Ahead of her presentation at this week’s VETS conference, former White House appointee and 8(a) associate administrator Jackie Robinson-Burnette joined me on GovCon Intelligence. Jackie and I worked together at SBA in the aftermath of the Ultima court decision to save the 8(a) program, and we talked at length about what the program will look like after this latest crisis.
I also got her thoughts on the Rule of Two, the attack on the women-owned small business program, and how small businesses are faring generally. Finally, she shared her lessons on leadership based on a 35-year career in public service.
Please visit www.govconintelligence.com for a full transcript and show notes.
Links
Jackie Robinson-Burnette on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jackierb/
Senior Executive Service Solutions:
SBA proposed rule on deleting the presumption of social disadvantage: https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoDetails?rrid=1397162
8afacts.org: http://8afacts.org
Protecting Small Business Competition Act, as amended: https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/119320/documents/BILLS-119-ANS1toHR2804-W000816-Amdt-3.pdf
Eliminating Discrimination in Government Contracting Act: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/4390
Christopher Slottee: “Army Shifts Acquisition Policy: New Preference for Competition in SBA 8(a) Program” (Schwabe): https://www.schwabe.com/publication/army-shifts-acquisition-policy-new-preference-for-competition-in-sba-8a-program/
“Firm Building Trump’s Ballroom Got a Secret No-Bid Contract for a Nearby Job” (The New York Times): https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/25/us/politics/lafayette-park-fountains-trump-contract.html
How Successful People Lead by John Maxwell:
Chapters
00:00 – Introduction & Jackie’s Background
00:18 – Jackie’s Historic Legacy at the SBA
01:20 – Deleting the Presumption of Social Disadvantage (Post-Ultima Reforms)
04:59 – The Impact of the 8(a) Application Freeze on Small Businesses
07:05 – Streamlining and Digitizing the 8(a) Application Process
10:37 – Individual vs. Entity-Owned 8(a) Firms (Alaska Native Corporations)
12:51 – The Rule of Two and Preserving the Small Business Industrial Base
16:15 – GWAC Pools (Women-Owned and HUBZone Set-Asides)
17:40 – Defending and Improving the Women-Owned Small Business Program
21:22 – Debunking Fraud Myths and Highlighting the Multiplier Effect
23:35 – Predictions for the Future of the 8(a) Program
27:19 – The Reality of Sole Source Contracts in Federal Agencies
31:06 – Consolidating the Four SBA Systems into One Unified Platform
36:02 – How System Consolidation Saved Public Service Jobs From DEI Cuts
38:03 – The Mid-2026 Sentiment and Financial Anxiety in the Small Business Community
41:21 – Refection on Returning to Government: Was It Worth It?
44:44 – Leadership Insights: “How Successful People Lead” and Leveling Up
47:46 – Conclusion & Where to Connect with Jackie
Transcript
Introduction & Jackie’s Background
Sam: Welcome to GovCon Intelligence. My guest today is Jackie Robinson-Burnette. Jackie, welcome to GovCon Intelligence.
Jackie: Thank you, Sam. I am happy to be here.
Sam: Thanks for inviting me. Thanks so much for coming. Jackie Robinson-Burnette is a nationally recognized authority in federal procurement and a steadfast champion for America’s small businesses.
A Senior Executive Service leader with more than 35 years of federal service, she built a reputation as a transformational executive known for delivering measurable, historic results. After retiring in 2017, she got a call from the White House to return to public service under presidential appointment as the Associate Administrator for Government Contracting and Business Development at the US Small Business Administration (SBA), where, by the way, she was my boss. In this role, she oversaw all federal small business contracting programs. Her leadership drove major modernization efforts, including the consolidation of SBA certification systems, and contributed to a record-setting $183.4 billion in federal small business contract awards for the first time in history. By the way, that’s still a record. I’ll just mention, it’s still there. Jackie is the owner and founder of Senior Executive Strategic Solutions, or SES2. She is married to Army Lieutenant Colonel Victor Burnette, retired, and they are the proud parents of three adult daughters, all commissioned Army officers.
Deleting the Presumption of Social Disadvantage (Post-Ultima Reforms)
Sam: Jackie, I wanted to start with some somewhat breaking news from the SBA, from the policy front. You were there with me for a number of policies and they’ve just been kind of quiet on policies for a bit right now. There was a size standard proposed rule, but they haven’t done much with the fraud rule that they were thinking about doing, and on the program front, there hasn’t been much. You ran the 8(a) program for quite some time at the SBA, and then when you were Associate Administrator, you had the responsibility of oversight over the 8(a) program. The SBA is proposing to make a change to the 8(a) program. This is one of the first policy changes to come out from the SBA during this administration. They sent a proposed rule to the White House OIRA office May 22nd to delete the presumption of social disadvantage for individual-owned firms only. It’s clear that these reforms do not impact entity-owned firms. Could you tell us a bit about the presumption of social disadvantage, why the SBA might be removing it, and what people have to know about this policy change?
