Federal contract program faulted

News

Federal contract program faulted

NATIVE CORPORATIONS: Probe by Congress criticizes oversight of deals.

By Paula Dobbyn
Anchorage Daily News
April 28, 2006

The federal government has fallen short in its oversight of the hundreds of millions of dollars in no-bid contracts awarded to Alaska Native corporations, according to a congressional investigation.

The Government Accountability Office, the auditing arm of Congress, found that the Small Business Administration is not properly monitoring a system that steered $1.1 billion worth of work to Native firms in 2004.

While the GAO's 86-page report released Thursday did not fault the Native firms, it said that without stepped up scrutiny by the SBA, "there is clearly the potential for unintended consequences or abuse."

The report concluded that the SBA should collect more information on what Native firms are doing and how they're doing it and determine whether they have a "substantial unfair competitive advantage" because of the contracting perks they receive under the 8(a) program.

The program, named for a section of SBA regulations, sets aside a portion of government work for small and disadvantaged companies. The contracts can be awarded without competition.

But unlike black, Hispanic, Asian or women-owned businesses whose contracts are capped at $3 million or $5 million, depending on the type, Alaska Native-owned firms can get contracts of unlimited size. That has triggered an intense backlash from minorities, union and government watchdog groups that say Native businesses have an unfair advantage.

Native executives say they are playing by the rules that Congress set up in the 1980s and 1990s.

The SBA has not tailored its policies and practices to account for the unique status of Native firms, the GAO concluded.

The agency does not know if other small businesses are losing contracts to Native firms. It also does not know if the Alaska companies are properly joint-venturing with bigger firms or are being used as fronts simply to win no-bid contracts, according to the report.

Native contracting with the federal government has become big business. In just a few years, some relatively small Native companies have been catapulted into the ranks of the state's largest firms.

From 2000 to 2004, the government awarded work totalling $4.6 billion to Alaska's congressionally created Native corporations. Of that, $2.9 billion was through the 8(a) program, and 77 percent of it was sole-sourced, meaning without competitive bidding, the GAO found.

Karen Forsland, director of the SBA's Anchorage office, did not return a phone call seeking comment Thursday.

In a response to a draft of the GAO's findings, which were leaked to the media earlier this month, an SBA official in Washington said the tone was the report was "unsettling."

Native firms are using the 8(a) program to bring resources back to their communities as allowed, wrote Calvin Jenkins, a deputy in the SBA's government contracting division.

"The tone of the report could lead one to conclude that GAO has concerns with this result," he wrote.

He also said many of the concerns raised were subjective and that the analysis relies far too heavily on individual anecdotes.

"We strongly disagree with this characterization," the GAO said. "Our findings are supported by the facts."

The SBA has said it recently took steps to improve its oversight of the 8(a) program, the GAO noted. But "we were not provided with any evidence that this or any other planned action had been taken, despite our requests for the information," the report said.

U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, authored many of the provisions that allowed Native corporations to achieve special status in obtaining government work. In a recent interview, Stevens said he had no problem with stepped-up scrutiny by the SBA.

His spokeswoman, Courtney Boone, said Thursday that Stevens' staff was still reviewing the GAO findings.

Jeff Hueners, chief operating officer for Chenega Corp., said he feels "pretty good" about the report.

"There isn't any real finding of abuse or of an Alaska Native corporation not following the rules," Hueners said.

But the negative attention Native contracting has generated has damaged the companies' abilities to work with the federal government to some extent, he said.

"It has changed the contracting landscape for Alaska Native corporations. You don't see awards of the same size or magnitude. The agencies are more cautious and judicious," Hueners said.





Comments

0 Comments

Submit a Comment