Photo of John E. McCarthy Jr.Photo of Jonathan M. BakerPhoto of Peter J. EyrePhoto of Olivia LynchPhoto of Michael SamuelsPhoto of M.Yuan ZhouPhoto of Christopher D. GarciaPhoto of Allison SkagerPhoto of Lex Eley

On September 30, 2022, President Biden signed the SBIR and STTR Extension Act of 2022 (the Act), reauthorizing the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR), Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR), and six pilot programs for three years, until September 30, 2025.  The Act includes new due diligence and reporting requirements, award restrictions, and clawback provisions related to national security risks—particularly regarding firms with ties to China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran—and increased minimum performance standards for multiple SBIR/STTR award winners.  The passage and signing of the Act averted a potential lapse of these programs, which were set to expire the day of the reauthorization.

The Act amends Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) as follows:

Foreign Risk Management and Agency Recovery Authority and Ongoing Reporting

Sections 4 and 5 of the Act require the head of each participating Federal agency, by June 27, 2023, to implement a due diligence program assessing security risks presented by small business concerns seeking any phase of SBIR or STTR award (unless the agency already has such a due diligence program in place).  Specifically, the Act calls on agencies to scrutinize small business’s cybersecurity practices, patents, employees, and foreign ties and obligations.  Prior to an agency making an award to an SBIR/STTR contractor, those contractors will be required to disclose ownership or other ties to various countries, including the People’s Republic of China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. 

The Act also requires awardees to report any “material misstatement that the Federal agency determines poses a risk to national security” and any “change in ownership, change to entity structure, or other substantial change in circumstances of the small business concern that the Federal agency determines poses a risk to national security.”  If such an issue has occurred, the contractor may be required to “to repay all amounts received from the Federal agency under the award.”

Report on Adversarial Military and Foreign Influence

Section 6 of the Act requires the Department of Defense (DoD), Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services, and National Science Foundation to submit reports “assessing the adversarial military and foreign influences in the SBIR and STTR programs” by March 29, 2024.  Agencies may engage independent entities to prepare these reports.

Program on Innovation Open Topics

Section 7 of the Act requires DoD to establish innovation open topic activities using the SBIR and STTR programs by March 29, 2024 and requires the Secretary of Defense to conduct at least one open topic announcement at each DoD component per fiscal year.  The goal of this provision is to increase the transition of commercial technology to the Department of Defense, expand the small business nontraditional industrial base, increase commercialization derived from DoD investments, and expand the ability for qualifying small business concerns to propose technology solutions to meet DoD needs.

The Small Business Administration (SBA) must now include data related to open- versus conventional-topic participation in its annual reports to Congress, and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) must issue an annual report comparing open topics and conventional topics under the SBIR and STTR programs.

Increased Minimum Performance Standards for Experienced Firms

Section 8 of the Act imposes increased minimum performance standards for “experienced” firms, effective April 1, 2023.  This provision restricts SBIR contractors that are failing to meet certain performance standards, limiting their ability to continue racking up additional SBIR awards and funding.   

If an agency determines that an awardee is not meeting an applicable minimum performance standard, the awardee may not receive more than 20 total Phase I awards and Phase II awards from each Federal agency for one year.  Awardees that are subject to enhanced Phase II performance standards must submit supporting documentation evidencing that all covered sales were properly used to meet the increased minimum performance standard, and they may not meet the increased minimum performance standard by obtaining patents.

Awarding agencies may apply for an SBIR/STTR program topic waiver exempting awardees from these increased performance standards if the topic is “critical to the mission of the Federal agency or relates to national security.”

SBA must annually submit to Congress a list of awardees that did not meet an applicable minimum performance standard (however, this list will be confidential and exempt from Freedom of Information Act disclosure).  The Act further requires the SBA Inspector General to conduct periodic audits and report to Congress on agencies’ implementation of the increased minimum performance requirements and awardees’ proper documentation of award-related sales and investments.