Jackie: Yes. Good question. So, the presumption of social disadvantage is pretty simple. If you belong to a certain race or ethnic group, you’re presumed automatically disadvantaged because of historical discrimination in the United States, especially for Black and brown companies. In the 1970s, maybe they had only one percent of all federal government contracts.
Sam: Yep. That’s right.
Jackie: When the 8(a) program was stood up, we realized we could go through a process of determining if these certain groups were disadvantaged, or we could just presume that they are. This means when they submitted an application for the 8(a) program, they didn’t have to write out a justification of how they were socially disadvantaged; it was just presumed. They checked that box of a certain race or ethnic group, and they were automatically disadvantaged. After the Ultima lawsuit, the SBA removed the social presumption. So, every firm that was applying for the 8(a) program had to outline how they were disadvantaged.
Sam: So that’s the social disadvantage narrative.
Jackie: Yes, the social disadvantage narrative that all the firms had to do. Even the firms that were already certified, of course, had to go back and explain how they were disadvantaged. All the firms were frozen in the program, except the entity-owned firms. I think the SBA is now just putting into law and solidifying that every firm has to explain how they are socially disadvantaged, and no certain group can just automatically be presumed socially disadvantaged.
Sam: This is really just putting into the regulation what it’s looked like since Ultima in operation, essentially.
Jackie: Yeah, basically what is in operation since the Ultima challenge.
The Impact of the 8(a) Application Freeze on Small Businesses
Sam: Which, when you were a presidential appointee as Associate Administrator, you came in just about when the SBA was bringing applications back after Ultima. So, that was thousands of reviews that the SBA had to do.
Jackie: Yes, definitely. At this time, of course, we didn’t grow the number of certifying officials or the certifying team members in the SBA. So, they were not processing new applications while they were trying to bring these firms that were suspended back on.
Sam: Meanwhile, you had the freeze there after Ultima while the SBA was trying to figure out this presumption of social disadvantage. Now you have a dark freeze, I’d say, because no one’s really talking about it, but the data seems to show that the SBA has not approved a new application in the 8(a) program since August of last year. There’s a counter on 8afacts.org. The last time I checked, it’s 285 days or so. How damaging is that, and how different is that from when you were there? I mean, you ran the 8(a) program. Going to zero, what difference does that make in the community?
Jackie: It makes a huge difference because every year a large percentage of the firms are graduating. If we don’t replenish that, it means that the program dies. It also means that Contracting Officers are going to be hesitant to put actions into the 8(a) program because it may not have the competitive base of firms to compete for that work. Historically, we used to say if you put something in the 8(a) program, it was always in the 8(a) program, which is not really the case. It just means that you had to get approval from the SBA to pull it out. Contracting Officers are now, at a greater number, pulling acquisitions out of the 8(a) program because they’re able to justify that 1,000 firms were suspended, and they don’t see a specific number of firms in the program that can compete for their work.
Streamlining and Digitizing the 8(a) Application Process
Sam: All right. I’ve been tracking this. A lot of firms have withdrawn from the program because of the data call and because of suspension, so you’re now under 4,000. Do you remember how much it was when you were there?
Jackie: I don’t remember the exact number. But when I first came to the SBA back in 2014—I think you were in OGC at that time—the application process was huge. It was a million boxes of paper; it wasn’t digitized.
Sam: Yeah, I remember the files. Remember when we’d get the files for OHA.
Jackie: Yes. Yes. And 60% of the applications were returned or rejected.
Sam: Mm.
Jackie: 60%.
Sam: What happens to 8(a) contracts if you have a lower number of firms? We’re now below 4,000 firms that are in 8(a).
Jackie: Well, it’s a significant impact, Sam, because Contracting Officers lose faith in the ability to put actions into the 8(a) program and have sufficient competition. As a result, they will start asking the SBA if they can remove those acquisitions from the 8(a) program. The program only survives if we continue to put in new companies. Every year, we have at least 300 to 400 companies that are graduating.
Sam: Right. It’s going to be a tenth because it’s a nine-year or ten-year program.
Jackie: Yes. And so you can actually just look down the line to see how many are coming out every year versus how many are coming in to see when there won’t be any firms in the program. We know that 1,000 firms were suspended and some removed from the program over the last year, so this is pretty significant. When I was the Associate Administrator overseeing the 8(a) program, when I first got there, there were about 1,200 applications every year. This was back when it was not digitized; we had boxes of paper coming in. 60% of them were rejected or declined and sent back. I started looking at how we could streamline this process and why they were being returned. In some cases, 30% of them were being returned because they were applying on the wrong form. So, I kept asking my staff, “Why are they all applying on the same wrong form? Where is this form at?” Well, it was the form on the SBA website.
Sam: Oh, no.
