Nine Years of Fraud With no End in Sight-Not an Anniversary to Celebrate

Share

Today is the ninth anniversary of the first congressional hearing on the diversion of federal small business contracts to large companies, including some of the largest corporations in the world.

On May 7, 2003 the House Small Business Committee heard testimony from the Small Business Administration’s Inspector General as well as small business advocates including American Small Business League President and founder Lloyd Chapman, on how fraud and abuse in federal small business contracting programs allows large companies to hijack tens of billions of dollars worth of federal small business contracts every year.

That hearing was the first federal acknowledgement of a problem that has continued to bankrupt the nation’s small businesses. Since 2003, over a dozen additional federal investigations have found hundreds of billions worth of federal small business contracts that were diverted to large companies, including Fortune 500 firms like Apple, Time Warner, Chevron, General Electric, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, AT&T, Bank of America, The New York Times Company, and Italian Defense giant Finnmeccanica, which has over $32 billion annual revenue and more than 75,000 employees.

Despite these numerous federal investigations and the ASBL’s decade-long history of pointing out fraud and abuse in federal small business contracting programs, politicians during the last three Presidential administration have failed to do anything to stop the rampant fraud and abuse that severely disadvantages our nation’s 28 million small businesses and brings down our national economy.

The U.S. government is the world’s largest buyer of goods and services, spending over $500 billion annually on federal “acquisition.” Acquisition, also known as “procurement,” is a term for when the government contracts with private vendors.

Federal law states that 23 percent of all federal acquisitions spending must be with small businesses, so small business contractors should receive over $100 billion in federal contracts annually. However, due to fraud and abuse, large companies receive a majority of federal small business contracts every year. In total, tens of billions of dollars worth federal small business contracts are diverted to large companies every year.

The latest data from the Federal Procurement Data System shows that 72 of the top 100 federal small business contractors were actually large companies that significantly exceeded federal small business size standards.

In 2005, the Small Business Administration’s Office of the Inspector General released Report 5-15, which stated that the diversion of federal small business contracts was “one of the largest problems facing the Small Business Administration and the entire federal government today.”

In October 2011, SBA Inspector General Peggy Gustafson testified before the House Small Business Committee, stating that the diversion of federal small business contracts to large companies continued to be the “top management challenge” for the SBA, for the seventh year in a row.

If the U.S. Military Wants to Cut Spending on Tanks by $360 Million, Then Why Is Congress Forcing them to Buy $400 Million Worth of Tanks?

Share

Government contractors will not be disclosing political expenditures any time soon. As reported by the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed S.1100, the “Keeping Politics Out of Federal Contracting Act,” which allows government contractors to keep political expenditures under wraps.

This bill is in response to an April 2011 Executive Order that aimed to require government contractors to disclose political expenditures. The EO was a long shot aimed at increasing transparency in federal contracting and received opposition from big business. The American Small Business League (ASBL) testified in front of the Senate Committee on Small business and Entrepreneurship that the organization always pushes in favor of greater transparency and the EO could have prevented campaign contributions directly impacting a company’s ability to win federal contracts.

In federal contracting as for anything in life, if someone doesn’t want to disclose information, they are probably hiding something. S.1100 is a shameful bill written by big business lobbyists–the same big businesses funding your representative’s campaign. Full transparency is the only answer to keeping government contractors from buying their way into lucritive contracts.

Testimony by ASBL Director of Government Affairs Kevin Baron. Mr. Baron speaks to the point of the EO at 112:00.

POGO blog here.

Pay to Play in Federal Contracting to Increase

Share

Government contractors will not be disclosing political expenditures any time soon. As reported by the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed S.1100, the “Keeping Politics Out of Federal Contracting Act,” which allows government contractors to keep political expenditures under wraps.

This bill is in response to an April 2011 Executive Order that aimed to require government contractors to disclose political expenditures. The EO was a long shot aimed at increasing transparency in federal contracting and received opposition from big business. The American Small Business League (ASBL) testified in front of the Senate Committee on Small business and Entrepreneurship that the organization always pushes in favor of greater transparency and the EO could have prevented campaign contributions directly impacting a company’s ability to win federal contracts.

In federal contracting as for anything in life, if someone doesn’t want to disclose information, they are probably hiding something. S.1100 is a shameful bill written by big business lobbyists–the same big businesses funding your representative’s campaign. Full transparency is the only answer to keeping government contractors from buying their way into lucritive contracts.

Testimony by ASBL Director of Government Affairs Kevin Baron. Mr. Baron speaks to the point of the EO at 112:00.

POGO blog here.

Army Awards Small Business Contracts to Large Propaganda Firm

Share

The U.S. Army has awarded nearly $20 million in federal small business contracts to a large communications firm that runs propaganda campaigns in Afghanistan. Propaganda campaigns, referred to by military leaders as ‘information operations,’ have come under scrutiny lately as taxpayer dollars spent on such operations have increased dramatically since 2002 with little proof of effectiveness.

The American Small Business League (ASBL) analyzed federal contracts awarded to the Army’s top propaganda contractor, Leonie Industries, and found that the propaganda is being funded, in part, by small business funds. It’s unclear from the description provided in the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) what work Leonie Industries was performing with nearly $20 million in U.S. small business funds, however it is clear that Leonie is not a small business nor is it registered as a small business in any government database.

