AN HONOR AND A CHALLENGE


ROBERT SEVERSON President and CEO The Severson Group San Marcos, CA


I


started Severson Group after retiring from the military in 2004 follow- ing 27 years in the Marines. It had always been my plan to start my


own firm. My military experience in logistics provided me the skills to launch a small government-contracting business in San Diego, CA, as well as the insight and knowledge into how private industry conducts business with the federal govern- ment. I wanted the company to focus on service contracts because of the numerous contract opportunities in that space.


As a small 8(a) and SDVOSB firm, we believe our service offering adds a more direct and personal interface to the gov- ernment in a way that large businesses will never be able to do. Small businesses add superior response time and robust capa- bility without the red tape and the many approval processes [a decision] takes in large business.


[However,] the incentives for set-asides are grossly mismanaged and not properly monitored. Prime example: My primary


128 Army AL&T Magazine January-March 2016


NAICS code is in food service manage- ment. Every Army food service contract has a component that gives Randolph- Sheppard Act blind vendors priority. [Te Randolph-Sheppard Act “provides per- sons who are blind with remunerative employment and self-support through the operation of vending facilities on federal property.” For more information, go to http://www2.ed.gov/programs/rsarsp/ index.html.]


Small businesses participating in con- tracts that give the Randolph-Sheppard program a priority is the big problem. If


the Army small business office con-


ducted a survey to determine how many food service contracts are under the Randolph-Sheppard Act and how many of those contracts have the same teaming partner, they would understand there is little to no opportunity for competitive small business participation because there are only one or two companies that the Randolph-Sheppard vendors are teaming with. Tose teaming partners basically have these opportunities cornered.


I believe the way the program is set up, the system is being manipulated. Te Army can fix this in two ways:


1. Make the set-aside whatever it chooses, such as 8(a), SDVOB, HUBZone or small business. How- ever, demand that the teaming


partner to the vendor also has to be in one of the set-aside categories. If the opportunity is set aside for one of the above categories, the contract- ing agencies should evaluate the set-aside company and then force the state’s Randolph-Sheppard vendor to team with the company that the government has selected, based on that company’s proposal meeting the RFP criteria. Tis will eliminate one company [that is not a small business] from getting all the set-aside teaming opportunities.


2. Continue to give the blind priority, but also have the Army sole-selection team approve the 8(a) or SDVOSB firm separately that would [team] with a blind vendor. Right now, the Army is allowing the state/blind ven- dor to make the final decision as to which company will provide food service to the Army DFAC [dining facility]. Te vendor picks the team- ing partner based on who will give him the highest percentage of profits from the project.


Investigate the Randolph-Sheppard pro- gram. Most of the small businesses that can do the work will not bid because they know that the blind vendor has already determined who its teaming partner is going to be, and, with an absolute priority, there is no chance of losing.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172