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

87–579 PDF 2014

S. HRG. 112–891 

CLOSING THE GAP: EXPLORING MINORITY ACCESS 

TO CAPITAL AND CONTRACTING OPPORTUNITIES 

ROUNDTABLE 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND 

ENTREPRENEURSHIP 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MARCH 3, 2011 

Printed for the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, Chair 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine, Ranking Member 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

TOM HARKIN, Iowa 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

KAY R. HAGAN, North Carolina 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

SCOTT P. BROWN, Massachusetts 

GERALD W. MORAN, Kansas 

DONALD CRAVINS, JR., Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

WALLACE K. HSUEH, Republican Staff Director 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS

Page 

Landrieu, Hon. Mary L., Chair, and a U.S. Senator from Louisiana .................. 1 

Snowe, Hon. Olympia J., Ranking Member, and a U.S. Senator from Maine .... 4 

Hagan, Hon. Kay, a U.S. Senator from North Carolina ....................................... 18 

WITNESS TESTIMONY

Panel I 

Johns, Marie, Deputy Administrator, U.S. Small Business Administration ...... 6 

Panel II 

Fairlie, Robert W. Ph.D., Professor of Economics, University of California, 

Santa Cruz ............................................................................................................ 21 

Morial, Marc, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Urban League . 32 

Allen, Susan, President and Chief Executive Officer, U.S. Pan Asian American Chamber of Commerce ................................................................................ 53 

Mitchell, B. Doyle, Chairman, National Bankers Association ............................. 64 

Montoya, Martha, Procurement Chair and Board Member, U.S. Hispanic 

Chamber of Commerce ......................................................................................... 68 

Panel III 

Gustafson, Peggy, Inspector General, U.S. Small Business Administration ...... 82 

Kutz, Greg, Managing Director of Forensic Audits and Special Investigations, 

U.S. Government Accounting Office ................................................................... 91 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

Allen, Susan 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 53 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 55 

Summary of testimony ..................................................................................... 113 

Fairlie, Robert W. 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 21 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 24 

Summary of testimony ..................................................................................... 111 

Gustafson, Peggy 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 82 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 85 

Summary of testimony ..................................................................................... 115 

Hagan, Hon. Kay 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 18 

Johns, Marie 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 6 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 9 

Summary of testimony ..................................................................................... 110 

Kutz, Greg 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 91 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 93 

Summary of testimony ..................................................................................... 116 

Landrieu, Hon. Mary L. 

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

IV 

Mitchell, B. Doyle 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 64 

Biography .......................................................................................................... 67 

Montoya, Martha 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 68 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 70 

Summary of testimony ..................................................................................... 114 

Morial, Marc 

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

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 34 

Summary of testimony ..................................................................................... 112 

Snowe, Hon. Olympia J. 

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

U.S. Census Bureau 

Report titled ‘‘Survey of Business Owners: Black-Owned Businesses: 

2007’’ .............................................................................................................. 117 

Report titled ‘‘The Compelling Interest for Race—and Gender Conscious Federal Contracting Programs: An Update to the May 23, 1996 Review of 

Barriers for Minority and Women-Owned Businesses’’ .................................... 157 
(1) 

CLOSING THE GAP: EXPLORING MINORITY 

ACCESS TO CAPITAL AND CONTRACTING 

OPPORTUNITIES 

THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 2011 

UNITED STATES SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS

AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:12 a.m., in Room 

428–A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Mary L. Landrieu 

(Chair of the Committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Landrieu, Hagan, and Snowe. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARY L. LANDRIEU, CHAIR, 

AND A U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA 

Chair LANDRIEU. Good morning. Thank you all for joining us this 

morning for a meeting of the Small Business Committee about 

Closing the Gap: Exploring Minority Access to Capital and Contracting Opportunities, specifically focused on closing the wealth 

gap in America and what our committee and the Small Business 

Administration can contribute to that effort. 

Since becoming Chair of this committee, I, along with other 

members, have made it a top priority to make sure the nation’s 

small businesses, and that is 27 million small businesses, have access to capital and ready access to government contracting, particularly Federal Government contracting. I have asked my staff to update me regularly on the number of banks, particularly community 

banks, as you know, Ms. Johns, who are participating in the small 

business lending programs, and we have seen a significant increase 

of banks in America stepping up to be partners with the SBA trying to streamline those processes and get capital to Main Streets 

throughout our country. 

