U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

37–146 PDF 2007

S. HRG. 110–209

ASSESSING FEDERAL SMALL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE

PROGRAMS FOR VETERANS AND RESERVISTS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS

AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JANUARY 31, 2007

Printed for the use of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo/gov/congress/senate

(II)

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts, Chairman

CARL LEVIN, Michigan

TOM HARKIN, Iowa

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut

MARY LANDRIEU, Louisiana

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington

EVAN BAYH, Indiana

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland

JON TESTER, Montana

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine,

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri

NORMAN COLEMAN, Minnesota

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana

ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota

BOB CORKER, Tennessee

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia

NAOMI BAUM, Democratic Staff Director

WALLACE HSUEH, Republican Staff Director

(III)

CONTENTS

Page

OPENING STATEMENTS

Kerry, The Honorable John F., Chairman, Committee on Small Business

and Entrepreneurship, and a United States Senator from Massachusetts .... 1

Snowe, The Honorable Olympia J., a United States Senator from Maine ......... 4

Isakson, The Honorable Johnny, a United States Senator from Georgia ........... 9

TESTIMONY

Oliver, Linda Bithell, Acting Director, Office of Small Business Programs,

Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Defense ........................................ 10

Denniston, Scott F., Director, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business

Utilization and the Center for Veterans Enterprise, U.S. Department of

Veterans Affairs ................................................................................................... 24

Elmore, William D., Associate Administrator, Office of Veterans Business

Development, U.S. Small Business Administration .......................................... 32

Celli, Louis J., Jr., president, Northeast Veterans Business Resource Center,

Inc., Boston, Massachusetts ................................................................................ 55

Yahner, Capt. Ann. S. USN (Ret.), president and general manager, Penobscot

Bay Media, LLC, Camden, Maine ...................................................................... 60

Hesser, Robert, chief executive officer and president, HI Tech Services, Inc.,

and chief executive officer, Allied Technical Services Group, LLC, Herndon,

Virginia ................................................................................................................. 65

Daywalt, Theodore L. Chief Executive Officer and President, VetJobs, Marietta, Georgia ......................................................................................................... 84

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

Akaka, Daniel K.

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 108

Bond, Christopher S.

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 109

Celli, Louis J., Jr.

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 55

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 58

Response to post-hearing questions from Senator Thune ............................. 141

Daywalt, Theodore L.

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 84

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 86

Response to post-hearing questions from Senator Thune ............................. 146

Denniston, Scott F.

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 24

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 26

Response to post-hearing questions from:

Senator Kerry ............................................................................................ 131

Senator Thune ........................................................................................... 133

Senator Liberman ...................................................................................... 134

Senator Pryor ............................................................................................. 135

Page

IV

Elmore, William D.

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 32

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 35

Response to post-hearing questions from:

Senator Kerry ............................................................................................ 136

Senator Lieberman .................................................................................... 137

Senator Pryor ............................................................................................. 139

Senator Thune ........................................................................................... 141

Hesser, Robert

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 65

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 68

Kerry, The Honorable John F.

Opening statement .................................................................................................. 1

Post-hearing questions posed to Linda Oliver and subsequent responses .. 114

Post-hearing questions posed to Scott F. Denniston and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 131

Post-hearing questions posed to William D. Elmore and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 136

Isakson, The Honorable Johnny

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 9

Lieberman, The Honorable Joseph I.

Post-hearing questions posed to Linda Oliver and subsequent responses .. 125

Post-hearing questions posed to Scott F. Denniston and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 134

Post-hearing questions posed to William D. Elmore and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 137

Oliver, Linda Bithell

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 10

Prepared statement with attachments ........................................................... 12

Response to post-hearing questions from:

Senator Kerry ............................................................................................ 114

Senator Pryor ............................................................................................. 119

Senator Lieberman .................................................................................... 125

Senator Thune ........................................................................................... 128

Pryor, The Honorable Mark L.

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 113

Post-hearing questions posed to Linda Oliver and subsequent responses .. 119

Post-hearing questions posed to Scott F. Denniston and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 135

Post-hearing questions posed to William D. Elmore and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 139

Snowe, The Honorable Olympia J.

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 4

Thune, The Honorable John

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 113

Post-hearing questions posed to Linda Oliver and subsequent responses 128

Post-hearing questions posed to Scott F. Denniston and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 133

Post-hearing questions posed to William D. Elmore and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 141

Post-hearing questions posed to Louis J. Celli and subsequent responses . 141

Post-hearing questions posed to Capt. Ann S. Yahner and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 145

Post-hearing questions posed to Theodore L. Daywatt and subsequent

responses ....................................................................................................... 146

Yahner, Capt. Ann S., USN (Ret.)

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 60

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 63

Response to post-hearing questions from Senator Thune ............................. 145

Page

V

COMMENTS FOR THE RECORD

Camacho, Dr. Paul R., director of special projects, the William Joiner Center

for the Study of War and Social Consequences, University of Massachusetts, prepared statement .................................................................................... 150

Gatewood, Wayne M. Jr., USMC (RET), president/CEO, Quality Support,

Inc., prepared statement ..................................................................................... 152

Hansen, Robert P., Applied Computing Technologies, Inc., business issues

and notes ............................................................................................................... 155

Krasner, Dave, reservist and small business owner (Expetec) ............................ 161

White Paper, ‘‘Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business,’’ submitted

by Maj. General John A. Corder, CEO, CymSTAR LLC, and Beau Witt,

vice president, CymSTAR LLC ........................................................................... 163

Wynn, Joe, treasurer, Veterans Entrepreneurship Task Force and legislative

liaison, National Association for Black Veterans .............................................. 165

(1)

ASSESSING FEDERAL SMALL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FOR VETERANS AND

RESERVISTS

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 2007

UNITED STATES SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND

ENTREPRENEURSHIP,

Washington, DC.

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in room

SR–428A, Russell Senate Office Building, The Honorable John F.

Kerry (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Kerry, Tester, Snowe, Thune, and Isakson.

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN F. KERRY,

CHAIRMAN, SENATE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND

ENTREPRENEURSHIP, AND A UNITED STATES SENATOR

FROM MASSACHUSETTS

Chairman KERRY. The hearing will come to order.

I know Senator Isakson wants to introduce one of the witnesses

on the second panel, but he is unable because of a conflict. We actually just both left Secretary Kissinger over at the Foreign Relations Committee, where we are having ongoing hearings on the war

in Iraq. But needless to say, this is a very important outgrowth of

that war that we are here to consider today, and so I am grateful

to all the witnesses for coming to share in that.

This hearing is important to me personally, and I am glad to be

able to be in a position to be able to hold it. Hello, Senator Snowe.

I think it is important to every Member of this Committee. I think

all of us really are grateful beyond words to those who are serving

our country under the most difficult of circumstances. You know,

we make some important promises to people who put on the uniform of our country.

I know that when I served back in the late 1960s in a very controversial war and a very divided country, veterans were not particularly treated well. They came back to a country that really

didn’t value their service and couldn’t have cared less in many

ways in many parts of the country. But that scar, that impact was

lasting and we saw an awful lot of impact on the ability of the

armed forces. It took longer for the armed forces to sort of come

back and be able to keep the promises and convince people that

they would keep the promises. And part of that was due to the

level of unemployment and the difficulty a lot of veterans had in

reintegrating into society.

2

One of the promises we—I am not going to spend a lot of time

going through it all except to say that one of the promises we all

made ourselves after that was that never again were we going to

allow that to happen, and it was critical. And I think that the

country ought to be very proud right now of most of the ways in

which the troops are receiving support. There is an incredible sense

of national gratitude and incredible welcoming that goes on. In

Maine, you have these greeters who send people off and welcome

them home. It is really quite remarkable. There are a lot of other

manifestations of this feeling in the country of gratitude. Just yesterday, or the day before down in Texas, they opened an incredible

rehab center, which I might add was put together by private funding rather than taxpayer dollars, which is its own statement about

some of the things we are and aren’t choosing to do.

What I want to make certain is that whatever is under my jurisdiction, we are going to pay attention to and make sure is done,

and this Committee is under that jurisdiction and there are mandates with respect to veterans within the small business world and

we want to make sure that those mandates are met.

As we sit here today, there are more than 128,000 of our men

and women who are in Iraq and another 21,500 in Afghanistan.

They are doing their duty because they are committed to serving

our country. We need to do our duty, which is to serve them in

keeping our promises that we have made to them. They are part

of a long line of men and women who have been called to serve

their country, from the Revolutionary War until today. The only

thing that they ask of us is that we keep our promises, we support

them while they are there, and we support them when they come

home.

The reason this hearing is timely is that at last count, more than

22,000 of our military personnel had been wounded in combat. Furthermore, there are more veterans returning each day because of

the War on Terror. Eight-hundred-thousand veterans were discharged between 2002 and 2005. We need to ensure that these

folks have a secure financial future, that they don’t come back to

a country that somehow in one way or another, inadvertently or

sometimes through negligence or other ways, spurns them.

The treatment of our troops ultimately affects our country’s ability to be able to recruit troops in the future and to retain those who

are already trained and serving. This hearing is an attempt to ensure that we are doing all that we can.

We want to find out what agencies are doing to meet their obligation to veteran business owners and how they can be more effective in those efforts. We are not trying to do this in a sort of

‘‘gotcha’’-slash retributive way. We really just want to see what can

we do to help those Reservists and Guardsmen who are small business owners keep the doors open when they are deployed.

I have talked to a lot of folks, some of whom had to shut their

businesses, some of whom have been recalled, enough that when

they came back and thought they got it going again, all of a sudden, they have to interrupt that process. It is particularly expensive and costly to them and in many ways demoralizing to them.

There are presently 3 million veteran small business owners. In

addition, 22 percent of the veterans in the United States are either

3

purchasing or starting a new business or considering purchasing or

starting one. The facts tell us that we need resources to help those

veterans in many cases, disabled veterans and Reservists, as they

open and maintain small businesses.

This hearing is going to look at the Government’s response to

supporting services to disabled veterans who want to start those

small businesses or who have started them. Service-disabled veterans are regrettably growing in number. We now have the most

we have seen since Vietnam. And unemployment for the recently

discharged veteran remains high, at 11.9 percent. That is more

than double the overall national unemployment rate of 4.6 percent.

We are also going to look at the strain that frequent and sustained call-ups have had on our Guard and Reservists who are

small business owners. Over the past decade, the Department of

Defense has increased its reliance on the National Guard and Reserves. During the Persian Gulf War, they accounted for 46 percent

of our total forces. This has intensified since September 11, and increased deployments are expected to continue. These call-ups hurt

small businesses and Reservist small business owners. So how to

mitigate the financial distress to Reservists who are fighting and

the small businesses who employ them is a question that we want

to address here today.

I have been working on legislation that I believe can help with

the strain of call-ups, and today, Senator Gordon Smith and I are

introducing the Active Duty Military Tax Relief Act of 2007, which

provides a tax credit to small businesses with less than 100 employees and the self-employed to help with the cost of paying the

salary of Reservist employees when they are called up for active

duty. So we try to mitigate against that disruption and cost. This

legislation provides an additional tax credit to help offset the cost

of hiring a temporary replacement employee so the business can

keep functioning.

Many Reservists who own their own business return to a business that is floundering, so disruptive that it is like starting over

in some cases. That is a hell of a sacrifice to ask people to make

in addition to the time away from family and the risks that they

endure. So these tax credits, we hope, will help Reservists who own

their own business, hire temporary replacement folks when they

are called up, and mitigate against the impact.

In addition, it will include tax provisions to help ease the finance

burden that military families face because they have to borrow and

undertake other steps to try to survive.

Finally, we want to look at the problem of contracting. The Federal Government does more than $376 billion in purchasing, and

it did so in 2005 alone. Veterans only get the crumbs. Service-disabled veterans get even less. The Federal Government has a goal

of 3 percent contracting with service-disabled veterans, but guess

what? They got less than 1 percent, .6 percent in 2005, which incidentally is up from .383 percent in 2004. So obviously we are glad

to see it go from .383 to .6, but it ought to be at 3 or above. We

really need to understand what is so hard about doing business

with the men and women who have sacrificed so much for our

country.

4

I know we can do better by these men and women and I hope

this hearing will help us identify what is working and see what we

can do better, and resolve all of us to make sure that we do. So

I thank the witnesses for their testimony here today and happily

turn to Senator Snowe.

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE OLYMPIA J.

SNOWE, A UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM MAINE

Senator SNOWE. Thank you, Chairman Kerry. I certainly commend you for your first hearing as Chair to address a most critical

issue, particularly because our veterans and service-disabled veterans are on the rise, as are the call-ups of the Guard and Reserves. We have to explore ways in which we can minimize the impact on these courageous individuals and what the Government can

do. Certainly the Government can do much in terms of increasing

the opportunities when it comes to small businesses, whether they

work for small businesses or whether they own their own small

businesses. So it is absolutely crucial.

There is no question, when a Guard or Reserve is called up it can

be devastating to their own business, to their family, to the people

they employ, or to the surrounding community, and we need to address and explore the government’s effectiveness and its ability to

make sure that the Federal small business and entrepreneurial

programs are available for these veterans and the service-disabled

veterans. These are critical resources that we have to make available so that they can maintain, grow, or start a small business.

So I appreciate your insights, because you obviously represent

critical agencies that can really have an impact on how we turn

around the contracting goals that Chairman Kerry spoke to, and I

am going to show a chart in a minute that will show what the

shortfalls are and how pronounced it is and why we have to do better. Certainly, our veterans deserve to have it done better by the

Federal Government, so it is absolutely essential.

I welcome a constituent from Maine, Captain Ann Yahner, who

is the president of Pen Bay Media Company. In fact, I had the opportunity to tour that facility and see her innovative approach in

helping to meet the contracting goals for Federal buyers and meeting contracting goals under the procurement program for veterans.

It is really a state-of-the-art facility, and in fact, it is a successful

woman-owned, service-disabled veteran-owned small business. She

is an example of the entrepreneurial spirit that has been brought

about by so many who have served in uniform, so I am pleased she

is going to be able to testify here today.

As Chairman Kerry indicated, there are more than 3.7 million

veterans who have taken on the challenge of owning their own

small business. So it clearly is in our economic interest to make

sure that they are able to be reintegrated into the mainstream of

our economy. It is a national interest and it should be our singular

goal to make sure that that can happen.

In my home State, in Bangor, Maine, at the Bangor Airport, they

have greeted every group of returning troops from the front. They

did that in the Persian Gulf War and they are doing it in the Iraq

War and the Afghanistan War. It doesn’t matter what time of day,

they are there to greet the troops on the ground at the airport.

5

My State has had one of the highest Guard and Reserve deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, 50 percent of the Guard

and Reserve have been deployed either to Iraq or Afghanistan. So

it has had a singular impact on a very small State.

Back in 2003, I commissioned a CBO report which found that 35

percent of the Guard and Reservists worked for small businesses

or are self-employed. In addition, the small businesses that employ

them obviously bear a disproportionate share of the burden of increased Guard and Reservist call-ups, which is happening, as we

well know, and a change in policies at the Department of Defense

is making our country increasingly reliant on the Guard and Reserves, both for Iraq and Afghanistan. So the burden is further

magnified when a small business owner happens to be a key employee or the owner and happens to be deployed. Obviously, all

combinations have had a unique impact.

I have introduced several initiatives that have been supported by

the Committee that were actually part of the reauthorization that

we enacted here in the Committee unanimously and also supported

by the full Senate. Unfortunately, it wasn’t passed in the House of

Representatives, but there are two initiatives that I think go to

some of the fundamental issues.

One, of course, is doubling the funding for the SBA’s Office of

Veterans Business Development. That is absolutely crucial because

it is at static funding of $750,000 for the last 5 years. And I also

introduced the Patriot Loan Act to the Military Reservists Economic Injury Disaster Loan, which gives these loans top priority

processing. But in addition to that, it allows loans up to $25,000

without requiring collateral as another way of easing the process

and providing them with much-needed assistance.

Finally, on the issue of Federal contracts and subcontracts, which

is disturbing in terms of the fact that no agency has met the minimum 3 percent goal of contracting in 2005. That is unfortunate for

firms that are owned by service-disabled veterans, so that the

agencies have not accomplished that goal. In October of 2004, the

President issued an Executive order again requiring the agencies

to achieve that goal, to lay out the steps in order to accomplish it,

and to increase and to maximize the efficiencies of these agencies

in order to make sure that the 3 percent goal is met. That hasn’t

happened. As a result, we have seen that our veterans have been

shortchanged by $7.5 billion in fiscal year 2005 alone.

Now, I understand that the preliminary data for 2006 shows that

agencies have met this goal. I am concerned from what I hear that

these numbers may have been achieved due to the fact that large

contractors are actually receiving the contracts that are targeted

for small business. So that would be disturbing if, in fact, that is

true and that is the case, and that is something I would also like

to ask you about here today.

So we can get serious about making sure we meet these goals,

and if you look at this chart, let me just show you for a moment,

because I see where the 3 percent required agency goal is, and

where the shortfalls are. You can see from 2003, 2004 and 2005.

VA has obviously come up considerably in that time, but we have

a long ways to go in meeting the 3 percent goal by both the SBA

and the Department of Defense and even the Veterans AdministraVerDate 11-MAY-2000 08:20 Dec 12, 2007 Jkt 037146 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\37146.TXT DianeA PsN: DianeA
6

tion has come up, but obviously still is not meeting the 3 percent

goal.

So I think it is important for us to understand that where we are

seeing the shortfalls that exist as a result, and so I think that sort

of illustrates the problems we are facing. But this should be one

easy way of helping our veterans and our service-disabled veterans

in particular who own small businesses. So I hope we can get to

the bottom of that today in this hearing.

Again, Chairman Kerry, I thank you very much.

[The charts referred to by Senator Snowe in the above paragraphs follow:]

7

8

9

Chairman KERRY. Senator Isakson, thanks so much for being

here. I know you want to introduce your Georgia constituent.

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHNNY ISAKSON,

A UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM GEORGIA

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Like

you, I am on the Foreign Relations Committee, so will be going

back and forth, and I apologize to the first panel if I jump up and

leave before you testify, but I have to get back there for a few minutes before I return back here.

But when the Chairman’s staff notified the Members of this

hearing, which I commend him on holding, and asked if we had

any suggestions on individuals that might be good to testify, I immediately jumped at the opportunity to call Ted Daywalt, my

friend and my neighbor in Georgia, who is going to appear on the

second panel with the lovely lady from the prettiest town in North

America, Camden, Maine, I might add. I did that for Madam

Snowe, to let her know I was paying attention.

[Laughter.]

Senator ISAKSON. Ted Daywalt is uniquely qualified to testify at

this hearing. He retired from the Navy after 30 years of active and

reserve duty as an intelligence officer. He served our country as an

intelligence officer in London, the Middle East, and in Africa in his

years of active duty employment. In 1999, Ted founded a company

called VetJobs. VetJobs has placed thousands of American veterans

in meaningful employment, I would guess—I haven’t asked Ted

this, but the vast majority, probably in excess of 80 percent of

those, in small businesses, maybe even more than that.

VetJobs is a very unique company. It is a small business that

was recognized last year by the WEDDLE’s Users’ Choice Award

as one of the top 30 job placement sites on the Internet, out of

40,000 job boards on the Internet. I think that is a pretty outstanding record.

I have watched Ted and his activities in our Chamber of Commerce and in our State of Georgia and his many trips to Washington to testify and advocate on behalf of employers and Reservists and active duty personnel who return to see to it that we have

meaningful employment for those veterans and that placement of

that employment is, in fact, as easy as possible. To serve that end,

Ted is the president of the Employers United for a Stronger America organization, whose sole purpose is to ensure that veteran

placement is important and that businesses and the needs of businesses who hire our veterans are understood.

He was recently published in the Military Times, and I have already read his statement that he will make today and I commend

it to all of you as an insightful statement on the current challenges

that face veterans, the current challenges that policies of the Department of Defense place on employers and on veterans, and I

think his insight will be important to this Committee. I appreciate,

Mr. Chairman, the opportunity to introduce my good friend and a

great veteran of the U.S. Navy, Mr. Ted Daywalt.

Chairman KERRY. Thanks so much, Senator. We appreciate your

introduction and we appreciate your participation in the ComVerDate 11-MAY-2000 08:20 Dec 12, 2007 Jkt 037146 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\37146.TXT DianeA PsN: DianeA
10

mittee and your concern about this issue, so thank you very, very

much for that.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you.

Chairman KERRY. Our first witness panel this morning is going

to feature testimony from various Federal agency representatives.

We are going to hear from Ms. Linda Oliver, the Acting Director

in the Office of Small Business Programs in the Department of Defense. Next, we will hear from Mr. Scott Denniston, the Director

of the Office of Small Business and Center for Veterans Enterprise

in the Department of Veterans Affairs. And finally on the first

panel, we will hear the testimony of Mr. William Elmore, the Associate Administrator of the Office of Veteran Business Development

of the SBA.

If I could ask each of you, so that we have time to get to the

questions, if you could—your full testimony will be submitted into

the record as if read in full. We do ask you to try to summarize

in about 5 minutes or less, if you can, and that will give us time

for a little bit of exchange. Thank you for being here.

