TOPICS
TOPICS
SBA seeks comments on proposed women-owned business program
The Small Business Administration is seeking public comment on a proposal to provide contracting preference to women-owned small businesses through a set-aside program similar to those in place for other disadvantaged business sectors.
The proposed Women-Owned Small Business Federal Contract Assistance Program, which was the subject of a successful lawsuit by the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce relating to implementation delays, was detailed in a Thursday Federal Register notice.
The Women's Chamber charged that the administration dragged its feet after Congress authorized a women's preference program in the 2000 Small Business Reauthorization Act. Last November, a U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia judge found in favor of the business group, and set a timetable for the SBA to comply with the act.
The program described in Thursday's notice answers that requirement, aiming to boost federal contracting and subcontracting by small businesses in which women own a controlling stake to meet a 5 percent target that has been in place since 1996. Agencies have never met that target, according to background information provided in the notice, with women-owned small businesses hovering around 3 percent of prime contract awards in recent years.
The proposed program would establish a basis for limiting competitions of up to $3 million, or $5 million for manufacturing contracts, to women-owned small businesses. The new provisions would be grouped with existing disadvantaged preference programs, and follow guidelines similar to those for minority-owned companies and those located in historically underutilized areas.
Despite the Women's Chamber of Commerce interest in seeing the program implemented, representatives of the group said they were upset to see that the proposed guidelines omit a means for women-owned businesses to self-certify their eligibility.
As described in the SBA's Federal Register notice, the authorizing act stipulated that businesses would be able to certify their status by providing certain information to the agency. "However, based on prevailing Supreme Court precedent, the likely disruption that such an approach would have on the acquisition process as well as the agency's goal of reducing the risk of fraud associated with the program, SBA has decided not to propose a self-certification process for procurements set aside under the program," the notice stated.
"At every turn, the SBA has sought to sabotage the implementation of this important program for women as established in 2000," said Margot Dorfman, the chamber's chief executive officer, in a statement. "Now they seek to change the laws established by Congress."
The proposed rules would allow companies that are women-owned and have a disadvantaged status certification through another program to apply that certification to the women's preference, but Dorfman said it was unclear how that would work since other preference programs do not collect data on whether a business qualifies as women-owned.
Another provision of the notice said the SBA anticipates that about 2,000 businesses per year will seek women-owned small business certification. Dorfman challenged this estimate, noting that 76,000 women-owned firms have registered their interest in seeking federal contracts in the government's Central Contractor Registry, and questioned whether the SBA will have sufficient resources available to process applications.
Dorfman said the group would fight adoption of the program as proposed.
Public comments on the rules are due to the SBA by July 17, and should be submitted with identification number 3245-AE65 via the Internet at the Federal eRulemaking Portal, by e-mail to Linda.Waters@sba.gov, by fax to (202) 205-6390, or by mail to:
Linda Waters, Procurement Analyst
Office of Federal Contract Assistance for Women Business Owners
U.S. Small Business Administration
409 3rd St. S.W.
Washington, DC 20416
COMMENTS
- It's a terrible idea! You're either small or you're not. It shouldn't matter what physical attributes you have. Who cares if you're a woman (I am one) or a minority? If you prepare a good proposal, with good rates, you'll be considered for the job. No one cares what color your skin is or what body parts you have. If you can do the work for a great price, you'll get the job. Once we have a new set-aside in place, it's there forever. Try taking away any of the current set-asides and you'll start hearing about discrimination in the federal contracting arena. In the end, set-asides always come back to bite us. Taxpayer Posted October 3, 2006 8:41 AM
- I would agree to a SBA women-owned business program only if measures were in place to ensure that this set-aside is not used to cover up who is really in charge. Oftentimes the profiteer (male) grabs a female, puts her name as the person in-charge, and takes advantage of contracts that he would not otherwise be able to obtain. Then, the real women owned businesses find it hard to compete. Martha Spicer Posted August 1, 2006 3:47 PM
- Women-owned small businesses do not represent a recognized minority! The set aside is a quota system to assure some government business goes to protected minorities! It is not to handle everything someone at SBA can think up! It is highly questionable if the current program is of any use to minorities and to water it down with women is a step in a totally wrong direction! How about a set aside for gays! How about a set aside for illegal aliens? How about a set aside for rural businesses or is that handled by the department of agriculture? Come on SBA -- think outside the box and the legal limits on your programs! You are supposed to be creative! Here is a good example of why we should demand that Congress get rid of the SBA and stop its funding! Congress should establish a loan guarantee program for small and minority owned businesses and let the banking sector handle the evaluations and risk assessments to determine who gets the guarantee. This would be similar to the various forms of insurance and guarantees Congress offers everyone else and would remove the need for the SBA on any basis! Taxpayer Posted June 16, 2006 7:43 AM