In addition, this committee is on constant lookout for new and 

better ways to improve those programs to streamline them, eliminate regulation, and to try to open up capital markets and increase 

contracting opportunities for small business when those opportunities present themselves through Federal contracting. It is clear to 

me that small businesses need reliable and non-predatory financing 

opportunities in both the debt and equity market in order to start, 

to grow, and to succeed. They want to know that when the Federal 

Government does contract for goods and services and it is in the 

billions of dollars—and we are going to try to have that figure before the end of the meeting today—that small businesses can com-
2 

pete on a level and fair playing field with large businesses that also 

compete for contracting. 

As Chair, I will continue to focus on removing any arbitrary barriers that are identified as blocking this goal. In some cases, those 

barriers are not unlike the challenges all businesses face that are 

trying to work with the Federal Government—red tape, regulations, slow time frames. But in some cases, the obstacles that minority business owners face, whether it is African American or Hispanic or Asian or women, are quite unique. Since 2009, I have convened at least three meetings to address ways that this committee 

and the SBA through many of its programs can address and provide remedy to these issues. 

The purpose of today’s hearing is clear. We are here to discuss 

solutions, initiatives and solutions on how this committee, this 

Congress, and the SBA administration can close and eventually, if 

possible, try to erase the wealth gaps in this nation that were so 

clearly identified by Dr. Robert Fairlie, a professor of economics at 

the University of California at Santa Cruz, who is again with us 

today and will be testifying on our second panel. 

I know, and I have known through many years of experience that 

the only way to close these disparities in wealth gaps in our nation 

is through a holistic approach, obviously, improved access to education, improved access to home ownership using traditional and 

safe models of lending and equity building. These issues, however, 

are not within the jurisdiction of this committee. But improving access to capital for small businesses, expanding opportunities for 

contracting with the Federal Government, expanding opportunities 

for export, the broadband initiative, part of that is under the jurisdiction of this committee, and we are going to remain focused on 

these areas and closing this gap. 

Last year at a hearing on this subject, Dr. Fairlie, who will be 

testifying today again, testified that many factors are responsible 

for the disparity in business performance between minority and 

non-minority-owned businesses. Access to financial capital is one. 

He pointed out that one of the major roots of the problem is the 

extremely high level of wealth inequity, or I would say it as an extremely low wealth accumulation by African American families. 

I was astonished to learn, and I have been in public office now 

for over 30 years, that the median wealth for African American 

families in America in the year 2000—and this was the Census, I 

think, of 2000, now we have some updated figures today—was only 

$5,000, compared to $87,000 for a majority of white families. And 

for Latino families, it was less than $8,000. These levels of wealth 

are one-eleventh to one-sixteenth the levels of wealth held by nonminorities. 

I want to show this graph which is up here. I am sorry that all 

of you cannot see it. I do not know if there is anything the staff 

can do to hand this out, but for those of you that can see the video, 

it is really startling. The disparities in wealth are substantially 

larger than disparities of income, and I think that sometimes in 

America, we focus on closing the income gap. And you can see the 

income gap for non-minority families at $55,000. For African American families, it is $34,000. And for Latino families, it is $37,000. 

There is a gap. It is troubling. It has been improving, I think, sub-
3 

stantially, but we are going to hear some testimony as to whether 

that is improving. 

But when you look at the wealth gap, the net worth, the gap of 

net worth between white families in America at $87,000 and African American families at $5,400 and Hispanic families at $7,900, 

it is absolutely startling, jaw dropping, and if it does not make 

more than just this committee focus, I am not sure what data or 

testimony would. 

And that is why we are here today, to talk about solutions to 

closing this gap. I have shared this with my family, who was in disbelief. I have shared it with people that do not believe it when I 

say it, and so we are going to have a second hearing today. And 

I have shared it in speeches all over this country. I have made it 

one of my priorities as Chair of this committee to do what I can, 

which is limited under the jurisdiction of this committee, but this 

committee is one of the standing committees of the Senate and we 

are going to take this issue on. 

Despite the sobering impact of Dr. Fairlie’s testimony, which we 

will hear on the second panel, there is some good news for minority 

business owners that we will hear today. The good news is the 

number of businesses in our minority communities continues to 

grow. According to the most recent data available from the SBA Office of Advocacy, minority-owned small businesses are among the 

fastest growing segment of the small business community. From 

1997 until 2002, firms owned by African Americans grew almost by 

45 percent, Hispanics by 31 percent, Asian Americans by 24 percent, and Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders by 49 percent. 

Minority-Owned Business Enterprises accounted for more than 

50 percent of the two million new businesses over the last ten 

years, far outstripping, I think, their make-up of the population. 

