Search Results

By Elizabeth Sullivan In all but three of the last 46 fiscal years, Congress has enacted a continuing resolution (CR). Every year the same drama unfolds and the government contracting community gets understandably frustrated. Why? When there is a CR, contracts and grants suffer delays – a disaster for all involved. However, this timetable has become the norm – regular order is a thing of the past – and contractors should be prepared for it at the start of every new fiscal year. A quick refresher on this process. There are two types of bills we will keep talking about: regular appropriation bills and CRs. Continuing resolutions continue the same level of funding from the previous fiscal year into the next fiscal year. If 12 appropriations bills are not signed into law or a CR is not passed before the new fiscal year begins on October 1, then comes a government shutdown. There was no appetite from Democrats or Republicans for a government shutdown this year – with the midterm elections coming in November, delaying the CR would have been a poor political strategy. Generally speaking, the Congressional timetable for a CR is pretty much the same. The Congress passes a CR from the beginning of the new fiscal year until around the holidays, where the Members of Congress compromise before the clock strikes “Christmas.” This year, the President signed a CR into law to fund the government until December 16. If you are looking for more details on the appropriations process, they can be found here. After December 16, there will likely be another CR for a week to give appropriators the chance to iron out any differences and prepare a massive funding bill. In the end, after expressing frustration with the process, everyone goes home for the holidays. Why should government contractors care about this process? As previously mentioned, a CR generally means no new starts and usage of bridge contracts. Bridge contracts are either an extension to an existing contract beyond the period of performance or a new short-term contract awarded on a sole-source basis to avoid a lapse in service caused by a delay in awarding a subsequent contract. The federal workforce is subject to seemingly endless stop-and-start contract cycles, which creates inefficiency and disruption for the entire supply chain. This “not-so-new normal” disproportionately impacts smaller companies because it requires a reserve of capital and other resources necessary to keep the trains running. So, new normal? Not so much.

Government Relations Analyst Boutique government relations firm specializing in government contracting and small business issues looking for another team member to provide legislative and regulatory support. Fiercely bipartisan, this woman-owned firm is seeking the most qualified person, regardless of political affiliation. This role is an integral part of our government relations firm and critical to the success of our lobbying work. Analyst responsibilities include (but are not limited to): preparing a range of written communications for internal and external audiences, tracking and reporting to team members and clients on legislative/regulatory policy developments, covering Congressional hearings, and supporting the team’s advocacy activities. We are seeking a detail-oriented team member with strong writing skills, the ability to understand legislative/regulatory actions and willingness to provide team support. Some Hill/government relations experience or government contracting experience preferred. Equally important is the ability to work as a team player. Bachelor’s degree required. Interested candidates should send a resume to MSGIhire@gmail.com and answer the following question - do you think the government provided enough assistance to government contractors during the COVID-19 pandemic? This firm is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Nothing in this job posting or description should be construed as an offer or guarantee of employment.

Hearing Report: A Review and Assessment of the SBA’s HUBZone Program Subcommittee on Contracting and Infrastructure House Small Business Committee July 14, 2022 For HUBZone certified companies and their advocates, some of the discussion in this hearing was admittedly tough to listen to. Members of Congress listened to the testimonies of HUBZone Contractors National Council Chair, Shirley Bailey, attorney Matt Schoonover, and business owners Brent Lillard and Inés Rivas-Hutchins, who talked about the importance of the HUBZone program and offered suggestions to improve and expand the program. The Chair of the Subcommittee, Kweisi Mfume (D-MD) mentioned his impatience with small business contracting issues saying that the Congress hears the same feedback from small companies but doesn’t act to fix them. Our witnesses agreed—this was not the first time they have offered suggestions on how the program could be better utilized by federal agencies. Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI) took the discussion one step further by asking whether the HUBZone program is worth continuing or should it be scrapped and start all over again. Ouch. Brent Lillard’s response was that offering suggestions on program improvements should not be interpreted as a call to get rid of the program. Instead, the witnesses offered the following suggestions: Stop “double counting” by federal agencies. In other words, if the agency awards a contract to a HUBZone company but it is headed by a woman—the award shouldn’t be counted toward its women-owned goal and the HUBZone goals. Pick one. Apply the HUBZone price evaluation preference to task orders. This bill passed the House on June 8, and the Senate needs to act. Expand sole source contract opportunities for HUBZone companies. Get rid of the justification requirements that stifle awards to HUBZone companies (and everyone else except 8(a) program participants). Expand training of the acquisition workforce to better understand small business contracting programs. Expand the Highway Trust Fund to include HUBZone businesses. Modernize the employee requirement of 35% requiring residence in a HUBZone for a period over 180 days. Not that this wasn’t out of touch before COVID, but since COVID –worker shortages and the demise of “9-5 in the office 5 days a week” suggest this change is imperative. Expand “Attempt to Maintain” to all contracts. In other words, allow companies to show a good faith effort to meet the requirement that 35% of all employees must reside in a HUBZone area. Alternative: change the 35% requirement entirely. Require 1 federal agency to prioritize HUBZone contracts to increase awards – HUBZone First. If Congress and the SBA listens to these witnesses and their suggestions, there is no doubt more companies would pursue the HUBZone certification. Federal agencies must also increase their buying from these companies. Inaction on both fronts will simply produce the current unsatisfactory results.