This adds to the hundreds of billions of dollars in federal small business contracts that have been awarded to large companies since 2003. The federal government has a statutory goal of awarding 23 percent of all prime contract dollars to legitimate small business, however by reviewing just a sample of federal small business contracting data, we can see that most of that money is awarded to large businesses.

In the case of Leonie Industries, there is no logical way that the U.S. Army could have determined that the company was a small business. Whether this was a mistake or done purposely, one thing is certain—the government has been able to apply almost $20 million toward its small business-contracting goal by including contracts to this large propaganda firm.

Does the U.S. Department of Treasury Sound Like A Small Business To You?

Share

Story Update: Here’s his response:

Mr. Rosenfeld,

We have been able to find the error on the reporting for the subject Contract Award PIID. As I explained to you on the phone, the contract award was not made to the department of the treasury. The reason it is showing the department of treasury as the contractor is because the address field was populated with Treasury’s address when the contract award was made back in 2010. The DUNS number belongs to a Personal Services Contractor. His address information associated with the DUNS was entered incorrectly with the department of treasury’s address information instead of his own address.

This can only be corrected by the contractor himself. The contractor is out of the country at the moment returning on July 6. I have brought this to his attention and he will take action as soon as he comes back to the U.S.

If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.

Thank you and best regards.

Michael Tekle

Contracting Officer

Department of the Treasury, IRS

Office of Treasury Procurement Services(OS:A:P:T)

Voice: 202-283-6117

Fax: 202-283-6083

Email: michael.tekle@irs.gov

————————————

The following is the letter that I sent to IRS contracting officer Michael Tekle on June 27, 2012, after inquiring about federal small business contracts that were awarded to the U.S. Department of Treasury.

To view one of the contracts in question, click here: USTreasuryContract_June_08_2011

From: Elliott Rosenfeld
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 1:45 PM
To: ‘michael.tekle@irs.gov’
Subject: Contract Award PIID: TMO10T036

Mr.Tekle,

I appreciate you taking the time to speak with me. I wanted to ask for further clarification regarding contract PIID: TMO10T036 and all modifications/contract actions associated. The reason I ask is because the U.S. Department of Treasury is listed as a vendor to the U.S. Department of Treasury. Moreover, the U.S. Department of Treasury was labelled as a “small business” under CO Business Size Determination.

You explained to me that D&B will populate the vendor name on a contract once you input a DUNS number. You also said that the Duns number is checked against ORCA. So, then, why is the U.S. Department of Treasury the vendor on this contract? Small business advocates are extremely dissapointed that the U.S. Department of Treasury has received over $600,000 as a small business contractor in the last month alone.

Please respond to my request for more information within 7 business days or notify me if this won’t be possible.

Thanks,

Elliott Rosenfeld

——————————-
Elliott Rosenfeld
Public Relations Director
American Small Business League
(707) 789 9575
——————————-

ASBL Asks Government About Suspicious Contract

Share

To: ‘Donahue.Jeff@PBGC.gov’, ‘Taylor-Capers.Edna@pbgc.gov’

CC: ‘OIGHOTLINE@PBGC.GOV’

Subject: Contract Award PIID: PBGC01CT12002

Sent: Fri 3/30/2012 1:34 PM PST

Hello,

 

My name is Elliott Rosenfeld. I work for the American Small Business League, an independent, not-for-profit, non-partisan small business advocacy organization. Our primary focus is on research and reporting about fraud, abuse and loopholes in federal small business contracting programs.

 

As such, I am writing to inquire about contract award with PIID: PBGC01CT120022, signed on March 29, 2012.

 

The award to is Vendor: State Street Corporation, DUNS – 062156427, under CO Business Size Selection: Small Business, despite the fact that annual revenue is reported as upwards of $3.9 billion and number of employees is reported as 28,000.

 

Is this truly a small business award? 

 

Thank you for attention to this matter.

 

Best,

 

Elliott Rosenfeld

 

——————————-

Elliott Rosenfeld

Public Relations Specialist

American Small Business League

(707) 789 9575

Sweden geospatial giant winning $millions in fed small biz contracts

Share

Today in federal contracting failure I want to shed light on a company named Erdas Inc. Experts in the geospatial industry, Erdas has been winning small business contracts since at least 2006, but has not been a small business since at least 2005 when they were purchased by Sweden geospatial giant Hexagon AB.  Moreover, Erdas has never registered with the federal government’s online representation database as a small business so in no way, shape or form should even the government’s least competent employee have screwed this one up.

Erdas has won millions in small business contracts since 2006 and so far in 2012, this large business has won $1.2 million. This comes after the New York Times quoted SBA spokesperson Hayley Meadvin, saying federal contracting data is as “clean as it an be.” Yet the SBA failed to realize that Erdas has been winning small business contracts for the past 6 years. Anyone that has followed the government wide 10-year-old contracting scandal knows “clean as can be” is an SBA talking point that they use so consistently that I imagine if you walked into the SBA press office you would catch them practicing the line in front of a mirror.