There are now more than four million minority-owned companies 

in the United States with annual sales totaling $700 billion. These 

businesses cross the entire industrial spectrum, from financial 

services and health care to construction and transportation. 

So it is clear there is great potential here. It is clear that besides 

access to high levels of education for minority communities, and I 

should say quality education, it is besides just the opportunity for 

traditional wealth creation through home ownership, not what we 

have seen in the last few years, which has been actually moving 

in the wrong direction, but in the traditional sense of equity building. But having the ability to build a business, to build wealth, to 

transfer that wealth to future generations is absolutely essential to 

close this startling and shameful gap that we are experiencing 

right now in our country. 

So that is what this hearing is about. There will be hearings over 

the next month or two in the areas of fraud, abuse, in all programs 

related to the SBA. That is not the subject of this hearing. This 

hearing is about positive solutions for closing this gap and for acknowledging that this gap actually exists. 

So that is why the Secretary is here this morning, Marie Johns, 

to testify about, A, does the SBA recognize this gap? Do you consider it in your mission an opportunity to try to, or within some 

aspect of the mission of the SBA to see what you can do to close 
4 

this gap through the programs that the SBA basically runs and 

monitors and how we are addressing that. 

So I am looking forward to this panel. We have a large second 

panel. And then the third panel, because of the minority’s request, 

will focus on some additional issues. 

I am joined by my Ranking Member, Senator Snowe, and then 

we will turn to our first panel for their testimony. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM MAINE 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you, Chair Landrieu, for holding this 

hearing today to discuss the barriers that continue to exist for our 

nation’s underserved small businesses. I also thank our distinguished panelists that include the SBA Deputy Administrator, 

Marie Johns, SBA Inspector General, Peggy Gustafson, Greg Kutz 

from the Government Accountability Office, and all of our other 

witnesses to appear in the second panel, who will offer invaluable 

insight into the various hurdles minority-owned small businesses 

encounter when trying to access capital to participate in the Federal marketplace. 

Regrettably, January marks the 21st consecutive month that the 

unemployment rate has been at or above nine percent. Even more 

astounding, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in January unemployment of African Americans was 15.7 percent, and 11.9 percent among Hispanics. 

According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, minority-owned firms generate $1 trillion in economic output to the U.S. economy 

and create 9.5 million jobs. Just imagine the strides we could 

achieve towards an economic recovery if the Federal Government 

could better harness minority-owned firms’ job creation potential. 

Ensuring that minority-owned businesses have fair access to 

Federal contracting opportunities is one way that our government 

can help foster minority entrepreneurial success. Last year, when 

it was brought to my attention that the HUBZone program would 

be given a super-preference for contracts above the other SBA contracting programs, I was very pleased to introduce legislation addressing this inequity by leveling the playing field so that contracts 

to service-disabled veterans, 8(a), HUBZone, and women-owned 

firms may be awarded with equal deference to each program. Particularly during these difficult economic times, it is imperative that 

small business contractors possess an equal opportunity to compete 

for Federal contracts, and so I am pleased that this parity legislation became law last fall. 

Furthermore, when it comes to small business goaling requirements, I am pleased to also note that the Federal Government exceeded its five percent Small Disadvantaged Business contracting 

goal in fiscal year 2009, awarding 7.5 percent of total contracts to 

these firms. I strongly encourage the administration to continue to 

build on these successes. However, much more needs to be done. 

For example, there remains a glaring problem facing minorityowned small businesses in accessing Federal contracts and that is 

the fraud that plagues the SBA’s 8(a) Business Development Program. In March of 2010, the GAO issued a report detailing the extensive fraud within the 8(a) program. The report revealed that 14 
5 

ineligible firms received $325 million in sole source and set-aside 

contracts, even though these firms were not eligible for the 8(a) 

program. As we use this hearing to examine barriers facing the minority community, I look forward to hearing from the GAO and 

their recommendations, as well as the SBA, to remedy the illegitimate firms siphoning away contracts from the rightful businesses 

trying to compete within the 8(a) program. 

As Ranking Member of this committee, I take very seriously our 

responsibility of vigorous oversight. That is why last December, 

Chair Landrieu and I sent a letter to the SBA highlighting the recent headlines and GAO reports of fraud and abuse that have 

plagued the agency’s contracting programs. I want to echo again 

today, as we did in our letter, our first priority this Congress is ensuring that all of the SBA’s contracting programs, because we know 

that fraud and abuse are not unique to the 8(a) program, are running efficiently, effectively, and free of exploitation. 

