Holomua Consulting Group, LLC
info@holomuaconsulting.com
(808) 369-1471
  • Home
  • About
  • Services
    • SBA 8(a) Program Services
    • DBE Program
  • News
  • Contact
    • Initial Consultations
  • Our Blog
  • Pilot Course
  • Student Portal

​The Small Business Blog

TIPS * UPDATES * INDUSTRY NEWS

SBA OHA Case Reminds Us That Familial Relationships Can Impact Small Business Size Status 

3/2/2017

1 Comment

 
Picture
On February 13, 2017, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) issued a decision in the matter of: Size Appeal of Prosol Associates, LLC, Appellant. Appellant was named the apparent awardee of a contract for IT training with the marine Corps Systems Command (MCSC).  In response, an unsuccessful offeror filed a size protest alleging affiliation with ProSol, LLC (Prosol) based on an identity of interest, the newly organized concern rule, and totality of the circumstances.  This appeal arose out of the SBA Area Office's size determination that Appellant was not a small business under the applicable $15 million size standard due to its affiliation with ProSol based on identity of interest (based on familial relationship between father and son).
Background Facts
  • Michael E. Dean (ME) is Appellant's sole shareholder and CEO.
  • Michael J. Dean (MJ) is the father of Michael E. Dean and the sole owner of ProSol.
  • ME acquired Appellant in 2008 but from 2002 - 2010 held a variety of positions at ProSol (thus, there was a period of 2 years where he was employed by ProSol and Appellant).
  • Appellant subleases office space from ProSol at market rates (note that Appellant's office space can only be accessed through space occupied by ProSol); Appellant and ProSol therefore have the same business address.
  • Appellant and ProSol, although they do not have the same primary NAICS code, so have 13 common NAICS codes as listed on their SAM profiles.
  • Since 2008, Appellant has been a subcontractor to ProSol and receives, on average, 16% of its revenues from such subcontracts from ProSol.
  • ProSol was listed as Appellant's subcontractor on the proposal for the contract at issue in this case.

Legal Analysis and Applicable Standard
  • SBA regulation 13 CFR 121.103(f) creates a rebuttable presumption that family members have identical interests and must be treated as one person, unless the family members are estranged or not involved with each other's business transactions.
  • The presumption created by 13 CFR 121.103(f) can be rebutted if the challenged firm is able to show there is a clear line of fracture among the family members.
  • "Factors that may be pertinent in examining a clear line of fracture include whether the firms share officers, employees, facilities, or equipment; whether the firms have different customers and lines of business; whether there is financial assistance, loans, or significant subcontracting between the firms; and whether the family members participate in multiple businesses together."  
  • Note however, that a minimal amount of business or economic activity between two concerns does not prevent a finding of clear fracture.  

SBA OHA Decision
In upholding the SBA Area Office's size determination finding that Appellant and ProSol were affiliated such that Appellant's revenues exceeded the applicable size standard, OHA found the following to be relevant:
  • Subcontracts from ProSol accounting for 16% of Appellant's revenues is not considered a minimal amount, but rather represents a significant portion of Appellant's Revenues.
  • The fact that the two firms share office space and that ProSol was listed as a subcontractor to Appellant on the contract at issue.
  • Since the two firms have 13 common NAICS codes listed in their SAM profiles, they cannot be said to be in completely different lines of business.
  • ME never achieved a clear fracture from his father's business interests since ME worked at ProSol and continued to work there for a period of 2 years after ME had acquired Appellant.  

Lessons Learned
  • One firm does not necessarily have to exercise actual or total control over the other firm for there to be affiliation; rather, the existence of the relationship itself is enough to create a presumption that the family members have identical interests.
  • If the presumption applies, it is always the burden of the challenged firm to rebut the presumption by showing a clear line of fracture.  
  • This presumption applies not only in the context of contract award, but it also applies with respect to eligibility for small business contracting programs like the 8(a) Business Development program, the HUBZone program, WOSB and SDVOSB programs.  

Many firms that we consult with don't have a good understanding of the significance of familial relationships and how they can have a big impact on various aspects of federal contracting.  This case is a good reminder that identity of interest should be a serious concern for small businesses.  Although the Appellant in this case was unsuccessful, this case nonetheless provides a roadmap for other firms in the same or a similar situation in terms of steps they might take to create a clear line of fracture.   For more information on identity of interest and affiliation, please contact us at:  info@holomuaconsulting.com.  





    1 Comment
    Mia Evans link
    1/18/2023 06:05:33 pm

    It really helped when you said that small businesses should also have eligibility when it comes to contracts such as 8(a) assistance development programs and more. I can imagine the there are so many factors to consider in the process of owning a business, but it seems that the contracts are one of the most important ones. It must also be helpful to have the guidance of experts to actually succeed in this endeavor that an individual would want to pursue.

    Reply



    Leave a Reply.


      Enter your email address:

      Delivered by FeedBurner

      Archives

      May 2020
      April 2018
      October 2017
      September 2017
      August 2017
      July 2017
      June 2017
      March 2017
      February 2017
      December 2016
      November 2016
      October 2016
      August 2016
      June 2016
      March 2016
      February 2016
      December 2015
      November 2015
      October 2015
      September 2015
      August 2015
      July 2015
      June 2015
      May 2015
      March 2015
      January 2015
      December 2014
      November 2014
      October 2014
      September 2014


      Categories

      All
      8(a) BD Program
      Affiliation
      Affirmative Action
      Business Development
      Compensation
      Conferences
      Contractor Compliance
      DBE
      DFARS
      Employment
      Events
      FAR
      Federal Contracting
      FLSA
      GAO Protest
      General Business Tips
      GovCon Tips
      Government Contractor Compliance
      HR Compliance
      HUBZone
      Joint Ventures
      Marketing
      Market Research
      Native Hawaiian Issues
      NHO
      OFCCP
      Ostensible Subcontractor Rule
      SBA OHA Decisions
      SBA Regulations
      SBIR
      SDVOSB
      Size Protests
      Small Biz Tools
      Small Business Compliance
      Small Business Programs
      Subcontracting
      WOSB

    CONTACT US

    • (808) 369-1471
    • info@holomuaconsulting.com
    • P.O. Box 29735, Honolulu 96820

      Newsletter, alerts & updates, promotions

    Subscribe
    Back to top
    • Home
    • About
    • Services
      • SBA 8(a) Program Services
      • DBE Program
    • News
    • Contact
      • Initial Consultations
    • Our Blog
    • Pilot Course
    • Student Portal
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    © 2014 Holomua Consulting Group, LLC.  All Rights Reserved.