Jackie: So, then I started looking at whether we were declining these applications and rejecting them for eligibility issues or for technical paperwork things in the application that had nothing to do with eligibility. We just started streamlining the process. We brought OGC in, OHA, and other groups in the SBA, and we came up with a streamlined application. We went from a rate of 90% of the applications being declined—I want you to think about this: 1,200 applications coming in, only 25% of them got through the process for a decision to be made, and then 90% of them were declined.
Sam: Wow.
Jackie: So, it was really bad. There were a lot that weren’t even getting to the decision. Exactly, even when you get there, it’s hard. It was really bad. We turned that around to doing about 1,200 approvals a year. This last year, I think in 2024, because we were catching up from the freeze on the Ultima challenge and then we were trying to shift into the new certification system, I think we processed 2,000 applications.
Sam: That’s a lot.
Jackie: That’s a lot.
Sam: Yeah. Yes. And some of those firms are probably withdrawing from the program or have been suspended. It just looks like a different program now.
Jackie: Yeah, unfortunately. The thing that makes it worse is that it is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. You get 8(a) certification once, and you can never get it again. Right now, for a lot of political reasons, all of these socially and economically disadvantaged, underrepresented firms are losing their once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to get a foothold in federal government contracting, and that is forever. They can never come back and get that certification again.
Individual vs. Entity-Owned 8(a) Firms (Alaska Native Corporations)
Sam: Yeah. Then on the other side, so that’s the individual-owned firms. On the other side with the entity-owned firms, those entities have a business strategy where, as firms graduate, they get new firms into the program so they can fill that void in a particular industry or NAICS code. If you have a freeze that now is probably going to go from nine months to a year, they can’t backfill those firms that have graduated.
Jackie: That’s true. There are people that are against the individual 8(a) companies as well as the entity-owned companies. One reason is they think it’s so unfair that the entity-owned companies can regenerate themselves with new 8(a) company spinoffs. But the difference, of course, that everyone should think about is individual-owned companies—all that revenue is for them, their family, and whatever they want to do with it. The entity-owned company is supposed to be refueling jobs, hospitals, and schools, putting money back into those communities that are depressed.
I actually had a chance to go to Alaska and walk through hospitals and schools that were built by additional funds that these entity-owned Alaska Native Tribal companies put back into the communities from the contracts that they won.
Sam: Yeah. I just want to remind people that there are numbers out there showing Alaska Native firms get X million dollars or billions of dollars in contracts, but only so much of that is going back to the community because on a government contract, you have costs. A $10 million contract might have only a 5% profit margin, and it’s really only the profits that you could sink back into the community.
Jackie: Of course. Of course.
Sam: Yeah, so I’ve seen some inaccuracies out there on that. But you did more than just work on the 8(a) program while you were at the SBA. While we were there, we worked closely on the Rule of Two. We put out a proposed rule from the SBA that then became a proposed rule from the FAR. Now, there is a Rule of Two bill that is going through Congress. It just passed unanimously through the House Small Business Committee a couple of weeks ago. What is the reason for the Rule of Two, why is it important, and why is it important for small businesses to track this bill as it’s going through?
The Rule of Two and Preserving the Small Business Industrial Base
Jackie: Well, first, Sam, I need to give you kudos for helping get that Rule of Two pushed through. I mean, you have been working on that for years. Do you remember how many years you were behind the scenes continuing to put that before new senior executives that came in, different political parties, talking to people on the Hill, talking to OMB? You did that for years.
Sam: Well, it’s important to note that this is a bipartisan issue. I mean, we’re talking about something that unanimously goes through Congress. There’s very little that people can agree upon, but they can agree on the Rule of Two.
Jackie: Yeah, definitely. So, FAR Part 19 says that when there are two or more small businesses that are capable of bidding on the work, they show interest, and they have the ability to bid on the work at a fair market value, that work should be set aside for small businesses. The Rule of Two comes from that—”two or more.” So when people say, “Well, where’s the Rule of Two? I can’t really find that in the FAR,” it is that FAR Part 19 clause regarding two or more. There were some discussions on how to apply that across federal government contracting. Does it apply to GSA? GWACs? Does it apply to agency-wide IDIQ contracts? Now it is solidified that when there are two or more, this work should be set aside.
When we first implemented category management—and I think the discussions on category management started around 2010 or slightly before—the way we implemented it actually ended up losing 40% of our small business industrial base. The idea was great to consolidate and get economies of scale, but the contracts were just so huge. Once we made these large contracts, we never thought about making sure that there were small businesses on them so the actions that could be set aside for small businesses could be set aside. As a result, we thought large companies would give small businesses subcontracts. In some cases they did, but you still lose your industrial base when you don’t have prime awards for small companies. I think we went backwards in terms of building our industrial base, and then we kind of learned a little bit from that. Now, pushing forward with the Rule of Two, all of these category management contracts that are coming out have small business set-aside provisions in them. So, you have pools for large and small companies, or if they’re all together now, you can use the Rule of Two to set aside work if small companies can do it on those vehicles. I think it’s very important.
