3 Comments
User's avatar
Shirley D. Collier's avatar

Like Shakespeare said “Hell hath no fury like a woman…”. Elected officials would be wise to steer clear of eliminating the WOSB program.

Shauna Weatherly's avatar

"The FAR requires contracting officers to check SBA’s list to see whether the contract is in an authorized industry." Yet, there is no training course that addresses how to procure a WOSB or EDWOSB set-aside or sole source action. I was responsible for course updates and was the FAI Instructor for "MAS and the Utilization of Small Businesses" course from 2014 to 2020. I was allowed to include the need to check the list in my script (not slides) but I was only allowed to "go that deep" because I had done research and found there was no other training in FAI or DAU that included that information. They all only went as far as to state what it took to qualify as a WOSB, but not the steps for how to procure a WOSB set-aside or sole source action -- two contextually different things. In my 2021 and 2023 white papers to Congress on the lack of progress meeting WOSB goals and CSs/COs unaware of the list you mention (among other things), I pointed out CS/CO training as a critical component to strengthening the program and meeting goals. Awareness of this list was key. Still...nothing to this day that I'm aware of on the training front.

And you can't trust a Secretary these days, even under oath. That's a whole other conversation.

Sam Le's avatar

This is fascinating. The NAICS restriction was point #1 whenever I talked about WOSB while at SBA (point #2 was the backlog). I'm glad you put that into white papers!

This also explains why it helps to have multi-agency set-aside IDIQs. Buying offices just want someone else to have taken care of the set-aside details ahead of time.