Madison Services Group, on behalf of the HUBZone Contractors National Council, is pleased to announce a huge win for small business contractors, the result of months of advocacy. The Department of Defense (DoD) has released the “Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) 2.0” – the updated version of the Department’s effort to enhance cybersecurity practices of its federal contractors. Many of the changes made by the DoD come as a result of the Council’s efforts over the past two years to highlight challenges/propose solutions to increase compliance and affordability for small contractors. Michael Dunbar, President of Ryzhka International, testified on behalf of the Council in a June hearing on CMMC implementation and what it means for small businesses. He highlighted the need for cost transparency, streamlined standards and establishing clear communication on CMMC efforts, amongst others. In response to the hearing, the Small Business Committee Members introduced a bipartisan amendment that was included in the House-passed FY2022 House National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that exempts contracts awarded to small businesses classified as tier 0 from category management or successor strategies for contract consolidation. Floor #337 – Requires DoD Report impact of CMMC on small businesses. Requires DoD to submit a report on the impact of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) on small businesses within 120 days. The report must include estimated cost burden for each CMMC level, anticipated decrease in number of small businesses as a result of CMMC and how the DoD plans to mitigate the negative effects to small businesses resulting from CMMC. [Reps Phillips (D-MN), Van Duyne (R-TX)] Our efforts in elevating the voice of defense industrial base resulted in changes in CMMC 2.0, specifically laid out by DoD to “reduce the burden for small businesses by: streamlining requirements at all levels, eliminating CMMC-unique practices and maturity processes; allowing companies associated with the new Level 1 (Foundational) and some Level 2 (Advanced) acquisition programs that do not involve information critical to national security to perform self-assessments rather than third-party assessments; and providing additional flexibility through the allowance of plan of actions and milestones (POA&Ms) and a waiver process.” Thank you to all of our members and strategic partners that have added their voice to our efforts, and we look forward to continuing this important policy work through our new Secure Supply Chain Consortium.

On September 23, the House passed H.R. 4350, the FY2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Accompanying the 1,362 pages of legislation were  476 amendments offered by lawmakers. Included in the amendments were several wins for MSGI clients: HUBZone Contractors National Council, GovEvolve, and Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce (MCCC). These amendments are huge win for the small business community and are the result of months of advocacy. Floor #352 - Transfers decisions for HUBZones to OHA. Floor #314 – Clarifies that the HUBZone price preference applies to task orders. Floor #365 – Raises sole source thresholds for all socioeconomic programs from $4/$7.5 to $8/$10 million (does not eliminate option years, this is total over the life of the contract). Floor #26– Raises small business contracting goals. Floor #186 – Creates category management exemptions for tier 0 contracts. Floor #412 –Requires a company to update their small business status in SAM/notify KO’s if status changes within 2 days. Floor #149–Adds cyber counseling capability to SBDCs. Floor #337 – Requires DoD Report impact of CMMC on small businesses. Considering the ongoing hardships resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, adoption of these changes would assist small businesses seeking to succeed in the federal marketplace. In October, MSGI pushed for these amendments to be included in the Senate’s version of the FY2022 NDAA by writing a letter to Senate Small Business Committee Chair, Ben Cardin of Maryland and Ranking Member, Rand Paul of Kentucky. The letter was supported by MSGI clients listed above, as well as the Women Veterans Business Coalition (WVBC), the Small and Emerging Contractors Advisory Forum (SECAF), the Women Construction Owners and Executives (WCOE), and hundreds of independent small businesses across the country. Read the Small Business Amendments Support Letter here. Access a detailed list of small business amendments in the House FY2022 NDAA here.