We will start off with Ms. Oliver. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF LINDA BITHELL OLIVER, ACTING DIRECTOR,

OFFICE OF SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS, OFFICE OF THE

SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Ms. OLIVER. Thank you very much, Chairman Kerry and Senator

Snowe, for inviting me to this hearing. I appreciate having the opportunity to testify about service-disabled veteran-owned small

business and their relationship to the Department of Defense, for

two reasons. One is because I am always happy to spread the word,

and the second reason is I do think we have good news stories.

A hearing is always very helpful, I think, to the people who are

working in the field because of the guidance we get, and I appreciate the guidance we have gotten so far and look forward to the

guidance that will come out from the questions.

Senator Kerry, when you talked about never letting things get

the way they were after Vietnam in terms of how people felt about

veterans, I have to say I agree and that the people who have been

trying to keep our servicemen and veterans held in high esteem

have been mighty successful. As you probably know, in the Department of Defense, we focus every day on what is good for the soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen. The touchstone of all of our decisions is, ‘‘Will it help them do their job better?’’

In our personal careers, in our personal lives, the military members are our colleagues, our brothers and sisters, our children, our

neighbors, and our friends. So when they transition from being

military members to becoming veterans, they don’t really leave the

family. And as a result, the Department of Defense—the people in

the Department of Defense in general, are very receptive to doing

business with veterans, and particularly with service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses.

My testimony actually talks about our strategic plan, takes it

point by point. But rather than do that, I wanted to show you some

illustrations of what has resulted from our efforts in the Department of Defense and with our strategic plan. Behind me is Frank

11

Beaty. Frank? Frank is the vice president of Oak Grove Technology.

Chairman KERRY. Vice president of what?

Ms. OLIVER. The vice president of Oak Grove Technology. The

president of Oak Grove Technology, who was the service-disabled

veteran, is ill today. He sent along his vice president from South

Carolina. This is a wonderful and a representative company and it

is representative of the earlier crop of veterans. This is such a good

company that they have been nominated—they were the first company who came into the Mentor Protege Program, which was a result of Senator Snowe’s amendment to the Department of Defense

Mentor Protege Program—they were the first company in and they

have been nominated for the prestigious Nunn-Perry Award, which

will be awarded in March. We will see what happens with that.

They are a great company in terms of what they do professionally,

but they are also a really great company in terms of setting an example to other service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses.

Oak Grove Technology actually is mentoring, sort of unofficially,

another small business, and that small business is owned by Dawn

Halfaker, who is also here. Dawn served in Iraq, lost her arm to

a rocket-propelled grenade, came back, teamed up with another

West Point graduate, has opened a small business that is a security business which is just booming and is under the mentorship

of Oak Grove Technology.

Also here today is Tracy Reep. Tracy was also injured by a rocket-propelled grenade, a different one, in Iraq. He lost an eye and

part of a hand, was in the Texas National Guard, shut down his

business to go to Iraq when called up, came back, was rehabilitated, and has started a new business and, among other things,

sells product to Oak Grove Technologies.

My point of all of this is, the world has changed for veterans. It

is not like it was after Vietnam. They are loved and respected within the Department of Defense and I don’t think this part is new—

are wonderfully helpful to each other, reaching down to help the

younger people.

That concludes my remarks and I am ready for questions.

Chairman KERRY. Thank you very much, Ms. Oliver. Thank you,

each of you, for coming in here today. We really appreciate it.

Thank you very, very much.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Oliver follows with attachments:]

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Chairman KERRY. Mr. Denniston.

If I can get you to say a few words afterwards, you will be an

unexpected witness, if you are willing to.

Thanks. Go ahead, Mr. Denniston.

STATEMENT OF SCOTT F. DENNISTON, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF

SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS UTILIZATION AND

THE CENTER FOR VETERANS ENTERPRISE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Mr. DENNISTON. Chairman Kerry, Ranking Member Snowe,

thank you so much for holding this hearing today. I am honored

to represent Secretary Nicholson and the dedicated workers in the

Department of Veterans Affairs who serve our veterans daily.

Based on our preliminary numbers, I am also pleased to report

that VA achieved 3.38 percent of our fiscal year 2006 dollars to

service-disabled veterans. We also spent approximately 6.35 percent of our total procurement dollars to veteran-owned small businesses. Keep in mind that VA’s procurement budget in 2006 was

$10.3 billion.

Our Department has a work unit dedicated to supporting veterans in business and those who want to become business owners.

This is the Center for Veterans Enterprise. This office has 17 employees, 13 of whom are veterans. Two of these veterans served in

Operation Iraqi Freedom. Permit me to introduce to you Mr. Omar

Morel, a proudly serving former Marine who saw duty in the Battle

of Ramadi, and also Tech Sergeant Patricia Gould, who serves with

the Maryland Air National Guard as an emergency medical technician. Since joining CVE in September 2005, she has also been deployed to New Orleans, Bosnia, and just returned in January from

Iraq.

Our mission is to connect veterans with community resources

who will help them with their business development needs. I am

proud to report that our work is well received. Last September, the

Veterans Business Journal conducted its first readers’ survey. CVE

was voted the organization that provides the best support to veterans in business. We appreciate this vote of confidence and will

strive to repeat this honor in 2007.

What did we do to deserve this distinction? First, we leveraged

VA’s considerable resources to spread the word about entrepreneurship opportunities for veterans. Once the veteran calls us, we determine their needs. Then we refer most calls to a partner organization, such as the local Small Business Development Center, Veteran Business Outreach Center, Procurement Technical Assistance

Center, or one of the corporate or government advocates for veterans’ enterprise who have volunteered to assist veterans.

CVE maintains a robust Web portal which enables veterans to

quickly link to our partner organizations. We are grateful for the

generosity and resources of the Air Force and the Army’s Small

Business Program Offices. We have conducted road shows with the

Air Force and have been guests on their cable television program

several times. With the Army, we have twice co-sponsored the National Veterans Business Conference, which we will do again this

June.

25

The General Services Administration has executed a formal partnership with VA to promote opportunities for service-disabled veterans. CVE offers free market research, training, and other services as may be requested by our Federal partners and their prime

contractors.

On our Web portal, we host the VetBiz.gov Vendor Information

Pages database. Here, browsers can easily locate more than 13,000

veteran-owned small businesses. At all of our outreach events, we

distribute the Tool Kit for Veteran-Owned Small Businesses, which

was jointly developed and co-branded by GSA and VA. It contains

legislation and policy documents, information on how to market to

Federal agencies, a list of Federal veteran business advocates, and

templates to assist business owners. The tool has proven to be so

successful it is now in its fourth edition.

To promote awareness and utilization of veterans and business,

CVE distributed more than 3,000 posters to prime contractors and

Government offices last October. To expand awareness of start-up

assistance, we dispatched Operation Business Ownership DVDs for

use in Transition Assistance Program briefings.

Both SBA and CVE are highlighted under ‘‘Small Business Resources’’ in the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program pocket guide. In the annual Federal Benefits for Veterans

and Dependents’ book, information about CVE appears under

‘‘Transition Assistance.’’ Army Knowledge Online’s Web site

reaches 660,000 personnel. Our Web portal link is prominently displayed on that site. We are also prominently displayed on military.com’s site, and also the VetBiz.gov link appears on USA.gov

and the OSDBU.gov web portals.

We teach business owners that business is about successful relationships. We think we have built some good ones.

In the commercial marketplace, more than 300 franchisors have

joined the VetFran program, which VA and the International Franchise Association refreshed in 2002. Currently, more than 600 veterans have opened franchises under this program. In VetFran, veterans are eligible for reduced franchise fees and other support.

In closing, I know that you are interested in what more needs

to be done. I would recommend increased attention to conducting

and documenting training of Federal agency personnel and using

the tools available through the Federal Veterans Entrepreneurship

Program. Agencies are required to post their strategic improvement

plans for enhancing achievements with service-disabled veterans.

Veterans who call us want to see these plans in the annual reports

posted in an easy-to-identify location.

Many contracting activities are still struggling with a lack of capable businesses in specialized industries. A method to incentivize

prime contractors to incubate new small businesses in these underrepresented fields will benefit all parties.

I hope you agree that opportunities for veterans in business are

abundant and there is widespread support for the program.

Chairman Kerry, thank you again for convening today’s hearings.

We will submit our written testimony and be able to answer any

questions you may have. Thank you.

Chairman KERRY. Thank you very much, Mr. Denniston.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Denniston follows:]

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

Chairman KERRY. Mr. Elmore.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM D. ELMORE, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF VETERANS BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT,

U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Mr. ELMORE. Chairman Kerry, Ranking Member Snowe, and

other distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for your

request to appear before you today. I am Bill Elmore, the Associate

Administrator for Veterans Business Development, representing

SBA Administrator Steven Preston.

As expressed in our January 24, 2007 Memorandum for Heads

of Departments and Agencies, jointly issued by Administrator Preston and Office of Federal Procurement Policy Administrator Denett,

the Administration is broadly committed to enhancing all of our

programs and services for service-disabled veterans, for veterans,

and for Reservists, especially those veterans and Reservists returning from duty in the Global War on Terror, or those injured or disabled in service to America.

SBA’s efforts go beyond the activities of SBA’s Office of Veterans

Business Development. Each SBA program is tasked to expand and

improve their services for veterans and service-disabled veterans.

Thus far, the results have been good. The number of loans made

to veterans has increased from 4,800 in fiscal year 2000 to approximately 8,000 loans in fiscal year 2006. In fiscal year 2006, our business counseling training and outreach programs reported more

than 108,000 veterans and Reservists assisted.

In October 2004, the President issued Executive Order 13360,

and in our effort to lead by example, we do believe that SBA exceeded our 3 percent SDVOSB goal for the first time in fiscal year

2006. We also believe the Federal Government increased its

achievements in fiscal year 2006. However, final data is not yet

available to confirm this. But it does point to steady and significant

growth towards achieving the 3 percent goal. Federal agencies are

working very hard to achieve this goal and the numbers of SDV

small businesses registered in CCR shows that the veterans themselves are doing their part, as demonstrated by the significant

growth in those numbers.

CCR, in the last 6 months, the number of SDVOSB small businesses have grown by approximately 11 percent, to over 12,500,

while the total number of small businesses registered in CCR has

grown only by approximately 2 percent. SBA and our many Federal

partners’ outreach to the SDVOSB market is contributing to this

growth. However, we have also noted that the average size of the

CCR-registered SDVOSBs continue to be the smallest of all SBA

procurement programs. This points to weaknesses in our targeted

outreach, to gaps in the SDVOSB understanding of how to succeed

in the Federal marketplace, and perhaps to the capacity of the

identified SDVOSB business community itself.

This is why we are strengthening the full range of SBA programs

in support of SD veterans and veterans, including our SBDC program, SCORE, Women’s Business Centers, Veterans Business Outreach Centers, our District Office outreach, our 7(a) and 504 loan

programs, our Surety Bonding Program, our matchmaking program, and the use of our PCRs and CMRs, all in an effort to imVerDate 11-MAY-2000 08:20 Dec 12, 2007 Jkt 037146 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\37146.TXT DianeA PsN: DianeA
33

prove the knowledge, availability, and applicability of all of our

services and programs for both service-disabled veterans and veterans.

I am going to jump to the part that now addresses Reservists,

since my time is short. In this last year, I increased OVBD staff

by 50 percent. We have improved SBA contracting with service-disabled veterans’ small businesses through that process.

Let me talk to the Reservists and Guard, and I have to diverge

for just a second. I thank you both for referencing the data that

SBA has been able to coalesce and create and gather over these

last 5 years. I think that is one of the most important things we

could do because there was a striking lack of data, and I thank Advocacy for their work.

We implemented the Military Reservists Economic Injury Disaster Loan in August 2001 and continue to promote that. We think

it is a tool of great assistance to those small businesses that it is

helpful with, but we also recognize that as a disaster loan, it is constrained by its very design. It is a disaster loan. It is not a business

loan. And for those reasons, it doesn’t always hit the mark and we

realize that.

We have enhanced our outreach counseling training and our

lending programs to assist Reservists by offering pre- and post-mobilization business counseling, e-counseling and planning. SBA initiated and continues to lead the Federal effort to develop and offer

assistance to small business owners at risk of economic damage

when activated. In addition to internal SBA coordination, we have

produced comprehensive program guides and business planning

materials providing a broad range of information while coordinating many of our activities with various elements of the Department of Defense.

You have most of the things I was going to touch on. Because I

have run out of time, all I can tell you is that we continue to work

as diligently as possible with the Department of Defense in their

efforts, because these are their soldiers and airmen and marines,

when activated. They have a certain responsibility in this. The best

I think arguably we can do is try to promote, offer, refine, define,

and deliver our services.

The biggest issue, if you will, that I hear from our service delivery partners is they can’t find these Reservists who need assistance. I believe, like you do, that there is a very significant problem

occurring, but without the Reservists themselves stepping up and

utilizing the services that we do offer, to a degree, we are stymied.

You have referenced, Madam, that my budget is what it is. I think

we have done an enormous amount to reach out to this community,

but the community has to engage with us, as well.

If there are some solutions in there, perhaps that is really where

it lies, in how the Reservists and Guard members themselves are

directed to utilize the resources and services we have, and through

that, how we improve and dramatically improve, really at the direction of my Administrator, Administrator Preston, how do we improve and deliver our services in the most effective way.

Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today and I

welcome your questions.

34

Chairman KERRY. Thank you very much, Mr. Elmore. We appreciate it.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Elmore follows:]

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

Chairman KERRY. I thank all of you for sort of holding it in that

timeframe. That is helpful to all of us.

I am glad to welcome Senator Tester here, a new Member of our

Committee. We are delighted to have him aboard because he brings

a lot of personal small business experience.

Senator, do you have any opening comment you want to make?

You don’t have to.

Senator TESTER. No.

Chairman KERRY. All right. Thanks.

Let me proceed, then, to a few questions initially, if I can. I want

to pick up, Mr. Elmore, because we just sort of ended with you and

while it is fresh, in your testimony and you were just chatting

about this difficulty of sort of finding people and what happens. I

would like to get at this a little bit with all of you, if we can.

The Disaster Loan Program which we passed here, which I authored in 1999, basically then we were focused on Haiti, Iraq, Bosnia, and Kosovo after those conflicts, but your judgment is that

something is, I think you have labeled it as onerous in the testimony, and that there are some constraints within the formulation

of the program itself, which obviously we don’t want to create. So

the question is, help us understand those, if you would. What are

those constraints and what can we do about them to make that

more effective?

Mr. ELMORE. The constraints include, for example, it is not a

business loan. It is a disaster loan. Eligibility occurs after activation, and I think we all understand that the majority of Reservists

who have been activated since September 11, 2001, have generally

had very short notice for activation, so they can’t really arguably

make application until after they have returned. By that time, the

damage is done.

So what we have tried to do with our outreach is to move to a

preemptive step and try to put our services and programs in front

of Reservists before they get called. So on one hand, through our

business counseling and training, they can prepare for the activation, because they now know they are going to be activated, certainly sooner or later and sometimes more than once.

The second is if we can move the ability of that loan program to

be available prior to activation, that would be a suggestion that I

would make and I have made in the past.

Third is——

Chairman KERRY. Is it limited by the mere designation as disaster, or is it limited because of further formulation in the language?

Mr. ELMORE. I think it is really both. Because it is in our disaster program——

Chairman KERRY. You can’t do it until there is, in effect, the

downside?

Mr. ELMORE. Well, you can’t consolidate debt with a disaster

loan, for example. Now, that is a typical business approach, perhaps, to lending and borrowing, but in a disaster loan, we can’t

really do that. So in that sense, where it sits doesn’t allow what

is a normal business process of growing, planning, and arguably

even how one prepares for——

42

Chairman KERRY. We need to refine the definitional language,

sort of the permissive language?

Mr. ELMORE. And there is another impediment, I think, as well,

and that is on the 90 days that you have to apply after you return.

Chairman KERRY. The question is, is that enough time or isn’t

it?

Mr. ELMORE. I think you said it, sir. The loan——

Chairman KERRY. Would you——

Mr. ELMORE. We would change that. But you said it yourself.

The loan was really designed for when we were in Kosovo and

Haiti, and now we are in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the level of

activations is way disproportionate, five times higher than it was

in 2000, maybe six times higher. So the scale of what is happening

with those self-employed Reservists out there, I mean, we recognize

this and we know this. This is why we started working in September 2001, bluntly, to try to organize our ability to reach out and

offer these services.

So I think, certainly in my discussions with Administrator Preston, we would like to engage with the Committee to discuss how

to improve and enhance our programs for veterans and for Reservists, and I assume—and I think that includes the military Reservists loan.

Chairman KERRY. Well, let me come back to this a minute, because when we wrote it, we created a fairly open assistance program, and you were the folks who came here and said we have got

to limit this. Specifically, you added the word ‘‘substantial’’ to economic harm so that they would have to show a greater level of

harm. You reduced the application period. We had allowed 180

days. You reduced it down to 90. In addition, you sort of pressed

for the ability to be able to make it easier to show a link between

the Reservist’s absence and economic injury. So to the degree it is

constrained, you folks constrained it.

Mr. ELMORE. If I can try to answer, sir, all I can tell you is that

in 1999, I wasn’t working for SBA at that point. There wasn’t an

Office of Veterans Business Development, and I——

Chairman KERRY. You must understand that the agency’s view

of this was delimiting.

Mr. ELMORE. OK, and I didn’t realize that. I didn’t know that the

agency then had come back to you with those recommendations or

suggestions.

Chairman KERRY. They came back with more. They restricted us

because we were—they substituted the term ‘‘essential employee’’

for ‘‘owner, manager, or key,’’ because that restricted again who

might or might not get it, because an essential employee was exempt from call-up. So the result was it became, again, more delimiting.

So basically, look, I am happy to go back to the way we were trying to help people, which was to be pretty broad and encompassing.

I hear you. Is the 90 days too short a time?

Mr. ELMORE. I believe it is.

Chairman KERRY. I am glad to hear you say that, because that

is why we put 180 originally. So we will come back and see if we

can’t reverse that and fix it up.

43

What about the complaint by some people that I hear that it is

not marketed? A lot of Reservists don’t even know this exists. They

go in, they come out, and nobody proactively says, hey—we don’t

hand them something saying, we want you to know here are the

following things that will be available to you to try to help cushion

your business. Boom, they are given it proactively.

I think in your testimony, Mr. Denniston, I heard you say it, because I wrote it down, you said, once the veteran calls us, we determine their needs. Is it only upon initiation by the veterans’ call?

Mr. DENNISTON. No, sir. We are very active in outreach ourselves. Our staff does about 100 conferences a year. The partners

that I mentioned in my testimony, we are very active with them

to get the word out to veterans. Again, our focus is on the Federal

procurement arena and most of the veterans that contact us are

people that are interested in starting small businesses, and again,

that is not our focus, but that is why we have the partners that

we do so that we have people that we can refer veterans to in the

local area.

But given the staff we have, between the Web site that we have

and the activities that we have in the outreach area, we think we

do a pretty good job of reaching veterans. We also have information

now in all the Transition Assistance Programs, so that when veterans get out of the military and think about starting small businesses, they have references so they know where to go so that we

can help them.

Chairman KERRY. Here is the thing. I hear from veterans—I

hear what you are saying and appreciate your point of view. But

often in the bureaucracy, and it is not—I am not suggesting it is

willful, but it is just a fact of bureaucracies, there is sort of a

breakdown between the program and the intention and what really

happens out there.

What I hear from a lot of veterans is, and we have heard it, I

think each of the Senators have heard it, is they don’t get this information. It just doesn’t somehow reach them. They don’t know

proactively this is really there. It is put to them maybe at odd moments. I mean, I can remember when I was getting out and they

said, you have got to sign this and do this and this, and I didn’t

care what it was. I signed it and I got the hell out. That is sort

of a reaction. People are tracking.

The question is, can there be a more effective way of putting this

information in front of people and making certain that they have

it?

Mr. DENNISTON. I think the best that we can do, because you are

right, we face the same thing. I remember when I got out of the

Army, the only thing I wanted to do is go get a job and leave the

military behind, and I didn’t pay attention to all those documents

that I was given. But we still think that the Transition Assistance

Program is one of the best ways to leave information with veterans,

because what we are finding at the Center for Veterans Enterprise,

we get contacted by thousands of veterans a month, 2,000 or 3,000,

that are thinking about starting a small business. What is interesting is the vast majority of them have been out of the military

for 5 to 10 years. They have worked for a large business. They have

worked for the Government. They have worked for a small business

44

and now they have this entrepreneurial vision that they want to

implement.

So our issue becomes what can we put in front of veterans today

that they will remember 5 to 10 years from now, and quite frankly,

that is a challenge. That is why we think between what we do with

the Transition Assistance Program, what we do with the outreach

or the partners we have, with using resources, as I mentioned, like

the Air Force cable television programs, we are doing, we think, a

pretty good job. But obviously, we are open to any other suggestions that we can that would help in this outreach effort, because

it is definitely a challenge.

Chairman KERRY. Do you run any PSAs on it?

Mr. DENNISTON. We have done some PSAs, probably not as many

as we should. We have been more active on the Internet and the

Web sites and the links to military.com, the Army Knowledge Network, because we are finding that particularly with the younger

veterans, they are very computer savvy, and where us older veterans may wait for a PSA, these folks are aggressive and are using

the Internet to get the information that they need to fulfill their

goal.

