small business | The Contracting Education Academy

March 23, 2021 By cs

What does CMMC really mean for small businesses?

If you are a small business, you have an area of expertise, and then there are a lot of departments where you just don’t have the manpower or bandwidth to give it adequate consideration.

That is certainly the case when it comes to concerns like payroll, accounting or HR.

Now, consider how significant your records are and how you keep and secure your computer documents and policies. The security of your organization’s data and that of your clients is going to be essential to your survival. One data spill can shutter your doors, ruin your reputation, and cost you staggering fines.

Now more than ever, businesses do not have the luxury of ignoring the implications of inadequate data management and security.

What It Means, and Why

The recent emergence of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) initiative, which effectively builds off of the tenets of the DoD’s existing DFARS 252.204-7012 regulation requiring contractors to at a minimum “self-certify” their implementation of proper security practices, essentially ups the ante for its Defense Industrial Base by now independently verifying that they have the proper controls in place to protect the government’s data before doing business with them.

Translation: If you currently do work for the DoD or plan on doing work with them in the future, from mowing the lawn to handling freight, you have some digital hygiene to do – NOW.

Keep reading this article at: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/commentary/2021/01/what-does-cmmc-really-mean-for-small-businesses/

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 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/

February 23, 2021 By cs

Size recertification prior to contract award – When is it required?

The U.S. Court of Federal Claims (COFC) decision in HWI Gear, Inc. v. United States highlights the importance of reviewing a solicitation to determine if the text of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.219-28 is included in it, as well as the risk of engaging in corporate transactions while a proposal to a procuring agency is pending.

In this case, the COFC held that an offeror was required to recertify its size status during a procurement, and the agency’s failure to enforce this requirement invalidated the award.

In HWI Gear, Mechanix Wear, Inc. (Mechanix) and HWI Gear, Inc. (HWI) submitted proposals in response to a solicitation set aside for small businesses. After proposal submission but before award, Mechanix informed the procuring agency that it had changed its corporate structure from a corporation to a limited liability company and changed its corporate name, but that all other terms and conditions in its proposal remained unchanged. Mechanix, however, did not inform the agency that its change in corporate structure was the result of a merger with a large business and that Mechanix no longer qualified as a small business under the size standard established for the procurement. The agency ultimately selected Mechanix as the awardee, and HWI filed a bid protest challenging the agency’s evaluation.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/size-recertification-prior-to-award-4583775/

If you are a small business, you have an area of expertise, and then there are a lot of departments where you just don’t have the manpower or bandwidth to give it adequate consideration.

What It Means, and Why

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