What's completed: Budget Resolution – House and Senate passed. This is the blueprint for the fiscal year and Presidential signature is not required. Important action: Set spending targets for appropriators to do their work. Required authorizing Committees to report suggested program changes by September 15. What’s half completed: Infrastructure – Passed by Senate by a wide margin. Needs House action. FY22 Appropriations – House has completed 9 of 12 of the bills. Senate has passed 0. A likely scenario is that spending bills will be combined into groups (called minibuses) or one gigantic bill known as the Omnibus appropriations bill. What’s not completed: Budget Reconciliation– A special bill which can be used once a year to overcome filibusters and requires only a majority vote. It is limited to spending and tax provisions rather than policy only. This bill is the one to watch. Look for many program and tax changes, reflecting the Democratic majority’s priorities. Raising the Debt Ceiling- Secretary Yellen warned Congress that the debt ceiling needs be raised in October. Delays have negative consequences for the economy, including consumer confidence. Failure to raise it can result in a default on US fiscal obligations. See her letter to Speaker Pelosi here. Continuing Resolution- Since appropriations for FY22 are unlikely to be completed by the beginning of the fiscal year (October 1), a continuing resolution must be passed to keep the government operating until the 12 appropriations bills are passed and sent to the President. If a continuing resolution is not passed by October 1, expect a government shutdown. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – This annual “must pass” bill determines defense spending for the Fiscal Year. It contains new initiatives, changes in programs and direction for the distribution of funding. The House and Senate will consider this bill when returning to Congress in September. How to Follow These Actions Federal contracts and grants depend on appropriations levels and program changes that Congress. The timetable for grants are also affected by delays in funding. And, on a personal note, the stock market is responsive to Congressional actions. If you are a client of Madison Services Group, we send out a daily communication, Today in Washington, that follows major bills like those listed above. In addition, you should familiarize yourself with Congressional websites such as appropriations.house.gov, and Congress.gov. Knowledge is power. Get ahead of your competition by tracking Congress and the programs that provide revenue to your business.

Win for small business contractors today – a bipartisan bill that encourages interagency collaboration to utilize small business contractors has passed the Senate. The Promoting Rigorous and Innovative Cost Efficiencies for Federal Procurement and Acquisitions (PRICE) Act expands opportunities for small companies by requiring the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to work with federal acquisition leaders to share best practices, including awarding more contracts to small businesses. Reintroduced by Senators Gary Peters (D-MI), Chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC), and Joni Ernst (R-IA), MSGI clients GovEvolve, HUBZone Contractors National Council, the Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce, and the Women Veterans Business Coalition, supported this legislation. Client quotes in the HSGAC press release include: “Small business participation in the federal marketplace is key to ensuring a strong industrial base, however, small businesses find that agencies continue to be reluctant to utilize these programs,” said Michelle Burnett, Executive Director. HUBZone Contractors National Council. “The PRICE Act provides increased opportunities for HUBZone companies by encouraging the acquisition workforce to share innovative best practices to increase small business participation across the federal government.” “Small IT companies are at the forefront of innovation, but often face barriers when selling to the federal government,” said Eminence Griffin, Executive Director, GovEvolve. “The PRICE Act addresses the need for modernizing the federal acquisition system and will be transformative for small business IT contractors around the country.” Read the bill text here. Read the press release from the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs here.