Chairman KERRY. Let me ask you something. When a veteran is

called up, when a Reservist is called up, do you know at that

time—do you know their occupation?

Mr. DENNISTON. We don’t get involved in the call-up of Guard

and Reserve. That is an SBA and DOD——

Chairman KERRY. Is there coordination between DOD——

Mr. ELMORE. There is a level of coordination. Let me go to your

first question, sir. DOD just in the last couple of years has put together a database of the employers of Reserve and Guard members,

and they had to go through all the processes because of privacy

concerns to be able to do that and they have fairly recently completed that. We have continued to work with offices in DOD on

some of the research they are doing to try to identify not only the

employers, but more importantly, what has been the effect of these

activations.

Chairman KERRY. What if you did this. What if DOD, when DOD

sends them their call-up notice—they get a formal notice, correct?

What if it had an accompanying letter that says very simply, if you

are a small business owner or an essential employee in a small

business and this may be disruptive, the following options are

available to you, right there.

Ms. OLIVER. It makes sense.

Mr. ELMORE. If I might, sir, if you really—I support that kind of

an idea, but I would like to accelerate that beyond or before, if you

will, they actually get their orders. They are in the Reserve and

Guard now, and what I would suggest, and this is what we try to

do through my office, because we sent our Reserve and Guard kits

to Reserve and Guard units themselves. These men and women

should know about the services and resources available to them

simply because they are in the Reserve and Guard, and it is not

just for purposes of planning their business for their eventual activation, but it also ought to address if they are interested in creating a business, the services and resources available to them, as

well.

45

Chairman KERRY. But is there today someone actually coordinating this between your three agencies?

Mr. ELMORE. [Shaking head negatively.]

Chairman KERRY. Wouldn’t it make sense to actually have sort

of a coordinated effort here, since you are all players in this happening? You are the provider, you are the convener, and you are

the service industry on the back end. So, I mean, if you get together, then you have got much more capacity to be able to make

certain you are really going after people and reaching them aggressively, at the right moments, and repeatedly, probably.

Mr. ELMORE. If I can, sir, my office has been coordinating with

the Assistant Secretary for Reserve Affairs inside DOD, so we have

tried to coordinate the SBA side of this. We haven’t talked with VA

specifically about their role in this, but that is the approach we

have taken.

Chairman KERRY. One last question, because I want to get my

colleagues in on this, but Ms. Oliver, incidentally, we are delighted

that obviously in the last year, the agencies have come up in their

procurement. But the question is large in DOD above all. How can

DOD be so far behind on this?

Ms. OLIVER. I am torn here, because I don’t want to sound

smart—smarty—but this is actually a pretty graphic explanation

and I will tell you the details of it in just a second. You can’t put

nine pregnant women in a room for a month and have a baby come

out. It just doesn’t work that way, and we have a history of that

same sort. Some things can’t be hurried up in the Department of

Defense.

Now, I can tell you a lot of the reasons. One is you can’t be looking at contracting with different people on a contract until that

contract has expired. There are training issues. There is the complexity of the contracts. Probably most difficult for us is the product mix. There are so many things in the Department of Defense

that there is no hope at all that a small business be able to

produce, including a service-disabled veteran, or maybe particularly a service-disabled veteran-owned small business.

Our history is really clear. I think there are some charts that

show the direction that we are going in all these areas. That is a

history typical of all the other special programs that we have had.

Chairman KERRY. Let me just——

Ms. OLIVER. Sure.

Chairman KERRY. Nobody is asking DOD to let a contract to

somebody who isn’t qualified to perform it.

Ms. OLIVER. Right.

Chairman KERRY. We understand that.

Ms. OLIVER. Yes.

Chairman KERRY. But what we hear—what I hear, anyway, and

I will speak for myself, is that there are service-disabled veteranowned businesses ready and willing to take on some of these contracts and they either just don’t get them or they find it too much

of a maze to be able to walk through. But they are there. They are

waiting. They want the opportunity. And there are all kinds of

other things besides sophisticated—I mean, there are all kinds of

service——

Ms. OLIVER. Yes, there are. That is right, Senator.

46

Chairman Kerry. Huge, stunningly huge budget——

Ms. OLIVER. Yes, that is correct. I agree with that.

Chairman KERRY. There really should—I mean, it seems to me

of all the agencies that ought to be sensitive to this and able to do

it, it is DOD itself.

Ms. OLIVER. It is interesting. I mean, that is right. As I said in

my testimony, it is——

Chairman KERRY. So what is the bar?

Ms. OLIVER. What is—I am sorry——

Chairman KERRY. Why doesn’t that happen? I mean, are there

those service-disabled veteran-owned businesses ready and willing?

Is it your judgment that they are there?

Ms. OLIVER. Here is the problem. The Competition in Contract

Act requires that we compete contracts unless there is a specific exemption to it, which means that maybe the answer is: We need to

train service-disabled veteran-owned small business owners about

how to compete better—which we have tried—I mean, we are working on. It just takes time.

Bill pointed out that these tend to be very small businesses. That

is a second kind of a problem.

Chairman KERRY. Let me stop you there for one second.

Ms. OLIVER. Sure.

Chairman KERRY. SBA, don’t you help these people to be able to

compete?

Mr. ELMORE. Yes, sir. Yes, sir, through our training and counseling and through our Small Business Development Centers.

Chairman KERRY. Where is the gap here?

Mr. ELMORE. Well, the gap is—if you look at the data, sir, and

this is from my perspective, 0.7 percent of the businesses in America that have employees are owned by service-disabled veterans.

That is what the 2002 Survey of Business Ownership tells us from

Census. So we have a three percent goal, but we have a 0.7 percent

population to achieve it.

I think we are fairly close to the 0.7 percent, but we are nowhere

near the 3 percent goal. We have to build the capacity of the businesses that are presenting themselves——

Chairman KERRY. That doesn’t make sense. Those are apples

and oranges that you are comparing there. It doesn’t matter. Whatever the percentage is in terms of the total population, because

they are veterans and service-disabled, they are supposed to get a

higher piece of the pie. That is the equation.

Mr. ELMORE. We are——

Chairman KERRY. So if 80 percent of them are getting a contract

because that is what it takes to get the 3 percent, that is what they

are supposed to get, and it is because they are veterans. It is not

a relevant percentage.

Mr. ELMORE. If I can, sir, because I am glad we are talking about

this because this is in many ways central to this whole discussion,

what has happened, and I applaud Congress for doing this and you

know this, I was part of the effort to make this happen before I

came to SBA. What we have done is we have plugged the moral

imperative of how we as a Nation contract with service-disabled

veterans into the Federal procurement system, but yet the Federal

procurement system isn’t geared to mandate contracts. It is geared

47

to mandate opportunity to compete and there is a gap there. So all

of these things that we have touched on from the capacity——

Chairman KERRY. What do you mean by geared?

Mr. ELMORE. We cannot——

Chairman KERRY. We have a goal of 3 percent.

Mr. ELMORE. We cannot just award contracts to service-disabled

veterans simply because they are service-disabled veterans. They

have to provide the best value to the Government in that process.

So there is a process——

Chairman KERRY. So what you are effectively saying is that they

are not capable of winning the competitions.

Mr. ELMORE. No, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying

is we have to build——

Chairman Kerry. Aren’t you duty-bound to provide it to them?

Mr. ELMORE. We have to build the capacity of those businesses

that are presenting themselves. If you look at the size of the businesses in CCR——

Chairman KERRY. You are losing me.

Mr. ELMORE. I am trying to explain this, sir.

Chairman KERRY. No, let me just—you have to build the capacity. Does that mean they lack the capacity?

Mr. ELMORE. I think many of them do.

Chairman KERRY. OK, which means they can’t compete.

Mr. ELMORE. It means they can compete, but they have as a——

Chairman KERRY. They can’t win.

Mr. ELMORE. Many of them can’t win, no. I don’t believe they

can, not as they are presently structured and the size that they are

and the arenas that they are trying to compete in——

Chairman KERRY. A lot of them disagree with that, and I think

we will hear from some of them, that that is not the judgment of

a lot of them in terms of what this fairness of competition is.

I don’t want to dominate this. Let me let Senator Snowe ask

some questions. We will come back afterwards and follow up.

Senator SNOWE. Thank you, Chairman Kerry.

Just getting back to the entire question, which really needs a solution as to how we achieve these goals. The law has been in place

since 1999. So why is it that the agencies can’t get together to accomplish the 3 percent goal? I was talking to my colleague, Senator

Coleman, who was telling me about someone who is serving in the

National Guard and has been deployed to Iraq, lost his business,

not aware of any of the resources available. It seems to me that

you all have a database, so can’t there be an interagency council

to coordinate so that they are made aware before they are called

up, what are the resources, is there a contracting pamphlet so that

they can review their options? Isn’t there a way to get around all

this?

In the final analysis, we need a solution to this problem, because

obviously, it is not working. I just wonder, is it possible to do that,

because it is a requirement under the law, and the President had

to issue an Executive order in 2004 to lay out the criteria for

achieving this, and yet it is still not happening. Now, I will get to

2006 because I want to address the question that was raised as to

whether or not large businesses were getting contracts that were

intended for small businesses.

48

But Ms. Oliver, let us start with you. Is there a possibility, and

I would like to hear from the three of you, to create an interagency

council, because as has been identified here, we have a problem. It

isn’t rocket science to coordinate and have a single database, to

share the information. I understand SBA has some information on

some service-disabled veterans, others do not. There has to be a

way of doing this.

Ms. OLIVER. Yes, I agree with you, Senator Snowe. I will tell you

one of the problems, because I have seen—we have tried to work

toward the solution of this before. The Privacy Act, and this is appropriate, is very careful about having people have private information collected by the Government used for any purpose other than

that for which it was collected. That has been a stumbling—that

actually has been a stumbling block in, for example, going to VA

and getting from VA a list of all their service-disabled veteranowned small businesses, or all their service-disabled veterans.

There may be ways around it, but that is definitely a problem.

Senator SNOWE. Have you gotten a ruling on that? Is that something anybody has pursued?

Ms. OLIVER. The Department of Defense attorneys, and we didn’t

get a—we don’t have—I don’t have a written opinion, but it was

the opinion of the Department of Defense attorneys when the Veterans Corporation wanted information to reach out, they said, we

can’t give it to you.

Chairman KERRY. Or as Shakespeare said, kill all the lawyers.

[Laughter.]

Ms. OLIVER. Well, I can’t be in favor of that.

Senator SNOWE. Well, then if that is the case, I would like to

hear as to why. Now, I would like to hear from each of you if that

is the same response that you are going to give——

Mr. DENNISTON. No.

Senator SNOWE. OK. Mr. Denniston.

Mr. DENNISTON. First, let me say that I think we are confusing

two issues here, so I would like to separate them, if I can. I think

the issue of the Guard and Reserve call-up is one issue. I think the

goals that we are talking about, the procurement goals, are very

different. So I would like to focus on the second one, if I can.

Two things. We have a database of veteran-owned and servicedisabled veteran-owned businesses that want to do business with

the Federal Government. That is the Vendor Information Page.

That is those 13,000 companies that I talked about. That is available to all Government agencies. It is available to all prime contractors, and government agencies and prime contractors are using

it.

The issue of the privacy comes in with someone getting a list of

the 2.5 million veterans that we have on our rolls as service-connected disabled veterans. But one of the things that we do every

year is those veterans get a letter from the VA telling them what

their compensation check is going to be, because we have the inflation factor so it changes every year. Every year that that letter

goes out, we tell them of the services available from the Center for

Veterans Enterprise and from the Small Business Administration

if, in fact, they have a small business or are interested in starting

a small business. So that is how we get around that privacy thing.

49

We can’t give them the information out, but we let the veterans

know what is available.

Let us go back to the issue of the goals. My opinion is that this

is a cultural issue, because we face this in the Department of Veterans Affairs, this is a new program. Contracting officers have been

so—what is the right word—I don’t want to say ‘‘brainwashed,’’ but

to focus on the 8(a) program and the other small business programs that have been around longer that, quite frankly, what we

are doing is we are talking about a change in culture.

To us, the two ways that we have worked on this, number one

is education, is to make sure that every VA contracting officer and

every person in the VA that holds a purchase card knows of the

Department’s responsibilities to service-disabled and veteranowned small businesses.

The other thing that we have pushed very hard is that Public

Law 108–183 gives us mechanisms through set-asides, particularly,

to limit competition only to service-disabled veteran-owned businesses, and one of the ways that we have been successful to reach

the 3 percent goal is by instilling in our contracting officers the

need to use that mechanism.

The other thing that has helped us is when GSA, the General

Services Administration, under the Federal Supply Schedules came

out with a determination that said you can limit competition on

Federal Supply Schedules based on the socio-economic category of

business. So now our contracting officers can use the Federal Supply Schedule as a mechanism and limit competition to service-disabled veterans.

So to me, the issue is about changing culture, and that is why,

as one of our recommendations, we said we have to do a better job

of educating contracting officers, and particularly program officials,

in the Government as to what goes on. The other thing that is important is to get people——

Chairman KERRY. Do you mind if I just ask——

Mr. DENNISTON. No, go ahead.

Chairman KERRY. What is happening with respect to that now?

This has been a known problem for a long period of time, this,

quote, ‘‘education’’ of the officers. What directive and specific effort

does take place to do that?

Mr. DENNISTON. After the President’s Executive order was

signed, one of the things that the Department of Defense did very

quickly through the Defense Acquisition University, was put a

course online about the service-disabled veteran program, and that

is available for contracting officers throughout the Government.

But the issue——

Chairman KERRY. I am not talking about what is available. I am

talking about what is happening mandatorily to make them aware

that they have got to do this.

Mr. DENNISTON. Well, that is the issue. It is the issue of compliance and it is the issue of follow-up. One of the things that we did

in the VA to show our seriousness to this is after the Executive

order and our requirement for strategic plan, we made our Deputy

Secretary Gordon Mansfield the chief executive responsible for implementation of the plan so that it got the attention of people within the management structure of VA. The other thing that we did

50

was we put the accomplishment of the goal on everybody’s performance plan so that now this is one of the things that they are rated

on if they want to get a bonus.

The other thing that we did was every month in the senior managers’ meeting that we have, I used to report on what the accomplishments were. We have changed that around, and rather than

my doing it, so they are not my numbers, now we have each of the

administrations and the buying offices to report to the Deputy Secretary on how they are doing. So that now becomes ownership that

is theirs rather than mine, because the one thing we know about

the small business programs, to make them successful, we have got

to have buy-in from everyone, top management, the contracting officers, the program officials, and the Small Business Office.

Senator SNOWE. Mr. Elmore.

Mr. ELMORE. Yes. I will touch on what Scott was talking about

and then I will come back to the Reserve and Guard, if that is OK,

kind of like Scott divided the two.

What we are doing inside SBA is we are working with our PCRs

and CMRs and the Administrator has directed that we are

prioritizing our services and our goals internally for women, HUB

Zone, and service-disabled veterans. So we are trying to increase

the profile and the use of our PCRs and CMRs across the Government structure to push for and try to deliver some of these same

things that we are talking about here today, use of the set-aside

and sole source authority, understanding of how to identify and

find service-disabled veteran small businesses, those kinds of

things.

On the Reserve front, I would agree with you. I think that there

should be some cross-government process, not just SBA, not just

DOD, and not even necessarily just VA. I would suggest that perhaps Treasury has a role in this, as well, that there has not been

an across-government process to tackle this and take this on the

right way. I have been frustrated by that like the members in the

Reserve and Guard have been.

Now, I may risk myself when I say this, but it does take leadership that comes from beyond my office. I can tell you that my Administrator is dead-on serious about doing this right and doing this

as well as we possibly can, and I applaud him; I support him and

we are working very hard to try to do that. So if there is any leadership that the committee itself can exert in this arena, I would applaud that, as well.

Senator SNOWE. Well, I appreciate that, Mr. Elmore, and I say

that to you, Mr. Chairman, because I do think we have to get to

the core of the issue here and see what we can do to serve as a

catalyst for standardizing this process, because inevitably, there

are going to be rationales as to why it can’t work. I mean, there

is just not going to be the motivation there. I think we have to create it.

The President did in the Executive order and said ‘‘shall.’’ That

was very definitive. It is obviously not happening. So I think we

have to get beyond, and I appreciate your straightforward response

to that request, and I think we have to work it out and figure out

how best to work this out. That is something this Committee can

work on, Mr. Chairman, because I truly think it is going to happen.

51

I mean, it is too large. There is too much of an opportunity there

that is natural, so why not take advantage of it to help our servicedisabled veterans? There has to be a way. I think that that is critically important.

A couple of other issues. In 2006, is it true about meeting the

goals or not?

Ms. OLIVER. We don’t know yet.

Senator SNOWE. You don’t know yet.

Mr. DENNISTON. For VA, 99.9 percent certainty that we have met

the goals. The 3.38 is going to be the final number that we certify

to SBA. Now, keep in mind that with our ten-point-some billion

dollar procurement budget, that equates to about a million contract

actions. We have gone through that data several times to ensure

that there are no large businesses reported in that data.

One of the dilemmas that we have government-wide is that we

don’t have a centralized database that talks to the size standard

of the small businesses. One of the reasons for that is because for

every NAICS code that we use, you can be large in one and small

in the other. Some of the other reasons, it is just poor clerical work

on the part of the contracting officers who input the information in

the Federal Procurement Data System. But we have cleansed our

data and I will tell you today that there are no large businesses

that are in that 3.38 percent.

The other thing I would like to mention, too, to get at this idea

of interagency cooperation, after the President signed the Executive

order, we put together a working group of all the Federal agencies

to share best practices, to share a standard strategic plan. We, the

VA, took the lead for that. And the agencies that chose to participate, I think you will find, have the best strategic plans and their

accomplishments, even though they haven’t met the 3 percent goal,

are trending up better than the agencies that didn’t choose to take

part in that, because one of the things that we know in the small

business program is the more we can share best practices, the better off we are all going to be.

Mr. ELMORE. Tell me the question again, please. I got so engrossed in listening to Scott——

Senator SNOWE. Whether or not for 2006 you are able to——

Mr. ELMORE. Large businesses, OK. We, like VA, we have

scrubbed our data, and in fact, we looked at it again last night or

else I wouldn’t have been able to come up here and say what I said.

We believe that we have, in fact, exceeded 4 percent.

Now, we are very sensitive to this question of whether or not

there is any large businesses involved in our data. Clearly, you understand that. I can’t sit here and tell you with all certainty, like

Scott can, because I just bluntly don’t know. But I would be flabbergasted if any of the contracts that we let with service-disabled

veterans in 2006 went to any large business.

Senator SNOWE. Just to follow up, and this will be my last question, last summer, I was really surprised when the GAO determined the SBA regulations, that, if there was an ineligible contract

that was issued and it wasn’t challenged before the contract was

issued that the ineligible contractor could keep the award. Is that

true? Why is that?

Mr. ELMORE. I think——

52

Senator SNOWE. That just seems so ludicrous. It is almost hard

to believe.

Mr. ELMORE. And what I would ask is, if you have a specific

question, please get it to me and we will get you a detailed answer

back, but I will tell you——

Senator SNOWE. Yes, there is a specific case.

Mr. ELMORE. OK.

Senator SNOWE. The Veterans Enterprise.

Mr. ELMORE. I would have to go back and look at that because

I am not privy to all the detail——

Senator SNOWE. These were contractors who did not have service-disabled veterans. I mean, it was not owned by service-disabled

veterans and yet received—the Veterans Enterprise should have

had it and some other contractor got it, and because it wasn’t challenged before the contract was issued, then they could keep it. So

the eligible contractor was not remunerated, wasn’t compensated

for the loss and didn’t receive the award, obviously.

Mr. ELMORE. I haven’t looked at that particular case. I can tell

you that I have looked at how our protest process works and I can

give you the numbers and those kinds of things. But again, if you

have a specific question, please get it to me and I will make sure

we get you the answer back——

Senator SNOWE. Well, we will, because I think it is obviously

something that needs to be addressed.

Mr. ELMORE. Yes.

Senator SNOWE. Thank you.

Mr. ELMORE. Thank you.

Senator SNOWE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman KERRY. Senator Tester.

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman KERRY. That was an important line of questioning,

and I agree completely with the Ranking Member about the followup piece and we are going to work on that.

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the

panel, also. I also appreciate Scott segregating the issues because

we were talking on several different levels there. The level I want

to talk about for right now is Guard and Reservists who go off and

there are programs out there to help them, and it kind of dovetails

in with what the Chairman was talking about.

Are folks working together now, and does that include DOD, as

far as education, allowing folks to know what programs are out

there, what services are available, and is DOD part of the equation?

Mr. ELMORE. Yes, sir.

Senator TESTER. It seems to me there was a statement made earlier, and I think it was you, Mr. Elmore, that made it, that folks

don’t know that the services are out there. If there is a concerted

effort between all working parties, the VA in particular and Small

Business in particular and the DOD, why is that occurring?

Mr. ELMORE. What I can tell you, sir, is the work that we have

done, and maybe this will help answer that, the materials that we

produced that are directed specifically to Reserve and Guard, we

have provided to Military Family Support Centers, we have provided to State Adjutant Generals, we have provided to the State

53

committees of the Employers’ Support of the Guard and Reserve,

and we have sent out to Reserve and Guard units themselves.

