whistleblower | The Contracting Education Academy

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/

January 8, 2021 By cs

Judge rules that lying about 8(a) eligibility violates False Claims Act

Another court has joined the growing chorus of judges who are singing the same tune on set-aside fraud: when a government contractor lies about its eligibility for a set-aside contract, it violates the False Claims Act, and can be sued by either the Department of Justice or a whistleblower.

The new case is United States ex rel. Montes v. Main Building Maintenance Inc., and the decision was issued on December 22, 2020, by Judge Jason Pulliam of the Western District of Texas.

This is a qui tam case brought under the False Claims Act by a whistleblower, or “relator” as it’s called under that statute. The relator alleges that two parents, Robert and Elvira Ximenes, created a company, JXM, to bid on government contracts reserved (or, in technical terms, “set aside”) for contractors that qualified for the so-called “8(a) Business Development program” for small businesses that are owned by “socially and economically disadvantaged people or entities.”

To qualify for such set-aside contracts, the business must first be “certified” as eligible by the Small Business Administration (SBA). And to be eligible for such certification, the business must make a series of representation to SBA about who both owns the business, and who controls the business.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/federal-judge-texas-rules-lying-about-eligibility-8a-business-development-program

December 18, 2020 By cs

Court of Appeals issues important decision on application of False Claims Act to set-aside contracts

On December 3, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its decision in United States v. Strock, a ruling that will significantly strengthen the hand of the government, and of qui tam whistleblowers, in False Claims Act cases against companies awarded government set-aside contracts but do not meet the requirements of the particular set-aside.

The contracts at issue in Strock were set aside for service-disabled, veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSBs).

Still, the Court’s reasoning also applies to other types of set-aside contracts, such as small business, women-owned small business, or HUBZone set-asides. This decision should hearten whistleblowers who have information about fraud in government contracting set-aside programs.

The Facts Of United States v. Strock

The government sued Strock Contracting, its owner Lee Strock, and one of Strock’s employees. The government alleged that Strock set up a new company called Veteran Enterprises Company (VECO) to bid on SDVOSB-reserved contracts from the Army, Air Force, and Veterans Administration. Strock, however, was not a disabled veteran. Instead, he recruited another individual, a disabled veteran named Terry Anderson.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/court-appeals-issues-important-decision-application-false-claims-act-to-set-aside

Read the full decision in this case at: https://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/36dc4bcd-69b0-4890-b0e2-56e98757e39f/3/doc/19-4331_opn.pdf#xml=https://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/36dc4bcd-69b0-4890-b0e2-56e98757e39f/3/hilite/

October 20, 2020 By cs

Nonprofit to pay $1.9 million to settle false claims and kickback allegations on federal contracts for blind workers

Industries for the Blind and Visually Impaired Inc. (IBI) has agreed to pay $1,938,684.09 to resolve allegations that IBI violated the False Claims Act and the Anti-Kickback Act in connection with certain federal contracts set aside to employ blind workers, the Justice Department has announced.

IBI is a nonprofit corporation headquartered in West Allis, Wisconsin that receives set-aside contracts from federal agencies under the federal government’s Ability One Program. In exchange, IBI agrees to give jobs to workers who are blind or visually-impaired and comply with other contractual requirements.

The settlement resolves allegations that, between 2009 and 2018, IBI misrepresented to the U.S. Ability One Commission when requesting set-aside contracts for furniture design and installation services that it would maintain a 3:1 blind-to-sighted ratio of employees, and that furniture designers and sales representatives working for IBI took impermissible payments and gifts from manufacturers on certain contracts. It also resolves claims that IBI improperly subcontracted a set-aside contract for screen-printed clothing to an entity that did not generally use blind labor.

The Ability One Commission operates under the authority of the Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act (JWOD Act), which was passed in 1971 to increase employment and training opportunities for persons who are blind or visually impaired, or who have disabilities so severe that they are otherwise unable to work at competitive employment. More than 400 companies participate in the AbilityOne Program and receive set-aside federal contracts in exchange for employing approximately 45,000 people who are blind or have severe disabilities.