Small businesses face increasing supply chain challenges due to the ongoing impacts of COVID-19. Highlighting this important issue, the bipartisan House Small Business Caucus held a roundtable with small business leaders to discuss their challenges and brainstorm solutions. MSGI clients Jackie Wilson, CEO of American Fashion Network; Chris Oliver, GovEvolve member and President of ID Technologies; Qin Li, CEO of Soliel LLC; and Rosemary Swierk, President of Direct Steel and Construction shared their experiences with Caucus Co-Chairs, Rep. Chris Pappas (D-NH) and Rep. Kevin Hern (R-OK). In addition, over 35 Congressional offices participated in the robust discussion. Issues of price increases, scarcity of raw materials, and intensified security risks were at the center of the discussion. Recommendations from the panel included adopting federal initiatives to buy products made in America, raising small business contracting sole source limits, establishing a NAICS code for IT resellers, and allowing price adjustments to federal contracts to accommodate the costs associated with price increases for goods and services. We are grateful for the enthusiasm of the Co-Chairs to confront the challenges facing small businesses, and we look forward to continued collaboration in the future.

MSGI Congressional Recap Hearing Title: Innovation as a Catalyst for New Jobs: SBA’s Innovation Initiatives Committee: House Small Business Committee, Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Tax, and Capital Access Chair: Rep. Sharice Davids (D-KS) Ranking Member: Rep. Dan Meuser (R-PA) Date: July 14, 2021 Witnesses Mr. E. LaVerne Epp Executive Chair KU Innovation Park Testimony Mr. Benjamin Robert Johnson Chairman Innovation Advocacy Council Testimony Dr. Gabriel R. Burks Vice President and Head of Research and Development FrostDefense Envirotech Inc. Testimony Mr. Jeffrey Maguire Managing Partner and Co-Founder Clearly Clean Products, LLC Testimony Main Points of Discussion Growth Accelerator Fund Challenge and Regional Innovation Clusters Chair Davids (D-KS) Questions: Dr. Burks, what was your experience participating in a growth accelerator? How did it impact your business long-term? Response: It has been a tremendous experience, lots of professionals and resources available. They host events that are in line with early-stage development. We can interact with other companies to build relationships. Mr. Johnson, from your perspective, you spend a decent amount of time talking about a robust regional ecosystem, is there anything else you would like to add? Response: Each region is unique, programs like regional innovation clusters allow regions to define what their strength is, it is not one size fits all. We can bring this to rural communities and better engage women and minorities that are left behind. Access to Capital Chair Davids (D-KS) Question: Mr. Epps, venture capital funding is centralized. What approach have you taken to address this challenge? Response: We try to cluster investors, like small cluster groups. However, a shortage of capital is a problem for us. An incentive for venture fund capital investment would be very helpful. Rep. Newman (D-IL) Question: Dr. Burks and Mr. Johnson, getting the right people in the right jobs is critical, what if we extended the Community Navigator Pilot Program? Where incubators and business groups could get funding to give companies expertise in specific areas. Response from Dr. Burks: I think that kind of supplement would be tremendous. Response from Mr. Johnson: I think that model is promising for people to connect with SBA resources. For us, the Regional Innovation Cluster was that hub. Bringing additional resources to the Regional Innovation Cluster program is a unique opportunity. Rep. Chu (D-CA) Question: I have reintroduced the Investing in Main Street Act, H.R. 4256, that will allow a bank or federal savings association to invest up to 15% of their capital and surplus in SBICs. Mr. Epp, SBICs are backed by SBA and last year they made 1/4 of their investments to underserved businesses. What is the importance of private investment in startups and how can SBIC's help them grow and succeed? Response: Small company investors are always looking for match funding, they often don’t want to be the first in. This type of funding “opens the floodgates.” Mr. Johnson, I have also introduced the PROGRESS Act, H.R. 2680, that will create two new tax incentives to address the disparity of women obtaining capital to start a business. Could you talk about how incentivizing third party investment into the smallest of businesses can improve their outcomes? Response: We see the hurdles of hiring the first employee as the main challenge. Anything that can help bring on a hire is important. Rep. Evans (D-PA) Question: Dr. Burks, access to capital is a persistent issue for entrepreneurs, particularly for black businesses and women. What types of funding have you used? Response: We have used the University of Illinois, the