What steps DOD may have taken to communicate with their particular service members, I honestly can’t give you that answer. I

think you would have to ask the Department of Defense.

Senator TESTER. It would seem to me that if they haven’t asked

you to come do any sort of workshops, in-service while they are——

Mr. ELMORE. In fact, I will be participating in a—and let me

make sure I get the name right for you——

Senator TESTER. That is all right.

Mr. ELMORE. There is a summit that is going to be held this next

month over in Arlington, I believe it is, with the Military Family

Support Center System, and as far as I know, we are the only

agency, my office, to come over and participate and be part of this

summit. So those kinds of things have been occurring and continue

to occur.

Senator TESTER. As far as procurement goes, I will just give you

my perspective and then we will move on. I think it deals with the

size of the contracts when you are dealing with small business

more than anything, and if you are talking about allowing servicedisabled veteran small businesses to be able to compete, the size

of those contracts are critically important, any Federal contract. I

know a lot of small businesses that flat don’t pay any attention to

Federal contracts because they don’t have the wherewithal, they

don’t have the infrastructure to be able to supply the kind of supplies they need, and I will give you a personal example.

If I wanted to go buy a beef, it is much easier to buy it from one

outfit. If I want to bring other people into the fold, I might want

to buy it a quarter at a time. And that is what folks need to understand with Federal contracts. For the most part, with my definition

of small business, there is no way they can even possibly begin to

supply what is there.

The last thing I want to ask, and this is open to anybody, I have

a small business and I am called off, and quite frankly, that business shuts down. Any time there is a void in business, it is filled

pretty quickly. By the time I get back from my duty in any war,

there is already a business sitting there that took the place of my

business and so I am out of business. Assuming I know every program that is out there, what is available for me?

Mr. ELMORE. What we can offer is, we can offer access to the full

range of our business loans as a businessman or woman before you

are even aware that you may be activated, and that is what we try

to do. We do offer the Military Reservists Economic Injury Disaster

Loan after the effective call-up and generally after they have returned.

Senator TESTER. What is the interest rate on that loan?

Mr. ELMORE. The average is about 2.9 percent and the terms can

go up to 30 years. Actually, it is a very good loan in that context,

but as we talked earlier, it is not a business loan, it is a disaster

loan. It is in our disaster portfolio.

Senator TESTER. And so to qualify for that, the business has to

be shut down or what?

54

Mr. ELMORE. No, they have to be able to demonstrate that there

has been some economic damage that is attributable to the activation.

Senator TESTER. How long does it take to get that loan approved,

on average?

Mr. ELMORE. I think it is probably about a 2-week process, but

don’t hold me to that, please, because I don’t run that program, but

we can get that answer for you.

Senator TESTER. OK.

Mr. ELMORE. We have approved about 70 percent of the applications that have gone through the entire process, I can tell you that.

Senator TESTER. All right. And there are plenty of dollars available?

Mr. ELMORE. Yes, sir. Those are our direct loans. We are generally—our loan products are primarily guaranteed, but that is a

direct loan program.

Senator TESTER. What else is available?

Mr. ELMORE. What else is available is the thousand or so Small

Business Development Centers, the 400, approximately, SCORE

chapters, including e-counseling, the 5 Veterans Business Outreach

Centers that my office funds, and the Veterans Business Development Officers stationed in every SBA District Office to try to help

these men and women understand where that technical assistance

and business planning assistance is available.

Senator TESTER. Is there any money for retraining?

Mr. ELMORE. No, sir, not from us.

Senator TESTER. Is there any money that you know that is out

there for retraining?

Mr. ELMORE. The only retraining funds that I am aware of——

Senator TESTER. Specifically focused on——

Mr. ELMORE [continuing]. Are not in the American government,

it is our British allies.

Senator TESTER. OK. Thank you. Thank you.

Mr. DENNISTON. If I could just jump on your question about Government contracts being too large, in a lot of respects, that is very

true, but I would also submit to you that there are opportunities

for small businesses to play. As an example, we have VA medical

centers in Montana that need construction, renovation. We buy a

lot of services locally, ambulance services, things like that.

The issue for a small business that has never played in the Federal marketplace, in my opinion, is they are overwhelmed by what

they perceive to be the red tape. The best resource and the way

that we help small businesses understand the Government process

is by DOD’s Procurement Technical Assistance Centers. You have

got several in Montana that do a great job at teaching the local

businesses how to do business with the Federal Government and

we rely on their services all the time to teach local businesses how

to break into the Federal marketplace and particularly how to provide us services with VA in Montana.

Senator TESTER. I applaud those efforts, make no mistake about

it. It is not all failure. I am just saying that if you are really concerned—I am not implying that you are not, but I know the size

of the contracts impacts a lot of folks. That is all. I am not saying

55

you do all bad work. You do some darn good work, and I want that

on the record.

Chairman KERRY. Thank you, Senator. Those were good questions and important ones, I think, and if I could just follow up on

one and then we are going to switch to the next panel. Are you all

going to stay to hear some of these business folks, because I think

it would be good for you to hear what they have to say.

Ms. OLIVER. Yes, sir.

Mr. DENNISTON. Yes, sir.

Mr. ELMORE. Yes, sir.

Chairman KERRY. Secondly, I heard you say that you have the

Internet. You put packages out. All of that is well and good, but

I have to tell you from human experience, that is absolutely no

guarantee anybody knows what is in them or that it gets to people.

And so what you have to think about here is this coordinated, inyour-face effort to be proactive that actually sits with people and

gets in a personal way in touch with them, because everything else

gets lost. It really does. That coupled with what Senator Snowe

raised, and I think we have got to really follow up on that, which

is sort of the contracting process per se, and we are going to look

at that very, very hard.

I will leave the record open for the submission of questions by

Members of the Committee for a week and we look forward to your

responses to those. There will be some follow-ups to our own questions. We just don’t have time. Thank you very much.

If I could ask the members of the second panel to come up. Let

me introduce them as they come up. They are all small business

owners, so we particularly welcome them to this reality check.

We have a Boston native. I am pleased to welcome Mr. Louis

Celli, Jr., who is a veteran and the president of Northeast Veterans

Business Resource Center.

Then we will hear from retired U.S. Navy Captain Ann Yahner,

who is the president and general manager of Penobscot Bay Media

out of Maine.

We will also hear testimony from Mr. Bob Hesser, who is the

president and CEO of HI Tech Services, Inc., as well as the CEO

of Allied Technical Services Group.

And finally, we will conclude with the testimony of already introduced by Senator Isakson, Mr. Ted Daywalt, president and CEO of

VetJobs.

So welcome to all of you. Thank you very much for your patience.

We really look forward to your testimony today. Why don’t you lead

off, Mr. Celli. Thanks for being here.

STATEMENT OF LOUIS J. CELLI, JR., PRESIDENT, NORTHEAST

VETERANS BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER, INC., BOSTON,

MASSACHUSETTS

Mr. CELLI. Thank you, Senator Kerry. Boy, this seat is really

warm.

[Laughter.]

Chairman KERRY. Well, it should be.

Mr. CELLI. Good morning, Senators. Thank you for the invitation

to come before you and share my experiences and work within the

veteran business owner community.

56

Senator Kerry, like you, I, too, am from Massachusetts, and like

you, I left the service to start my own business. I am a 22-year veteran of the U.S. Army, a service-disabled veteran, and I started

two businesses. My company, the Northeast Veterans Business Resource Center, is headquartered in Massachusetts and we have recently opened up an office in the Walter Reed Army Medical facility.

We are a nonprofit organization that teaches, coaches, and mentors veterans to start and grow micro-enterprises and small businesses. Over the past 4 years, we have trained over 2,000 veterans

through formal training and have served over 4,000 veterans

through counseling, seminars, and formal classes.

I serve as the vice chairman for the American Legion’s Veterans’

Small Business Task Force and have recently been elected to serve

as the Chairman of the Small Business Administration’s Advisory

Committee on Veterans Business Affairs.

I have been asked for my opinion and to relate my experiences

regarding the challenges that veterans experience while trying to

start small businesses, and specifically examples of Guard and Reserve business owners who have suffered damages to their business

as a result of military deployment, and what recommendations I

might have to help our veteran community.

One of our clients owns a computer repair store in Boston. His

story is probably the most common. He received notification that

he was being deployed about a week prior to his activation. His

wife was the principal owner and she couldn’t afford to replace him

during his deployment at the going rate for a senior engineer of

$70,000 to $80,000. So what they decided to do was to close the

business until he returned. Like me, he believed that when he returned, there would be some kind of Government program in place

to assist him which would give him—which gave he and his wife

a sense of solace while he was gone. It is what made them comfortable while he was away.

While he was away, the bills kept coming in because he still

owed the money that he had taken out to support this business,

and his income from the military was significantly lower than his

small business income. He and his wife began to fall behind on

their payments. They suffered credit damage when he was deployed, and when he returned, he tried to get a loan from every

available disaster and commercial loan program, but was denied

due to poor credit.

Another one of our clients faces a different problem. He and his

partner started a business together. Our client deployed for more

than a year. When he returns, the business partner had incurred

debt due to his absence while trying to sustain the business. The

partner who had remained was growing the business based on the

existing clients and then that year’s worth of recruiting efforts, and

now the question that faces them is who owns what? How do they

reconcile an equal division of that business with one person gone

and the other person working for a complete year? Who has what

debt?

Senator Kerry, Senator Snowe, Congress and specifically this

committee have been working on veterans’ business owners’ issues

for years—Public Law 106–50, 108–183, Executive Order 13360,

57

and most recently Public Law 109–461. In my opinion, I don’t think

we need more laws to try to help veteran business owners. I think

we just need to enforce the ones that we have. More funding will

definitely help. We don’t nearly have the funding needed to serve

the veterans who require services now that we see.

And Public Law 106–50, it was complicated. It was intricate, but

it was very well written. I have had many spirited discussions with

my colleagues, many of whom are here today, and basically there

are 7 parts to 106–50 which were all designed to work independently while working toward a common goal. Each of the entities

created by 106–50, the SBA Office for Veteran Business Development, the VA Center for Veteran Enterprise, the SBA Advisory

Committee, the Veterans Corporation, the Veterans Representative

for SCORE, and all of the others were all supposed to work cooperatively together for the common goal of assisting veteran business owners. They were supposed to support each other while

working together.

Public Law 106–50 set in motion a four-year plan, that at the

pinnacle of the 4th year, all of these agencies were supposed to coalesce and be working together, supporting each other so that they

might have a greater population of veterans as a team. Instead,

none of these entities worked together. None of them worked as a

team and they simply just coexisted, going in their own way. If

there had been an administrator or some kind of oversight to 106–

50, a single entity with the sole purpose of making sure that the

separate entities and organizations not only complied with the letter of the law but also the spirit and intention, as well, I believe

that these separate parts would have been thriving by now rather

than individually struggling along.

In my opinion, again, we just don’t necessarily need more laws.

We need to enforce the ones we have and work harder—that you

have worked hard to produce in the first place. And by the way,

I did mention funding, right? Funding is important.

As you seek to assist veteran business owners, I ask only that

you consider adequate funding for training and assistance, as was

mentioned earlier, implement a veterans’ direct loan program to assist veterans who wish to start businesses, and invest in a Guard

and Reserve deployment business care program that will train, prepare, and support veteran business owners who are called up by

our country to defend our Constitution of the United States of

America.

I would be happy to assist with any detailed suggestions for

these recommendations should your Committee request to pursue

them further, and I stand ready with myself, my company, and any

of my resources to support this Committee in any way necessary.

Thank you for the time today.

Chairman KERRY. Thank you, Mr. Celli. We appreciate it.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Celli follows:]

58

59

60

Chairman KERRY. Captain Yahner.

STATEMENT OF CAPT. ANN S. YAHNER, USN (RET.), PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER, PENOBSCOT BAY MEDIA,

LLC, CAMDEN, MAINE

Capt. YAHNER. Good morning, Senator Kerry, Senator Snowe. I

am Ann Yahner. I am the resident and majority owner of Penobscot Bay Media. We are an IT company with strengths in geographic information systems, Web development, interactive distance learning, and film and video, and we are located on the magnificent coast of Maine.

In addition to other contract vehicles that we have in place, we

are one of the 43 prime contractors that was awarded the Veterans

Technology GWAC, and we are the only company that was awarded in New England. Our Vets GWAC partners, many of whom are

veterans and disabled veterans, come from all over the nation, including the same States as five Members of this Committee.

I want you to know that because of this contract that we have

been awarded, I finally feel confident that as a company, we can

provide a benefits package to our employees that they need and deserve, especially in the areas of medical, dental, and short-term disability insurance. And also because of this contract, I anticipate

that our workforce will probably double in the next 12 to 18

months.

Senator Kerry, like you, I, too, served my country honorably in

the Navy, and as it happens, I was in Vietnam the same year that

you were. As you know, it was a very busy year and a difficult

year——

Chairman KERRY. Are you sure I was there? According to some

people, I wasn’t.

[Laughter.]

Capt. YAHNER. Oh, you were there. You were there. It was a particularly difficult year, I am sure for you, and it certainly was for

this very young, naive, idealistic 23-year-old nurse who got a real

wake-up call real quickly.

Because my husband and I are both veterans, my partners and

I have started a program where we are hiring qualified veterans

and include many of the people, Maine National Guard and Reservists, who are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, there

are four soldiers right now that if they come back in April, they

have interviews for one of our initiatives.

In conjunction with other IT companies in our area, we are working with the University of Maine to develop training and certification programs to align skill sets with current needs of information technology. We have also developed a really nice relationship

with many of the State agencies, as well as the local town council

of Camden, to work toward meeting some of these goals with economic development. The Reservists and the National Guard that I

am particularly looking at in our company are those that are in engineering battalions because they have the background for GIS and

mapping and we have a very strong initiative in spatially intelligent robotic areas and they would be good to work in that area.

Now, as it pertains to this hearing, once I saw what the topic

was, I canvassed the SDVOs and veteran-owned companies to try

61

to find out what two major obstacles we all felt we had to do business with the Federal Government.

First, the Congress, led by this Committee, needs to make

SDVOs equal to 8(a) businesses by making it possible for a contracting officer to award sole-source contracts to qualified SDVOs

on the same grounds as is currently permitted for 8(a) businesses.

A contracting officer may make a sole-source contract noncompetitive award to an 8(a) business without completing any justification

paperwork. He need only believe the 8(a) is capable of performing

the work

In addition, an award to an 8(a) cannot be protested. However,

in the case of an SDVO, the contracting officer must investigate

and determine that there are no other SDVOs that claim they can

do the work. Otherwise, a time-consuming competition must be

conducted. He must complete a justification and approval document

and consider the risk of potential protests of the award and take

whatever necessary precautions to ensure he can withstand such

protests.

I might also add that we have found that when we talk to contracting officers, we are educating the contracting officers because

they know very little about the set-aside program at all. That is a

little discouraging and, I think, needs to be corrected in that area

of training about this program.

And the other thing I might add that I didn’t have in my testimony, I went through and looked in the past 2006 all of the contracts that were awarded to SDVOs. It is a little discouraging for

me as an IT company to sit here and see that most of these awards

are going to construction, roof repairs, medical equipment, custodial and janitorial services. I don’t see a lot of things going to IT,

and hopefully the Vets GWAC will solve that problem.

The second area that I want to bring up is accountability, and

this has been touched on a little bit. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I

am a very practical business woman. When I and my management

team fail to achieve our business objectives, we don’t expect to get

a bonus or any kind of accolades. Likewise, when the senior management team of any agency doing business with the Federal Government does not even come close to meeting their goals, they need

to be held accountable, and that accountability must have negative

consequences. It must have some teeth—be it an entry in a performance evaluation or a fine. I don’t really care as long as there

is some accountability. When there is no accountability and there

is no enforcement of regulations that are already in place, then it

is just business as usual and the SDVO set-aside program will continue to suffer.

So in my opinion, if these two major points are not corrected, all

the initiative and hard work and support of the various veterans

groups, the GSA and the SBA will be for nothing and a great opportunity for veterans and disabled veterans could be lost.

Now, Penobscot Bay Media is like a thousand other small companies that are the backbone of my State and the Nation’s economy.

My understanding, as has been pointed out, is this program was

put in place to help the veteran who chose to wear a uniform and

was injured in the defense of this Nation. It was to help small businesses grow, partner with other small businesses, hire more emVerDate 11-MAY-2000 08:20 Dec 12, 2007 Jkt 037146 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\37146.TXT DianeA PsN: DianeA
62

ployees, provide good salary and benefits, bring Federal money into

communities, and increase economic development in our States. If

you don’t give the service-disabled veteran an equal playing field

with other set-aside programs, one of this will happen and the program will not be successful.

And finally, the service-disabled veteran deserves at the very

least to have parity with the other set-aside programs. Unlike all

the others, the service-disabled set-aside is the only program that

is earned. It is earned by long separations from our family, missing

important life events, lost income from our business, and literally

fighting and many times being injured in our service to our country. And as one man quoted, ‘‘Veterans deserve consideration above

and beyond anyone else in America,’’ and I think that is extremely

poignant right now.

I, too, will take any questions anybody has.

Chairman KERRY. Thank you very much for important testimony.

We appreciate it. Thank you for your service, also.

[The prepared statement of Capt. Yahner follows:]

63

64

65

Chairman KERRY. Mr. Hesser.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT HESSER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND PRESIDENT, HI TECH SERVICES, INC., AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ALLIED TECHNICAL SERVICES GROUP, LLP,

HERNDON, VIRGINIA

Mr. HESSER. Morning, Chairman Kerry, Ranking Member

Snowe. Let me first thank you for the opportunity to come before

you today to share my views of Federal procurement policy. I am

an executive member of the Vet Force, formerly the Task Force of

Veteran Entrepreneurship. However, my comments today are mine.

While the framers of Public Law 106–50 did a good job on setting

up the program in 1999 to assist all veterans interested in starting

or expanding their own small businesses, it wasn’t until the Veterans Benefits Act of 2003, section 308, that a Federal Procurement Program for Veterans was created. Under Section 308, contracting officers were to be given authority to restrict competition

or make sole-source awards for procurements to service-disabled

veteran-owned businesses. Nonetheless, today, the simplified procedures used to sole source and set aside 8(a) and HUB Zone procurements do not exist for SDVOBs.

I believe that the FAR Council’s and the SBA’s joint efforts to effectuate section 308 did, in fact, cause greater confusion. They created additional subparts of the CFRs and FARs that do not reflect

what is in Public Law 108–183.

To encourage greater Federal agency participation in the SDVOB

procurement program, the President issued 13360, which we have

heard about here. Executive Order 13360 did heighten the awareness throughout the Federal Government and to large business

contractors, I think sometimes to the contractors more than to the

government.

My entire adult life has involved service to the Federal Government. I am a retired Navy Master Chief. I was a senior Federal

Government employee, left as a GM–14, and a Government contractor. During my involvement, I have learned that a very high

percentage of Government employees possess a collective mindset

supporting the corporate good. I think they are good people. They

try to help us.

Government employees working with contractors build business

relationships like anybody else. Some of their relationships last

many years. Of course, each contracting officer knows the contractor who is timely, the contractor with reasonable prices, and in

what action each contractor is at their best. The CO contracts the

contractor to get what their agency customer needs.

When a new requirement is brought to their attention that is not

within the scope of existing contracts, the CO wants to use the

most efficient, effective, and lowest-cost means to put a new contract in place. Their customer needs a contract created in order to

carry out the mission. If the required product or service can be provided by a small business, the CO will first consider the scope of

existing small business contracts.

Second, they will consider contractors with whom they already

work. This includes large business with an existing subcontracting

66

relationship with a small business capable of fulfilling the requirement.

Third, they are likely to consider inquiring the GSA schedule system, known as GSA Advantage. They will not consider a servicedisabled veteran-owned business, sole source or set-aside. They will

work with SDVOBs also certified as 8(a)s or HUB Zone businesses.

Why? Because they can award to the other two without any hassle

or additional work and can take credit through double- or triplecounting of goal accounting. I believe the goals, if you actually look

at the statistics on the Web sites and the pdf’s from GSA, you can

identify contracts that this $5 million contract was awarded to a

service-disabled veteran, they are identifying exactly the same contract number down here awarded to a SDVOB. Whoosh, $10 million.

I have spent thousands of dollars and thousands of hours over

the past 6 years chasing leads, creating new markets, educating

government employees on new technology, and trusting that new

legislation will end inequities within the procurement system.

These inequities still exist.

Several opportunities have been created by our marketing or

were identified for us by prospective Federal customers. When the

customer took the requirement to a contract office, the contracting

officers have, in every case, found reasons for not awarding as a

sole source or not setting it aside for SDVOBs. All contracts awarded to us have been full and open, small business simplified acquisitions, or GSA delivery orders. We have three GSA Schedules and

are service-disabled veteran-owned small business subcontractors

on nine extremely large contracts held by large Federal contractors.

We have concentrated on opportunities with us being the prime. In

most cases, subcontracting work from a large business comes from

the small business finding the Federal work and using the prime’s

contract. We do not pay a prime contractor a percentage of our

work if we can possibly get the contract ourselves. We do not believe in the small contractor always waiting for the big contractor

to give it to them.