Shifting to access to capital, in April of last year, this committee 

held a hearing on the obstacles and opportunities for minority 

small business owners in capital markets. At that hearing, the 

committee investigated Dr. Robert Fairlie’s, who we are fortunate 

to have with us again today, report, Disparities in Capital Access 

Between Minority and Non-Minority-Owned Businesses. This report highlights a wide disparity in capital access between minority 

and non-minority firms. 

For example, the study concludes that minority-owned firms are, 

one, less likely to receive loans than non-minority firms; two, receive lower loan amounts than non-minority firms; and three, are 

more likely to be denied loans; and four, pay higher interest rates 

on business loans. These conclusions are certainly alarming, and 

clearly, as I have said repeatedly to the SBA, more must be done 

to address these problems. 

But I am pleased to say that, overall, the SBA has broken the 

mold in regard to minority lending. In fact, SBA-backed loans are 

about three times more likely than conventional loans to go to minority-owned firms, and micro loans have a particularly high success rate in fiscal year 2010. Forty-six percent of the SBA’s micro 

loans, a five percent increase over the previous fiscal year, went to 

minorities. 

I am pleased to also say that the increased micro loan limits and 

the heightened 7(a) and 504 loan limits, which I had initially called 

for in my legislation, the Next Step For Main Street Credit Availability Act, were recently enacted into law, and I thank the Chair 

for her role in helping to secure those changes. It is my hope that 

this initiative, combined with other measures that we will be able 

to provide, like the $24 million in the Recovery Act for micro loan 

intermediaries who were encouraged to carry over the funds into 

future fiscal years, will help provide even greater capital access to 

minorities. 

I also expect the micro loan program to continue to be a powerful 

tool for minority entrepreneurs moving forward and hope that Deputy Administrator Johns can speak to this issue today. 

Additionally, the SBA has initiated two new lending programs, 

the Small Loan Advantage and Community Advantage Programs, 

which have the potential to provide additional sources of capital to 
6 

underserved communities. So today’s hearing does provide an opportunity for the Administration to explain to key stakeholders 

how these new lending programs will increase access to capital for 

minority entrepreneurs. 

Again, thank you, Chair Landrieu, for your leadership in these 

critical issues and I am looking forward to working with you and 

to hearing from our witnesses. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you, Senator Snowe. 

Let me go right into our introductions to Marie Johns, who is the 

Deputy Administrator for the SBA. Since being confirmed by the 

Senate, Ms. Johns has been focused on the management of the 

agency, the development of SBA policies. Recently, she has focused 

much of her efforts on the development and implementation of the 

policies enacted by the Small Business Jobs Act, which was signed 

into law, which this committee led, and we are very, very proud of 

that particular Act. Prior to becoming SBA Deputy Director, Ms. 

Johns served as President of Verizon Washington, where she was 

responsible for over 2,000 employees and 800,000 customers. We 

thank you, Ms. Johns, for being here today. 

We are joined by Senator Hagan and we will go through a round 

of questioning after your presentation. Please begin. Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF MARIE JOHNS, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, U.S. 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

Ms. JOHNS. Thank you, Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member 

Snowe, and Senator Hagan. Thank you for inviting me to testify 

today on these very important issues. It is an honor to be speaking 

before you this morning. 

As an African American woman, as a former small business 

owner, and most importantly, as an American citizen, I greatly appreciate this committee’s commitment to ensuring that minorityowned companies have the same opportunities as small businesses 

across our country. 

Core to our mission at the Small Business Administration is expanding opportunities for companies in traditionally underserved 

areas, including those owned by minorities, women, veterans, people with disabilities, and people from rural areas. These businesses 

typically have a harder time accessing the tools they need to grow 

and create jobs in their communities. 

The SBA is well poised to reach these businesses. For example, 

our lending programs support companies that struggle with access 

to conventional capital. One study by the Urban Institute, and this 

was referenced earlier, showed that women- and minority-owned 

small businesses are three to five times more likely to receive an 

SBA loan than a conventional loan. We are proud of the work that 

we have done supporting underserved communities, but always we 

know we can do more, and this is especially true since many of 

these communities have been disproportionately hard hit by the recession. 

As a result of the tight credit market over the last two years, the 

overall share of SBA loans going to small businesses in underserved communities has decreased significantly. From fiscal year 

2008 to fiscal year 2010, overall SBA 7(a) lending to small businesses in underserved communities dropped nearly five percent, 
7 

and that decline has been even greater in some communities. But 

that decline equates to a drop of $780 million in loans to businesses 

that need them most. This drop in lending has been a call to action 

for us at the SBA. 

