Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Training
    • Class Registration
    • On-demand Training
    • GTPAC COVID-19 Resource Page
    • Veterans Verification Video
    • Other Training Audio & Video
  • Useful Links
  • Team Directory
    • Albany Counselor
    • Atlanta Counselors
    • Augusta Counselor
    • Carrollton Counselor
    • Columbus Counselor
    • Gainesville Counselor
    • Savannah Counselor
    • Warner Robins Counselor
  • Directions
    • Atlanta – Training Facility
    • Atlanta – Office
    • Albany
    • Augusta
    • Carrollton
    • Columbus
    • Gainesville
    • Savannah
    • Warner Robins
  • COVID-19
  • New Client Application
  • Contact Us

VA fails again to apply the ‘rule of two’

June 27, 2019 By Andrew Smith

In June 6, 2019, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a decision in the matter of Veterans4You, Inc., deciding that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) must apply the “Rule of Two” even when it procures goods and services through other government agencies.

In the VA context, the Rule of Two is the commonly known name for a statutory provision of a 2006 amendment to the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act requiring that “the [VA] shall award contracts on the basis of competition restricted to small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans” where the VA “has a reasonable expectation that two or more [such concerns] will submit offers,” and “the award can be made at a fair and reasonable price that offers best value to the United States.”  As discussed in an alert in 2018, VA has struggled to reconcile this mandate with myriad other mandates establishing preferential sources for government procurements.

Continue reading at:  Pillsbury

Filed Under: Contracting News Tagged With: GAO, rule of two, SDVOSB, veterans, VOSB

Department of Labor to host education, outreach event for veterans June 26th

May 27, 2019 By Andrew Smith

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs and Veterans’ Employment and Training Service are collaborating with the Georgia Department of Labor, the Atlanta VA Health Care System, and the Goodwill Career Center to host a veteran’s education and outreach event, according to a press release.

The event, titled “From Deployment to Employment: Hire a Veteran Career and Resource Linkage,” serves as an opportunity for qualified veterans, veterans with disabilities, and military spouses to connect with federal contractors offering employment.  The event will also assist federal contractors in meeting goals for hiring individuals with disabilities and veterans, and connect these companies with community-based organizations that provide training and rehabilitation services to veterans with disabilities.

Registration for the event is available at:  Eventbrite 

Continue reading at:  U.S. Department of Labor website

Filed Under: GTPAC News Tagged With: federal contracting, Labor Dept., labor laws, veterans

GTPAC launches Veterans verification video

May 16, 2019 By Andrew Smith

The Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center (“GTPAC”) has created a new free training resource for Veteran small business owners.  GTPAC, with the support of the Defense Logistics Agency (“DLA”), has produced a free video that provides a detailed explanation of how Veterans can get their small business verified as a Veteran-Owned Small Business (“VOSB”) or Service-disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (“SDVOSB”) under the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ (“VA”) Vets First Verification Program.

SDVOSBs and VOSBs receive certain preferences in the federal procurement process, including SDVOSB and VOSB set-aside contracts, sole-source awards (for SDVOSBs), and subcontracting opportunities with federal prime contractors, who are often required to utilize SDVOSBs and VOSBs in their subcontracting plans.

“This video is a great resource for helping VOSBs and SDVOSBs understand the verification process at VA, and how they can benefit from getting verified,” said Andrew E. Smith, Program Manager of the Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center, he continued, “We take great pride in assisting our Veteran small business clients here in Georgia, and want them to take full advantage of the opportunities that are available to them.”

Each year, the federal government awards billions of dollars in contracts to VOSBs and SDVOSBs.  Federal prime contractors also frequently subcontract work to VOSBs and SDVOSBs when performing large government contracts.

GTPAC hopes this video helps Veterans understand the verification process, and makes that process a little bit easier.

Additional resources including links to key VA Verification websites is available on the Veterans Verification Video page.

Filed Under: GTPAC News Tagged With: SDVOSB, service disabled, verification, Verification Assistance Brief, veteran-owned, veterans, Veterans First, VOSB

VA announces increase in contracting with Service-Disabled and Veteran-Owned Small Businesses

May 2, 2019 By Andrew Smith

Secretary of Veterans Affairs (VA) Robert Wilkie announced an increase to the department’s goals for contracting with Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (“SDVOSBs”) and Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (“VOSBs”).