I have included a written request to Congress to close loopholes

in the GSA Schedule process wherein large businesses are allowed

to take away business intended for small businesses. This has existed for many years.

There are some Congressional actions that will streamline the

Federal Procurement Program for Veterans. In summary, assist the

Vet Force and veterans’ service organizations in changing legislation critically needed so we can move forward. Get rid of the ‘‘Rule

of Two.’’ This has been mentioned a couple of times already.

Two, program oversight is vital. Ensure the SBA, OMB, GSA,

and other pertinent agencies report to Congress each agency’s

quarterly actions taken in support of the Federal Procurement Program for Veterans, their compliance with reporting requirements

such as 106–50 and 108–183. We know there in 106–50, there are

several things that haven’t been done from GSA, from SBA.

Program execution must be simple. If contracting officers are to

be held responsible, they should be given the authority and not

burdened by poor policy.

67

Since I have a couple of seconds left here, I wanted to point out

one thing. I work a lot with service-disabled veteran-owned businesses. They call me because I have been in the business for a long

time, et cetera. There are some, like myself, who really can’t work

40—I cannot work a 40-hour week. I work 60 to 80 hours, but I

work in the middle of the night and everything else. I have had 24

operations since 1982. I am continually in the hospital, out, in, out.

I am still managing my company, and my HI Tech Services, the

only employee in there is me, and I don’t always get a salary. My

other company I work with, I am CEO. We have contacted about

400 service-disabled veteran-owned companies and we have an understanding with them that they can provide break fix on PCs, et

cetera within 30 minutes’ driving time of every VA hospital. We are

trying to help them get going. We have been somewhat successful.

So I have two companies. It sounds great. One is by myself and

the other one, we now have, I think, nine employees that we are

providing to the Government. I just want to say for myself, it is

sometimes difficult to work for a service-disabled veteran. We do

need some good parity with the 8(a)s and with the HUB Zone, and

I am more than willing to help with anybody, help write similar

legislation.

Chairman KERRY. Well, we will do that. Thank you very, very

much.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hesser follows:]

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

Chairman KERRY. Mr. Daywalt.

STATEMENT OF THEODORE L. DAYWALT, CHIEF EXECUTIVE

OFFICER AND PRESIDENT, VETJOBS, MARIETTA, GEORGIA

Mr. DAYWALT. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Senator Kerry,

Ranking Member Senator Snowe, staff members. It is a pleasure

to be here before the Committee. You will have to excuse my voice.

I just had a major neck operation, and unfortunately, they put the

plate right behind my vocal cords. Some days are good, some are

bad.

Chairman KERRY. If you hadn’t have said anything, we wouldn’t

have known.

Mr. DAYWALT. Well, thank you. It is an honor to be here. I would

ask that my written testimony be entered into the record. I appreciate your doing that. In my written testimony, I present——

Chairman KERRY. Let me correct myself. We are going to leave

the record open for two weeks, so I stand corrected.

Mr. DAYWALT. In my written testimony, I present some suggestions from the position of being a businessman for nearly 30 years

as well as a drilling Navy Reservist. The most important of my

suggestions, which you have already heard several times here

today, is the Rule of Two needs to be eliminated and Federal contractors need to have the ability to sole source directly to small veteran-owned businesses.

However, I want to bring to your attention the second half of my

written testimony that discusses the new DOD policy extending

call-ups for the Guard and Reserve. Corporate America is not going

to put up with this. I have been in corporate America. I have run

billion-dollar operations, million-dollar operations. It is not going to

happen.

At a press conference on January 11, Dr. David Chu, the Under

Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, was quoted as

saying, ‘‘The fact that some with previous Iraq experience will end

up spending more than 24 months on active duty is no big deal.’’

It is a big deal.

Since the announcement of the new policy, I have had the opportunity to talk to dozens of HR managers, senior executives from

different corporations throughout the United States, and many of

them brand-name companies, but they want to remain confidential

because of the USERRA and other laws, but uniformly, they say

they cannot support the new policy because it puts their human resource managers and their recruiters in a very precarious situation. It is a quandary that they have got to face.

One senior HR executive in a major company commented that in

light of the new policy, they will continue to support current employees who have been activated, but will no longer hire members

of the Guard and Reserve, and that is pretty uniform. All seem to

agree with that position.

Another explained it to me this way. If I have three final candidates for a position who are all equally qualified and one mentions that they are a member of the Guard or Reserve, I now have

two final equally qualified candidates.

You see, companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to run an efficient and profitable operation and they can’t

85

do that if they cannot count on having their employees, their

human capital, present, readily available to work. While for many

this is just common sense, those making the decisions on how to

utilize the Guard and Reserve at DOD seem to have missed the

point of what corporate America is saying.

This week, I received an e-mail from a Master Sergeant who is

a recruiter for the National Guard in Fort Lee, Virginia. Here is

the concern this recruiter expressed.

As an AGR soldier with a spouse that is a TPU member, I find this new policy

very disturbing. How can our government ever conclude that it is okay to add more

uncertainty to serving in the Reserve? I recently interviewed a soldier who chose

not to affiliate with the Guard because of her fear that her employer would not support her service.

And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Last week, I met a Navy Reserve Commander who had 7 years

active duty and the rest of it in the Navy Reserve, a total of 16

years’ service, and he is going to resign his commission because of

this new policy. He is a financial analyst with a major corporation

and he is up for a promotion. He can’t take that promotion if he

is going to be called up for 24 months. In fact, when I used to be

president of different companies, I would have had to quit the Navy

Reserve because my board would never have tolerated me being

gone for 24 months. I couldn’t have been the president.

This is appalling, but more appalling is what corporate America

is quietly saying. Following the policy announcement, Workforce

Magazine, which is read by a lot of senior executives and HR managers, ran a poll the week of January 15 that asked, ‘‘If you as an

employer knew that a military Reservist or National Guard member could be called up and taken away from their job for an indeterminate amount of time, would you still hire the citizen soldier?’’

The results are staggering. Only 29 percent said yes. Fifty-four percent said no and 17 percent said, don’t know. I think the 17 percent

were afraid they might be identified, so they said, ‘‘don’t know.’’

But the fact that there is even one employer that would say no disturbs me.

This new policy will hurt veteran-owned companies, because

guess where a lot of the service-disabled veterans work at, and the

ones that get called up, the Guard and Reserve. They work in veteran-owned companies.

This policy is the straw that is going to break the back of corporate America’s support for our Guard and Reserve system, which

has worked very well for the last 100 years. Without corporate

America’s support, the citizen soldier system cannot work, and that

is a big deal.

That concludes my testimony. I appreciate your time. If you have

any questions, I would be more than happy to answer them.

Chairman KERRY. That is very important testimony.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Daywalt follows:]

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

Chairman KERRY. I think Senator Snowe and I really take to

heart what you have just said and I couldn’t agree with you more.

I mean, I have heard this from people all over the country. It is

just a terrible burden being placed on folks right now and it is really complicating a whole bunch of things, not the least of which is

how you sort of deploy properly to meet the security needs of the

country without unraveling all the rest of this fabric.

Mr. DAYWALT. To add to what you said, Senator, I have talked

to several TAGs. In fact, this afternoon, I fly out for the National

Guard Bureau’s Family Service Conference out in Phoenix. I am a

speaker out there. Several of the TAGs told me—that is the Adjutant Generals—they are already receiving resignations from their

junior officers because they can’t be called up for 24 months and

still maintain a meaningful career.

Dr. Chu at DOD said there are a lot of people that get called up

the second or third time voluntarily, and I agree, that technically

is a very true statement. But they volunteer for the second and

third time because corporate America won’t hire them so long as

they are eligible for recall time and time again, and that is why

they volunteer. We are getting career part-timers because they

can’t get a decent job with businesses in this country, and that is

wrong. I feel that because I did 23 years in that system, but that

was a different environment. If the rules today applied, I would

have quit, too.

Chairman KERRY. Let me ask each of you—Captain Yahner, do

you want to say something?

Capt. YAHNER. I just want to look at this from a different angle.

The Congress made a decision after Vietnam to put a lot of support

troops into the Reserves because of troop reduction requirements,

and it wasn’t a problem with the Reserves as it is now because

they didn’t get called up that much prior to Desert Storm. Now

that we see that this is really creating a big problem across the

board, why don’t they increase the active duty number of

people——

Chairman KERRY. Well, we are about to. We are——

Capt. YAHNER [continuing]. And bring some of these things back

into the active service so you don’t have this bottleneck.

Chairman KERRY. We are going to do that. We are going to do

that. I mean, I recognize—you may recall, I proposed—maybe you

don’t recall in the course of these things, but I proposed in 2004

as part of the campaign that we needed an augmentation in the

Marines and Army by at least 40,000, and of course I was deemed

wrong and it was a ridiculous concept. Now I see we are talking

about 90,000 and they are finally admitting what everybody knew

back then. So hopefully, we are going to get that job done, but look,

rest assured, that is not going to solve this immediate problem.

Capt. YAHNER. No, it isn’t. No, it isn’t——

Chairman KERRY. That is a long-term piece, because it is going

to take us time to bring them in, time to force it up, time to——

Capt. YAHNER. Absolutely.

Chairman KERRY [continuing]. Time to do it, and you are not

going to see those folks in the service for a couple of years.

Capt. YAHNER. Absolutely, but I doubt very seriously that we are

going to have world peace, either, so——

101

Chairman KERRY. We are going to have a long——

Capt. YAHNER [continuing]. This is probably going to continue to

go on.

Chairman KERRY. Well, it is going to be very difficult for it to

continue to go on even in that context with the current Reserve

structure.

Let me ask each of you very quickly, and when I say quickly, because we are going to have to break up here in a couple of minutes,

and I want to get—let me just ask Dawn, Tracy, Omar, and Patricia, do any of you want to share anything quickly about your experiences? Is there something you want to say based on what you

have heard here? You don’t have to. I am not pressing you into

being a witness, but I want to give you the opportunity since you

took the time to come here today.

You did want to say something? Sure. We can find a chair for

you, I think, can’t we? Just identify who you are so the record has

that.

Ms. HALFAKER. My name is Dawn Halfaker. I am a small business owner, service-disabled veteran business owner. I would just

like to echo what the panel said. I mean, I was very impressed

with all of your testimonies. I would just like to reiterate, there

was a question that came up, I think it was in the first panel, and

it was something about the nature of: Are these businesses capable

of performing the services that the Federal Government needs, and

particularly let us look at DOD.

I would just like to reiterate the fact that not only are we capable, but we are the ones doing it right now. A lot of my classmates—I was a 2001 graduate at the U.S. Military Academy, and

a lot of my classmates right now are getting out of the service.

They have done three, possibly four tours in Iraq now, and I have

lost a lot of friends. I have seen a lot of my classmates die, unfortunately.

So what we are faced with is a situation where we are getting

out and we want to continue our service, but we don’t know how

to do that. So what I have created is a small business which I really think is a vehicle to enable them to continue to serve—to enable

any veteran who wants to continue to serve, and so we are really

targeting our business within DOD.

But I would just like to say on that note that we do have the

experience and the skills and the abilities, the motivation and the

sense of duty to perform these services for the Federal Government

and right now particularly DOD. So just to reiterate what all they

have said and to answer your question, sir, yes, we do have the

skills and we are ready. We just need the ability to get our foot in

the door and get access to these Federal contracts.

Chairman KERRY. Dawn, just quickly, what is your business?

Ms. HALFAKER. Sir, we are a national security consulting firm.

Chairman KERRY. How many people are in it?

Ms. HALFAKER. Right now, we have nine people.

Chairman KERRY. You started that?

Ms. HALFAKER. Yes, sir.

Chairman KERRY. How long has it been going on?

Ms. HALFAKER. We have been going since March of 2006, so just

10 months.

102

Chairman KERRY. March of 2006. That is great. What was your

initial capitalization funding? Where did that come from?

Ms. HALFAKER. It came from me.

Chairman KERRY. OK. And are you interested in trying to get either SBA involvement in this routine or do you want to just go

straight for the contract and stay free and clear of that?

Ms. HALFAKER. Well, I think right now, we are really having to

strategize where we spend our time and energy. Do I spend my

time and energy at the SBA office, which does have a lot of resources, or do I leverage off of other contacts that I have, my network, and try and get in and start actually going after contracts

while trying to create my infrastructure and get all those necessary

things like the GSA Schedule, all those things that take quite a bit

of time, and actually, you are supposed to have been in business

for a certain period of time before you can even apply for those

things.

So, I mean, there really are a lot of obstacles, and not to say that

there is not a lot of hard work on the initiatives being done to overcome those, but I just really believe that we need to somehow

bridge this gap.

Chairman KERRY. We could facilitate it, in your judgment, considerably?

Ms. HALFAKER. I believe so.

Chairman KERRY. What year were you at West Point?

Ms. HALFAKER. Two-thousand-one.

Chairman KERRY. Two-thousand-one. Where were you serving?

Ms. HALFAKER. I served over in Korea, and then I was stationed

at Fort Stewart, Georgia, and deployed with Third Infantry Division to Iraq.

Chairman KERRY. Where in Iraq?

Ms. HALFAKER. Bakuba. Military police officer.

Chairman KERRY. Well, thank you so, so much for your service

and for the comments this morning. That was really very, very

helpful, very important.

Ms. HALFAKER. Thank you. Thank you all for your time.

Chairman KERRY. It is very important.

Senator SNOWE. I, too, want to express my admiration and gratitude for your service to our Nation, and now you are doing it in

another dimension and we want to make it easier for you. Thank

you for your very important testimony.

Ms. HALFAKER. Yes, ma’am.

Senator SNOWE. Thank you.

Chairman KERRY. Thanks a lot.

Do you want to add something, I gather, Tracy?

Mr. REEP. Yes, if I could, please.

Chairman KERRY. Sure. Please.

Mr. REEP. Is the seat hot?

Chairman KERRY. She cooled it down.

[Laughter.]

Mr. REEP. Yes, she did. My name is Tracy Reep and I am the

president of Disabled Veterans Office Suppliers. I want to—I agree

with many things that have been stated here today, but in particular as a Texas Army National Guardsman and previously a corporate HR person, a recruiter specifically, a lot of what Mr.

103

Daywalt said rang true to me in my personal experience prior to

being called up.

Obviously, as a Guardsman, we speculated that that was going

to happen in late 2002 and I was beginning to feel the heat in my

corporate position and therefore made a decision to step away from

that corporate position and start my own recruiting firm in hopes

that that did not come to fruition, and also in the instance that it

did, I didn’t want to leave my company in a lurch. I wanted to be

able to prepare my replacement and then attempt to move on in

my own endeavor and hopefully not leave that company in a negative position.

In hindsight, I don’t necessarily think I should have been put in

that position. I was. I think I made the right decision at the time

and don’t regret that, but I do think there was a lot of pressure

early on prior to the beginning of the conflict. I can only imagine

what it is like now within the corporate world.

Chairman KERRY. Thank you for that observation. It is helpful.

We are going to have to wrap up in a moment or two. Let me

ask each of the panelists, your testimony is important and we have

it, but give us sort of the shorthand, you know, 30 seconds, 1

minute, the biggest obstacle that you see to SDVOBs getting at

these contracts, or veterans getting their businesses going one way

or the other. Just a short hit. What is our biggest priority here in

this Committee, in your judgment? Let me go down. Mr. Daywalt,

why don’t you lead off. We will just go down the table.

Mr. DAYWALT. Personally, you have a mentality that has to be

corrected within the Government bureaucracy. You have got to get

rid of the Rule of Two, allow sole sourcing.

The other biggest problem with people starting a company up is

called capitalization, and for the Government to step in and say,

I am going to help you 6 months, 12 months, 18 months after you

are out, that isn’t when we need the help. When I capitalized this

company, I put my own money into it because there wasn’t anybody else. Then I got investors later on. But getting financial help

right up at the front is when entrepreneurs need the help. After

we are up for 18 months, I really don’t need Government help if

I have been up for 18 months. I have already succeeded.

Chairman KERRY. OK. Mr. Hesser.

Mr. HESSER. Ditto on the Rule of Two. It is the number one biggest problem. The other one is I really believe that oversight, had

we had the oversight on 106–50 from the very beginning, you even

commented: Is there any one thread, any one person, any one thing

for all three of them getting together for DOD? That is what is

really needed, is——

Chairman KERRY. The coordination between——

Mr. HESSER [continuing]. Coordination and the fact, are they

doing it?

Chairman KERRY. Thank you. Captain.

Capt. YAHNER. To understand——

Chairman KERRY. Where did you serve? Where were you?

Capt. YAHNER. I was on the hospital ship Sanctuary, spent a little time getting bombed at, shot at in Danang for a while. I was

up in the DMZ with the Third Med Battalion until we got bombed

104

and my CO wanted me back. And I spent 2 weeks in an Army

MASH unit, believe it or not, nothing like the television show——

Chairman KERRY. That is too bad.

[Laughter.]

Capt. YAHNER [continuing]. Where I was promoted Lieutenant,

and I had the honor, I suppose, of saying that I was promoted with

Army Captain’s bars.

Chairman KERRY. Good for you.

Capt. YAHNER. Anyway, it was an interesting year.

Chairman KERRY. Good for you. Congratulations.

Capt. YAHNER. I guess. I would say reduce the restrictions. Understand that SDVOs are as capable as any other set-aside. And

then hold people accountable for meeting those goals, and if they

don’t, put some teeth behind them, but make them meet the goals.

Chairman KERRY. Got it. Mr. Celli.

Mr. CELLI. Thank you, Senator Kerry. First, I want to say it has

been an honor to be here today, and if I could leave with some

parting comments, training, cooperation, planning, and funding. I

think that the planning on the part of the Guard and Reserve

member needs to start 18 to 24 months prior to them even being

notified that they are getting ready to leave. If a business owner

makes a commitment to become a Guard and Reserve member or

vice-versa, they need to start to prepare early and they can only

do that with the support and funding from Congress and organizations such as have already been created can carry that plan out.

Chairman KERRY. I want to thank all of you. I don’t know if Senator Snowe has questions or comments. Let me just for myself close

out by saying to all of you that I want to join with Senator Snowe,

and I am sure she wants to do this, to respond to each of those

things that you have just put forward. We will put together legislation. I am confident we can pass it in short order out of here. We

will do everything we can to respond to those concerns that you articulated. I think they are legitimate. I think they will have an impact. It is imperative that we facilitate this, that we make it as

simple as possible.

We have a lot of folks who are going to be coming back, and ultimately, a whole bunch of folks. But there are more yet to go over.

This thing is not over. It is not going to end in the near term and

the War on Terror itself is going to go on for a long time, and so

the demand is going to be there. We have got to get this right and

we are determined to do that and we will do our part here in this

Committee.

Senator Snowe.

Senator SNOWE. Thank you. I, too, want to express my appreciation for the collective testimony. I think it is going to be very useful

in helping us to shape a package to address these particular concerns. I mean, it has been an ongoing challenge on the 3 percent.

And also, I think, the prejudice within the agencies in how they

evaluate and how they approach small business, I think that has

been, unfortunately, one of the dimensions to this problem. There

has been a natural tendency to resist in opening the doors for small

business within the agencies, which it seems to me would be the

most useful path to assisting those who have served our Nation so

honorably, as demonstrated here today by these men and women,

105

and it is just such an impressive group. Thank you all for your

service to our Nation, as well. We certainly can do better.

I know that Senator Kerry and I will be working along with the

Members of the Committee. I think there won’t be much difference

or disagreements with respect to how we should proceed to overcome some of these barriers.

I know on the sole source, we had included it in the last reauthorization, but as I said, it didn’t get beyond the Senate, regrettably. So we are going to go back and try to work through these

issues, but I truly appreciate—and Mr. Daywalt, you mentioned

about the National Guard and that 24-month call-up. I deeply regret that it was characterized as no big deal. I can tell you, in my

State, it is a big deal and it is a real hardship. So I am just sorry

that that was conveyed and that statement was even uttered.

Chairman KERRY. I concur and we thank you all very, very

much, and for all the veterans here, we thank every single one of

you for your service. Take care. God bless.

We stand adjourned. Thank you.

[Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

(107)

APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

108

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII

I first thank Senator Kerry for his kind invitation to participate in this important

hearing. Senator Kerry and I have worked together in the past on issues related

to veterans—especially service-connected disabled veterans—and small business. I

very much look forward to continuing our efforts in this area.

In 2003, Congress recognized that Federal agencies were not meeting the 3 percent governmentwide goal, established in Public Law 106–50, for procurement from

service-disabled veteran-owned small business. As a result, Congress enacted Public

Law 108–183 to provide additional opportunities for service-disabled veterans to

contract with the government by authorizing a Federal contracting officer to award

sole source contracts to small businesses owned and controlled by service-disabled

veterans.

However, the government has not come close even once to meeting that 3 percent

goal. This hearing, which will review the Administration s efforts to comply with

the law, should give us a good understanding of how we can increase Federal contracting opportunities for small businesses owned and controlled by service-connected disabled veterans.

We must make certain that we are doing everything within our power to provide

contracting opportunities for service-disabled veterans. These veterans selflessly set

aside their lives in service to the Nation. The Federal Government must fulfill the

minimal goal established by Congress to give them opportunities to advance their

small businesses.

