SBA | The Contracting Education Academy

May 21, 2020 By cs

SBA issues final rule implementing certification for women-owned small businesses

The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) on May 11, 2020, published its long-awaited Final Rule implementing important changes for Women-Owned Small Business Concerns (WOSBs) and Economically Disadvantaged Women-Owned Small Business Concerns (EDWOSBs) participating in the Procurement Program for Women-Owned Small Business Concerns (Program).

Among other things, the Final Rule requires a certification for businesses competing for set-aside or sole source contracts under the Program, and to those seeking to be awarded multiple award contracts for pools reserved for WOSBs and EDWOSBs. It also changes EDWOSB requirements to be consistent with the 8(a) Business Development (BD) Program.

The rule becomes effective on July 15, 2020; however, it’s important to note that many of the specific changes do not go into effect until Oct. 15, 2020.

Some of the important points are summarized here in more detail: https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/government-contracts-procurement-ppp/934468/sba-issues-final-rule-implementing-certification-for-women-owned-small-businesses

April 2, 2020 By cs

What you need to know about the new small business ‘reserves’ FAR rule

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) has been amended to implement regulatory changes made by the Small Business Administration, which provide a policy for partial set-asides and reserves, and for total set-asides to small businesses on multiple-award contracts.

The final rule goes into effect March 30, 2020.

As used in the new FAR rule, a “reserve” provides small businesses with opportunities to participate in federal contracts as prime contractors in circumstances where small businesses might not have otherwise been able to participate.

Reserves are applicable to Multiple-Award Contracts only and are to be used when market research indicates that a total or partial set-aside is not feasible.

The language at FAR 19.503 addresses factors the contracting officer must consider at the contract level. Multiple-award solicitations with reserves may result in contract awards to more than one small business. FAR 19.504(c)(1) addresses procedures at the order level when more than one small business receives an award under a multiple-award solicitation with a reserve.

The new rule is expected to benefit small business by removing the current requirement for small business offerors to submit an offer for both the set-aside and non-set-aside portions of a partial set-aside. That requirement was burdensome for small business concerns looking to perform only the set-aside portion(s). Now, small business offerors may submit an offer for only the set-aside portion if they are only interested in performing that portion. By allowing small business offerors to only submit an offer for the set-aside portion, the Government expects to have fewer proposals to evaluate for the non-set-aside portion of the solicitation, which would result in a reduction in burden. However, there may be additional proposals received on the set-aside portion of the solicitation from offerors that previously did not submit a proposal for the requirement because they would have had to submit a proposal for all portions of the solicitation.

Other impacts of this final rule include the following:

The rule provides contracting officers with the authority to issue orders directly to a small business under a reserve, which will increase opportunities for small business concerns awarded a contract under a multiple-award contract reserve but will result in lost opportunity for the other contractors with awards on the multiple-award contract.
The rule removes the ability of interested parties to protest sole source awards under the service-disabled veteran-owned small business program.
The rule requires certain multiple-award contracts to be assigned more than one NAICS code.
The rule requires contracting officers to specify the compliance period for the limitations on subcontracting at either the contract or order level.
The rule prohibits tiered evaluation of offers on multiple-award contracts unless the agency has statutory authority.

Applicable contract clauses governing the use of set-asides and reserves for multiple-award contracts are:

Solicitations for multiple-award contracts that are total set-asides are to include FAR clause 52.219-6.
Solicitations for multiple-award contracts that contain partial set-asides are to include FAR clause 52.219-7.
Solicitations for multiple-award contracts that contain a reserve are to include FAR clause 52.219-31.

March 6, 2020 By cs

Contracting official sentenced to 18 months in federal prison for role in bribery scheme to rig VA contracts

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs official Dwane Nevins has been sentenced to serve 18 months in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release, for corruption offenses. He took cash bribes and then extorted undercover small business owners so that he could have his “Christmas.”

We first reported on the allegations against Nevins in September 2018. Then, in January of this year, we reported on the sentencing of a businessman who conspired with Nevins. Sentencing of one more individual in this case is scheduled later this month.

According to Court records, Dwane Nevins — a small business specialist at the VA’s Network Contracting Office in Colorado — agreed to take bribes offered by co-defendants Robert Revis, Anthony Bueno, and an undercover FBI agent to help them manipulate the process for bidding on federal contracts with the VA.

Revis and Bueno, working with Nevins, agreed to submit fraudulent bids from service-disabled-veteran-owned small businesses under contract with their consulting company so that federal contracts would be set aside for only those companies. As Bueno put it, the conspirators would then “own all the dogs on the track.”
Nevins, Bueno and Revis worked to conceal the nature of the bribe payments by either kicking back to Nevins a portion of the payments made to their consulting company, or by asking their consulting company’s clients to pay Nevins for sham training classes related to federal contracting. At one of those sham trainings in Las Vegas, Nevada, Nevins accepted a $4,500 cash bribe from the undercover FBI agent.