National Science Foundation (NSF) SBIR Program, the Illinois Incubator, and we have gotten investment from private vineyards. This has funded a multitude of things. How does this work? Response: The incubator recognized our idea as having potential. From there, you continue to grow and apply for other funding. If you get the NSF SBIR, you can use that funding to further develop your efforts. The incubator is supposed to give you the support you need so eventually you can leave and become a self-sustaining business. Taxes and the Current Economy Ranking Member Meuser (R-PA) Questions: Mr. McGuire, The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act created a more competitive environment for small businesses, what would happen if it was repealed? Response: It will impact the amount of money we can reinvest into our expansion. If the tax rates increase, the amount of capital we will have will decrease because the money will go to taxes. The bonus depreciation (which allows for full and immediate expensing of capital investments) is a particular concern to you. How was this advantageous to your company Response: We added 5 production lines to our facility, we were able to depreciate the costs against income taxes which allowed us to invest millions of dollars back into our lines and continue to grow our company. The only way to innovate is to have the resources to innovate. Without the tax cuts we would have stopped growing forward. What are your thoughts on patents? Response: Patents for small business are very important for growth. Dr. Burks, what is the biggest need for startup companies? Response: Biggest challenge is putting an initial team together, assistance early on is important. Also, having flexibility is important. Rep. Young Kim (R-CA) Questions: Mr. Johnson, what would a higher capital tax rate do to early-stage funding? Response: We don’t often hear about tax issues from our entrepreneurs, we hear that they need support - connecting with capital and developing products. The policy environment needs to be two sided, a decrease in regulation as well as developing the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Mr. McGuire, would you agree that a higher capital tax rate would put our small businesses at a disadvantage? Response: The capital tax rate will affect investment in companies, but it won’t stop it. When you mess with capital gains you will impact small businesses negatively. Mr. McGuire, how will increase in prices or inflation affect you? Response: We have seen 15 – 30% increase in raw material costs. Rep. Van Duyne (R-TX) Questions: Mr. McGuire, do you think your company’s rapid growth would have been possible today? Is the economic environment today compared to before the pandemic less friendly to business innovation? Response: It was easier to hire before the pandemic - we are trying to deal with having the appropriate people. I don’t see the current situation getting better in the next 6 months. When you think about the tax proposals coming from this Administration, how would it affect small business capital at large? Response: It will be difficult, most small businesses are self-funded. You cannot build a business in an environment with tax increases. Mr. Epp, without sacrificing waste, fraud, or abuse protections, how can we eliminate some of the paperwork for small businesses participating in the innovation programs? Response: The accelerator program lacks restrictions and paperwork, and it works very well, we need more of that.

MSGI Congressional Hearing Recap Committee: Committee on Small Business Subcommittee on Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and Workforce Development Hearing Title: Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! Subcommittee Chair: Representative Jason Crow (D-CO) Ranking Member: Representative Young Kim (R-CA) Date: June 30, 2021 Witnesses Mr. John R. Dearie President Center for American Entrepreneurship Testimony Dr. J.D. LaRock President and Chief Executive Officer Network for Teaching Entrepreneurship Testimony Ms. Denyse Airheart Business Pathways Director Mi Casa Resource Center Testimony Mr. Craig Etkin President and Chief Executive Officer Intelligence360 Testimony Main Issues Discussed Reaching Underserved Communities Chair Crow (D-CO) Questions: Ms. Airheart, what is the primary barrier that entrepreneurs face when starting a business Response: Systemic issues in the community. For example, the Latinx population want to work together, but there is a lack of leadership. We work to shepherd individuals through training, looking at access to capital. Many individuals in underserved areas do not see leaders who look like them. Can you expand on "support ecosystems?” Response: Yes, they can be modeled in different ways, such as peer to peer connection. Ultimately you want to see the stickiness: they can hire locally, invest locally, retain local talent. Support ecosystems build the steppingstones. We are looking for business not to leave distressed communities