cs | The Contracting Education Academy

March 19, 2021 By cs

OFPP issues memo addressing procurement administrative lead time (PALT)

The Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) recently issued guidance on the subject of measuring the timeliness of federal procurements.

**This graphic illustrates a typical agency’s PALT goals.**

In government acquisition circles, this measurement is typically referred to as PALT or procurement administrative lead time.

Simply put, PALT is the time between the date on which an initial solicitation for a contract or order is issued by a federal department or agency and the date of the award of the contract or order.

Now, OFPP has issued a guidance memorandum that provides:

a common definition of PALT, and
the steps agencies can take to incorporate modern business practices that shorten the time between identification and delivery and reduce PALT in acquisition activities.

Acquisition officials can view the OFPP memo on the Acquisition Gateway at: https://hallways.cap.gsa.gov. The memo is also viewable at in the Federal Register at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/21/2020-00783/procurement-administrative-lead-time-palt.

March 18, 2021 By cs

‘Rule of Two’ must be analyzed before ‘any’ acquisition

The Court of Federal Claims (COFC) recently affirmed that agencies are required to apply the “Rule of Two” to all federal acquisitions in its decision of Tolliver Grp., Inc. v. United States.

Further, agencies must give a reasonable explanation supported by factual evidence when canceling solicitations. The decision ensures that small businesses will continue to have robust access to

The two solicitations at issue in this case were for the procurement of training staff for a field artillery school located in Fort Sill, Oklahoma. Both solicitations were set-aside for service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSBs). After the Army awarded the contracts to two SDVOSBs, a third SDVOSB bidder protested the awards, alleging deficiencies in the Army’s evaluation of various factors.

The Army issued Notices of Corrective Action for both contracts, stating that it would cancel both awards, “[r]e-evaluate the requirement and acquisition strategy to ensure that it accurately reflects the Army’s current need,” and either cancel or amend the solicitations. The Army’s internal memorandums indicate that part of the rationale for revisiting the solicitations was because the Army now had a new multiple award indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (MAIDIQ) contract vehicle that encompassed the scope of the two solicitations at issue.

Using a MAIDIQ allows the government to select several possible vendors for an agency to rely on, then ask that small group of vendors to bid against one another to complete each separate task; giving the government a competitive price for each task without initiating a new contract competition and all that it would demand of contracting officers. While the Army initially intended the MAIDIQ to be a small business set-aside, the Army determined, after conducting market research, that given the breadth of the MAIDIQ’s anticipated scope of work, none of the small business proposals could meet the requirements.

On September 13, 2018, the Army issued the MAIDIQ Solicitation as a full and open competition. Five businesses were awarded the MAIDIQ contract, none of which qualified as a small business.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/government-contracts-procurement-ppp/1037100/cofc-rule-of-two-must-be-analyzed-before-any-acquisition

March 17, 2021 By cs

A case study of the government’s struggle to police procurement fraud

On January 5, the Pentagon’s Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) awarded a contract worth up to $33 billion over 10 years to a privately held equipment supplier called Atlantic Diving Supply, Inc., or ADS.

Only small businesses were legally permitted to bid on the contract, and ADS has been accused of defrauding the Pentagon by falsely claiming to be a small business. According to the most recent official tally of top government contractors, ADS is ranked as the 24^th largest federal contractor in fiscal year 2019 with more than $3 billion in sales and ADS is the only “small business” among the top 50 that year.

ADS’s gargantuan new award for work on a Pentagon logistics program landed after the company’s majority owner, Luke M. Hillier, personally agreed to pay $20 million in 2019 to settle civil charges that his company defrauded the same program by falsely claiming to be a small business, among other accusations. An ADS spokesperson told the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) that Hillier is “unavailable for comment” and emails to him went unanswered.

