The companies claimed to be small, minority-owned businesses, giving them preference in bidding for government contracts, Air Force documents allege. But government investigators found they were part of a larger minority-owned firm and not eligible for small-business contracts.

The Air Force and Army awarded the companies 112 stimulus projects, federal contract records show. It wasn't until Sept. 23 — more than a year after the investigation started — that the Air Force suspended the firms from new federal contracts.

Scott Amey of the non-partisan Project on Government Oversight said the case exposes an oversight gap under the $787 billion stimulus plan and federal contracting in general. "Was there any disclosure of the contractors' missteps prior to them receiving the stimulus money?" he asked.

Air Force Lt. Col. Ann Stefanek said the stimulus projects were awarded independently by officers at military bases who wouldn't have spotted problems unless a contractor was suspended or debarred.

Federal rules let agencies terminate contracts if it's in the government's interest. Stefanek and Army Maj. Jimmie Cummings said the companies' work has been satisfactory and neither branch plans to cancel the stimulus contracts that were awarded before the firms were suspended.

According to the Air Force, Craig Jackson, who owns Sanders Engineering in Yorba Linda, Calif., created various businesses that were owned by friends and family — but were managed and controlled by him or his companies. Jackson and his family hid financial ties between the businesses, the suspension order alleged.

Over the years, 19 companies controlled by Jackson "received more than $700 million in government contracts to which they may not have been legally entitled," the Air Force said.

Jackson did not return calls. An attorney for Sanders Engineering, Tony Franco, said the company plans to "vigorously contest" the suspension.

In a response to the contracting suspension filed Friday, Franco said the Small Business Administration always has known of the relationships and encouraged Sanders to share its administrative expertise with other businesses.

Allegations concerning one of the companies, APM LLC of Yorba Linda, Calif., became public in an August 2008 SBA audit. The firm was suspended from an SBA development program, and the Defense Department opened a criminal investigation.

Records show Scott Air Force Base in Illinois awarded two projects worth $423,000 to APM on Sept. 24, a day after the contracting ban was issued. Stefanek said those awards have been rescinded.

Grabell reports for ProPublica, an independent, non-profit newsroom based in New York.

Source:  http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-10-25-stimulus-contracts_N.htm

Solution providers looking to the government for economic stimulus dollars for IT projects may be disappointed unless the government does a better job of working with small businesses, according to a small-business activist working with Congress to push such a change.

Lloyd Chapman, president of the American Small Business League and a former IT solution provider who has been working with federal government leaders and through the courts to ensure that government contracts set aside for small businesses end up in the right hands, said poorly run programs have cost small businesses millions of jobs and will result in little opportunity to take advantage of the economic stimulus spending.

Chapman, who started championing the cause of small businesses years ago when his own company lost government contracts to larger corporations, two years ago started writing the first draft of what is now known as The Fairness and Transparency in Contracting Act of 2009.

The act, which was introduced by U.S. Rep. Hank Johnson, (D-Ga.), earlier this week, specifies that a "small business" cannot include publicly traded or foreign-owned companies or their subsidiaries.

It further specifies that the Small Business Agency (SBA) and other government agencies respond to and report on complaints about small-business contracts awarded to companies that do not fit the definition of a small business, and that a complete list of approved contractors be published.

The act is necessary because, while small businesses account for 98 percent of new jobs in the U.S., the government and the SBA have been lax in ensuring that small businesses get their fair share of government spending, Chapman said.

Chapman estimated that the act would push an additional $100 billion in infrastructure spending to small businesses, including smaller solution providers that now have to compete against larger integrators that either fraudulently or in error have been classified as small businesses.

"Who in their right mind would oppose legislation that would create millions of jobs?" Chapman said. "Anyone opposing it shouldn't be in Congress."

Chapman said that President Obama, in some of his prior speeches, estimated that every $1 billion in infrastructure spending creates 40,000 jobs.

"But my research shows that up to $120 billion a year in small-business contracts goes to large businesses," he said. "If my bill passes, it will create 4 million new jobs, based on President Obama's estimates."

Small businesses are the only real means for stimulating the economy, Chapman said.

"If you're trying to stimulate the economy, you have to work with small businesses because that's where the jobs are created," he said. "Since 1977, large businesses have not created one net new job. This is because of things like NAFTA, which shipped millions of U.S. jobs overseas, and the fact that fewer and fewer Americans work for large companies."

Getting small businesses involved in the economic stimulus is an urgent goal of Chapman and his bill.