We found that the lower-dollar loans were significantly important to helping entrepreneurs in underserved communities start 

and grow their businesses. Often, a small business does not need 

a $1 million or a $5 million loan. Some do, but others need more 

in the range of $50,000 to buy new equipment or $100,000 to renovate a building. We have heard from our lending partners that the 

paperwork and the processing time involved with those loans frequently meant that they were not as cost effective to make a lowdollar loan through the SBA. 

So to address this, we recently announced two new loan initiatives, part of our 7(a) program, Small Loan Advantage and Community Advantage, and those programs are designed to get lowerdollar loans into the hands of small business owners. These initiatives streamline the application process and cut down the paperwork while still offering our standard guarantee. 

Small Loan Advantage is open to lenders in our Preferred Lending Program, and I am happy to report that the SBA began accepting applications for Small Loan Advantage loans on February 15, 

a full month ahead of schedule. 

Meanwhile, Community Advantage opens our 7(a) lending program to, quote-unquote, ‘‘mission lenders,’’ such as Certified Development Companies, Community Development Financial Institutions, or CDFIs, and SBA certified micro lenders. This is for the 

first time ever. We are very excited about bringing these non-bank 

lenders on as partners because of the proven track record they 

have in serving underserved communities, including providing effective technical assistance that many of those borrowers need. 

The SBA has also begun accepting applications from mission 

lenders to become SBA lenders, and once approved, those lenders 

will immediately be able to offer Community Advantage Loans. 

The SBA also works to help small businesses compete for and 

win government contracts, which are an important source of revenue in many instances. Our 8(a) Business Development Program 

has been critical to helping these small businesses win contracts, 

grow, and create jobs. To strengthen the 8(a) program even further, 

the SBA recently undertook the first regulatory review process in 

over a decade. The agency actually began the process back in 2007. 

Once we had a draft proposal for new regulations, SBA officials 

went on an extensive listening tour, where we gathered over 1,500 

comments from around the country. 

And after much hard work, the new 8(a) regulations were posted 

this month. These new rules cover a variety of areas in the program, from clarifications on determining economic disadvantage to 

tightening the requirements on joint venture contracts. Overall, our 

goal was to strengthen the program while eliminating opportunities 

for waste, fraud, and abuse, and ensuring, as was said earlier, that 

the program benefits flow to their intended recipients, and I believe 

these new regulations go a long way to achieving that goal. 

The SBA also recently finalized and released the Women’s Contracting Rule. The rule is a critical step toward giving women- 
8 

owned small businesses better opportunities to compete for Federal 

Government contracts. 

Our steps to strengthen the 8(a) program and the structure behind the Women’s Contracting Rule are also examples of the threeprong oversight strategy that we are implementing across all of our 

programs. That strategy focuses on, one, effective up-front certification. Two, ongoing surveillance and monitoring. And three, timely and robust enforcement. These steps are aimed directly at ensuring that only eligible small businesses benefit from our programs 

and that when we suspect that bad actors are present, we go after 

them appropriately and aggressively. 

While I am proud of what the SBA has accomplished under the 

leadership of Administrator Mills, alongside this committee, I believe we must continue to be diligent in our work with underserved 

communities. We know that with the right tools in hand, entrepreneurs and small businesses in these communities can have significant impact in driving economic growth and creating jobs where 

they are needed most. 

Thank you very much. I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Johns follows:] 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you very much. I really appreciate particularly the comments about the Small Loan Advantage and the 

Community Advantage Programs. 

One of the goals that I share with Senator Snowe is to really get 

our community banks in America partnered with the SBA in a 

much stronger partnership to make sure that the capital that is 

available and that the Federal Government is guaranteeing, particularly in our new lending program, actually hits the streets on 

Main Street. And making the SBA programs more user-friendly is 

something that the two of us and all of us, I think, hear a great 

deal about. So I appreciate those efforts and will look forward to 

monitoring the success of those programs. 

Let me ask you, though, about loan size for African American 

businesses, minority businesses. The data that is coming in to us 

shows that from 2001 to 2006, the average loan size for African 

American business owners dropped from $181,000 to $84,000. That 

is a 53 percent drop in the size of loan. By contrast, the average 

loan to non-minorities dropped only 19 percent, to around $2,013. 

Is the SBA aware of this? What do you think is pushing that 

trend? Do you think it is something that should be cause for concern, and are you aware of those numbers? 