Among the allegations resolved by the settlement are claims asserted in a lawsuit filed under the whistleblower provision of the False Claims Act, which permits private parties to file suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in a portion of the government’s recovery. The lawsuit was filed by Paul Inzeo, formerly a marketing manager at IBI, whose share has not yet been decided.

The settlement also resolves conduct that IBI investigated and disclosed to the United States concerning the receipt of gifts and money by its furniture designers and sales representatives that was not alleged in the whistleblower complaint. It received credit in the settlement for its disclosure, cooperation, and remediation efforts in connection with this conduct.

The settlement was the result of a coordinated effort among the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Wisconsin and the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Justice Department’s Civil Division, with assistance from GSA’s Office of Inspector General, the U.S. Army Criminal Investigative Command, the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, the Defense Contract Audit Agency, the AbilityOne Office of the Inspector General, and the U.S. Department of the Interior Office of Inspector General.

The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability. The lawsuit resolved by the settlement is captioned United States ex rel. Inzeo v. Industries for the Blind, Inc., et al., No. 15-cv-996 (E.D. Wisc.).

Source: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/wisconsin-based-nonprofit-pay-19-million-settle-allegations-false-claims-and-kickbacks

June 5, 2020 By cs

Contractors to pay $2.8 million to settle False Claims Act allegations of fraudulently obtained small business contracts

Tulsa, Oklahoma-based contractor Ross Group Construction Corporation (Ross Group), and its corporate affiliates, have agreed to pay over $2.8 million to settle allegations that they violated the False Claims Act by improperly obtaining federal set-aside contracts reserved for disadvantaged small businesses, the Justice Department announced this week.

To qualify as a small business for purposes of U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) programs, companies must meet defined eligibility criteria, including requirements concerning size, ownership, and operational control. The settlement with Ross Group resolves allegations that the company fraudulently induced the government to award certain small business set-aside contracts to several affiliated entities that did not meet eligibility requirements.

The government alleged that Ross Group created two companies, PentaCon LLC and C3 LLC, to obtain small business set-aside contracts for which Ross Group itself was ineligible. Also alleged was that Ross Group maintained operational control over the day-to-day and long-term management decisions of the two purported small businesses, including controlling their financial affairs and business operations, and that, as a result, neither PentaCon nor C3 satisfied the size and eligibility requirements to participate in the set-aside programs. Ross Group, PentaCon, and C3 allegedly concealed their affiliation from the government and knowingly misrepresented the eligibility of PentaCon and C3 for the set-aside contracts.

The settlement with Ross Group and its corporate affiliates resolves a lawsuit filed under the whistleblower provision of the False Claims Act, which permits private parties to file suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in a portion of the government’s recovery. The civil lawsuit was filed in federal district court in the Western District of Oklahoma and is captioned United States ex rel. Southwind Construction Services, LLC v. The Ross Group Construction Corporation, et al., Case No. 15-0102-R (W.D. Okla.). As part of the resolution of this matter, the whistleblower will receive approximately $520,000.

The settlement is the result of a coordinated effort among the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Oklahoma, DCIS, the Inspector General Offices of the SBA, General Services Administration, and the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Army Criminal Investigation Division Major Procurement Fraud 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/oklahoma-contractors-pay-28-million-settle-false-claims-act-allegations-concerning

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.

Another court has joined the growing chorus of judges who are singing the same tune on set-aside fraud: when a government contractor lies about its eligibility for a set-aside contract, it violates the False Claims Act, and can be sued by either the Department of Justice or a whistleblower.

The Facts Of United States v. Strock

Industries for the Blind and Visually Impaired Inc. (IBI) has agreed to pay $1,938,684.09 to resolve allegations that IBI violated the False Claims Act and the Anti-Kickback Act in connection with certain federal contracts set aside to employ blind workers, the Justice Department has announced.

Search this Website