For fiscal year (FY) 2019, VA seeks to award at least 15% of its total contract dollars to SDVOSBs and at least 17% to VOSBs, representing a 5% increase in both goals, a significant change not noted since 2010.

This increase reflects the department’s heightened emphasis on contracting with such firms after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kingdomware Technologies v. United States (2016), Wilkie said.

“Three years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court underscored our mandate to do business with service-disabled and other Veteran entrepreneurs,” Wilkie said. “We have increased the dollars awarded each year, but now it’s time to update the goals to reflect this new commitment.  We need to lock in the gains we have made and continue to build for the future.”

Continue reading at: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Press Release

Filed Under: Contracting News Tagged With: veteran owned business, veterans, Veterans First

‘Cascading’ set-asides now authorized at the VA

June 5, 2018 By Andrew Smith

In what many will see as VA’s continued assault on its Veterans First Contracting Program post-Kingdomware, the Dept. of Veterans Affairs (VA) recently implemented “Cascading” set-asides.

The VA refers to these set-asides as “Tiered Evaluations,” noting they are also known as “Cascading” set-asides.

The VA issued Acquisition Policy Flash (No. 18-15), transmitting Procurement Policy Memorandum (PPM) No. 2018-04, dated and effective February 8, 2018.

The VA issued the PPM in response to requests from VA contracting officers requesting guidance and procedures for the use of tiered evaluations within a single synopsized solicitation when applying the “VA Rule of Two.”

Keep reading this article at: http://vetlikeme.org/its-official-cascading-set-asides-are-now-authorized-at-the-department-of-veterans-affairs/

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: cascading set-asides, class deviation, CLIN, FAR, Kingdomware, rule of two, SDVOSB, set-aside, tiered evaluations, VA, veteran owned business, veterans, Veterans First, VOSB

The labor shortage: How military veterans can help fill the gap

March 23, 2018 By Andrew Smith

Approximately 250,000 people leave military service each year and begin the often bumpy process of re-entering civilian life, a large part of which is finding a suitable career. As construction continues to grapple with a chronic workforce shortage, the numbers of new veterans alone represent enormous potential for the construction industry.

Transitioning military members and veterans are a natural fit for construction, which demands problem-solving, loyalty and onsite decision making — all of which are skills the military instills in its servicemembers. Veteran-specific organizations and construction companies alike recognize the opportunity for this demographic in the industry.

Military members undergo training like few other people do. Following rules and procedures, working as a team and placing absolute trust in colleagues can mean the difference between life and death.

Filed Under: Contracting Tips Tagged With: 8(a), construction, hiring, jobs, military service, veterans

Comments due Mar. 12 on proposed changes to VA’s VOSB program

January 17, 2018 By Andrew Smith

The January 10, 2018, edition of the Federal Register, contains a proposed rule by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) that would amend the VA’s regulations governing its Veteran-Owned Small Business Verification Program.  Public comments on the proposed rule must be submitted on or before March 12, 2018.

The proposed rule is designed to implement §1832 of Public Law 114-840, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2017, which placed responsibility for issuing regulations relating to ownership and control for the verification of Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (VOSBs) with the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).

VA’s proposed regulation will remove all references to ownership and control and seeks to add and clarify certain terms and references that are currently part of the VA’s verification process.  The NDAA also requires, in certain circumstances, that a firm may qualify as a VOSB or Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) when there is a surviving spouse or an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP).

The NDAA provisions designate the SBA as the federal agency responsible for creating regulations governing ownership and control. As regulations relating to and clarifying ownership and control are no longer the responsibility of VA, the VA is proposing to remove six definitions that relate to and clarify ownership and control. Specifically, VA is proposing to remove the following definitions: Day-to-day management, day-to-day operations, immediate family member, negative control, the same or similar line of business, and unconditional ownership. In addition, the VA is proposing to remove one additional definition, VetBiz.gov, in anticipation of changes to the location of the Vendor Information Pages database.