Ms. JOHNS. Senator Landrieu, this recession has been very difficult on all businesses, but it has been incredibly hard on small 

businesses and particularly minority businesses, businesses operating in underserved communities. And we are very focused on that 

as an agency and that is exactly why we have developed a new initiative that is strictly focused on underserved communities. 

The Advantage Loans that I described earlier are a key part of 

that underserved strategy because access to capital is absolutely 

critical. But as you know, the SBA takes a very holistic approach 

to how we serve small business growth and development. Capital 

is a critical part of that approach, but we also focus on government 

contracting as well as our counseling programs. And taken together, that is the best recipe for ensuring that small businesses 

have the support that they need to grow and create jobs. 

We also are in the process of establishing a council on underserved communities, an advisory council. I am delighted to share 

with you that we are honored that Catherine L. Hughes, a founder 

of Radio One and TV One and a true leader in media industry, and 

as an African American woman quite a ceiling-breaker, is chairing 

the council. Ms. Hughes also was an SBA borrower early in her 

business formation. So she knows our programs. She knows our 

agency. And we are going to have under her leadership 20 of the 

most—the best minds that we can find around this country to help 

us focus on these kinds of statistics and to give us the advice that 

we need to determine, where do we need to replicate programs that 

are working well and where do we need to focus on addressing the 

gaps. 

You talked earlier very eloquently about the effects of the recession and the effects of—for example, housing values that have 

dropped. Using equity in a home has been, forever has been a primary source of capital for small business owners to use in order to 

capitalize their business. So when we have seen the drop in hous-
15 

ing values, that has had an impact on businesses’ ability to get 

loans and to grow their businesses. 

But we are confident that with the Advantage Loans as well as 

the improved counseling, the more robust counseling that we are 

going to be able to provide out in the field, because of—and thank 

you for your support on the Small Business Jobs Act—$50 million 

was appropriated for our Small Business Development Centers so 

that we can have more robust facility—counseling capacity available for small businesses around the country. We touch over a million entrepreneurs a year and we are hoping to grow that number 

because of the additional capacity that was available through the 

Small Business Jobs Act. So that is an example of some of the 

things that we are doing to address the issue that you raise. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Well, I know this committee is going to stay 

very focused as we address the challenge of budgets and closing the 

deficit gap to recognize that this particular agency has a very special and important mission. If this recovery is going to be evenly 

felt across the country, it is going to take a well-resourced and 

well-structured and well-managed SBA, working with partners in 

the private sector and State governments, to make sure that these 

programs are reaching to areas that are obviously, by the data that 

has been presented to this committee, sometimes left out and underserved. And so I think we have to be very careful, I would caution my colleagues, about cutting back on these areas when we are 

really trying to turn the corner. 

Let me turn it over now to Senator Snowe and then to Senator 

Hagan, and then we will go maybe through a second round of questioning, as well. 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you, Chair Landrieu. 

Ms. Johns, I want to get to the issues that I raised earlier in my 

testimony regarding the GAO report to get a better understanding 

of exactly how the SBA is responding to that report, because in the 

final analysis, given the fact that we are grappling with enormous 

deficits and trying to ensure that we maximize the efficiency and 

effectiveness of all of our programs and obviously root out any 

fraud and corruption, the fact is that there were 14 ineligible firms 

that were determined by the GAO to be fraudulent and designated 

as 8(a) contractors ineligible for the contracting program. 

As I understand it, between 2009 to today, the SBA Office of Inspector General has referred 26 contractors for suspension or debarment, meaning permanent removal from Federal procurement. 

From those 26 referred, the SBA has suspended a grand total of 

three contractors. What happened to the other 23 contractors that 

were referred by the Inspector General’s Office? 

Ms. JOHNS. Let me begin, Ranking Member Snowe, by talking 

about our approach to fraud, waste, and abuse. First of all, there 

is zero tolerance for fraud, waste, and abuse. I spoke in my opening 

statement about our process for how we address fraud, waste, and 

abuse through effective certification on the front end, effective monitoring and surveillance during a business’s time with us in a particular program, and then timely and robust enforcement. If there 

is a bad actor, that is how we address that company. 

Any business that comes to our attention as a potential case for 

fraud, we investigate every single one, and there are three basic 
16 

paths that one of those complaints can take. There is a criminal 

path, which involves the Department of Justice and the Inspector 

General. There is the civil penalty path, which again involves the 

DOJ and the IG. And then there is the administrative path, where 

the agency has the most latitude to act. We are in regular touch 

with our IG’s office about matters of this type and we are—as I 

said, we take any case of potential fraud very seriously. 