GWAC Pools (Women-Owned and HUBZone Set-Asides)
Sam: Yeah, the bill that passed from the House committee put that task orders are specifically excluded from the coverage of the Rule of Two. But the point that you made is an important one: a lot of these GWACs have pools. When you were there, we worked together on the MAS pool. Remember the GSA Schedule pool for 8(a)?
So, the Rule of Two, in my view, becomes less important when you have all of those pools available because agencies can go and use those set-asides on the pool. They don’t necessarily need the push of the Rule of Two. So, it makes a bit of sense in the world where you have a lot of pools to look at the Rule of Two on a contract level rather than going all the way to the task order level. I think reasonable people can disagree on that. I certainly had a different viewpoint on that, but I do recognize that these big GWACs like OASIS Plus and Polaris are coming out with pools, and they’re pools that include Women-Owned Small Business and HUBZone, which we haven’t seen in the past. We’ve had 8(a) STARS and VETS, but these are the first vehicles that have that special women-owned set-aside. That’s really important for that program.
Defending and Improving the Women-Owned Small Business Program
Sam: Nevertheless, that program is under attack. It’s the next one after the 8(a) program. We’ve seen a lot of movement on the 8(a), but now the WOSB program is under threat by certain members of Congress. They’re looking at killing the program entirely. Now, you made a big effort while you were at the SBA to address a very long WOSB backlog in the certifications of applications. I think it was at a year at some point—people were waiting over a year. What happened there?
Jackie: Well, before we consolidated the certification system, you could be a service-disabled veteran, a female service-disabled veteran, and submit an application and get certified as an SDVOSB in two weeks. But then you’d have to submit a separate application into the women-owned portal, and that could take a year or a year and a half because that program wasn’t funded well.
The veteran program was funded very well; the women-owned certification program wasn’t. It was understaffed. Once we consolidated the systems, now you can submit one application, check the boxes, and the company will get all their certifications at the same time. Now, of course, since 2025, the applications that also include 8(a) certification have stalled because the SBA is not able to just make a decision on some of the certifications and not the other. They don’t want to make decisions on the 8(a) applications, so that whole package gets stalled.
Sam: So that’s an important point. If you’re thinking about women-owned plus maybe veteran plus 8(a), you would get caught up in the 8(a) freeze.
Jackie: Yes, yes. So you have to make a decision now whether you want to pull your application back, take 8(a) off the table, get your other certifications, and then apply for 8(a) later. But WOSBs are still underrepresented in the federal government contracting space. Even with the five percent goal, they’re getting less than five percent. The set-asides—we’ve never set aside anywhere near five percent of the work in order to reach the five percent goal. The way that women are winning is because they’re competing as a veteran, an 8(a), or a small business, and those contracts still show up as a WOSB contract if they are certified. But you rarely see WOSB set-asides, and so they are still underrepresented.
I just think about how it was only a couple of years ago at the SBA that we removed the requirement for a woman to have her husband, who had no affiliation with her company, sign on a loan application.
Sam: Oh, wow. Just a few years ago.
Jackie: Just a few years ago. The husband could be unemployed, uneducated, not working, and the woman could be educated, winning millions of dollars of contracts, but she had to get her husband’s approval to apply for a loan for her business. So, we changed that. But women need to persevere.
I think about some of the women that have done some remarkable things in the federal space in bringing innovation. You lose that ability to have smart women, like the woman who helped create the GPS system, or the woman who did the math for the trajectory of NASA and John Glenn for the space shuttle. It was an African American woman that helped come up with the COVID vaccine. Wow. So, when you think about not considering opportunities for this group, those are the things that you lose. I want us to think about what is the percentage? 5%? We’re just asking for women to get 5%.
Debunking Fraud Myths and Highlighting the Multiplier Effect
Jackie: We kind of skipped over the percent for the 8(a) firms, but I also want to just stress, Sam, that still with 8(a), only 3% of contracts get awarded through 8(a) procedures. 3%. That means that leaves 97% for everything else.
Sam: Well, yeah. If you look at sole source contracts, there’s a big deal about, “Oh, 8(a) is ripe for fraud because it’s mostly a sole source program.” The amount of sole source contracts that go through the 8(a) program as compared to the whole is tiny.
Jackie: It’s tiny. It really is. Half of that 3% that is awarded through the 8(a) procedures is going to the entity-owned companies. Then the other half is going to those firms that we want to say are DEI, race-based, ethnic group firms. So, that’s 1.5%. This whole target of fraud and all of this push is to really stop the 1.5%. Can they have the 1.5%? Regardless of whether it’s a sole source award or a competitive award, none of this is free money. It’s an opportunity to work and create jobs because whatever firm wins that contract has to have a line of credit or funding to do the work. After they do the work and it’s accepted by the government, they can submit an invoice for the work to be paid. None of this is free money. It’s opportunity—opportunity for job creation, really.