but reinvest in them. Rep. Phillips (D-MN) Question: Only 3 urban areas in the country account for 80% of all venture capital investment: Silicon Valley, New York City, Boston. Mr. Dearie, what role can Congress play to help with distribution of this funding to areas that are starved of it? Response: We hear this problem at every roundtable. There is not an equitable distribution of venture capital funding. I suggest the provisions found in the New Business Preservation Act. It creates a program where public funds are matched with private dollars in a 1 to 1 match in heartland states. Dr. LaRock, what specific steps can Congress take to inspire young people for entrepreneurship? Response: The foundational concepts of the Next Generation Entrepreneur Corps Act (NextGen). I also think that our education system, including high schools and middle schools, need to start integrating career exploration. There needs to be more funding for youth entrepreneurship. Rep. Newman (D-IL) Question: Mr. Dearie and Dr. LaRock, what are the top 3 issues that Congress can address? Response from Mr. Dearie: First, entrepreneurship remains white and male. As a pathway to economic empowerment, we need to place priority in making entrepreneurship more inclusive. Following that, access to capital and access to properly skilled people. Response from Dr. LaRock: Focus effort on disparities that exist, we must build in equity. I also believe that mentorship is vital, as well as opportunities in the education system, such as community colleges. Rep. Bordeaux (D-GA) Question: Ms. Airheart, are there things that we could be doing to help with minority owned businesses better access programs? Response: Yes, we must create awareness of what is available. Funding for programs like the women’s business centers is critical because these programs are accessed by the new builders of the new America. Problems with Job Creation Ranking Member Kim (R-CA) Question: There has been difficulty finding workers for jobs. Mr. Dearie, can you elaborate how we can increase worker’s skills and help them develop new ones? Response from Mr. Dearie: Access to skilled workers is equally as important as access to capital. The U.S. educational system is failing to produce sufficient workers. STEM education is important as is the great underused education system: community colleges. There needs to be more communication between businesses and educators. Response from Dr. LaRock: Career and technical education is important. Burdens on Entrepreneurs Chair Crow (D-CO) Question: Ms. Airheart, what barriers should we remove, and what would that look like? Response: Many entrepreneurs must make the choice between going to college or starting a business because of student loan debt. Costs and lack of access to childcare are also incredibly challenging to women. Also, financial education: many people lack the skills and confidence to pursue capital investment. Rep. Garbarino (R-NY) Question: Many of the businesses in my district have left because of bad infrastructure, Mr. Dearie, what do we start with? Response: Physical infrastructure is very important, but so is childcare. In WW2 we had a national childcare system because women were working, this led to a booming economy. Mr. Etkin, costs of goods are high, what are we hearing about inflation from small businesses Response: It has been shocking to see the price differences on lumber and steel. Our timelines are disrupted, but this is a complex issue – not based only on one policy. Ranking Member Kim (R-CA) Question: How will sharply increasing taxes hinder small businesses from growing or hiring people? Response from Mr. Dearie: The broad consensus is that we need to invest more in infrastructure, but the tax issue we hear is on tax complexity rather than marginal rates. People struggle with the constant uncertainty. Response from Mr. Etkin: I get feedback that now is not the time to handcuff business and job creators with taxes. We need to focus on critical infrastructure - when you move outside of that, you put into question the priority of bringing back jobs. Dr. LaRock, what price pressures would you like to see eliminated? Response: The proliferation of regulation. More than taxes, regulatory burdens, and administrative burdens. SBA Role in Reversing the Decline of Entrepreneurship Rep. Bordeaux (D-GA) Question: Mr. Dearie, can you elaborate on why the decline in entrepreneurship is happening? Response: The research shows the decline on new businesses is pervasive- happening in all 50 states, all but 50 metro areas, all industry sectors. We don’t understand why this is happening. Chair Crow (D-CO) Question: Mr. Dearie, how is access to SBA capital better for entrepreneurs than access to traditional/commercial lenders? Response: Banks are not the ideal source of capital for startups. Banks don’t want to damage the balance sheets. SBA bridges the gap between venture capital and angel investment type of funding and banks by assuming some of the risk.