In addition, the VA is proposing to amend the definition of Center for Veterans Enterprise by changing the term to Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) to reflect the name change effectuated at 78 FR 59861, on September 30, 2013. The definition of CVE would be further amended to reflect the change to the functions of CVE office to verification activities. The last sentence of the definition will be removed to clarify CVE’s function.

A list of the VA’s proposed changes appears below:

  • Amend the definition of “joint venture” to conform to the amendments to 13 CFR part 125 as it pertains to SDVOSB joint ventures.  The VA has also added language to clearly address the current policy by indicating that at least one venturer must be a VOSB.
  • Amend the definition of “Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization” to more accurately reflect the role fulfilled by this office with respect to VOSB matters.
  • Amend the definition of “non-veteran” to remove the reference to VetBiz, as VA is considering moving the site which hosts the Vendor Information Pages database.
  • Amend the definition of a “participant” to emphasize CVE’s role in verifying status.
  • Amend the definition of “primary industry classification” to make a technical change to use the acronym NAICS as it has already been defined in a parenthetical earlier in the definition.
  • Amend the definition of “principal place of business” to change “day to day operations” to “daily business operations” in order to match the wording in 13 CFR 125.13.
  • Amend the definition of “service-disabled veteran” as the current definition has led to confusion regarding the documentation necessary to establish a service-connected disability. The VA says this change would also help increase program efficiency by specifically referencing BIRLS, the system that allows CVE to quickly and accurately determine veteran status.
  • Amend the definition of “service-disabled-veteran-owned small business concern” to align the definition with the definition for “small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans” proposed by SBA in the amendment to 13 CFR 125.11.
  • Amend the definition of “small business concern” to align the definition with the definition for “small business concern” proposed by SBA in the amendment to 13 CFR 125.11.
  • Amend the definition of “surviving spouse” to reorder existing language and incorporate additional requirements outlined in the NDAA. The amended definition would provide that immediately prior to the death of the deceased veteran the concern must have been owned and controlled in accordance with 13 CFR part 125 and the concern was listed in VIP.
  • Amend the definition of “Vendor Information Pages” to replace the reference to the website http://www.VetBiz.gov with the website that is the successor to VetBiz.gov and allow for CVE to make reasonable and necessary adjustments without the need for an amendment of the regulation.
  • Remove the definition of Vetbiz.gov to account for anticipated changes to the location of the Vendor Information Pages database.
  • Amend the definition of “verification eligibility period” to reflect the current eligibility period of 3 years, which was effectuated via publication in the Federal Register on February 21, 2017 at 82 FR 11154.  Additionally, a technical change would amend the reference to “Center for Veterans Enterprise” by replacing it with the abbreviation CVE.  A final technical change would replace the word “year” with “eligibility period” to agree with the change in the first sentence.
  • Amend the definition of “Veteran” to add a reference to the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA). This revised definition is meant to be inclusive of all persons who served on active duty and were discharged or released under conditions other than dishonorable. Historically, the program has had an issue wherein applicants who did, in fact, qualify as veterans under the statutory definition, did not meet the standards outlined in § 74.1. This change is not intended to create a new class of Veteran, but rather to clarify that those who are eligible under the applicable statutes will be found eligible for participation in this program.
  • Amend the definition of “Veterans Affairs Acquisition Regulation” to remove the term U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and replace it with the abbreviation for VA as previously defined in § 74.1.
  • Amend the definition of “Veteran-owned small business,” in accordance with the NDAA, to reflect that stock owned by ESOPs which in turn are owned by one or more veterans are not included in determining requisite ownership percentage, and to use the abbreviations that have been previously defined in § 74.1.
  • Amend § 74.2 by revising paragraphs (a)-(e) and adding a new paragraph (g). In both 2010 and 2012, GAO published reports tasking VA with reducing potential instances of fraud, waste, and abuse. VA has found in its administration of the verification program that the use of the procedures identified in § 74.2 protects VA acquisition integrity and diminishes ongoing exposure to fraud, waste, and abuse. Therefore, for such limited situations as identified in § 74.2, and only in these limited instances, VA finds that immediate removal from the public listing is warranted in order to protect the integrity of VA procurement. Accordingly, the proposed amendments to § 74.2 would serve to more comprehensively outline the circumstances under which a participant would be found ineligible for the VOSB Verification program.