Prohibition Against Writing Solicitation Topics

Section 9 of the Act requires awarding agencies to implement a multi-level review and approval process for solicitation topics to (i) ensure adequate competition and (ii) ensure that no private individual or entity is shaping the requirements for eligibility for the solicitation topic after selection of the solicitation topic.

GAO Study on Multiple-Award Winners

Section 10 of the Act requires GAO to conduct a study and issue a publicly available report on awardees that have received more than 50 SBIR/STTR Phase II awards in the 10 fiscal years preceding the most recent 2 fiscal years and will therefore be subject to the Act’s increased minimum performance standards by March 30, 2024.

GAO Report on Subcontracting in SBIR and STTR Programs

Section 11 of the Act requires GAO to report to Congress on subcontracting under SBIR and STTR program awards by September 30, 2023.  This report will examine the extent to which small business prime SBIR/STTR awardees are subcontracting to “other than small” entities, which is likely in response to concerns that that extent of such subcontracting may subvert the intent of the SBIR/STTR program.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of John E. McCarthy Jr. John E. McCarthy Jr.

John E. McCarthy, Jr. is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Crowell & Moring and member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group. John has spent more than thirty years litigating all forms of government contracts cases for both large and small…

John E. McCarthy, Jr. is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Crowell & Moring and member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group. John has spent more than thirty years litigating all forms of government contracts cases for both large and small government contractors, with a particular emphasis on bid protests. Because of John’s strong engineering background, he has particular experience in technology related issues, including litigation regarding complex technology and data rights, patent and other intellectual property issues.

Photo of Jonathan M. Baker Jonathan M. Baker

Jonathan M. Baker is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. He practices in the Government Contracts Group.

Jon advises clients on a wide array of government contracts legal issues, including both federal and state bid protests, prime-sub disputes, government contracts…

Jonathan M. Baker is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. He practices in the Government Contracts Group.

Jon advises clients on a wide array of government contracts legal issues, including both federal and state bid protests, prime-sub disputes, government contracts due diligence and transactions, regulatory compliance, and contract terminations. Jon’s practice has a notable emphasis on technology-related issues, including counseling clients in the areas of patent and data rights, responding to government challenges to technical data and computer software rights assertions, and litigating cases involving complex and cutting edge technologies. Jon also provides guidance on national security matters, such as National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual compliance and facility and security clearance matters. In addition, Jon has advised clients on local government contract negotiation, internal and government investigations regarding potential False Claims Act issues, and export violations. Jon is also actively involved in the firm’s pro bono program, having litigated prisoner neglect, parental rights termination, and landlord-tenant matters.

Photo of Peter J. Eyre Peter J. Eyre

Peter J. Eyre is a partner and co-chair of Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group. He is also a member of the firm’s Management Board. Peter was named to BTI Consulting Group’s list of “Client Service All-Stars” in 2016, 2017, and 2019 and…

Peter J. Eyre is a partner and co-chair of Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group. He is also a member of the firm’s Management Board. Peter was named to BTI Consulting Group’s list of “Client Service All-Stars” in 2016, 2017, and 2019 and has been named an Acritas Star, Acritas Stars Independently Rated Lawyers (2016, 2017, 2019). He is nationally ranked by Chambers USA in Government Contracts since 2014, and by Super Lawyers since 2017.

Photo of Olivia Lynch Olivia Lynch

Olivia L. Lynch is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group in the Washington, D.C. office.

General Government Contracts Counseling. Olivia advises government contractors on navigating the procurement process, compliance and ethics, commercial item contracting, accessibility, supply chain assurance, and…

Olivia L. Lynch is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group in the Washington, D.C. office.

General Government Contracts Counseling. Olivia advises government contractors on navigating the procurement process, compliance and ethics, commercial item contracting, accessibility, supply chain assurance, and various aspects of state and local procurement law.

