Last week, I once again had the pleasure of presenting at the Design-Build Institute of America’s Federal Project Delivery Symposium in Washington, DC.  I was joined on the panel by Reggie Jones (the Chair of Fox Rothschild’s Government Contracts practice) and Michael Daniels of W.M. Jordan.  Our presentation from last year on the

Qui tam cases alleging violations of the False Claims Act remain red hot in today’s climate.  The Federal government continues to use the FCA both as shield against those seeking to defraud the government and a sword to claw back money from allegedly undeserving government contractors.

In particular, the healthcare and construction industries have seen

The 2014 numbers are in – and they confirm that Federal marketplace remains volatile for government contractors.

According to the Interagency Suspension and Debarment Committee (ISDC), Federal agencies saw an uptick of about 14% in suspension and debarment proceedings.  Such exclusion proceedings remain among the chief tactics for combating alleged instances of fraud

Bottom Line Up Front: This blog post updates several of our previous posts addressing the implementation of the minimum wage for federal contractors. The FAR Council issued an interim rule on December 15, 2014, which establishes a new FAR provision – FAR 52.222-55 – governing the federal minimum wage. Specifically, the minimum wage is set

Bottom Line Up Front:  OCI exists when work performed by a contractor on a federal contract may: (a) result in an unfair competitive advantage for the contractor; or (b) impair the contractor’s objectivity in performing federal contract work.  OCI or the appearance of OCI must be avoided at all costs because OCI can lead to

Bottom Line Up Front: A recent decision by the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA”) clearly demonstrates that federal contractors will lose (or the very least put at risk) their legitimate claims for payment or extra costs when they commit fraud on a federal contract, even when the claims for payment or extra

Bottom Line Up Front: Contractors who provide labor, materials, or products to federal agencies that do not meet the specifications / qualifications called for by the contract are likely violating the False Claims Act. 

DRS Technical Services, Inc. (DRS), a Virginia-based defense contractor agreed to pay the government $13.7 million to settle False Claims Act

The SBA Inspector General recently determined that over $400 million in small business awards were awarded to firms that were not eligible small businesses at the time of award.  These awards were apparently issued in error by various agencies, but were used to inflate the federal government’s overall small business award results.

Further, the SBA

Veridyne Corp., an 8(a) small business concern, was subject to fraud and false statement claims by the U.S. Department of Transportation (UDOT) for undervaluing an estimate to perform a task order contract extension.  The Federal Circuit recently denied Veridyne’s request for payment of approximately $1 million claimed owed under the task order.  See Veridyne Corp.

Last week, I attended the Federal Project Symposium presented by the Design Build Institute of America and the Society of American Military Engineers.  As always, DBIA and SAME provided insights into the rising number of federal project types utilizing design-build methodology and offered attendees cutting-edge access to the latest in design-build best practices.