  • Amend § 74.2(a) to add the clause “submitted required supplemental documentation at http://www.va.gov/ osdbu to clearly explain the key steps necessary to submit an application and obtain verification.”  Additionally, a technical change would be made to use the abbreviated form “CVE” for consistency.
  • Amend § 74.2(b) to address the impact of criminal activity on eligibility and thus better protect the government from fraud, waste, and abuse. The title would be amended to reference the System for Award Management (SAM), which has replaced the Excluded Parties List System. Additionally, the language of the first sentence would be amended to address the impact of 38 U.S.C. 8127(g)(3), which now VA authority to exclude all principals in the business concern. Accordingly, the language of § 74.2 would be amended to specify that the debarment of any individual holding an ownership and control interest in the concern will impact the concern’s eligibility.
  • Amend § 74.2(c) by adding the phrase “false statements or information” to reference the title and provide further clarification on the eligibility requirements. The removal provision would be additionally reworded to clarify that removal is immediate. Finally, a technical change would remove the word “the” before CVE in the last sentence.
  • Amend § 74.2(d) by including tax liens and unresolved debts owed to various governmental entities outside of the federal government as financial obligations that would disqualify an applicant for inclusion in the VIP database.  The title would be additionally amended to reflect this change. If after verifying the participant’s eligibility, CVE discovers that the participant no longer satisfies this requirement, CVE will remove the participant from the VIP database in accordance with § 74.22. Finally, a technical change would remove the word “VetBiz” before verification in the last sentence.
  • Amend § 74.2(e) to clarify the consequences of SBA protest decisions and other negative findings. “Other negative findings” will additionally be clarified by specifically referencing status protest decisions. A technical change would remove the word “VetBiz” before verification throughout. The title of this section would additionally be amended to clarify this section is not limited to SBA decisions. In order to properly capture the impact of negative findings, § 74.2(e) would continue to clarify removal is immediate. The second sentence would be amended to take into account “other negative findings.”
  • Amend § 74.2(f) to specifically reference the System for Award Management (SAM) registration. SAM is a consolidated listing of previous databases and was not in existence at the time the original regulation was created and therefore was not referenced. Registration through SAM is required by 48 CFR 4.1200 as supplemented by 48 CFR 804.1102.
  • Amend § 74.3(a) to reflect that ownership is determined in accordance with 13 CFR part 125 as the result of the amendments to Title 38 of the United States Code as set forth in the NDAA.
  • Amend § 74.3(e) to redesignate this paragraph as § 74.3(b) to account for the removal of paragraphs (a)-(d). VA is proposing to amend § 74.3(b)(1) by a technical change to replace “application” with “VA Form 0877” in order to clarify the requirement and conform language to the rest of the regulation.
  • Amend § 74.3(b)(1) to add a 30-day time period for submission of a new application after a change in ownership. This change would provide CVE the ability to definitively and accurately track changes of ownership. Further, by adding a time period for a new application, the program would be better able to comply with its statutory mandate to verify that all concerns listed in the VIP Database meet the prescribed ownership and control requirements of the verification program.
  • Amend § 74.3(b)(3) by a technical change to replace “application” with “VA Form 0877” in order to clarify the requirement and conform language to the rest of the regulation.
  • Amend § 74.4(a) to state that control is determined in accordance with 13 CFR part 125 pursuant to the NDAA. Paragraphs (b)-(i) would be removed.
  • Amend § 74.5 to include joint ventures. The paragraph would additionally be reworded to clearly establish that 38 CFR part 74 does not supersede 13 CFR part 121 with respect to size determinations. VA is proposing to add paragraph (b) to specifically address the eligibility of joint ventures. Subparagraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) would be added to provide notice of applicable requirements outlined elsewhere in VA regulation.
  • Amend § 74.10 to remove reference to the physical address for CVE. Addresses or methods for submission may change over time, and this change allows CVE to make reasonable and necessary adjustments without the need for an amendment to the regulation. This section would be further amended to remove the word “VetBiz” before verification, and change “located” to “contained” in the last sentence for better clarity. Finally, a technical change would remove the word “the” before CVE in the last sentence.
  • Amend § 74.11 to redesignate paragraphs (c)-(g) to account for the addition of new paragraph (c). The VA is proposing to amend § 74.11(a) to accommodate a more veteran-friendly, customer service centric approach to processing applications. “Center for Veterans Enterprise” would be changed to “CVE” and “[t]he CVE” would be changed to “CVE.”  Additionally, the VA is proposing to amend § 74.11(a) to incorporate the term “application days” and to increase the review period to 90 application days, when practicable, to accommodate time spent between registering for verification and the time that all required documentation is received and the application is deemed complete.