Sam: Yeah, that’s the multiplier effect. I remember at the SBA they did a study about which program had the largest multiplier effect, and it was actually the women-owned program which had the largest multiplier effect of all of them. So, that was a good support for the program. Maybe it has something to do with the industry designations and how you have to get this NAICS code approval list from the SBA; only 70% of the NAICS codes are in that. As this program is under attack with the bill that’s out there that would eliminate the program, what is it that small businesses of any type—WOSB or whatnot—can do to recognize the importance of the program if they feel it is important?
Jackie: I think Congress definitely has to be engaged in solidifying the importance of this program. WOSBs really need to petition those that represent them in Congress, those that they voted for that are in Congress, and stress the importance. When the 8(a) program was under attack, I explained to all the other companies: just because it doesn’t impact you doesn’t mean it doesn’t matter. It’s important for all of us to fight for all these programs because there’s room at the table for everyone.
So, those of you that are not WOSBs, just because that doesn’t apply to you, it doesn’t mean it’s not something you should be fighting for. The attacks start on one group, and then they roll down to the rest. So, we now see 8(a), now it’s women-owned. But it’s important because WOSBs create jobs, they generate solutions, and it’s important that they have a place at the table.
Predictions for the Future of the 8(a) Program
Sam: What’s your prediction for the 8(a) program? Where do you see it in 5 or 10 years?
Jackie: The 8(a) program has survived so many attacks. It has survived so many attacks, so I think this is a recalibration again of the program. I think it can definitely come back strong. In the meantime, it’s important for companies to continue to bid, compete, and strengthen their past performance with other set-asides. Even if they are capable, go after unrestricted opportunities. For firms to team up, for companies to engage in the Mentor-Protégé program—what’s the sad thing right now is that 8(a) companies may be going through the program and opportunities are diminishing. Their certifications may be threatened all the time. I just had an 8(a) company that lost 50 employees overnight from the USDA, and it’s not because the USDA didn’t need the work. They took the work and modified it under a large business contract.
Sam: To a large business?
Jackie: And no one’s paying attention. Can’t get anybody on the phone to look at it or discuss it. I think it was for political reasons, honestly. The work was still needed, and this just isn’t something that should occur. It’s not even allowed in the FAR to take work that is within the scope of another contract, terminate it for convenience, and then just roll it into a restricted pool.
Sam: Yeah, the new FAR—the FAR overhaul—says shift 8(a) to HUBZone or women-owned service advantage. You don’t go to large business.
Jackie: Yes. Typically, if you’re going to do that, it would be that you decide not to exercise an option or you wait until the contract expires, but just not in the middle of a performance period. So, I think the program can come back stronger, though. I actually do. Definitely, we’re not going to have the presumption of social disadvantage, but I think firms don’t need it.
They can write their story. What’s important is we have to have people that are objective to look at those stories and make the right decisions, and I think the SBA will be shifting towards that. People just need to stay encouraged. It’s a time of high anxiety for companies, but I think we will come out of this. Sometimes I like to use my Bible verses: “This too shall pass.”
The Reality of Sole Source Contracts in Federal Agencies
Sam: It may come back in a different form than it looked before. You’re already seeing, for example, the Army has reportedly come out and told its Contracting Officers, “Don’t use sole source.” So, maybe you’re looking more at competitive environments or things like 8(a) STARS, maybe other vehicles that could include only 8(a) firms. Do you predict that other agencies—the USDA, for example—would follow the Army in that movement? And how does the VA look after that?
Jackie: Across the federal government, there’s an undercurrent where Contracting Officers are being told not to award sole source 8(a). The SBA definitely needs to give waivers so they can be compliant and allow those contracts under $5.5 million to be competitive. I hope they will continue to put contracts in the 8(a) program at every dollar amount. Because if you say, “Don’t do it under $5.5 million,” and there’s no authority to compete at that level, then those contracts aren’t even going to go into the 8(a) program; they’re going to be issued elsewhere because the rule says under that threshold it has to be sole source. So that needs to be addressed too. When I was in the 8(a) program, I gave the Corps of Engineers a waiver. So, anything they wanted to compete at that time—it was $4.5 million—under that, they could just do it. That’s the better solution. But Contracting Officers are being called on the carpet if they’re trying to award or keep things in it. So, I think competition is definitely going to increase for those.
The bottom line is the federal government will always need sole source contracts. They will always. I spent most of my career in the DoD, and in the DoD, things hit the fan overnight. You need someone to go and set up camp in another country or handle a catastrophe like Katrina with the Army Corps of Engineers. We need people out putting roofs on buildings; you don’t have time to do a full competition. Sometimes you just need to get a contract in the hand of a company and say, “Go out there and start passing out water, picking people up on a bus, and driving them out of the war zone,” or wherever there has been a FEMA disaster. All of those contracts—they can’t be competitive. You can have IDIQ vehicles in place, but once a task order is going to be awarded, if there are multiple awards, you still have a need for sole source contracts. You don’t have the time to compete.