MSGI Congressional Hearing Recap Committee: House Small Business Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Regulations Hearing Title: CMMC Implementation: What It Means for Small Businesses Subcommittee Chair: Representative Dean Phillips (D-MN) Ranking Member: Representative Beth Van Duyne (R-TX) Date: June 24, 2021 Witnesses Mr. Jonathan T. Williams Partner PilieroMazza PLLC Testimony Mr. Scott Singer President CyberNINES Testimony Ms. Tina Wilson Chief Executive Officer T47 International, Inc. Testimony Mr. Michael Dunbar President Ryzhka International LLC *Testifying on behalf of the HUBZone Contractors National Council Testimony Main Issues Discussed Cost of CMMC Implementation Chair Phillips (D-MN) Questions: Mr. Williams, the cost of CMMC can be burdensome, how can we strike a balance with cost and protecting cybersecurity? Response: Keep as many small businesses as possible at Level 1. The businesses will have adequate protections but will avoid the costs of Level 3. We need a controlled approach where small businesses don’t have to take on Level 3 information. Are there funding streams to help small businesses? Response: I am not aware of any, but it is a great idea. Smaller firms cannot afford the investment up front. Existing mentor protégé programs work very well, mentors can help with CMMC. Ms. Wilson, what is your experience with CMMC? Response: I learned about it when attending an industry day, I understand how it works in a broader perspective. T-47, my business, must secure a specialist because CMMC is very complex. Overlapping Requirements Ranking Member Van Duyne (R-TX) Question: Mr. Dunbar, do you believe the CMMC duplicates any standards that are already present? Response: Yes, it is built on an existing standard. The reason behind CMMC is there was no third-party assessment. Why create an existing standard? Why not add on the third-party assessment to an existing standard? Rep. Evans (D-PA) Question: Ms. Wilson, can you mention just a few other certifications you have to comply with? Response: We have invested in the ISO certifications, SBA’s annual 8(a) certification, WOSB certification, defense counterintelligence security certification. The CMMC process has been the most challenging because there is no transparency. Lack of Transparent Information on CMMC Ranking Member Van Duyne (R-TX) Questions: Mr. Dunbar, where do you get the information on CMMC? How can we make it easier? Response: We get the information from LinkedIn. There is no consistent message or method coming from the Department of Defense (DOD). Even the CMMC FAQ page is not streamlined. Is there a role for the SBA? Response: There should be a role for the SBA. I think the DOD has sidelined them in the same way that small businesses have been ignored. Mr. Singer, what is the penalty if a business doesn’t comply? Response: You are out of business with the DOD. Can you point to one or two things that would make understanding this easier for small businesses? Response from Mr. Singer: The prime contractors need to step up and play a bigger role, they have the resources and the teams to do so. There needs to be more support for the whole supply chain. Response from Ms. Wilson: To ensure that everyone has the same information there needs to be a concerted effort across all industries. Response from Mr. Williams: Regarding the flow down of information, the prime contractor has a lot of power. The challenge is that the questions are not being answered on the main issues. Response from Mr. Dunbar: A lot of small businesses work from home now. Small businesses will be subject to home inspections, the risk of this is incalculable. Small businesses need the ability to protect themselves. Rep. Evans (D-PA) Question: Mr. Dunbar, what is your recommendation to businesses just learning about CMMC? Response: I don’t have an answer. We are trying to find the information, which has not been clear. Response from Mr. Singer: It is important for companies to find reputable partners to help them through the process. I think Level 3 businesses, such as small manufactures, are just now starting to understand this. Businesses that qualify as Level 1's may not understand that CMMC will affect them yet. Determining Levels for Small Businesses Rep Evans (D-PA) Question: Mr. Wilson, what would be the ideal way for small businesses to be taken care of? Response: Offer up costs to pay for Level 1 and Level 2 certifications. This way, DOD has some level of comfort. The other businesses can go out and secure other levels if needed. Rep. Meuser (R-PA) Questions: Mr. Dunbar, what is the DOD’s feedback on if Level 1 is satisfactory? What do they say about you, and suppliers like you, regarding Level 1? Response: Part of the problem is that we aren’t hearing a lot. We don’t know if we will we need to keep chasing technology as we go along. What is the cost difference from Level 1 to Level 3? Response: 10 to 20-fold cost difference. How much more secure is Level 1 to Level 3? Response: From where I am currently, I am secure. Rep. Hagedorn (R-MN) Question: Mr. Dunbar, wouldn’t it make more sense if the government imposed reasonable standards? Response: I agree, the key word is the definition of reasonable, DOD believes that these numbers are reasonable. My company has 6 people, this is not reasonable. Chair Phillips (D-MN) Question: Mr. Singer, how likely is full CMMC implementation by 2026 when there is such a lack of assessors? Response: It will be very difficult to get there with the current progress of 100 provisional assessors and 2 C3PAOs. The timeline is very stretched, we need more than 8,000 assessment team members to make this happen. There needs to be flexibility for the third-party assessors. Not everyone needs to be at Level 3. There needs to be an understanding of risk to the supply chain. Mr. Williams, how concerned are you that the CMMC initiative will be adopted by civilian agencies and become a baseline? Response: It is certainly a possibility. I would view what is happening at DOD as a trial.

