It's been a very interesting past few months for the Small Business Administration. After a high-profile article was released by the New York Times on June 12th highlighting the state of the Agency's lending and small-business-support goals in the wake of Steven C. Preston's departure, the SBA has experienced heightened scrutiny of its practices. The most notable talking points, as outlined in the article, are the waning flow of SBA loans, the shortfall in meeting woman-owned business goals, and the much-criticized reality of large businesses receiving contracts that are earmarked for small businesses.

The SBA maintains that it is an Agency in transformation. Jovita Carranza, the Acting Administrator of the SBA, stated in his subsequent Letter to the Editor that the Times' article was "stunning in its omission of letters and proclamations of support for the agency's turnaround from industry groups and legislators."

Indeed, it does seem that a turnaround is taking place, and that major changes are not far afield at the SBA. This seachange is reflected in the increased, self-administered scrutiny in reporting that the contracting community is witnessing at the SBA.

In a preliminary assessment of SBA's 2007 numbers, which will be released in August, Kent Hoover, the Washington Bureau Chief at Bizjournals.com, says that the Agency will not be meeting its goal of 23% allocation of government procurement dollars to small businesses (SB). However, at the same time, some interesting figures jump out:

• $436 billion in total prime contracts (more money than 2006)
• SB prime contract dollars decreased to 22.1% from 22.8% in 2006
• $1 out of every $3 went to DC metro area firms

This downtick was likely attributable to the fact that small business acquired by large businesses no longer counted toward Agencies' small business goals. Additionally, for the first time ever this year, Agencies were required to certify the accuracy of their contracting data: in theory, this means fewer size standard and codification errors, and more transparency surrounding small business contracting processes, which will hopefully allow small businesses targeting government business to breathe a sigh of relief and rest assured that their concerns are being addressed.

Although all the back and forth between critics and the SBA has done much to increase scrutiny of the numbers, the actual reality of small business concerns in the contracting world remains relatively static. Relationships still matter, quite a bit, and although this has never been a surprise in the contracting arena, it is surprising to just what degree such increased access still informs government procurement. With so many new programs of such a high profile at stake:

• PACTS, the $1.5 billion DHS vehicle which touts support-service set-asides for Service-Disabled, Veteran-Owned businesses
• Army's ITS-SB , which sets aside $400 million of its IT Services contracts for small businesses
• 8 NETCENTS II small business set-aside programs – Air Force will spend a portion of the $10 billion ceiling for contracts involving SOA Enterprise, Software Services, Infrastructure and Support Engineering

It's very important that the SBA and the contracting community work together, reconcile differences and stave off post-award outcry, which only creates further hindrances and expense to the procurement process.

Perhaps the best way to move forward is to assimilate the input of small businesses themselves, to ensure visibility and support for all policies; it seems as though increased oversight in this direction, however slowly, provides targeted growth and greater opportunities. One thing is for sure - there is always progress to be made.

INPUT welcomes the feedback of its members. Are you sensing a change on the horizon for small business concerns, and the government's commitment to meeting its goals? Or are we just conducting business as usual?