You mentioned some numbers. What I would like to share with 

you, under our suspension and debarment process, in the last two 

fiscal years—now, this covers our lending as well as our procurement programs—we have had seven suspensions, 54 proposed 

debarments, and 44 actual debarments under the administrative 

track. I would be happy to provide additional—— 

Senator SNOWE. Well, can I get to these specifically—— 

Ms. JOHNS. Mm-hmm. 

Senator SNOWE. And to this program and what the GAO cited? 

Ms. JOHNS. Well, the GAO—— 

Senator SNOWE. On the 14 ineligible—— 

Ms. JOHNS. On the 14—— 

Senator SNOWE. Yes, and then—— 

Ms. JOHNS. Every one of the 14 firms that were cited by the GAO 

had been investigated and—— 

Senator SNOWE. So what is the disposition, then? 

Ms. JOHNS. There were a variety of dispositions. First of all, of 

the 14 that the GAO cited, by the time we received the report, I 

believe about six or seven of those companies were no longer in the 

program for a variety of reasons. Of the remaining eight, others 

were removed from the program or left the program voluntarily. 

There were a variety of dispositions, and again, I can provide that 

detail for you. 

Senator SNOWE. Well, I think the committee needs to have a response from the SBA on these issues. I mean, it is this program 

and every other program. We need exact responses on these questions so that we have a full appreciation and understanding. We 

have an obligation here in the oversight capacity of this committee, 

but in every committee on every program, frankly. I mean, that is 

where we stand today and always with respect to how taxpayers’ 

dollars are being used. So I think we need to have an accounting 

for each and every one of those. 

Ms. JOHNS. We will be happy to provide that. 

Senator SNOWE. Okay. And so on the 26 contractors that were 

recommended, was that part of that 14? Only three contractors 

were suspended out of the 26 that were referred to the SBA. 

Ms. JOHNS. I have to say, I am not familiar with the data that 

you are quoting from, but I will be happy to—if we can get that 

information in writing, we will be happy to provide a detailed answer. 

Senator SNOWE. Well, who is responsible in the SBA for addressing these issues? Who is singularly responsible? What level of priority is this accorded within the SBA? 

Ms. JOHNS. Responsibility for—— 

Senator SNOWE. For addressing these issues. Correct. 

Ms. JOHNS. Well, Administrator Mills and myself are ultimately 

responsible. But the responsibility is not singularly focused. It is a 
17 

responsibility across the agency, and that gets to a new process 

that we put in place, the Suspension and Debarment Task Force, 

which is chaired by our General Counsel. That task force is looking 

at how we can ensure that, across the agency, employees are 

trained, better trained, to identify instances of possible fraud at 

every possible point throughout the process, either the certification 

process, time in the program, et cetera. And so we are—that task 

force is doing its work and we intend to have an even stronger 

view—process, rather, on fraud, waste, and abuse later this spring. 

But what I assure you again, Ranking Member Snowe, is that 

every instance of fraud that comes to our attention is fully investigated and we are working in concert with the Inspector General, 

and the process that I described earlier as far as certification, monitoring, and enforcement, is modeled directly after the recommendations that were in the GAO report. 

Senator SNOWE. Okay. Then I would like to see the final results 

of all that. 

Ms. JOHNS. Sure. 

Senator SNOWE. I think the committee deserves a response to the 

report, to the specific disposition of each and every firm or individual that was cited in the GAO report or any individual or firm 

that has been reported to SBA. I think at the end of the day, we 

have to go after those people, even if they have been removed from 

the program or left in the program, whatever they did, we have to 

go after them with a vengeance, as well. If you inappropriately use 

Federal dollars or access Federal programs illegally, then we obviously have to make sure that we take appropriate action. 

Ms. JOHNS. And we are as serious about that as—— 

Senator SNOWE. We cannot relent on that. 

Ms. JOHNS. Absolutely. We are relentless, as well, because we 

know that the integrity of the program is to make sure that they 

are available for those business owners for whom they are intended, rest on the fact that we run good programs and that we 

ferret out fraud, waste, and abuse at every turn. 

And so I also want to thank the committee for the support of the 

Small Business Jobs Act because you gave us another very important tool in that regard. The presumption of loss provision in the 

Small Business Jobs Act says that even if a company has provided 

a service to the government and has misrepresented itself, that we 

can, once that is determined, we can go back and collect treble 

damages from that company. That is a new tool that our agency 

did not have before and that is available now to us through the 

Small Business Jobs Act. 

