contractor that contracts with the prime contractor to perform a scope of work on a construction project.

However, it is not always easy to distinguish a subcontractor from a materials supplier (sometimes referred to as a “materialman”). That distinction is important in the context of claims by lower-tier subcontractors or materials suppliers on payment bonds, such as those provided by prime contractors on federal and state public works projects. That is, a lower-tier subcontractor or materials supplier may not be entitled to recovery from a payment bond if its contract is with a materials supplier instead of a subcontractor. Therefore, identifying the role of the party with whom a contractor is contracting is a key task the prudent contractor will perform at the outset of a project.

This distinction is most important in the context of federal public works projects. For those projects, the Miller Act restricts claimants on payment bonds to those who had a contract with the prime contractor and those who had a contract with a subcontractor, provided that in the latter case the claimant provides notice to the prime contractor. In other words, if a firm has a contract with a materials supplier, as opposed to a subcontractor, the firm does not have entitlement to payment under the bond. Courts look at the “total relationship” between the parties to determine if the party in question is a subcontractor or materials supplier.

Courts have applied a balancing test to make this determination, with some factors weighing in favor of a subcontractor relationship and other factors weighing in favor of a materials supplier relationship.

Keep reading this article at: https://idahobusinessreview.com/2019/02/28/the-definition-of-a-subcontractor-and-why-it-matters/

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?

Here are the Georgia companies who won federal contracts in earlier months of 2019:

Contract winners from previous years are archived below:

Background

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?

Here are the Georgia companies who won federal contracts February 2019:

Contract winners from previous years are archived below:

Contracting News

Contracting Tips

GTPAC News

Georgia Tech News