It is also important that we look at the needs of the brave men and women now

serving on active duty, especially those who have been mobilized from the Guard

and Reserves. The economic impact on the Guard and Reserve members who own

and operate small businesses is immense. I will be particularly interested in learning what is being done to help these individuals.

We have a tremendous obligation to those who serve in our armed forces. Entrepreneurial education for disabled service members who are transitioning from military to civilian life and want information on starting a small business is critically

important. We must make certain that each servicemember is receiving high quality

assistance.

One phrase that is used repeatedly in this area is ‘‘seamless transition.’’ I understand this to mean that, for the servicemember, the shift from military to civilian

life should be as smooth as possible. Achieving this result should always be an important outcome, but never more so than during a time of war when so many

servicemembers need assistance in dealing with the impact of military service on

their lives. All soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines, including the men and women

who are coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan, should have nothing less than a

seamless reintegration into civilian society.

I look forward to reviewing the testimony of all of those presenting today. I will

be particularly interested in the input we get from the panel of veteran small business owners. Their firsthand experience will help us understand what best might

be done to serve the needs of our Nation’s veterans.

109

110

111

112

113

PREPARED STATEMET OF HON. MARK L. PRYOR, A U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS

I’d like to thank Chairman Kerry and Ranking Member Snowe for having this

hearing today which will assess small business programs for veterans and reservists. Your leadership on this Committee and this issue are highly valued. The topic

of this hearing is quite timely and it is important that we review our small business

programs to ensure services for our veterans remain intact and robust. With thousands of veterans re-entering the workforce and looking for an appropriate spot in

the marketplace, it is vital that we evaluate the current state of our outreach and

support to them to ensure that we are providing the greatest benefit to these honorable men and women. I am pleased that the Committee has brought together so

many leaders in the government and private marketplace that can provide us with

better insight into the effectiveness and/or ineffectiveness of our current small business programs for veterans. I look forward to hearing from these witnesses today,

and working together in a bipartisan fashion to provide the best remedies and methods to serve our veterans.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE, A U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA

• Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important hearing to consider the

effectiveness of the Federal Government’s small business assistance programs for

our veterans and reservists.

• Our veterans have served and sacrificed for their country, and they deserve

their government’s help in finding meaningful and productive employment as they

transition from military to civilian life.

• Likewise, those reservists who are self-employed small business owners who’ve

been called to active duty deserve the help needed to keep their businesses established while they’re deployed.

• I strongly support the programs Congress has enacted to help spur entrepreneurial activity among our veterans, particularly through awarding Federal contracts to small businesses owned by service-disabled veterans, and I’m committed

to making sure these programs are strong and effective.

• I look forward to the insights and expertise on these programs provided by today’s panelists, and I hope that we will be able to translate what we learn today

into effective results for our veterans and reservists. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

RESPONSE BY SCOTT F. DENNISTON TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question 1. We all know that with the current conflict, services for veterans and

disabled veterans will be under an increasing strain. The VA has admirably attempted to meet those needs over the years and I’m sure they will continue to do

so. With that in mind, I have a few questions about how the VA is responding to

the needs of this new group of veterans as small business owners.

Question 1a. What are the current needs of veterans in small business and how

are the needs of these veterans different than previous veterans?

Answer. America’s business base has shifted from manufacturing to a service

economy. Veterans of earlier eras often returned to civilian life and accepted employment with private industry, many times this was lifetime employment. The

older generation of veterans often had 10 years or more of industry experience before starting their own businesses, and therefore often have more detailed knowledge of how the process works from the start.

However, the newer generation of veterans is returning home to a challenging employment reality. Today’s 20-year-old may expect to have many different jobs for

many different employers during their productive work years. Job instability is a

reality for this generation. While their basic information needs remain similar to

previous generations’ (access to capital, and management and technical support),

this generation differs in how they access information; using the Internet, instant

messaging and other electronic sources is common for them.

Our younger veterans need guidance in how to get their businesses started and

in how to go about learning the ropes of Federal procurement. The small business

development centers (SBDC) and the procurement technical assistance centers

(PTAC) are good organizations for helping these young veterans with their questions

and in guiding them through the process. We make frequent referrals to these organizations so that the veterans can get a leg up on how to do business. The challenge

is ensuring that veterans are aware of these services and know how to easily access

these services. The Center for Veterans Enterprise (CVE) has created a data base

of assistance centers to facilitate easy retrieval of this information by veterans seeking to start or expand a business.

Question 1b. In general, what veteran or reserve needs do you see that are not

currently being met?

Answer. The majority of small businesses are frequently capitalized initially

through the owner’s savings or through family members. For veterans, frequent

changes of station, combined with lower pay, leaves them without the substantial

savings or the support network necessary for starting a small business. The most

commonly expressed unmet need for enterprising veterans is access to equity capital

funding, other than loans. Many veterans served by CVE have little or no credit.

They do not have access to the capital necessary to start their businesses. They do

have the technical training and a strong drive to be successful if they are able to

overcome the capitalization problem.

Question 1c. What authority, programs or funding would you need to address

them?

Answer. A veteran’s venture capital type fund could make the difference in whether or not a veteran-owned or service-disabled veteran owned business could be viable. Another area of improvement is a coordinated effort to identify the 22 million

existing veterans, who’ve been out of uniform for awhile and who could benefit from

learning about the Federal veterans entrepreneurship program. It’s difficult to locate these veterans. Last, we need to effectively engage the current generation of

uniformed personnel. The traditional lines of communication have not been successful. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) does not seek to become the Small

Business Administration (SBA) for veterans. We want to work with SBA, with the

Department of Defense (DoD) and with the Department of Labor (DoL) to create an

effective communications strategy that meets the needs of today’s younger, ‘‘wired’’

veterans.

Question 2. You testified that the VA will exceed the SBVOSB contracting 3 percent goal. You have gone from 1.361 percent of Federal contracts going to SDVOSB

2 years ago to an estimated over 3 percent contracting last year.

VA:

FY 04: 1.361 %

FY 05: 2.151 %

FY 06: over 3 %, estimated

132

Question 2a. What did VA do to create greater contracting opportunities for

SDVOSBs?

Answer. With the final numbers for fiscal 2006 now available, we are pleased to

announce that VA exceeded the 3 percent goal, for fiscal 2006, 3.39 percent of VA’s

total procurement dollars went to Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business

(SDVOSB) contracts. Numbers for subcontracting are not yet available for fiscal

2006. VA hopes to see improvement in subcontracting. VA’s Office of Small Business

(OSB) programs and CVE worked directly with the prime contractors in outreach

programs and to publicize SDVOSB opportunities. Our continuous outreach efforts

through meeting with the prime contractors, veteran business conferences and targeted mailings seem to be having a positive effect for SDVOSBs interested in contracting with VA.

Question 2b: What steps were most effective in bringing about this phenomenal

change?

Answer. Our phenomenal results between fiscal 2004 and 2006 are due to a two

pronged approach. First, and foremost, we have to give credit to the exceptional support we have received from VA leadership. Without this support, our efforts would

not be seen as either necessary or important. VA leadership believes strongly in

helping veterans in all aspects, and this includes placing an importance on contracting with veteran owned businesses.

Secondly, VA’s OSB programs played and continue to play an important role in

contracting decisions. OSB often acts as an advocate for veteran owned small businesses (VOSB) and SDVOSBs to the contracting officers. Without this intervention

and participation, these goals could not have been achieved.

Question 3. In the last Congress, we passed new VA procurement procedures that

will significantly increase opportunities for veterans and service disabled veterans

at your department. For the first time, an agency will have the ability to sole source

and set-aside for 2 SDVOSBs on an equal par with other disadvantaged groups. Veterans will also receive a preference in contracting.

Question 3a. How will this legislation make it easier for veterans and SDVOSBs

to contract with your agency?

Answer. Public Law (PL) 109–461 is an important milestone for both VOSBs and

SDVOSBs in contracting with VA. This legislation establishes an order of precedence within VA in which veterans are first priority and it strengthens the sole

source authority. Additionally, the requirement in the law that all VOSBs/SDVOSBs

in the vendor information pages (VIP) data base should be verified to ensure that

they are who they represent themselves to be will make that listing an important

tool for all agencies and contractors wishing to do business with veteran owned companies. It will become a reliable source of businesses that agencies, prime contractors and the general public can use to find veteran owned businesses to fulfill their

needs.

Question 3b. Do you believe that this legislation should be extended to other agencies?

Answer. While VA has no Administration-cleared position on doing so, it is obvious that extending the requirements in PL 109–461 to other Federal agencies would

increase opportunities for VOSBs and SDVOSBs. Under PL 106–50, procurement

goals are set for SDVOSBs, while veterans without disabilities who valiantly served

our country are given no preferences in Federal contracting. Extension of PL 109–

461 would open new doors for VOSBs.

Question 3c. Do you have any additional ideas for legislation which would aid this

effort?

Answer. The Department has not yet implemented PL 109–461 so it is too soon

to suggest other ideas. Some ideas have been proposed in pending bills. Among

these are House Resolution (H.R. 109, the Disabled Veteran Small Business Eligibility Expansion Act of 2007, and Senate (S) 117 the Lane Evans Veterans Health

and Benefits Improvement Act of 2007. Under HR. 109, SDVOSBs would achieve

parity in contracting with the SBA’s 8(a) program. S. 117 would help to provide access to capital for veterans in being able to choose between the housing loan guarantee and a small business loan guaranty. Other suggestions often raised by owners

include establishing set-asides in the General Services Administration (GSA) Federal supply schedules.

Question 4. The Center for Veterans Enterprise, which you lead, is ‘‘designed to

assist veteran entrepreneurs who want to start and expand their businesses in the

Federal and private marketplace.’’ The center also works with SDVOSBs trying to

do procurement with the Federal Government. The SBA, Department of Defense

133

and other agencies also strove to do this. What are you doing to make sure that

your efforts are being coordinated with the efforts of other agencies?

Answer. CVE coordinates and communicates with other Federal agencies both formally and informally. CVE has partnered with SBA, DoD, GSA, and other Federal

agencies to present veterans business conferences, to train contracting personnel,

and alert veterans to upcoming activities.

In 2006, regional conferences were held in Albuquerque, Colorado Springs, Ann

Arbor, Boston, Indian Wells, New York City, St. Louis, Washington, DC, and a National Veterans Small Business Conference was held in Las Vegas. Planning for the

2007 national conference is well-underway with an even greater number of agencies

co-sponsoring the event. These conferences have given small business owners opportunities for training and counseling, and matchmaking with VA and other Federal

customers. In addition, they have afforded VA and other Federal agencies the opportunity to meet with and advise prospective contractors. Volunteers from Federal

agencies and Federal prime contractors have offered to man an answer desk for veterans interested in procurement opportunities with their organizations. CVE maintains lists of these volunteers on the VetBiz.gov Web portal.

RESPONSE BY SCOTT F. DENNISTON TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR JOHN

THUNE

Question 1. I know in my state, local economic development boards are always

looking for economic development opportunities to expand a small town’s tax and

employment base. I know they’d like nothing more than to help local veterans establish businesses in their small towns. Are there any initiatives out there to encourage

a town’s economic development boards to reach out to veterans in the community

to inform them of the opportunities that are available to them through Federal contracting, or at least informing people who walk in the door of an economic development corporation with a business idea that, if they’re a veteran, these tremendous

Federal contracting opportunities are out there for them?

Answer. VA reaching out to SBDCs throughout the United States. This past Fall

VA mailed posters to all the SBDCs and to all PTACs to display in their offices to

inform veterans and others of the opportunities available to veteran owned businesses and how to contact CVE. Additionally, VA refers a large number of veterans

who call regarding starting a small business to the SBDCs in their local areas. VA

has engaged the Council of Better Business Bureaus in discussions about how to

access their network of centers and business owners. In addition, we hope to establish a partnership with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to further expand VA’s

reach.

Question 2. I represent a state with a large number of Native American veterans,

many of whom live on the reservation. Many of our reservation communities in

South Dakota are in dire need of more economic activity. I know there are certain

programs the SBA has established to help Native American small businesses. Do

you see any Native American veterans taking advantage of the contracting opportunities available to them?

Answer. There are excellent opportunities for Native Americans who are also

SDVOSB. We have seen some veterans leveraging their dual status. A good example

of a successful Native American-owned SDVOSB is Metropolitan Enterprises, Inc.

The owner, Tony Jacobs, is a Native American who started out as a small mechanical, heating ventilation and air conditioning contractor. Using his status as an 8(a)

company he gradually built up his resume and began some very smart partnering

and teaming contracts. Building on his SDVOSB status, he worked with CVE to establish a teaming agreement with CCI, Inc., an Alaska-based company that gave the

teaming arrangement the bonding capacity to bid on a prime contract for building

a VA facility. On October 23, 2006, Metropolitan Enterprises, Inc. won a $31 million

prime contract from VA for the construction of a VA facility in Menlo Park, CA. VA

has also conducted outreach conferences in Oklahoma and other communities with

a large veteran population who may also be Native Americans.

Question 3. Since the 3 percent contracting goal is a governmentwide initiative,

it seems likely that there would be a lot of duplicate activity across the Federal Government with regard to this program, and a commensurate amount of difficulty for

a veteran to gather all the useful information that may be out there. Are you observing anything to indicate that veterans are having difficulty due to the vast

amount of information out there that is spread across the Federal Government? Is

there an interagency cooperation initiative that serves as a center for veteran to be

able to gather all the information that they need to start and sustain a small business based on contracting with the Federal Government?

134

Answer. In VA we have worked hard to educate our employees about the services

available to veterans through CVE. Veterans seek assistance first from VA. CVE’s

Web portal is identified on the Department’s home page. This Web portal,

www.VetBiz.qov provides links to all partner organizations involved in supporting

veterans in business. Further, CVE maintains a national call center to serve veterans interested in business ownership and expansion. VA uses the services of the

veterans’ business outreach centers (VBOC), SBDCs and PTACs to assist veterans,

depending upon the nature of their question and the stage of business ownership.

CVE’s services are free to the veterans. SBA funds in part the SBDCs and the

VBOCs. DoD funds the PTACs. We believe this is a sterling example of interagency

cooperation that works to benefit our veterans.

In addition, CVE has established formal partnerships with key agencies, like

GSA, to provide direct support to veterans interested in obtaining Federal supply

schedule contracts. GSA maintains a toll-free assistance line, a robust Web site and

an extensive outreach conference calendar to ensure veterans receive timely and

courteous response to their questions.

To help solve some of the problems that come with interagency cooperation, VA

formed the Executive Order 13360 working group with representatives from most

of the Federal agencies. This group works on coordinating the annual National Veterans Small Business Conference, as well as coordinating the strategic plans for increasing support to SDVOSBs from each of the agencies. It was instrumental in

aligning the content of the strategic plans so that veterans could easily locate information in different plans and could also compare the plans.

More interagency outreach efforts aimed at educating the Federal workforce will

improve opportunities for SDVOSBs. We need to target acquisition professionals and

program managers to educate them and encourage them to make use of the

SDVOSB set-asides and sole source contract vehicles available to them. The National VOSB Conference helps fill, in part, this education need.

RESPONSE BY SCOTT F. DENNISTON TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN

Question 1. Mr. Elmore, Ms. Oliver, and Mr. Denniston: Can you each outline a

plan for your respective agencies to improve outreach efforts to veterans about small

business programs and loans?

Answer. PL 106–50 requires that the agencies work cooperatively and that we

work with private sector partners as well. Under this legislation, the Secretary of

Veterans Affairs has a duty to annually inform veterans about the availability of

services that will help them expand their business. This letter is coordinated with

SBA and DoL. Our mutual outreach efforts have been previously mentioned. There

is solid cooperation in planning outreach programs. Improvement areas include

reaching non-Federal resources, like the Chambers of Commerce, to locate the nonFederal veteran-owned small businesses. We believe we have adequately informed

the Federal VOSBs about the program.

On continuing basis, CVE and our Federal partners have assembled advisory and

coaching services for veterans that provide the veteran business owner with free advice and assistance, individualized coaching, several small business conferences each

year, periodic e-mail notifications, and other assistance mostly for free or at very

low cost. If these services did not exist, veterans would have to pay several thousand dollars a year to obtain them through for-profit conferences and professional

services.

Based on our small business contracting performance and feedback from veterans,

I believe that we have created an effective outreach design of national conference,

regional conferences and local outreach that allows the small business owner to obtain information, make initial contacts with customers, and start marketing their

product or service to Federal agencies. As part of this, CVE, GSA, SBA, and the

Army and Air Force are cooperating today to host the national conference and the

regional conferences and do other outreach.

For example, just last month, CVE and the Army Corps of Engineers Norfolk District corresponded with construction companies registered in CVE’s VetBiz VIP data

base regarding upcoming construction opportunities being managed by the Norfolk

District. As a result, Norfolk District has a preliminary list of over 80 SDVOSB construction companies that are interested in these opportunities, and the SDVOSB

community has sufficient notice to start preparing well before the time the announcements appear in Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps).

Results show that we already have an effective outreach system. More small business conferences will most likely not materially help the smallest business owners.

135

In fact, they may have a dilutive effect on the mature small businesses, so we are

not moving in that direction. Instead, we are focusing on, and relying upon, the local

contracting activities to identify commodities and services to purchase from

SDVOSBs and VOSBs. We recognize those high performing activities in VA’s annual

Champions of Veterans Enterprise Awards program.

Question 2. What steps can be taken immediately to improve the process of informing veterans about these programs?

Answer. We currently have a team at CVE working on improving the process of

informing veterans about the small business programs available to them. We have

conducted focus groups on how to best reach out to veterans and how to improve

the services of CVE for veterans. The results will be available at the end of March.

Further, CVE’s communications’ team is conducting market research on the best

methods to touch veterans and how to efficiently disseminate information in the

most cost effective method.

Question 3. Have you begun to work on coordinating a plan between the SBA, Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs to implement these improvements?

Answer. VA shares information with our veterans business advocate volunteers in

the Federal agencies. These volunteers include SBA, the Office of the Secretary of

Defense, and the respective military services. We are also organizing an education

conference in conjunction with our annual awards program in June to go into detail

on the results of the focus groups. Also, on an as needed basis, VA convenes meetings of the Executive Order 13360 strategic plan work group.

RESPONSE BY SCOTT F. DENNISTON TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR MARK L. PRYOR

Question 1. Mr. Denniston, I understand the difficulty it may be to facilitate interagency cooperation, but I would like to applaud the VA and all these agencies for

coming to task when looking for needed solutions to serve our service-disabled veterans who have served our country so well. I would like to ask you a few questions

regarding the cooperation of these three agencies here today. How effectively would

you assess the cooperation of these agencies to achieve the goals to serve our service-disabled veterans and their small businesses?

Answer. The cooperation of the agencies in achieving SDVOSB goals is having a

positive effect on results for most agencies. It is imperative that we have buy-in

from all the agencies that use Federal procurement dollars because veteran-owned

businesses represent the full spectrum of types of businesses that are created. Federal procurement dollars are spent on virtually every consumer item by one agency

or another. In order to help all agencies meet their 3 percent goal, there must be

cooperation and top down buy-in from all agencies. We have seen solid commitment

from the agencies that co-sponsor the national VOSB conference and those which

participate in the Executive Order 13360 strategic plan working group.

Question 2. Are there any programs or activities that you would like to mention

regarding interagency cooperation?

Answer. CVE is holding its 6th annual champions of veterans enterprise awards

ceremony on June 14, 2007. In conjunction with this, we are planning a 1–day accountability conference where we will hold those who hold the purse strings accountable for their actions in helping or not helping meet the agency and prime contractor goals. Agencies and prime contractors who have met/exceeded their goals or

have made great improvements in meeting their goals can show how they achieved

their success. Those that have not made the progress expected will be held accountable for why progress has not been made. Further, several agencies were specifically

identified in the testimony as having outstanding programs for veterans. They include the Army, Air Force and GSA. The Army organizes the national VOSB conference. The Air Force hosts the business opportunities showcase, a cable television

program. GSA organizes regional events, created flexibility in Federal supply schedule competitions and recently awarded a very large Government-wide contract for

information technology (IT) services which is limited to SDVOSBs.

Question 3. Are there any new initiatives that have been created to facilitate

these processes?

Answer. While not new, the Veterans Entrepreneurship Task Force has been instrumental in ensuring that Federal agencies remain focused on creating opportunities for service-disabled veterans, veterans and surviving spouses. They are very effective monitors of agency actions. They scrutinize FedBizOpps announcements and

question the accuracy of data in the Federal Procurement Data System—Next GenVerDate 11-MAY-2000 08:20 Dec 12, 2007 Jkt 037146 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 C:\DOCS\37146.TXT DianeA PsN: DianeA
136

eration. When they identify concerns, they go straight to the agency to get resolution while the problem is fresh.

Question 4. What assistance could Congress provide to facilitate greater interagency cooperation and, as a result, our veterans?

Answer. Regular congressional oversight of the Veterans Entrepreneurship Program and Federal agency implementation of Executive Order 13360 will deliver the

message that this program is important. Town hall meetings would be valuable in

informing congressional leadership if the program is really working.

Question 5. In your opinion, what resources have been the greatest resources for

our service-disabled veterans as they seek to enter the small business marketplace

or utilize Federal procurement programs?

Answer. Readers of the Veterans Business Journal voted VA’s CVE as the most

effective organizational provider of services in a recent survey. CVE’s Web portal,

VetBiz.gov, is recognized as the first place to seek information about this program.