  • Amend § 74.11(c) to address instances where CVE does not receive all requested documentation.  The VA must verify applicants prior to admission in the database. In order to comply with the statute, the VA requests documentation to demonstrate eligibility. This proposed revision would notify the public that failure to adequately respond to document requests may render CVE unable to verify the eligibility of a concern and therefore may result in a denial or administrative removal.
  • Amend § 74.11(c) to be redesignated as § 74.11(d) and to make a technical change to insert a reference to the newly added paragraph (c).  Additionally, the reference to paragraph (d) would be changed to paragraph (e) to account for the redesignation. VA is proposing to add the term “totality of circumstances” to clarify longstanding CVE interpretation and procedure. References to § 74.11(b) and § 74.13(a) would be added to highlight all applicable exceptions. Finally, a last sentence would be added to clarify the longstanding policy that the applicant bears the burden of establishing VOSB status.
  • Amend § 74.11(d) to be redesignated as § 74.11(e). The first and second sentences would be amended by removing the word “adversely.” The third sentence would be removed as it refers to withdrawal or removal of verified status. This scenario will be addressed in § 74.21, which specifically deals with how participants can exit the VIP database. Therefore, the removal would help to eliminate redundancy and reduce the likelihood of confusion. Additionally, VA is proposing to add § 74.11(e)(1) to specifically address bankruptcy as a changed circumstance. Subparagraphs (a)-(c) would be added to outline requirements applicable to firms undergoing the bankruptcy process.
  • Amend § 74.11(e) to be redesignated as § 74.11(f).
  • Amend § 74.11(f) to be redesignated as § 74.11(g).
  • Amend § 74.11(g) to be redesignated as § 74.11(h). A second sentence would be added to increase program efficiency by requiring firms to provide updated contact information. This would allow the program to use the most efficient methods to dispatch determinations and ensure that applicants will receive determinations in a timely manner.
  • Amend § 74.12 to expand the list of required documentation in order to provide the public notice of documentation that is routinely requested by CVE. This amended list would include documents previously referenced by § 74.20(b). While the documents would still be required for examination as described in § 74.20(b), they also are initially required for the application. As the application is a concern’s first exposure to the process, VA finds this list would be more appropriately placed in this § 74.12 to notify the public of the documentary requirements. Additionally, “electronic form” would be changed to “VA Form 0877” throughout for clarity. Similarly, “attachments” would be changed to “supplemental documentation” throughout. Finally, the last two sentences would be removed for clarity.
  • Amend § 74.13 to modify the title and to remove references to the previous reconsideration process, to include removing paragraphs (b)-(d). In accordance with the NDAA, appeals of initial denials on the grounds of ownership and control will be adjudicated by SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) in accordance with 13 CFR part 134. Accordingly, Section 74.13 (a) would be amended to refer to the appeal process set forth in 13 CFR part 134.
  • Amend § 74.13(e) to be redesignated as § 74.13(b). The VA is further proposing to modify this section to reflect the removal of the reconsideration process and to remove the phrase `service-disabled veteran’ as the term veteran is now used to refer to both veterans and service-disabled veterans throughout. The VA is proposing to delete paragraphs (f) and (g) as they are no longer relevant to the process.
  • Amend § 74.14 to remove references to requests for reconsideration and to include notices of verified status cancellation and denials of appeals in the list of determinations that trigger a waiting period before a concern may submit a new verification application. Including denial of appeals takes into consideration any appeal filed with OHA that sustains the initial denial letter issued by the CVE. The program has instituted several procedures through policy to assist applicants to identify and address easily correctable issues that render the applicant ineligible. Therefore, the class of notices listed in § 74.14 are issued to applicants with substantial issues in their business structure or underlying documentation that result in ineligibility.
  • Amend § 74.14 to be redesignated as § 74.14(a). A new paragraph § 74.14(b) would be added to clarify that a finding of ineligibility during a reapplication will result in the immediate removal of the participant. VA only intends, to the extent practicable, to list as verified in the VIP database concerns which currently meet verification requirements. This proposed change would clarify current policy and serve the important purpose of assisting contracting officers in the procurement process by ensuring the database only includes concerns that are eligible for an award of set aside procurements. A final technical change removes the word “VetBiz” before verification throughout.