After complaining about not being paid by Revis and Bueno for his participation in the scheme, Nevins used his official position at the VA to extort approximately $10,000 from an undercover FBI agent, telling the agent that “the train don’t go without me. You know what I mean? I’m the engine. I’m the caboose. I’m the engine room.” Nevins also told the undercover FBI agent “this is a business and businessmen need to get paid . . . . so I can have my Christmas, you know what I’m saying?”

Anthony Bueno was previously sentenced in this case to 30 months imprisonment. He was also sentenced to 63 months imprisonment for his role in a separately indicted wire fraud scheme in which he used false representations about investment opportunities to take over a million dollars from several victims.

Robert Revis pleaded guilty in April 2019 to an Information charging him with a single count of supplementing the salary of a federal official. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for March 2, 2020.

Source: https://www.justice.gov/usao-co/pr/former-veterans-affairs-official-sentenced-18-months-federal-prison-role-bribery-scheme

March 4, 2020 By cs

IG says Pentagon awarded $876 million in contracts meant for disabled vets to ineligible companies

Small businesses owned or run by disabled veterans may have been cheated out of hundreds of millions of dollars in Defense Department contracts by unscrupulous firms who were ineligible for the awards.

This information is contained in an Inspector General’s report released to the public on Feb. 20, 2020.

The IG’s audit found that the DoD “awarded $876.8 million in contracts to ineligible contractors and did not implement procedures to ensure compliance with the Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) subcontracting requirements after the contracts were awarded.”

At least 16 of the 29 contractors reviewed in the report who received business from the DoD on the basis that they met the disabled veteran requirements were found to be ineligible, the IG’s office said.

Unless the DoD conducts better oversight, “service-disabled veterans may be in jeopardy of not receiving contract awards intended for them, and the DoD will be at risk of misreporting the amounts for SDVOSB participation,” the 29-page report states.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/02/20/pentagon-awarded-876m-contracts-meant-disabled-vets-ineligible-companies-ig.html

January 20, 2020 By cs

Businessman who tried to ‘own every dog on the track’ sentenced for conspiring to bribe VA contract specialist

The Justice Department announced in Denver last week the sentencing of a businessman who engaged in a conspiracy with a Veterans Affairs’ contracting official to manipulate contract awards to benefit a consulting company that purportedly represented service-disabled veteran owned small businesses.

Anthony Bueno was sentenced to serve 30 months in federal prison, followed by 3 years of supervised release, for his role in a conspiracy to bribe a VA official so that clients of his company would gain an unfair advantage in the VA contracting process. Bueno was remanded into custody immediately after the sentencing hearing.

The VA’s contracting official, Dwane Nevins, previously pleaded guilty in September 2019 to every count of an indictment charging him with this scheme, including counts of conspiracy, receiving bribes, extortion, and criminal conflicts of interests. He is scheduled to be sentenced on February 19, 2020.

According to court records:

Bueno and his business partner, Robert Revis, agreed to help an undercover FBI agent, who was posing as a veteran and small business owner, bribe Nevins, a contracting specialist at the VA’s Network Contracting Office in Colorado.
As part of the bribery scheme, Bueno and Revis, working with Nevins, agreed to submit bids from small businesses owned by veterans disabled during military service (one of whom was the undercover FBI agent) under contract with Buenon and Revis’ consulting company so that federal contracts would be set aside for only those companies.
As Bueno explained to the undercover agent, the conspirators would then “own all the dogs on the track,” meaning their clients were guaranteed to get the contracts.
Bueno, Revis and Nevins worked to conceal the nature of the bribe payments by either kicking back to Nevins a portion of the payments made to the consulting company, or by asking the consulting company’s clients to pay Nevins directly for sham training classes related to federal contracting.

Robert Revis pleaded guilty in April 2019 to an Information charging him with a single count of supplementing the salary of a federal official. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for March 2, 2020. Bueno pleaded guilty on September 17, 2019.

Bueno has also pleaded guilty to conspiring to launder money arising from a completely separate wire fraud scheme in which he used false representations about investment opportunities to take over a million dollars from several victims. Sentencing in that case, pending before United States District Judge William J. Martinez, is scheduled for January 23, 2019.

The case was jointly investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General, with substantial assistance from the U.S. Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General.

Source: https://www.justice.gov/usao-co/pr/businessman-sentenced-two-and-half-years-imprisonment-conspiring-bribe-veterans-affairs

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) has been amended to implement regulatory changes made by the Small Business Administration, which provide a policy for partial set-asides and reserves, and for total set-asides to small businesses on multiple-award contracts.

Small businesses owned or run by disabled veterans may have been cheated out of hundreds of millions of dollars in Defense Department contracts by unscrupulous firms who were ineligible for the awards.

Search this Website