Our volunteers in Federal agencies and contractors are a tremendous asset to veterans seeking information about specific requirements and procedures. SBDCs and

PTACs are tremendous resources for a wide variety of support. In conjunction with

individual agency small business development offices help, VOSBs and SDVOSBs

navigate the waters of starting or expanding their small businesses and gaining access into the Federal procurement arena.

RESPONSE BY WILLIAM D. ELMORE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

FROM SENATOR JOHN F. KERRY

Question 1. In the hearing, we discussed some of the problems in the Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan program. Last Congress, I introduced a bill

that would provide grants to military reservist-dependent small businesses that are

able to demonstrate a plan for sustainability. Senator Snowe also proposed noncollateralized loans for these businesses.

• Do you think that these programs would be helpful to reservists?

• Are there additional assistance programs that the SBA could be marketing or

pursuing that would help returning reservist business owners prosper economically?

Answer. Given the individual circumstances each activated self-employed reservist

may face, a range of services and programs are now available to assist and support

them. Regarding proposals to add grants or other new loan products added to our

authorities, if these authorities are provided to SBA by Congress, we will implement

them.

We are always exploring means to improve our efficiency and effectiveness in supporting self-employed reservists. As I indicated in my Testimony, Administrator

Preston is open to working with Congress to improve our ability to assist reservists

and veterans.

Question 2. We have heard you state in your testimony that the SBA is expected

to meet the SDVOB contracting 3 percent goal. You have gone from 0.00 percent

of Federal contracts going to SDVOB 2 years ago to an estimated over 3 percent

contracting last year.

• What did SBA do to create greater subcontracting opportunities for SDVOBs?

• What steps were most effective in bringing about this phenomenal change?

• Based on SBA experience, what can the SBA do to help other agencies attain

this goal?

Answer. First, we consolidated additional responsibility for SDVOSB contracting

into the Office of Veterans Business Development to enhance our effectiveness, and

the staff and I worked with procuring officials at SBA to ensure that they were

aware of capable SDVOSIs interested in doing business with SBA. Following the

leadership from top officials within the Agency, we were able to match capable

SDVOSBs with contracting opportunities within SBA, and subsequently awarded

SDVOSBs contracts. SBA created a specific position in the Office to address procurement issues, and we are supporting that person’s effort with other members of the

staff. We are working to identify best practices, and the effective tools being utilized

by other agencies, and are engaging in specific discussion with other agencies to

support their efforts for SDVOSBs.

Question 3. Please list SBA’s SDVOB contracts and the companies which received

them in fiscal year 2006.

Answer. That information is being compiled into a list which we will provide

under separate cover as soon as it is completed.

Question 4. In 2005, .605 percent of Federal contracting was done with SDVOBs

up from .383 percent in 2004. For those service disabled veteran business owners

137

we must improve these numbers. SBA also plays a role in helping SDVOB contract

with all Federal Government agencies. • What can SBA do to help SDVOB contract with other Federal agencies? • Does the SBA have the resources that it needs to effectively help other agencies meet the 3 percent goal?

Answer. We are reviewing all of SBA’s procurement programs to explore means

for maximizing participation by SDVOSBs and by VOSBs. We intend to use all tools

at our disposal to improve contracting opportunities and success for veterans. The

Small Business Act statutes, along with the Presidents Executive Order 13360 provide us the tools and authorities necessary to achieve the goal.

Question 5. You mentioned that SDVOBs are the smallest of small businesses

that SBA tracks.

• What do you think accounts for this disparity in size?

• If SDVOB’s small size is hindering their ability to perform on Federal contracts, what can be done to address the size issue?

Answer. A combination of factors appear to contribute to the size disparity of

SDVOBs. SBA’s Office of Advocacy has conducted research that has found that not

all SDVOSBs report their status. With the significant marketing that SBA and our

partners have been and continue to do, the number of SDVOSBs registered in CCR

are increasing. However, as you and SBA have noted, many of the registered businesses are very small. We believe we can begin to tailor our outreach to try to encourage more mature SDVOSBs to enter the Federal marketplace, as these more

mature SDVOSBs will be past their startup phase and more capable of securing and

performing on contract opportunities. Additionally, providing technical assistance or

other resources to help the small firms currently registered in the CCR grow and

mature so they can better compete in the Federal marketplace.

Question 6. I was very disappointed to hear about the SBA’s decision to move Teresa Lewis from her position as Assistant Administrator for the Office of Federal

Contract Assistance to Veteran Business Owners. However, I am gratified to learn

that you have hired a new veteran contracting official.

• When will the new person start?

• What accounted for this lag in finding someone new?

The procurement point person started in this new position in December 2006, The

lag is attributable to going through the process of securing the authority to add a

position to the office. We spent time and effort designing the job description, advertising the availability of the position and going through a rigorous selection process

to ensure that the position was offered to the very best candidate available. We are

pleased that we offered the position to our first choice, and he accepted.

Question 7. We have heard about a number of initiatives that you are undertaking

to help veterans and reservists.

• Do you see any veteran or reserve needs that are currently not being addressed?

Answer. We have strengthened program agreements and improved our data collection processes to support and track reservists’ participation in our Entrepreneurial Development programs. If there is a gap, it is the inability to identify and

correspond directly with every self-employed small business owner in reserve components to ensure they are aware of and can take advantage of our services and programs significantly prior to their anticipated activation(s).

Question 8. Lastly, the goal of this hearing is to improve the services that the government offers to veterans, service disabled veterans and reservists. With that in

mind:

• What authority, programs or funding would you need to improve the present

programs or to address issues that are currently not being addressed?

Answer. DOD indicates that reserve components have transformed from a strategic to an operation force in the Global War On Terror. We are constantly reviewing our programs as to how they may best benefit reservists, veterans and servicedisabled veterans. As we identify recommendations for improvement that would require additional Congressional authorities, we will communicate those recommendations to our authorizing Committees.

RESPONSE BY WILLIAM D. ELMORE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN

Question 1. Mr. Elmore, Ms. Oliver, and Mr. Denniston: Can you each outline a

plan for your respective agencies to improve outreach efforts to veterans about small

business programs and loans? What steps can be taken immediately to improve the

138

process of informing veterans about these programs? Have you begun to work on

coordinating a plan between the SBA, Department of Defense, and Department of

Veterans Affairs to implement these improvements?

Answer. SBA is constantly reviewing our programs and services in an effort to

improve our efficiency and effectiveness. Regarding coordination with DOD, and

DVA and other Federal partners, my office presently coordinates outreach and access to SBA programs and services with the DOD Office of the Assistant Secretary

for Reserve Affairs and other offices as necessary within DOD, including the National Transition Assistance Program. We also coordinate and collaborate with the

National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve, the DOL Office of Veterans Employment and Training Service, the Presidents National Hire

Veterans Committee, the DOL Office of Disability Policy Initiatives, and the Employment and Training Administration. We coordinate and collaborate with the DVA

Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and their Center for Veterans Enterprise, the DVA Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Services program, and other DVA programs as necessary or appropriate. In addition, we conduct

outreach to and with a number of Congressionally Chartered Veterans Service Organizations, including the American Legion, the VFW, the Disabled American Veterans, the Military Order of Purple Heart, Vietnam Veterans of America and over

100 other VSOs. We also provide materials to State National Guard Adjutants,

State Veterans Affairs Departments, Military Family Support Centers and numerous others.

Question 2. Ms. Oliver and Mr. Elmore: According to Mr. Elmore’s responses to

Senator Kerry’s questions, veteran owned businesses are encountering difficulties

winning defense contracts. Why are veteran and service-disabled veteran owned

businesses not winning these contracts at a higher rate? We need a solution to this

problem. How can we start moving in the right direction?

Answer. At SBA we believe we are moving in the right direction in supporting

the success of SDVOSB contracting with DOD and other Federal partners. As I indicated in my testimony, Census Bureau data shows that approximately 0.7 percent

of small businesses in America, with employees other than the owner, are owned

by Service-Disabled Veterans. We believe that by growing the capacity of existing

SDVOSBs utilizing all of SBA programs and services, along with a more tailored

outreach effort directed to more mature SDVOSBs that have thus far not entered

the Federal market place, we can and will achieve the 3 percent goal.

Question 3. Mr. Elmore, I am concerned about the status of the Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs, which was established in Public Law 106–50,

the Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development Act. This law created an advisory body within the Small Business Administration that could actively

participate in relevant policymaking that concerns veteran-owned small businesses.

I am dismayed by reports that the SBA has not utilized the resources of this committee—comprised currently of ten veterans—to its fullest capacity. I would like

some clarification about the role of the committee.

Question 3a. What is the SBA’s strategic short-term and long-term plan for the

Advisory Committee on Veterans Affairs?

Answer. Under the extension of SBA authorities, SBA has continued to support

this Committee and hosted the first 2007 meeting late in January 2007.

SBA supports what this Committee is doing and is working with the Committee

to set up future meetings.

Our short term and long term plan is to follow the statutes regarding this Committee.

Question 3b. Does the SBA consult the Advisory Committee prior to developing

initiatives designed to promote small businesses owned by veterans?

Answer. Consultation occurs at meetings of the Committee hosted by SBA in our

Headquarters at least three times per year, and on an ad hoc basis. Some of the

initiatives we have undertaken have been based in part on recommendations provided by the Committee. We consider the initiatives developed by the Committee as

recommendations in our efforts to improve our programs for veterans and reservists.

Question 3c. How will the SBA implement the recommendations of the committee’s most recent 2006 report?

Answer. We consider them as recommendations in our efforts to improve our programs for veterans and reservists.

139

RESPONSE BY WILLIAM D. ELMORE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR MARK L. PRYOR

Question 1. Mr. Elmore, I applaud your agency, the Small Business Administration, as well as the Department of Veterans Affairs for exceeding the 3 percent Federal procurement goals outlined by PL 106–50. Though sensibility would direct us

to the benefit these goals provide our veterans, the stories we will hear today truly

attest to the differences being made. However, there are a few issues I would like

to address regarding the Federal procurement goals.

Question 1a. Do you have current or the most recent figures tracking where service-disabled veteran procurements should be to meet the 3 percent target?

Answer. We are awaiting final fiscal year 2006 numbers from the Office of Federal Procurement Policy. When we receive them, we will study them in our ongoing

efforts to improve all of our programs and services for veterans, service-disabled veterans and reservists.

Question 1b. What are the most recent figures of actual Federal contracts being

awarded to these veterans?

Answer. The most recent final figures have been reported for fiscal year 2005.

Please see attachment provided.

Question 1c. Which agencies have improved the most in recent years?

Answer. SBA, DVA and the Department of State.

Question 1d. What agencies are the furthest from meeting these goals?

Answer. There are a number of agencies that have not achieved the same success

as those agencies in #1c above. Please see attached fiscal year 2005 list.

Question 1e. In your opinion, what initiatives should Congress undertake in order

to assist the agencies in achieving this goal and to help the veterans take advantage

of the program?

Answer. The opinions expressed to me by SDVOSBs include concerns with the disparity of language between the various procurement programs, including the

SDVOSB program. In addition, the latest authority recently provided to only the Department of Veterans Affairs could be considered for implementation across the Federal Government and clarifications in language and potentially duplicative or replicate efforts contained in that new law could be addressed as well.

Question 2. The Veterans Business Outreach Centers (VBOC) mentioned on your

website often cover a wide geographical area. Obviously, the geographical limitations for these centers and those interested in the services they provide can cause

somewhat of a disconnect or inability for real person to person contact.

Question 2a. What programs are in place to reach out to veterans serviced by

these VBOCs?

Answer. We direct the VBOCs to provide internet based assistance and what we

call ‘‘directed referrals’’ to local program services available at SBA and SBA resource

partners closer to where they live. The five centers are promoted in the Office of

Veterans Business Development Outreach Tools, the VetGazette Newsletter, and in

special Outreach Events hosted by or participated in by our district offices.

Question 2b. Are there any recent initiatives created by the SBA to facilitate communication amongst veterans and the centers?

Answer. We continue to conduct comprehensive outreach to veterans and reservists, and this always includes promotion of the availability of our five centers. We

are also reaching out to other public and private web sites as a means to promote

all of our services and programs for veterans and reservists, including a special page

on the Presidents National Hire Veterans Committee web site, and a major internet

based organization with almost 10 million members who are veterans, service members and family members. This will be announced when complete.

Question 2c. What assistance or mandates could Congress provide to further facilitate the process?

Answer. As I indicated in response to an earlier question, our ability to identify

and communicate directly with self-employed reserve component members is hampered.

140

ATTACHMENT.—FEDERAL CONTRACT AWARD FIGURES

1. Smarkeling Business Systems

SBAHQ–06–A–0030 $150,000.00

Office Supplies

2. Smarkeling Business Systems

SBAHQ–06–V–0035 $1,709.99

Office Supplies

3.Video & Telecommunications Inc.

SBAHQ–06–F–0397 $2,223,404.24

Software

4. Video & Telecommunications Inc.

SBAHQ–06–F–0243 $11,414.26

Copier Equipment

5. Intelligence Communications Solutions

SBAHQ–06–C–0035 $398,791.30

Consultant Services

6. Intelligence Communications Solutions

SBAHQ–06–M–0456 $1,469.00

Computer Equipment

7. Ambit Group

SBAHQ–06–0316 $181,701.60

Consultant Services

8. Ambit Group

SBAHQ–05–C–0029 Mod 1 $300,000.00 (FY 6)

Consultant Services

9. K.D. Lions Inc.

SBAHQ–06–M–626 $3,140.79

Office Supplies

10. K.D. Lions Inc.

SBAHQ–06–M–0651 $484.93

Office Supplies

11. K.D. Lions Inc.

SBAHQ–06–M–0649 $7,077.97

Office Supplies

12. K.D. Lions Inc.

SBAHQ–06–M–0647 $467.00

Office Supplies

13. K.D. Lions Inc.

SBAHQ–06–M–0646 $1,296.74

Office Supplies

14. K.D. Lions Inc.

SBAHQ–06–M–0645 $640.00

Office Supplies

15. K.D. Lions Inc.

SBAHQ–06–M–0644 $1,250.00

Total procurement dollors $3,132,847.82

Total Budget $80,000,000.00

141

RESPONSE BY WILLIAM D. ELMORE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR JOHN THUNE

Question 1. I know in my state, local economic development boards are always

looking for economic development opportunities to expand a small town’s tax and

employment base. I know they’d like nothing more than to help local veterans establish businesses in their small towns. Are there any initiatives out there to encourage

a town’s economic development boards to reach out to veterans in the community

to inform them of the opportunities that are available to them through Federal contracting, or at least informing people who walk in the door of an economic development corporation with a business idea that, if they’re a veteran, these tremendous

Federal contracting opportunities are out there for them?

Answer. We are working cooperatively with SBA resource partners and local small

business development programs, and our 504 Loan program, delivered though Community Development Corporations. The 504 program includes veterans in their public policy goals. We would be supportive of engaging with and providing our veterans

and reservists business development tools directly to any state or local economic development authority. All of our materials and services are available upon request.

Question 2. I represent a state with a large number of Native American veterans,

many of whom live on the reservation. Many of our reservation communities in

South Dakota are in dire need of more economic activity. I know there are certain

programs the SBA has established to help Native American small businesses. Do

you see any Native American veterans taking advantage of the contracting opportunities available to them?

Answer. Yes. My office is coordinating with the SBA Office of Native American

Affairs to identify means to improve our ability to support Native American veterans, service-disabled veterans and reservists.

Question 3. Since the 3 percent contracting goal is a governmentwide initiative,

it seems likely that there would be a lot of duplicate activity across the Federal Government with regard to this program, and a commensurate amount of difficulty for

a veteran to gather all the useful information that may be out there. Are you observing anything to indicate that veterans are having difficulty due to the vast

amount of information out there that is spread across the Federal Government? Is

there an interagency cooperation initiative that serves as a center for veterans to

be able to gather all the information that they need to start and sustain a small

business based on contracting with the Federal Government?

Answer. All Federal agencies with procuring authorities are working to identify

and improve contracting opportunities for veterans and service-disabled veterans,

and most agencies are working together on joint events. However, as in any marketing effort, there may be some duplication of effort, but until we achieve and

hopefully exceed the 3 percent goal for SDVOSB, we are hesitant to reduce or eliminate efforts from all the agencies. Regarding a one-stop web site, my office is developing just such an effort within SBA and further, we are working with other web

based partners to better promote this program as well as all SBA programs and

services for all veterans, including reservists.

RESPONSE BY LOUIS J. CELLI. JR. TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

FROM SENATOR JOHN THUNE

Question 1. I Know in my state, local economic development boards are always

looking for economic development opportunities to expand a small town’s tax and

employment base. I know they’d like nothing more than to help local veterans establish businesses in their small towns. Are there any initiatives out there to encourage

a town’s economic development boards to reach out to veterans in the community

to inform them of the opportunities that are available to them through Federal contracting, or at least informing people who walk in the door of an economic development corporation with a business idea that, if they’re a veteran, these tremendous

Federal contracting opportunities are out there for them?

Answer. Unfortunately not. Most economic development offices that I have worked

with are primarily funded through the Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of labor. City and State offices are run similarly to nonprofit

organizations in that they are usually servicing a grant or funded line item.

I am sure that it is not the case that the leadership or employees of these offices

are not Veteran sympathetic or Veteran friendly however they are employed to

serve the people of their communities as set forth by the grants they are servicing

and neither HUD nor DOL have issued many (if any) community development

grants which mention veterans (that I am aware of).

142

That said, any Veteran specific advice offered through community development offices would be ancillary unless that City or State had a specific Veteran initiative

which has been championed by their respective leadership.

In some cases, there are grassroots organizations which serve veterans such as

the Northeast Veterans Business Resource Center, our sister organizations in St.

Louis, MO and Flint, MI, and I know that much has been accomplished by way of

veterans procurement initiatives in other states as well such as California, Minnesota and Nevada but again, these are all primarily grassroots efforts which are

severely underfunded and overburdened.

Most recently, our organization answered a Request for Proposal (RFP) to participate in a Community Development Block Grant funded by HUD in the city of Lawrence Massachusetts where we built our flagship veterans business resource center.

We were encouraged to apply and encouraged to address the communities veteran

low income and homeless population by building a program which would assist targeted community veterans with starting microenterprises and enhancing small business skills and resources. After the City council reviewed our proposal, we were not

considered as the City Council felt that our proposal did not meet the focus of the

grant and that ‘‘Veterans were not a priority’’.

While this example does not specifically address your question, it demonstrates

what I explained earlier about how community development activities are paid and

subsequently where their focus is.

I hope this helps you to understand my answer to your question. Your question

is logical and basic and as such it would so reason that such advice, guidance, direction or counseling would be readily available. Perhaps a community development

outreach grant which seeks to educate the veteran business owner population might

help as the only such counseling initiative available presently is through the Procurement Technical Assistance Centers which may or may not have veteran specific

programs and again, this would depend on the sentiment of the prevailing leadership.

Question 2. I represent a state with a large number of Native American veterans,

many of whom live on the reservation. Many of our reservation communities in

South Dakota are in dire need of more economic activity. I know there are certain

programs the SBA has established to help Native American small businesses. Do

you see any Native American veterans taking advantage of the contracting opportunities available to them?

Answer. This is a question that I am not fully qualified to address as I work in

states which do not have large native American populations. I do however work

with colleagues who work extensively with the Native American population and I

have asked their assistance to help me address your question.

The colleagues which I have asked guidance from are:

Raymond Jardine Jr., PhD

President & CEO

Native Hawaiian Veterans, LLC

3375 Koapaka Street Suite B–286

Honolulu, Hawaii 96819

Vice Chair for ‘‘The National Veterans Business Development Corporation’’ aka The

Veterans Corp

Board of Directors for the National Guard Association of the United States representing the 14 western United States

Dr. Camilla Madden

Department of Veterans Affairs

Anchorage, AK

Formerly Director, Compensated Work Therapy (CWT) program

VA Black Hills Health Care Center

Eagle Butte, SD

Mr. Paul Adams

Chief Operating Officer

Liberty Tree Enterprises

Henderson, NV 89052

Bernie Cournoyer, LRC

Managing Director

Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Construction Team

Bedford, MA

These individuals possess a combined knowledge base and expertise which spans

the United States and paints a very clear and consistent picture of critical lack of

outreach and informational resources.

143

Before I continue, it should be noted that contained within the question, there are

two socioeconomic governmental programs in play, they are;

(a) The Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business (SDVOB) initiative which is

primarily a contracting initiative.

(b) The Woman Owned (WO) and Minority Owned program, 8(a) which is a business development program.

Native Americans business owners who also happen to be Service Disabled Veterans would be eligible to participate in both programs as well as certify as what

is known Super 8(a) status. This is where a Native American tribally owned enterprise can meet DOD Indian Incentives Act requirements, provide ‘‘super 8(a) status’’

and meet HUB Zone criteria.

The prevailing opinion among all of my collogues was that the severe lack of outreach initiatives, Small Business Education and program advertisement leaves most

Native American Business Owners ESPECIALLY Native American Service Disabled

Veteran Business Owners in the dark. It was commonly agreed that while there are

very powerful and well intentioned programs available to assist Native American

Veterans, there needs to be much more resources dedicated to education, training

and outreach if these programs are to have the effect on the native American Veteran Population that is intended.