Of course, we always have FAR Part 6 where you can do a justification, so it’s not necessarily going to an 8(a) company. But for the government, why go through the whole approval process of a FAR Part 6 acquisition when I can go to an entity-owned 8(a) and get exactly what I need? It doesn’t mean that you’re going to pay double because each of those contracts still has an IGE—an Independent Government Estimate—where we make a determination of what it should cost. There are some emergencies where we say “go” and we’ll figure out the cost later. But even still, they can’t bill for something that’s unreasonable because the government is going to determine what it should cost.
Sam: Yeah, and even with the emphasis on competition, you’re seeing some agencies—the National Park Service, it sounds like—discovering the ease of sole source contracts. There was news that the renovation of Lafayette Park is under a sole source contract. Other contracts in the DC area, as far as beautification, are under sole source contracts as well.
Jackie: Possibly, yes.
Consolidating the Four SBA Systems into One Unified Platform
Sam: One thing you did when you were in the Associate Administrator position is you changed the certification process for the programs, combining all of them together. Why did you do that? Were you somehow anticipating what could happen today? Because it actually is very important that you did it that way. Tell us a bit about why it’s so important.
Jackie: First, I never anticipated what’s going on right now; I just can’t imagine that it would happen the way that it is. But I was retired, happy, enjoying myself in Florida when I got this call from the White House to come back. It was a huge financial sacrifice for me to shut down my company and come back. I always used to tell you all, “I’m here for GS-13 pay,” and that was true. But at the time, Administrator Isabel Guzman really wanted to do this, and this was part of her vision. She had this idea. We were talking about this maybe eight or nine years earlier, before I had retired back in 2016 or 2017—we wanted to streamline the processes. This was even before the Service-Disabled Veteran program came over to the SBA.
But when I arrived, I looked at what we had. We had four different systems: 8(a), Women-Owned, HUBZone, and Veteran. There were four different teams, four different leaders, and executives running those teams. So, if you were a women-owned, veteran, socially disadvantaged company, you had to submit the same application to three different systems. If you were in the HUBZone, you had to submit to four different systems—the same tax returns, the same business documents to be reviewed by four different teams right there in the SBA, all on the same floor, looking at the same taxes and the same governing documents to make a decision.
The Veteran-Owned program was funded well. You could get processed in two weeks, and the only difference in that Veteran-Owned application for the Women-Owned program was the birth certificate to show that you were a woman. But it would take a year and a half to get the women-owned certification because they weren’t just looking at the birth certificate; that team was looking at all the stuff that the Veteran-Owned team had already looked at. Then it was the same for 8(a)—now you’re looking at economic disadvantage and social disadvantage. We consolidated all of those team members into one team, shut down all four IT systems, and created one IT system that would take an application and allow us to check the boxes. That meant I had to train all of the processors on every application. So, if a person used to just work in the WOSB program, they had to learn the veteran-owned rules, the 8(a) rules, and the HUBZone rules. Because if they got an application that had those boxes checked, they had to know how to read the regulation and apply it.
That was a big deal to change all of the performance requirements for all of those employees, change their job descriptions, and then train them on all those applications before going live. It was a huge deal. Then, of course, all the applications that were in the old systems—we wanted to get those all processed. I came to the SBA in January, and we wanted to get all of those applications processed—probably three years’ worth of applications for women and 8(a)—by August so we could go live on the new system. It was a lot to do, but we were successful and got it all done, really doing about four years’ worth of work in one year.
In addition, you were on the forefront of going through the rules and regulations that needed to be changed now that we were consolidating this. What do we need to change in the CFR? Because there are things that have a little difference in how these applications are being viewed. What are some of the things that we could just say, “This will apply to all”? You did all of those regulations and changes and, I mean, it was just a lot. It was a lot of work, but I’m so happy. Someone just posted recently on LinkedIn that they submitted an application to renew their certification. Not for an initial, but to renew, and they submitted, and within seconds it came back approved.
Oh my gosh. Because there are some things that once you answer the questions in the system, you don’t need a person to touch that application. Previously, you’d have to submit to four different teams who would hand-review with their eyes whether you continued to be eligible, and you’d have to wait. Now you submit it once, and it’s coming back instantly if all the boxes check.
How System Consolidation Saved Public Service Jobs From DEI Cuts
Sam: The genius of it is—and this came up very early in this administration—the White House was cutting so-called DEI offices. I remember there was an office at the EPA where they said, “We’re just going to eliminate this whole office.” The genius of consolidating the programs is there’s not an 8(a) certification office that you can cut.