  • Amend § 74.15(a) by splitting the paragraph into paragraphs (a), (b), and (c). A technical change would be made to what would be redesignated as § 74.15(a) to improve specificity. A change would be made to what would be redesignated as § 74.15(b) to require participants to inform CVE within 30 days of changes affecting eligibility, consistent with § 74.3(f)(1). A substantive change would be made to the list that would be redesignated as § 74.15(c), which would be expanded to include all situations in which the eligibility period may be shortened. VA is proposing to remove § 74.15(b) because it deals with affiliation and would, therefore, be addressed in § 74.5. Therefore, any shortening of the eligibility period due to an affiliation determination would result from an SBA determination. This scenario would be addressed by § 74.2(e) and is referenced appropriately at what would be designated § 74.15(c). A technical change would remove the word “VetBiz” before verification throughout. Finally, paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) would be redesignated as (d), (e), and (f) respectively. The redesignated § 74.15(e) will be amended to reference immediate removals pursuant to § 74.2.
  • Amend the first three sentences of § 74.20(b) for simplicity and clarification. In the first sentence, the phrase, “or parts of the program examination” would be removed. In the second sentence, “location” would be changed to “location(s)”. In the third sentence, the word “[e]xaminers” is changed to “CVE”. As the proposed revisions to § 74.12 would fully address the required documentation necessary for verification the complete list would be removed from § 74.20 in order to avoid redundancy and confusion. A final technical change removes the word “VetBiz” before verification throughout.
  • Amend § 74.21 to reorder for clarity and to conform with changes made to other sections of this Part. VA is proposing to amend § 74.21(a) by a technical change to remove reference to the “verified’ status button” in order to reflect the current graphical user interface of the VIP database. Additionally, “Vendor Information Pages” would be changed to “VIP.”
  • Amend § 74.21(b) by changing “Vendor Information Pages” to “VIP.”
  • Amend § 74.21(c) by referencing the immediate removal provisions established by and clarified in § 74.2. VA is proposing to amend § 74.21(c) and associated subparagraphs to be redesignated as § 74.21(d) and associated subparagraphs. Additionally, reference to the “verified’ status button” would be removed to reflect the current graphical user interface of the database.
  • Remove § 74.21(c)(5) as involuntary exclusions would now be addressed in § 74.2.
  • Amend § 74.21(c)(6) to be redesignated as Section 74.21(d)(5) to account for deletion of § 74.21(c)(5). Additionally, the phrase “or its agents” would be added to clarify who may request documents, and the words “a pattern of ” will be deleted to clarify the requirements necessary to remove a company for failure to provide the requested information. In the past, establishing a pattern of failure has led to ineligible firms maintaining verified status for an extended period of time by failing to provide requested documentation. This change would help CVE protect the integrity of the procurement process while still providing firms notice and opportunity to be heard prior to cancellation.
  • Amend § 74.21(c)(7) to be redesignated as § 74.21(d)(6) to account for deletion of § 74.21(c)(5).
  • Remove § 74.21(c)(8) as the action addressed by that provision would now be addressed in § 74.2.
  • Amend § 74.21(c)(10) to be redesignated as § 74.21(d)(7). The term “application” would be removed as VA Form 0877 reflects current program requirements.  “60 days” would be changed to “30 days” to conform with revised § 74.3(f)(1).
  • Add § 74.21(d)(8) to notify the public that failure to report changed circumstances within 30 days is in and of itself good cause to initiate cancellation proceedings.
  • Amend § 74.21(d) to be redesignated as § 74.21(e).
  • Amend § 74.22(a) to begin the relevant 30-day time period on the date on which CVE sends notice of proposed cancellation of verified status. This change would provide the agency the ability to definitively and accurately track the cancellation proceedings. Additionally, this change would provide the agency the ability to control the regulatory time period and consistently apply the subsequent provisions of the paragraph.
  • Amend § 74.22(e) to implement the new appeals procedure to OHA prescribed in the NDAA.
  • Amend § 74.25 to replace “the Department” with “VA”.
  • Amend § 74.26 to reflect the amended title of § 74.12.
  • Amend § 74.27 to reword the first sentence to specify that all documents submitted to the program, not only those used to complete applications, will be stored electronically. Additionally, the “Vendor Information Pages” would be changed to “CVE” in order to clearly denote who will be in possession of the documents and responsible for their retention. The location reference would be removed due to the electronic nature of the records to be maintained by the program. The second sentence would be revised to indicate that any owner information provided will be compared to any available records. Finally, references to records management procedures to be followed and procedures governing data breaches would be added.
  • Amend § 74.28 to replace “Department of Veterans Affairs” and “Center for Veterans Enterprises” to VA and CVE respectively.
  • Amend § 74.29 to refer to VA’s records management procedures, which would govern, absent a timely written request from the Government Accountability Office.