MSGI Congressional Hearing Recap Committee: House Small Business Committee, Subcommittee on Underserved, Agricultural, and Rural Development Hearing Title: “Prioritizing Small Underserved and Rural Businesses in the SBIR/STTR Programs” Subcommittee Chair: Jared Golden (D-ME) Ranking Member: Jim Hagedorn (R-MN) Date: June 23, 2021 Witnesses Dr. Joshua A. Henry President and Founder GO Lab, Inc. Testimony Ms. Nancy Min Founder ecoLong *Testifying on behalf of the Clean Energy Business Network (CEBN) Testimony Dr. Angelique Johnson Founder and Chief Executive Officer MEMStim LLC Testimony Dr. David Green Chief Executive Officer Physical Sciences Inc. *Testifying on behalf of the New England Innovation Alliance (NEIA) Testimony Main Issues Discussed Targeting SBIR/STTR to Rural and Underserved Communities Ranking Member Hagedorn (R-MN) Question: To all witnesses, I am concerned that these awards would be given based on preference on identity or race, like what we have seen with the Restaurant Revitalization Fund having a “priority group.” Response from Dr. Johnson: The program needs to stay merit based. These are not research grants; they are small business research grants. The merit should come from impact on economy and environment. Provide more assistance on the front end, such as "Phase 0" programs that businesses can use to develop a prototype and be successful in Phase 1. Chair Golden (D-ME) Questions: Dr. Henry and Dr. Johnson, can you gauge the impact that SBIR/STTR funding has on rural and underserved communities? Response from Dr. Henry: Representation is an issue because rural communities have different values than big cities. The people reviewing these applications are viewing them with a "city" lens. They are looking at scientific merit rather than economic merit. Response from Dr. Johnson: There is no consideration of an applicant’s background when determining who will get the grant. We need to look at ways to widen the array of applicants. Dr. Johnson, how could the SBIR/STTR programs be better targeted to underserved communities? Response: They need to go beyond the academic population and partner with startup ecosystems like SBDC's. Difficulty of Grant Applications Chair Golden (D-ME) Question: Dr. Henry, can you discuss the bureaucratic struggles of the SBIR application? Response: We found it to be the hardest of the federal grants to apply for, it varies across agencies and includes numerous addendums to the questions. Maine has full time consultants that work on this. There is no feedback from reviewers when a feedback is denied from consideration. Rep. Tenney (R-NY) Question: Ms. Men, some businesses have trouble getting through the technical and bureaucratic process of the grant applications, should we provide additional technical assistance? Response: Yes, we have taken advantage of technical support services in other circumstances, it has been very useful. Rep. Williams (R-TX) Questions: Dr. Green, is there an agency that administers this program the best? How can others follow? Response: The Department of Defense (DOD) has a very effective program because it ties the SBIR to agency needs. Department of Energy (DOE) & the National Institute of Health (NIH) have very deep peer review processes, which is helpful. Dr. Henry, could you elaborate on changes that could be made to streamline the application process without compromising security? Response: Process is unnecessary, we have won bigger awards with smaller applications. Best Practices for Success in the Program Ranking Member Hagedorn (R-MN) Question: Dr. Green, can you explain how you have done well with the SBIR program? Response: We look at all aspects of the problem and the best path to market. There are many stages, this often involves partnerships with other businesses. Rep. Tenney (R-NY) Question: Dr. Green, what can New York do to ensure we get more SBIR/STTR grants? Response: It is essential for small businesses who are peers to come together and share best practices. Chair Golden (D-ME) Question: Dr. Green, how did you start your company in the 1970's? Response: We existed for a decade before there was SBIR, we supported the government through research and development contracts. We learned that it is better to partner with companies that can do things we can't. Strengthening the SBIR/STTR Programs Rep. Stauber (R-MN) Question: Dr. Green, as we look toward reauthorization, what would you recommend we include or remove in these programs? Response: No more barriers that make the programs more difficult. I would urge the Congress to continue to make sure that award decisions are made in a timely manner and keep the programs merit based. Ranking Member Hagedorn (R-MN) Question: To all witnesses, do you have comments on whether we need to do more to help people? Response from Dr. Green: 3% administrative funds are adequate, but they can be administered differently to target other populations. I also suggest reauthorizing the pilot programs and making them permanent.