This is in response to your September 7, 1979, memorandum concerning information on Public Law 95-507. We submit the following data per this request:

1. On what date did your agency begin requiring
P.L. 95-507 subcontracting plans?

2.

3.

We notified our procuring agencies on July 10, 1979,

to implement the clauses requiring subcontracting
plans under Section 211 of the Act.

How many solicitations have been issued by your
agency requiring P.L. 95-507 subcontracting plans?

Solicitations totaling 119 were issued since

October 24, 1978. Of these, 95 were for the purchase
of food commodities, 11 for construction and 13 for
products/services.

How many contracts, amendments, or modifications
have been awarded with P.L. 95-507 subcontracting
plan requirements?

Contracts totaling 107 were awarded with P.L. 95-507
subcontracting plan requirements. Of these, 95 were
for the purchase of food commodities. These type
awards do not offer substantial subcontracting
opportunities since the contractor is the processor.
In addition, 44 percent of food commodity awards are
made to small business concerns which would make it
difficult for large businesses to locate

subcontractors for supplemental sources of supply.

4.

Comments: This office was not established until
June 26, 1979, and we did not receive notification
from GSA's Office of Acquisition Policy to implement
Section 211 until July 5. Consequently, our
agencies had limited notice to include clauses which
would require the submission of subcontracting plans.
In addition, the contractors have little knowledge
of this requirement, and have been requesting
guidance from our agencies. The training conference
we conducted on October 30-31, for our procurement
managers and program officials concerning P.L. 95-507
should help clarify this matter. We are planning to
hold a similar conference for our field offices in
Kansas City, Missouri on November 27-28.

2

At the close of my oversight subcommittee hearing held on the December 4, 1979 on government agency compliance with procurement provisions of P.L. 95-507, I indicated that I would be submitting further questions to each of the witnesses.

If you have any questions concerning this request, please contact Mr. George Neidich of my subcommittee staff at (202) 225-9321.

Sincerely,

JOHN J. LaFALCE
CHAIRMAN

1. You mentioned in your testimony that you intend to submit as part of the SBA annual report the report mandated by section 8(d)(11) on subcontracting plans found acceptable by buying agencies but which the SBA finds do not contain the maximum practicable opportunity for small and minority business. Please describe your findings to date.

2. The SBA was given considerable responsibility to make the subcontracting program work. The House and Senate conferees intended that SBA and procuring agencies. coordinate their reporting requirements to avoid unproductive duplication or contradiction. Please explain how you have carried out your reporting functions as they relate to sections 211 and 221 of the law.

3. What studies or surveys has SBA conducted to determine the extent of а contractor's compliance with the "best efforts" clause? Has SBA formulated any guidelines to make this

evaluation?

4.

and

Describe how SBA has assisted federal agencies businesses in complying with their responsibilities with the subcontracting provisions of the law.

5.

Describe SBA's review of agency's solicitations for contracts let which require section 211 subcontracting plans to determine the maximum practicable opportunity for small business participation. Also, describe what findings you have submitted

to appropriate federal agencies whose solicitations you have reviewed.

6. Describe SBA's evaluation of compliance with subcontracting plans either on a contract-by-contract basis, or in the case of contractors having multiple contracts, on an aggregate basis.

7. You have responsibilities under section 221 of the law to consult with the head of each federal agency to establish goals for participation by small business in procurement contracts having values of $10,000 or more. Has SBA in fact contacted the head of each agency? How many instances have there been where SBA and the head of an agency have failed to agree on established goals? In how many instances has this disagreement been submitted, as required by the law, to the administrator of OFPP for final determination?

-2

8.. How many agencies reported to SBA on the extent of participation by small business procurement as required by section 221 of the law? What have you done to ensure agency compliance with this provision? In your testimony you stated that you asked the head of each agency to submit to you in writing by the end of the first quarter of fiscal year 1979 their goals for both small and disadvantaged businesses. Please furnish the subcommittee copies of these requests. Please furnish us with copies of those responses. What is the status of your required submission to this committee of information obtained from such reports together with appropriate comments? Describe the extent of cooperation and consultation with the SADBUS of the respective federal agencies regarding their implementation and execution of the functions and duties relating to subcontracting.

9.

How many procurement center representatives slots are authorized for FY 1980? How many of the slots presently are filled? Please provide a copy of the names of the PCRs and subcontracting specialists, their location, and the agencies to which they have been detailed.

10.

We understand that to implement the subcontracting provisions of the law SBA was to restructure and reorganize the placement of its PCRs. When was authorization first requested? When did the central office approve the reorganization? Describe how this reorganization has led to uniform implementation of the subcontracting program.

11.

What specifically has SBA done with respect to the implementation of the subcontracting provisions as a result of the October 19, 1979, GAO opinion?