In the months before Hillier’s settlement, three non-ADS executives including a former state politician pleaded guilty in a felony scheme. According to the Justice Department, Hillier — referred to as “Person Y” in court records — allegedly created the scheme to allow ADS to benefit from contracts set aside by law for small businesses owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals, often women- and minority-owned ventures. Companies controlled by those non-ADS executives then allegedly would partner with ADS to perform work on the contracts. The arrangement allegedly allowed ADS to benefit even though ADS is mostly owned by Hillier and thus was not eligible to bid on the contracts directly.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2021/02/how-a-small-business-kingpin-wins-billions-in-defense-contracts/

March 16, 2021 By cs

Federal contractor agrees to pay more than $6 million to settle overbilling allegations

Virginia-based Information Innovators Inc. (Triple-I) has agreed to pay the United States $6.05 million to resolve allegations that a predecessor company, Creative Computing Solutions Inc. (CCSi), violated the False Claims Act by knowingly overbilling the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for work performed by CCSi employees who lacked required job qualifications.

Triple-I, which provides IT services and solutions to federal agencies, acquired Maryland-based CCSi in 2015. CCSi formerly provided IT services to DHS pursuant to an Enterprise Acquisition Gateway for Leading Edge Solutions Contract (EAGLE contract). The settlement resolves allegations that, from October 2007 to April 2014, CCSi knowingly submitted claims for payment to DHS for work performed by CCSi employees who lacked required job qualifications. CCSi allegedly violated the terms of the EAGLE Contract by using under-qualified personnel who were billed to DHS at higher rates reserved for more qualified employees.

“Contractors that knowingly overcharge the government will be held accountable,” said Acting Attorney General Brian M. Boynton of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The department will ensure that that those who do business with the government, and seek taxpayer funds, do so fairly and in accordance with their contractual commitments.”

“Defense contractors are required to bill for costs actually incurred, and to be truthful in the claims they submit to federal agencies,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Jonathan F. Lenzner for the District of Maryland. “The U.S. Attorney’s Office and our partners are committed to protecting taxpayer dollars and ensuring integrity and compliance with federal agency standards.”

“DHS OIG remains committed to protecting government programs, and American taxpayers who contribute to them, from fraudsters,” said Inspector General Joseph V. Cuffari. “Our agency, working closely with our law enforcement partners, will continue to root out these unlawful contracting fraud schemes.”

The settlement was a result of a joint investigation by the DOJ’s Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch (Fraud Section), the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland, and the Department of Homeland Security Office of the Inspector General’s Major Frauds and Corruption Unit. The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.

Source: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-contractor-agrees-pay-more-6-million-settle-overbilling-allegations

March 15, 2021 By cs

2021 NDAA includes numerous provisions impacting government contracts

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 (Pub. L. No. 116-283) was enacted into law on January 1, 2021, when the Senate voted to override President Trump’s veto of the bill.

The Senate’s move, the final step in the legislative process, followed the House’s earlier vote to override President Trump’s veto in December 2020.

The FY21 NDAA sets funding levels and outlines policy priorities for the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). It also addresses many areas of importance to government contractors, including acquisition policy and management, supply chain and industrial base matters, and small business issues. The final version of the NDAA produced by negotiators on the Conference Committee included provisions from earlier House and Senate versions, which we summarized in an earlier article.

This article includes our annual summary, by topic, of the most relevant provisions of the FY21 NDAA for government contractors. As detailed below, some of the provisions from the earlier House and Senate versions of the NDAA that we highlighted in our previous article were not accepted into the final version. As we’ve previously summarized, the NDAA also includes numerous provisions addressing cybersecurity and artificial intelligence policies with ramifications far beyond DoD, including implementing recommendations from the Cyberspace Solarium Commission’s 2020 Report.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/national-defense-authorization-act-for-5444697/

The Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) recently issued guidance on the subject of measuring the timeliness of federal procurements.

The Court of Federal Claims (COFC) recently affirmed that agencies are required to apply the “Rule of Two” to all federal acquisitions in its decision of Tolliver Grp., Inc. v. United States.

On January 5, the Pentagon’s Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) awarded a contract worth up to $33 billion over 10 years to a privately held equipment supplier called Atlantic Diving Supply, Inc., or ADS.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 (Pub. L. No. 116-283) was enacted into law on January 1, 2021, when the Senate voted to override President Trump’s veto of the bill.

Search this Website