Jackie: Exactly. As I was trying to convince the staff—because some staff members, it wasn’t easy, right? Change is always hard. Some of the staff members wanted to know, “Well, I was a GS-13 processing one application. Why am I going to be a GS-13 and I have to now review and be competent in all of the application processes?” There was a time when I told them things change as we move forward. Because of the Ultima challenge, and we still hadn’t received a decision on the Ultima challenge—like what’s going to be the judge’s decision on us removing the presumption? Is that going to be enough?
I explained to the team, “It’s important that you diversify and you become a unified team.” Because now if they cut the 8(a) program, that’s one office and employees that would go. They don’t have that vulnerability now because they’re all one. Of course, the same thing would happen with the women, which was a small group of people, but if you cut the women-owned program, well, we don’t need that certification process anymore.
Sam: It probably saved people’s jobs and kept the 8(a) certification process going because otherwise, you can just cut an entire office. You’ve seen this elsewhere. It’s not that the functions go away, you cut the budget away, but you just cut that whole office, and then, of course, that work isn’t getting done.
The Mid-2026 Sentiment and Financial Anxiety in the Small Business Community
Sam: This was all part of a very tumultuous 2025 at the SBA across contracting. It does seem to me that things have calmed down a bit. I mean, we haven’t heard nearly as much out of the SBA and others about suspensions and the 8(a) program. You run a successful consulting firm now. You have a very busy speaking schedule coming up. You’re headed to New Orleans this week for the VETS conference. What is the sentiment among small businesses that you’re talking to right now in mid-2026? Are they optimistic, or are they still reeling from that tumultuous 2025?
Jackie: A lot of companies went bankrupt. This is what’s not in the news, right? But a lot of companies went bankrupt. When you have ten contracts and nine end up becoming a word now... “dodged”—my contracts got dodged. A lot of companies went bankrupt. Those that are persevering and staying with it still have anxiety because they don’t know what’s next. Like I told you, it was just last month, within the last 30 days, that a company at the USDA just lost 50 employees. That’s huge for a small business because the average small business has 25 employees. So if they got to the point where they have 50, that’s a large number of their employees.
The other thing that makes it difficult for companies to continue to persevere is their access to capital has changed. It used to be when a bank saw a contract that had a base year and four option years, they felt confident to give a small business a loan because they could give them a line of credit or a loan to perform. They knew that at least that base year would be finished and the company could repay them. But now, in the middle of the base year or the middle of an option, contracts could just be terminated. So, it’s making it more difficult for small companies to get loans from banks, which then could tip them into predatory lenders, which exacerbates the whole problem.
Sam: Oh, that’s interesting. So their cost of capital goes up because of the uncertainty around whether contracts are going to be terminated.
Jackie: Exactly, because small business contracts aren’t as stable anymore. But we need clear guidance from Congress and the SBA on the future of all of the programs. We need stability in how Contracting Officers are going to treat small business contracts. They are our partners. When you think about a business, small businesses that support and serve the federal government are the federal government’s partners. How do you treat your partners? How do you treat your business partners?
It’s important for them to have some type of stability. I think companies are teaming up more. Acquisitions are getting larger because of bigger contracts, and small businesses can’t go after them on their own, so they’re teaming up to work together. They’re supporting each other. Where they’re not able to pick up the phone and get advice and guidance from the SBA or the OSDBU offices that have been gutted, they are calling each other and learning from each other. I always thought that the best way for a small business to learn is from another small business. But it doesn’t mean that the SBA SCORE, Apex Accelerators, and all of these entities need to lean backwards; they still need to lean forward and really do more now.
Reflection on Returning to Government: Was It Worth It?
Sam: You mentioned that you came back from retirement to join the SBA, and part of your call was to create this unified certification system. So now you’re over a year out, maybe a year and a half now. Was it worth it to go back into government?
Jackie: It definitely was worth it. Yeah, it definitely was. I want my legacy not to be everything that I’ve gotten for myself, but the number of ways that I’ve helped other people. That’s what I want my legacy to be about; it’s not just about what I do for myself. I think about all of the companies that were certified. I think about the companies that were inspired by the ability to knock on the door at the SBA and receive assistance. It’s important because jobs were created. We see things shifting now, but jobs were created, companies were certified, and contracts were won as a result. Most importantly, for the first time in probably 10 years, the team in the Government Contracting and Business Development office worked collaboratively together to make tremendous change for small businesses when they streamlined these processes and consolidated this certification.
This was huge. It will go down in history for years to come. It was just such a smart decision. I definitely came back to help lead it, but I wasn’t the brains behind it. Being able to put what needed to be done on the table and watch all the smart people in the SBA—like you, like Van Tran, like Larry Stubblefield—come to the table with the solutions and make this happen was wonderful. Sometimes I think about the hard work and late nights that all of these government employees put in, and it just brings tears to my eyes. I always talked about leadership, and when you’re leading public servants, it’s important that you understand the sacrifice that they’re making to serve publicly.