The Federal Register website where comments may be submitted is located at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/01/10/2017-27715/va-veteran-owned-small-business-vosb-verification-guidelines?utm_campaign=subscription%20mailing%20list&utm_source=federalregister.gov&utm_medium=email#open-comment

Remember, comments are due not later than March 12, 2018 at 11:59 PM EDT.

Filed Under: Contracting News Tagged With: CVE, Federal Register, public comment, SBA, SDVOSB, service disabled, VA, verification, VetBiz, veteran, veteran owned business, veterans, VIP, VOSB

SBA’s advocacy office report reveals Georgia ranks 6th in veteran-owned business population

May 3, 2017 By Andrew Smith

The Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy has released a new report on veteran-owned businesses. The report gives a detailed profile of this robust business population based on the latest available data, the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2012 Survey of Small Business Owners.

  • In 2012, the United States had 21.2 million veterans, and 2.52 million businesses were majority-owned by veterans.
  • Almost all of veteran-owned businesses (99.9 percent) were small businesses.
  • Veteran-owned firms had receipts of $1.14 trillion, employed more than five million people, and had a combined annual payroll of $195 billion.
  • These firms represent 9.1 percent of all U.S. firms.
  • The three states with the most veteran-owned businesses were California, Texas, and Florida.
  • Georgia ranks 6th among states with the most veteran-owned businesses. According to the report, there are 96,787 veteran-owned firms in Georgia.
  • The three states with the highest percent of veteran-owned businesses in their populations were South Carolina, New Hampshire, and Virginia.  Georgia ranks 16th among the states, with 10.4% of all businesses being veteran-owned businesses.
  • The report shows that in 2012, veteran-owned businesses in Georgia reported sales of $35,745,281.  This means veteran-owned businesses in Georgia ranked 6th in revenues, behind California, Texas, Florida, New York and Pennsylvania.

The report is entitled “Veteran-Owned Businesses and Their Owners: Data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Survey of Business Owners.”  It is one of the only large-scale compilations of data on veteran-owned businesses in the United States, and it provides valuable data for analytical and policy-making.

The full report is available on the Office of Advocacy’s website at https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/435-veteran-owned-businesses-report.pdf and the research summary can be seen here.

Filed Under: GTPAC News Tagged With: Georgia, SBA, small business, veteran owned business, veterans

VA and Kingdomware agree: Supreme Court case isn’t moot

December 2, 2015 By Andrew Smith

Supreme CourtThe VA and Kingdomware Technologies Inc. haven’t agreed on much in recent years, but in briefs filed with the Supreme Court on November 20, 2015, they agree on one thing: the pending Kingdomware Supreme Court case is not moot.

VA sealHopefully, the fact that neither party wants the case dismissed on a technicality will help convince the Court to decide Kingdomware on the merits.