"Unemployment is rising every month," he said. "We expect no new jobs created in 2009 and 2010. If that happens, when will the stimulus kick in?"

If the act passes, Chapman said small IT firms could see their government sales double or even quadruple. "My bill would do more to create jobs than any other bill," he said. "Economic stimulus funds for now go to only the top 1 percent of businesses."

Source:  http://www.crn.com/small-business/217700896;jsessionid=EKXLUBZTLRUVYQSNDLOSKH0CJUNN2JVN

Decir que la cuota de contratos públicos destinada a la pequeña empresa debería adjudicarse a los pequeños negocios parece una buena lógica de Perogrullo.

Sin embargo, años de quejas y denuncias alegando que miles de millones de dólares de contratos públicos escapan de sus legítimos destinatarios para ir a parar a manos de grandes corporaciones, demuestran lo contrario.

Valiéndose de sus pequeñas subsidiarias, esas grandes compañías aparentemente logran hacerse de jugosos subsidios cada año.

Frenar este desvío de fondos es el objetivo principal de la propuesta de ley presentada por el congresista Hank Johnson (D-Ga), bajo el nombre de Ley de Contratación Transparente y Justa (H.R. 2568).

El congresista señala que la misma se justifica especialmente en estos momentos en el muchos pequeños negocios se encuentran al límite de sus fuerzas debido a la crisis económica.

"Es inadmisible que haya grandes corporaciones beneficiándose de los contratos para los pequeños negocios", dice Johnson, señalando que su propuesta busca corregir ese error.

"Ha habido poco tiempo para digerir la información", comenta Lloyd Chapman, presidente de la Liga Americana de Pequeños Negocios (ASBL) y autor de fondo de esta propuesta, refiriéndose a que la misma se introdujo justo antes del fin de semana del Día de los Caídos.

Chapman cuenta con que Nydia Velázquez, presidenta del Comité de Pequeños Negocios del Congreso, la apoye –aunque al cierre de esta redacción no había confirmación al respecto-, y señala que a juzgar por manifestaciones anteriores del gobernador de California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, éste podría ser también uno de sus defensores.

"Si California está en quiebra, esta ley sería crucial para crear trabajos y riqueza sin ningún costo ni recorte presupuestario adicional", asegura Chapman, quien estima que actualmente los pequeños negocios del país pierden unos cien mil millones de dólares anuales en contratos que no reciben, de los que entre 10 y 12 mil millones corresponden a negocios de California.

Arthur Acevedo, profesor de la Escuela de Derecho John Marshall en Chicago, explica que el truco de crear una empresa subsidiaria cumpliendo con los requisitos federales de pequeño negocio –ya sea en cuánto a número de trabajadores o ingresos- es en la actualidad uno de los grandes agujeros legales por donde se escapan cuantiosas cifras en contratación para los empresarios realmente pequeños.

Sin embargo el académico teme que tal y como está redactada, siga dejando huecos legales que acaben vulnerando su propósito.

"Un riesgo serían las llamadas private equity firms, que podrían crear grupos de individuos muy ricos", dice Acevedo, señalando que ello podría perpetuar la desventaja que actualmente sufren los negocios verdaderamente pequeños y sin capital que los respalde.

La medida exige también que la Administración de Pequeños Negocios (SBA) y las agencias federales mantengan una lista pública de las firmas que reciben sus contratos.

Desde principios de esta década, más de una docena de investigaciones han revelado que compañías Fortune 500 habían recibido contratos para pequeños negocios. La Oficina del Inspector General de la SBA concluyó en 2002 que al menos 4.4% de mil contratos inspeccionados, y que originalmente iban dirigidos a pequeños negocios, acabaron en manos de compañías que no formaban parte de esa categoría.

Chapman enfatiza que los pequeños negocios son responsables del 97% de los empleos privados que se crean en el país, y señala que extrapolando la lógica del presidente Barack Obama, cuando proclamó que por cada mil millones de inversión en infraestructura se crean 40 mil empleos, esta medida podría generar cuatro millones de puestos sin dotación adicional de fondos.

"Ese sí que sería un gran estímulo, y además gratis", dice Chapman, animando a los propietarios de negocios a que se informen sobre esta ley y requieran el apoyo a la misma de sus oficiales electos.

Source:  http://www.impre.com/laopinion/negocios/economia-bolsa/2009/5/29/buscan-proteger-a-los-pequenti-127272-1.html