Photo of Michael Samuels Michael Samuels

Michael Samuels is a counsel in Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group. His practice involves counseling and representing government contractors on a wide range of issues.

Photo of M.Yuan Zhou M.Yuan Zhou

M. Yuan Zhou is a counsel in the Washington, D.C. office of Crowell & Moring, where she is a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group.

Yuan’s practice includes a wide range of investigatory, counseling, and transactional capabilities, including: internal investigations related to…

M. Yuan Zhou is a counsel in the Washington, D.C. office of Crowell & Moring, where she is a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group.

Yuan’s practice includes a wide range of investigatory, counseling, and transactional capabilities, including: internal investigations related to the False Claims Act, the Procurement Integrity Act, and other civil and criminal matters; compliance reviews and enhancing contractor compliance programs; representing clients in suspension and debarment proceedings; counseling on data rights issues, challenges, and disputes; mandatory disclosures; and providing government contracts due diligence in transactional matters. As part of the firm’s State and Local Practice, Yuan also counsels clients on state and local procurement issues, ranging from bid protests to contract negotiations with state agencies, and advises prime contractors and subcontractors on a variety of issues including prime/sub contract formation, disputes, and other government contracts issues.

Photo of Christopher D. Garcia Christopher D. Garcia

Christopher Garcia is a counsel in the Washington, D.C. office of Crowell & Moring, where he is a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group.

As part of his government contracts practice, Chris conducts internal investigations regarding False Claims Act issues and defends…

Christopher Garcia is a counsel in the Washington, D.C. office of Crowell & Moring, where he is a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group.

As part of his government contracts practice, Chris conducts internal investigations regarding False Claims Act issues and defends against related government inquiries and investigative demands. Chris also assists clients with technology-related issues, including counseling clients in the areas of patents and data rights, and defending against government challenges to technical data and computer software rights assertions. In addition, Chris performs government contracts due diligence for buyers in transactional matters, representing government contractors in a range of industries. As part of the firm’s State and Local Practice, Chris also counsels clients on state and local procurement issues, including reviewing state and local opportunities, and leading negotiations with government customers regarding contractual terms and conditions. Chris also advises contractors on the federal Freedom of Information Act as well as state-level public records laws. He has counseled contractors in numerous reverse-FOIA actions at the federal and state levels.

Photo of Allison Skager Allison Skager

Allison Skager is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s Los Angeles office, where she is a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group.

Allison’s practice covers a range of transactional and regulatory matters for both startups and mature companies, including government contractors, large…

Allison Skager is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s Los Angeles office, where she is a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group.

Allison’s practice covers a range of transactional and regulatory matters for both startups and mature companies, including government contractors, large retailers, and developers of emerging technology. She performs due diligence for complex transactions involving government contractors, advises on regulatory compliance issues, and adds critical support on matters related to mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, and private investments.

Photo of Lex Eley Lex Eley

Claud v.S. “Lex” Eley is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Corporate Group and has more than two decades of international transactional, private equity, venture capital, and general corporate experience. Lex focuses his practice on domestic and international mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures…

Claud v.S. “Lex” Eley is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Corporate Group and has more than two decades of international transactional, private equity, venture capital, and general corporate experience. Lex focuses his practice on domestic and international mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, and business transactions. A substantial part of Lex’s work involves international transactions. He has represented clients in global and regional transactions involving countries on all continents, and serves as global transactional counsel for a number of clients.

Lex began his career representing manufacturing clients, particularly in pulp, paper, forest products, and packaging, and while his practice has expanded to include many other industries, including, healthcare, cybersecurity, information technology, consumer products, mining and minerals, automotive, and energy, he continues to be very active in traditional manufacturing industries for a number of long-standing clients. Lex’s work for his clients is heavily weighted toward mergers and acquisitions, but has covered virtually all legal disciplines touching on his client’s businesses. Lex served as outside general counsel to a pan-European paper and forest products company for a number of years while he was resident in Europe.