As you may recall, shortly before the Supreme Court was to hear oral argument earlier this month, the Court issued an order removing the case from its docket.  The Court asked the parties to submit briefs on whether the contracts in question have been fully performed, and if so, whether full performance renders the case moot.

Well, those briefs are in – and Kingdomware and the United States agree that the case is not moot.

Keep reading this article at: http://smallgovcon.com/service-disabled-veteran-owned-small-businesses/va-kingdomware-agree-supreme-court-case-isnt-moot/

Filed Under: Contracting News Tagged With: Court of Federal Claims, GSA Schedule, preference, rule of two, Supreme Court, VA, veteran, veteran owned business, veterans, Veterans First

VA cancels contract award for management of its veteran-owned small business program

December 2, 2014 By ei2admin

Once again, the Department of Veteran Affairs is trying to figure out what company will manage the process of getting veteran-owned small businesses verified.

CVE logoThe agency decided to rescind its September $39.9 million contract award to Monterey Consultants Inc. of Dayton, Ohio, to manage its Center for Veterans Enterprise (CVE). That award, the bulk of which was for processing contractor applications to be verified as veteran-owned, which in turn allows them to be able to compete for work set aside by the VA, was protested in September by Loch Harbour Group Inc. of Alexandria.

The VA confirmed in a Nov. 18 court filing that the VA would re-evaluate Loch Harbour’s proposal to determine whether the company qualified for the award. Monterey will no longer be eligible for re-award of the contract, according to the filing, though Monterey executives said that the company is submitting additional information to the VA to counter the protest allegations in hopes that the agency reconsiders its decision.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/blog/fedbiz_daily/2014/11/back-to-the-drawing-board-va-cancels-its-contract.html

Filed Under: Contracting News Tagged With: bid protest, SDVOSB, VA, verification, veteran owned business, veterans, Veterans First, VOSB

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page »

Recent Posts

  • OMB releases guidance related to small business goals
  • Are verbal agreements good enough for government contractors?
  • OMB issues guidance on impact of injunction on government contractor vaccine mandate
  • CMMC 2.0 simplifies requirements but raises risks for government contractors
  • OFCCP launches contractor portal initiating AAP verification program

Popular Topics

8(a) abuse Army bid protest budget budget cuts certification construction contract awards contracting opportunities cybersecurity DoD DOJ False Claims Act FAR federal contracting federal contracts fraud GAO Georgia Tech government contracting government contract training government trends GSA GSA Schedule GTPAC HUBZone innovation IT Justice Dept. marketing NDAA OMB SBA SDVOSB set-aside small business small business goals spending subcontracting technology VA veteran owned business VOSB wosb

Contracting News

OMB releases guidance related to small business goals

OMB issues guidance on impact of injunction on government contractor vaccine mandate

Changes coming to DOD’s Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification under CMMC 2.0

Judge issues nationwide injunction halting enforcement of COVID-19 vaccine mandate

Nondisplacement of qualified workers is back, but with changes

Read More

Contracting Tips

Are verbal agreements good enough for government contractors?

CMMC 2.0 simplifies requirements but raises risks for government contractors

OFCCP launches contractor portal initiating AAP verification program

GAO rules that DoD may not require small business Joint Venture itself hold facility security clearance

Terminations for convenience clauses vs. mutual termination clauses

Read More

GTPAC News

VA direct access program events in 2022

Sandia National Laboratories seeks small business suppliers

Navy OSBP hosting DCAA overview (part 2) event Jan. 12, 2022

Navy OSBP hosting cybersecurity “ask me anything” event Dec. 16th

State of Georgia hosting supplier systems training on January 26, 2022

Read More

Georgia Tech News

Undergraduate enrollment growth reflects inclusive excellence

Georgia Tech delivers $4 billion in economic impact to the State of Georgia

Georgia Tech awards first round of seed grants to support team-based research

Georgia Tech announces inaugural Associate Vice President of Corporate Engagement

DoD funds Georgia Tech to enhance U.S. hypersonics capabilities

Read More

  • SAM.gov registration is free, and help with SAM is free, too
APTAC RSS Twitter GTPAC - 30th Year of Service

Copyright © 2022 · Georgia Tech - Enterprise Innovation Institute