There is little outreach to Native American veterans, even though there is usually

a high percentage of veterans in the Native American community. As I am sure you

are aware, the contracting mechanism for a Tribal 8 (a), or Super 8 (a) is very powerful, probably more powerful than any other Federal contracting mechanism. Government agencies must respond to an unsolicited proposal and there are no dollar

limits on sole source contracts. So, if a reservation wants to use the Tribal 8a status,

the veteran status is in the background.

Another problem is that not all agencies recognize all the diversity of a bid. In

other words, for an award to a team that consists of a Tribal 8a, a veteran owned

SB and a SCDVOSB, many agencies will only recognize the Tribal 8a. If that is

their policy, then there is no reason to diversify down the chain, so to speak, because there is no extra credit for hiring a Native American Veteran over a Native

American.

The net result is that there is little incentive for a Native American Tribe to focus

on its veteran population as such, they should just focus on leveraging their Tribal

8a contracting mechanism or being certified as a Native American owned SB if not

tribally owned. Since there is no certification program for SCDVOSB and perhaps

no extra credit to an agency for contracting with a Native American SCDV as compared to a Native American owned SB, the Native American veteran status is often

ignored.

More significantly, many of the Tribes are just not well organized to attract and

retain business. Some do it very well, others do it poorly. The system of grants for

economic studies often does not result in real economic growth. For example a colleague was working with a tribe that had conducted a feasibility study for a wind

powered renewable energy facility. I understand they received a grant for the study

and Federal dollars were used to pay for the study. Apparently, nothing has been

done with the study. My collogue approached the tribe and informed them, through

an intermediary that they were quite certain they could obtain 100 percent financing for their project if they could see the study. That was in November and to date

they have still not seen the study. I have heard from others that there are a lot

of feasibility studies that have been completed with Federal dollars and then similarly shelved.

So in addition to training and outreach, business counseling and mentoring to assist Tribal businesses organize their businesses and business concerns is also a

great need within this community.

Question 3. Since the 3 percent contracting goal is a governmentwide initiative,

it seems likely that there would be a lot of duplicate activity across the Federal Government with regard to this program, and a commensurate amount of difficulty for

a veteran to gather all the useful information that may be out there. Are you observing anything to indicate that veterans are having difficulty due to the vast

amount of information out there that is spread across the Federal Government? Is

there an interagency cooperation initiative that serves as a center for veterans to

be able to gather all the information that they need to start and sustain a small

business based on contracting with the Federal Government?

Answer. I was completely taken aback by this question. The most common similarity among Federal agencies is that there is no common school of thought or commonality of goal or program thus zero duplication.

PL 106–50 started an era of confusion which continues to plague the veteran business owner community today. The dreaded ‘‘may’’ versus ‘‘shall’’ strategically pitted

144

veterans against agencies, contracting officers against contractors and Americans

against their government.

While the intent of the law is clear, the execution and ‘‘letter of the law’’ is in

question and subsequently the interpretation is in constant flux. Some agencies

have attempted to develop programs which comply with the intent, which is to direct that 3 percent of all federally spend dollars which are used to purchase goods

and services be spent with businesses which are owned and operated by Service Disabled Veterans, but even with these initiatives, contracting officers are under no obligation to meet such goals.

The bottom line is that there is no duplication of services or efforts within our

Federal system. Several efforts have been made to attempt to define, clarify or amplify the language of PL 106–50, specifically, PL 108–183, Executive Order 13360

and most recently PL 109–461 and while these initiatives were designed to address

the ambiguity of PL 106–50 with regard to Federal contracting goals, it somehow

seems that these subsequent efforts still fall short of ‘‘directing’’ Federal agencies

to insure that 3 percent of all Federal dollars spent, be spent with Service Disabled

Veteran Owned Businesses.

Regarding the question of information, there is no authoritative agency, government, public or private which is the defining authority regarding this issue. While

one agency may have one opinion and policy regarding SDVOB contracting, another

agency may have a separate policy, and while a third may have yet another opinion

and policy, all will argue that the other policies directly conflict with the Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR).

More and more pressure have been put on agencies to reach a 3 percent SDVOB

contracting goal but for the most part, this program is not being enforced.

PL 106–50 mandated interagency cooperation yet every agency specifically addressed in PL 106–50 has summarily ignored this directive. Each has taken its own

program, it’s own dollars and its own interpretation of the law which initiated their

respective programs and have completely gone in their own direction. This is clearly

NOT what Congress had in mind when they passed this law.

I want to be more specific but I don’t want to make this answer too long. If you

would like me to work directly with your office regarding this or any other veteran

business or training issue, please consider my resources at your disposal. Agencies

should have a ‘‘mandated’’ (not goaled) amount that must be met. The penalty for

not meeting the mandate should be a reduction of their fiscal budget the next year

equal to the amount they didn’t meet the previous year.

Below is an article which I recently wrote for Veterans Business Journal Magazine.

HOW DO LAWS HELP SDVOBS?

Since 1999, there have been a number of legislative initiatives which have all

sought to assist veterans who are and who wish to become business owners.

PL 106–50, PL 108–183, Executive Order 13360 and most recently the passage

of PL 109–462 are some of the most notable.

The most notable issues addressed by these initiatives can be boiled down to two

things, training and contracting.

Depending on where you are in the business cycle, each may have a different

meaning. It is important to know that the laws you see published are often very

different than the bills which were the basis of the law in the first place, for instance; PL 109–462 establishes a mechanism for The Department of Veterans Affairs to authorize something called ‘‘Noncompetitive Procedures’’ (sole sourcing) and

effectively eliminates the dreaded ‘‘Rule of Two’’ which has plagued the veteran contracting community since the passage of PL 106–50.

Also ordered is the freedom of the Agency (VA) to set annual contracting goals

for doing business with SDVOBs which ‘‘will not be less than the Government-wide

goal for that fiscal year’’ which is currently set at 3 percent. Originally, when the

language which was the initial thrust of this law was proposed (HR 3082), the law

called for a minimum ‘‘Contract Requirement’’ of 9 percent of contract dollars to be

spent with VOBs and a minimum of 3 percent (of the original 9 percent) to be spent

with SDVOBs.

So what does this mean to you? Advocates are hard at work for you. Just because

you don’t see what you think is enough action in the law doesn’t mean that we

didn’t ask.

Your power is with your lawmakers, let them know how you feel and what is important to you as a constituent.

145

RESPONSE BY CAPT. ANN S. YAHNER TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

FROM SENATOR JOHN THUNE

Question 1. I know in my state, local economic development boards are always

looking for economic development opportunities to expand a small town’s tax and

employment base. I know they’d like nothing more than to help local veterans establish businesses in their small towns. Are there any initiatives out there to encourage

a town’s economic development boards to reach out to veteran’s in the community

to inform them of the opportunities that are available to them through Federal contracting, or at least informing people who walk in the door of an economic development corporation with a business idea that, if they’re a veteran, these tremendous

Federal contracting opportunities are out there for them?

Answer. I’m not aware of any initiative or agency that is specifically attuned to

informing veterans in their small towns about the opportunities in Federal contracting. Perhaps the Regional Economic Development Council who knows the

makeup of his constituents, or the local state representative might be a conduit for

this information. In my state of Maine, there are 160,000 veterans, but most are

veterans of WW II, Korea, or Vietnam, and are not wanting to start a business. Perhaps in states with younger veterans there might be more activity through veterans

groups. In my case, I personally have not been educated by any local representative,

in fact I have educated them on what opportunities are available to veterans.

Question 2. I represent a state with a large number of Native American veterans,

many of whom live on the reservation. Many of our reservation communities in

South Dakota are in dire need of more economic activity. I know there are certain

programs the SBA has established to help Native American small businesses. Do

you see any Native American veterans taking advantage of the contracting opportunities available to them?

Answer. In Maine we have a small population of Native Americans, primarily in

the northern part of the state. There are a few small business who have been

awarded Federal contracts as an 8(a) (minority and disadvantaged) set aside. There

are also a couple SDVO Native American SB who have been involved in Federal

contracts either as the prime or as a subcontractor.

Question 3. Since the 3 percent contracting goal is a government-wide initiative,

it seems likely that there would be a lot of duplicate activity across the Federal Government with regard to this program, and a commensurate amount of difficulty for

a veteran to gather all the useful information that may be out there. Are you observing anything to indicate that veterans are having difficulty due to the vast

amount of information out there that is spread across the Federal Government? Is

there an interagency cooperation initiative that serves as a center for veterans to

be able to gather all the information that they need to start and sustain a small

business based on contracting with the Federal Government?

Answer. PL 106–50 set aside the goal of 3 percent for all Federal agencies doing

business with SDVOSB. Executive Order 13360 re-enforced meeting that goal. As

a small business owned by a Service disabled veteran, we first went to the Small

Business Administration and the Veterans Administration for information on how

to get assistance and established in the CCR, fedbizopps etc. We then identified

which Federal Agencies we wanted to do business with and contacted their Office

of Small and Disadvantaged Utilization person, Small Business Specialist and Contracting Officer.

We then looked at GSA and applied for GSA Schedules. From there it was a marketing effort to establish relationships and show competencies and experience. It

was a lengthy process to break into the Federal arena. What we found most effective

was to be introduced by someone we had done business with, or to get a subcontracting award. We’ve found that once we had done a couple of jobs for Federal

agencies, our credibility and performance spoke for itself. That opened more doors,

and in time the business opportunities grew.

I think it might be helpful if there was a portal or website that could serve as

a central site to assess what assistance the small business SDVO needs with links

to SBA, VA, GSA and others. That way it would be easier for a small business to

fmd the information they need to get started like a business plan, financial assistance, proposal writing, various registrations, and know what steps to take to do

business with the Federal Government. However, after that, it’s up to the business

to sell themselves to Federal agencies. That can’t be done, nor should it be done any

other way. The SDVO needs to decide what agencies best match its capabilities and

look at their forecast for opportunities. That’s a lot of work and takes time.

The one area of difficulty due to the vast amount of information across several

Federal agencies is the need for training the agencies, their Small Business Specialist and their Contracting Officers about the SDVO set aside program. We have

146

found that we are educating the COTRs about the program, how to sole source etc.

If they do not understand the program, and they are not required to use the SDVO

set aside, they will continue to use the vehicles they have been using for years and

the 3 percent goal will never be met. Also, if they used a Woman owned, SDVO they

could get credit toward meeting their 5 percent goal for women as well.

Ann S. Yahner

RESPONSE BY THEODDORE L. DAYWATT TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

FROM SENATOR JOHN THUNE

Question 1. I know in my state, local economic development boards are always

looking for economic development opportunities to expand a small town’s tax and

employment base. I know they’d like nothing more than to help local veterans establish businesses in their towns. Are there any initiatives out there to encourage a

town’s economic development boards to reach out to veterans inform them of the opportunities that are available to them through Federal contracting, or at least informing people who walk in the door of an economic development corporation with

a business idea that, if they’re a veteran, these tremendous Federal contracting opportunities are out there for them?

Answer. I am not aware of any such initiative. In checking with several chamber

of commerce economic developers in Georgia, they were not aware of any such programs.

Question 2. I represent a state with a large number of Native American veterans,

many of whom live on the reservation. Many of our reservation communities South

Dakota are in dire need of more economic activity. I know there are certain programs the SBA has established to help Native American small businesses. Do you

see any Native American veterans taking advantage of the contracting opportunities

available to them?

Answer. The SBA has some programs that address this issue (see http://

www.sba.gov/aboutsba/sbaprograms/naa/index.html), but to my knowledge the

programs are not marketed very well.

A good example would be the recent National Guard Bureau Family Service Conference held in Phoenix, AZ. Over 300 transition assistance and family representatives from the 54 National Guards were present. While VetJobs, VA, DOD, VFW,

Legion, DAV and DOL had significant representation, conspicuously missing was

the SBA.

Question 3. Since the 3 percent contracting goal is a government-wide initiative,

it seems likely that there would be a lot of duplicate activity across the Federal Government with regard to this program, and a commensurate amount of difficulty for

a veteran to gather all the useful information that may be out there. Are you observing anything to indicate that veterans are having difficulty due to the vast

amount of information out there that is spread across the Federal Government? Is

there an interagency cooperation initiative that serves as a center for veterans to

be able to gather all the information that they need to start and sustain a small

business based on contracting with the Federal Government?

Answer. From my experience, it is very difficult for veterans to ascertain what

programs are available and how to access the assistance that is currently provided.

I am not aware of any interagency cooperation initiative per se to get information

out, but one needs to be put into place.

More importantly, the Congress has got to get Federal agencies to pay attention

to the 3 percent rule as was mandated in PL 106–50 8 years ago.

As a classic example of how Federal agencies intentionally subverts PL 106–50,

the March 5 issue of Military Times has a story titled: Web site will be key to transition. The story elaborates how DOD’s Transition Assistance Program, in conjunction with DOL and VA are designing a dynamic automated web-based system for

delivery of transition assistance and related information. Details of the site’s features or expected launch date were not immediately available.

I have made inquiries to friends at DOL and DOD and have since learned that

this portal is being developed by Monster.com. The portal is being developed by

DOD’s ODUSD, MC&FP/EdOps. This comes under Dr. David Chu. ODUSD,

MC&FP/EdOps gave an exclusive contract to Monster to develop the site for

transitioning military. The contract was not bid out, but was arbitrarily made part

of an existing contract with Monster in order to get around doing a bid. My sources

at DOD and DOL tell me that the site will be free to employers to search resumes

and post jobs. Monster is being paid a LARGE annual fee to run the site. This is

supposedly in the millions of dollars (actual figure has not been confirmed to me).

There are several problems with this activity by DOD ODUSD (MC&FP/EdOps):

147

1. Why was the work not bid out?

No veteran owned military related job boards were contacted to develop the portal, but several of the military job boards have the capability to do this work. This

would have been an excellent opportunity for DOD/DOL/VA to be able to move toward meeting the mandated 3 percent rule as dictated by PL 106–50, but instead

they chose to subvert the process and violate the spirit and intent of PL 106–50.

2. Why is this being given to a large corporation (Monster.com)?

As was pointed out at the SBE hearings on January 31, DOD is one of the prime

violators of not meeting the 3 percent rule under PL 106–50. VetJobs, as well as

some other small veteran owned companies who run military related job boards

could easily have done the work, and definitely considerably less expensive than

what DOD is paying Monster.

3. Why is DOD competing with what private enterprise sites that for the last decade have been doing this work very successfully?

It would seem that the activity by DOD will seriously affect many veteran owned

job board companies and could even put some of them out of business by offering

for free what employers now pay a fee, but at the same time giving millions of tax

dollars to a large corporation in violation of PL 106–50.

Until the Congress can get the Federal agencies to comply with both the spirit

and the intent of PL 106–50, the law remains a joke and raises serious questions

as to whether the Congress really wants to help veteran owned companies. The failure to enforce PL 106–50 and the continued practice by DOD to avert compliance

as in the case described above indicates that there is no real concern or truly effective effort to assist veteran owned companies!

(149)

COMMENTS FOR THE RECORD

150

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. PAUL R. CAMACHO, DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROJECTS, THE WILLIAM JOINER CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF WAR AND SOCIAL CON- SEQUENCES, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS BOSTON

Senator John F. Kerry, Chairman,

Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship,

Room 428A, Russell Senate Office Building,

Washington, DC 20510

DEAR CHAIRMAN KERRY: I would like to take this opportunity to submit a brief

letter of testimony for inclusion into the record for your Committee Hearing, ‘‘Assessing Federal Small Business Assistance programs for Veterans and Reservists’’

to be held on Wednesday, January 31, 2007.

As you are aware one of the most crucial matters in assessing the progress of any

program is the collection of solid statistical data. An assessment of progress for veterans involved in a small business/entrepreneurial endeavor is a case in point. Arguments about the numbers and percentages of veterans as well as Guards and Reservists was one of the principal difficulties veteran advocates had to confront during the half dozen years of advocacy preceding the passage of what eventually became PL 106–50, The Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development

Act of 1999.

What is needed is the following:

1. The Department of Veterans Affairs must work with the Bureau of Census to

develop a ‘‘universe of population’’ of veterans in small business so that the Bureau

has an adequate and representative base from which to draw appropriate samples

of veterans for inclusion in all future small business studies. This is a very feasible

and necessary task. Confidentiality should not be a concern, since the Bureau of

Census is the ‘‘gold standard’’ in terms of trust and confidentiality of sources and

sample sets. If one assumes that the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Bureau of Census collaborate, then this project including all the matching of data tables and data cleaning with IRS, Dun and Bradstreet, resources, etc. should take

no more that 18 to 24 months to complete.

2. SBA must be required to include veterans as a unit of analysis in all future

small business studies, including any that might now be in the planning process.

3. Funding for the development of the universe of population should be required

of the VA.

4. Funding to include veterans as a unit of analysis in all future small business

studies should be required of SBA.

The Congress must make these directives clear to the agencies in the strongest language possible and the agencies must be held accountable.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF VETERANS AS A VARIABLE

To date veterans have been only a variable. For example, see Table 7b, p 64–65

of Characteristics of Business Owners, 1992 Economic Census CB092–1. There you

will see the units of analysis: ‘‘All businesses,’’ ‘‘Hispanic-owned businesses,’’ ‘‘Blackowned businesses,’’ ‘‘Other minority-owned businesses,’’ ‘‘women-owned businesses,’’

and ‘‘non-minority male-owned businesses’’—you will never see Veteran/disabled

veteran-owned businesses!

Despite the risk of oversimplification, it may help to very briefly summarize the

consequential technical problem—the standard error and variance. Because veterans

are only a variable, only the broadest summary counts and percentages are fairly

accurate. However, as a researcher or committee staff person seeks to ‘‘drill down’’

into the data—take the number of black women veterans in retail trade as an example—the data is less reliable in that it has a greater variance and probability of

error. The deeper one drills down, the greater the variance and probability of error.

This is primarily because veterans are a variable not a unit of analysis.

It is the consequences of this distinction between a population being regarded as

a unit of analysis and one that is taken as a characteristic, i.e. is only a variable

that is the issue here. It is the reason I must emphasize the need for clear and

strong language and action on the part of the Congress.

MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AS PRINCIPLE INVESTIGATOR

As you are aware Senator, I worked with your office to gain cooperation of both

the Senate and House Committees: on Small Business and on Veterans Affairs during the time I was the Principal Investigator of The Status and Needs of Small

Businesses Owned and Controlled by Disabled Veterans November 10, 2000,

SBAHQ-99-C-0001. This was to be the report required by Congress under Public

Law 105-135, The Small Business Authorization Act of 1997, December 2, 1997. SecVerDate 11-MAY-2000 08:20 Dec 12, 2007 Jkt 037146 PO 00000 Frm 00156 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 C:\DOCS\37146.TXT DianeA PsN: DianeA
151

tion 703 required a study be conducted by the administrator of the Small Business

Administration that provided a report on:

(A) The needs of small business concerns owned and controlled by eligible veterans;

(B) The availability and utilization of Administration programs by small business

concerns owned and controlled by eligible veterans;

(C) The percentage, and dollar value, of Federal contracts awarded to small business concerns owned and controlled by eligible veterans in the preceding 5 fiscal

years; and

(D) Methods to improve Administration and other agency programs to serve the

needs of small business concerns owned and controlled by eligible veterans.

The product of that study was less than what I had hoped for, particularly in the

area of part ‘‘C.’’ One of the principal reasons for lack of success here was that SBA

and DVA, as well as OMB were uncooperative despite the letter with the signatures

of both the Chairman and Ranking members for both the House and Senate Committees on Small Business and Veterans Affairs (mentioned above) asking for their

assistance. The appendix of that report documents their refusal to provide assistance to the study.

During that time as the legislation for what became PL 106–50 was before the

Senate Committee on Small Business in 1998, SBA and OMB both urged the Senate

not to pass the bill, but to wait for the completion of the study (the study I was

undertaking and they were hobbling). Immediately after the committee approved

the bill, I received several phone calls denying my survey instrument. The counsel

for OMB for that overview denied even the possibility that any universe of population could be developed that was representative of veterans in small business. If

the committee requests a copy of that study with the appendix and SBA provides

it, then my claim will be readily verified. As a result I had to utilize a focus group

methodology that has no statistical power.

All during that time, and since then, I have pleaded that SBA include veterans

and disabled veterans as a unit of analysis in the economic census, ‘‘Characteristics

of Business Owners,’’ undertaken by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics

and Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census every several years. SBA continually has refused to do this. Veterans were included as a variable by the fact that

two questions were asked about military service in the last economic census. However, it should be absolutely clear to the Committee that this was a result of activists finding out about the coming economic study. They ascertained that no questions about military/veterans status were to be included and consequently sought

the intervention of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. That Committee’s

intervention was the only reason that the two questions were included.

I hope that these comments will convince you that only the strongest Congressional language with requirements for accountability and enforcement will result in

veterans being included in future small business economic studies by the bureau of

census. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call

on me.

Semper Fidelis,

DR. PAUL R. CAMACHO

Director of Special Projects

The William Joiner Center

For the Study of War and Social Consequences

University of Massachusetts Boston

100 Morrissey Boulevard

Boston, MA 02125–3393

Paul.Camacho@umb.edu

617–287–5853 Voice

617–287–5855 Fax

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

Æ