Probably you realize now, “Wow, I could’ve gotten out a long time ago and made all of this money that I’m making now,” but you make a sacrifice to say, “I’m gonna serve my country.” You make more money outside, and so when you look at people that have committed their life to public service, you have to lead them with integrity and character, and they have to know that you value what they bring to the table. I was never the smartest—you know that. I was never the smartest person at the table. It was all of the leaders around me, and that has been the way that I led: to say, “Hey, here’s the problem. Let’s put it on the board. What do you all think we need to do to get this fixed?” So, yes, it was worth it because of the things we accomplished and because I was able to allow leaders to step forward and do something miraculous.
Sam: Well, that was a tremendous effort that you led to consolidate the certification programs. It’s a huge difference now to have this 8(a) program at least still able to fight another day because of the work that we did together.
Leadership Insights: “How Successful People Lead” and Leveling Up
Sam: I’ll get you out of here on this. When we were together in 2024, I remember the principle “leaders eat last.” We had a good story about that. I’m not going to share it. Then the bus, right? Yeah, get the right people on the bus. Any additional leadership stories or tips that you want to share? You named your company SES. I know leadership is very important to you, and the path to the Senior Executive Service is important to you. What would you tell our listeners about leadership?
Jackie: Another book that I love to talk about is How Successful People Lead by John C. Maxwell, and also the concepts from Jim Collins. This concept is so simple, and if any leader or aspiring leader would just read it—it takes about an hour to read—it says getting the position of leadership is just the first level. That’s the first level of leadership, and it doesn’t really mean you’re a leader; it just means you have the position.
You don’t really get to the point where you start being able to make change until you get to level two, where you start engaging and building relationships with your workforce, and they know you and they trust you. Just because you got the position doesn’t mean that they trust you or that you care or value them.
So, you’ve got to get to that level two in order to get to level three, which is where you can bring change. A lot of leaders want to get the position and come in and immediately make change, but you’ve got to get the position, then develop the trust of the workforce, and then you can get to level three to make change.
Level four is developing other leaders. That’s what you want to constantly be doing; that’s what your legacy should be—developing and producing other leaders. You do that by making sure they have an opportunity to lead something and not having you, as a leader, being the only voice of authority in the room.
I think that is a level-one leader who comes in and says, “It’s my way or the highway. I don’t care if people like me. I don’t care if people want to listen to me; they have to because I’m the boss.” That’s a level-one leader, and you always want to aspire to be greater than that. You can’t get to those higher leadership levels until you develop relationships with your people, execute change, and then develop other leaders.
So, when we did the certification process, that’s what you saw: me getting the position, developing the trust with the people, and then putting people in positions where they could work their pieces to make change and execute—whether it was policy, IT, or personnel—and letting them lead it. You develop other leaders, and that is what a good leader is.
Conclusion & Where to Connect with Jackie
Sam: That’s been very important as you’re not there anymore and I’m not there anymore. Many of the leadership team members have left, and the SBA is continuing to serve small businesses because of that development of additional leaders. It’s been so fun going down memory lane with you and talking about these policies that we worked on and the certification system. Jackie, if people want to contact you, how do they find you?
Jackie: The best place to contact me is on LinkedIn; then you’ll get a chance to see me. I respond to messaging on LinkedIn. We can connect that way—I’ll get to see your face, and you get to see mine.
Sam, thank you so much. I want to thank you for everything that you did while I was there because I absolutely would not have been successful achieving the things that we did in that one year—which, like I said, was four years’ worth of work in one year—without leaders like you.
I depended on you a lot. I took you to every meeting with me with the Administrator because she was deep into the regulations. I used to say, “She’s in the weeds, and if she asks a tough question, I need the smart people with me.” So, I always brought you, and I just appreciate how you served, how you led, and how you built your team. It was just amazing.
Even when there was an opportunity for me to promote you and move you higher to supervise two other senior executives, you said, “Let me stay here because I’m just building my team.” That meant the world to me. It showed you weren’t there for position or title; you were there for the work, for policy, and for doing the right thing for small businesses. So, I appreciate you. It meant the world to me.
Sam: Thank you. We did a lot of great work together. Thank you for trusting me to support you and support the Administrator. You can see it in the policies that we put out. I have not done nearly as many policies in this last year and a half than we had when we were at the SBA. But I think we truly listened to small businesses, tried to figure out what we could do from a government perspective to help them, and I think we did a lot of good.
Jackie: We did. We did.
Sam: Thank you so much for being on the show, Jackie.
Jackie: Thank you. Thanks for having me.
Sam: Thanks, everybody.
With 20 years of Federal legal experience, Sam Le counsels small businesses through government contracting matters, including bid protests, contract compliance, small business certifications, and procurement disputes. Sam obtained his law degree from the University of Virginia and formerly served as SBA’s director of procurement policy. His website is www.samlelaw.com.
This video is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