Senator SNOWE. I would just mention that those 26 that I cited 

were in the IG’s testimony. So that was from their report specifically. Thank you. 

Chair LANDRIEU. I thank Senator Snowe. And as I have shared 

with her and with the staff, we are going to have a—we feel so 

strongly about the issue of waste, fraud, and abuse throughout the 

entire agency, obviously not just with the minority and African 

American programs but with the entire agency, particularly the 

IG’s scathing report relative to HUBZones, we are going to have a 

very specific hearing on fraud, waste, and abuse, particularly with 
18 

the HUBZone program and with other programs in the SBA. But 

the subject of this hearing is about closing the wealth gap. 

Senator Hagan. 

Senator SNOWE. Madam Chair, can I just raise an issue in that 

regard? 

Chair LANDRIEU. Yes. 

Senator SNOWE. I think that any time we have the opportunity 

to have witnesses in front of the committee from the agencies that 

are responsible for these programs and these issues should be 

raised. I am not suggesting that it is just unique to these programs. I would ask these questions of any program. And so we are 

starting today. You happen to be the witness. We happen to have 

the Inspector General’s report. We want a response to those issues 

and I think we deserve, but more importantly, not just us, but the 

taxpayers. So that is the issue. I would hope we would do this with 

every program. If it warrants it, then we should be raising those 

questions. 

Chair LANDRIEU. We will have ample opportunity to do that. 

Senator Hagan. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. KAY HAGAN, A U.S. SENATOR 

FROM NORTH CAROLINA 

Senator HAGAN. Thank you, Chairman Landrieu, and it is an 

honor to be here and thank you for convening this important hearing. I do think there is obviously a disparity, and through the SBA 

and through the lending practices, we certainly do need to step up 

and see what we can do to proactively help change that. 

And obviously, it is all about jobs. We need to see what we can 

do at the Federal level to make a better business climate so that 

private industries can grow and hire more people. 

But I also know that creating that better business climate is central to our economic recovery. I have been holding hearings around 

the State in North Carolina, and I do hear all the time that small 

businesses are having trouble accessing capital. And that is why I 

was very pleased with the bill that we passed, the Small Business 

Jobs bill with the Small Business Lending Fund. I think it is one 

of the most important pieces of that legislation was the Small Business Lending Fund, and by providing resources to community 

banks and independent banks, that Small Business Lending Fund 

is certainly encouraging those banks to increase their lending to 

small businesses throughout the country and in North Carolina. 

And I think it is important because it is targeted to the community 

lenders that serve businesses that otherwise struggle to secure financing. 

And encouraging entrepreneurship, I believe, is critically important to the sustained economic development and self-sufficiency in 

our underserved communities. While the SBA currently administers a number of well-meaning programs designed to make it 

easier for entrepreneurs in these communities to start a business 

and ultimately to grow that business, we have obviously got to be 

sure that those programs are working effectively, and to do so, the 

SBA programs must effectively encourage lenders to make those 

small-dollar loans that are needed most in our underserved communities. 
19 

But we have also got to ensure that Federal contracting preferences designed to assist disadvantaged businesses are not subject 

to fraud and abuse, and I think this hearing is a good opportunity 

to learn more about the state of these programs. 

I just want to compliment the Deputy Secretary, Ms. Johns. I 

have read your bio and we are mighty fortunate to have you come 

in to the public service work and I appreciate your efforts and your 

leadership. 

In your comments, you mentioned the Small Loan and Community Advantage Programs, which are intended to make it easier for 

the SBA lenders to make these smaller loans, in particular, to the 

underserved small business owners. The SBA Small Business Investment Company Program is designed to leverage private venture capital funds to encourage equity investments, which we know 

we need in these qualifying small businesses. 

Can you explain to me how the proposed would work in practice, 

having to do with—in President Obama’s 2012 budget, he proposes 

to leverage the SBIC program to support $200 million annually 

over the next five years in so-called impact investments that are 

targeted to economically and socially disadvantaged businesses. 

Can you explain how they would actually work and how it is intended to help minority- and women-owned small businesses expand more rapidly? 

Ms. JOHNS. Yes, Senator. Thank you for the question. We are in 

the process of developing the contours of that program. What I 

view as my key role at this stage in the process is to build awareness, because we want to make sure that we have a pool of firms, 

money managers and investment firms, that reflect our country, 

that reflect our business sector. And so I am taking a lot of my 

time to talk to individuals at every opportunity to say we have created this impact fund and now we want to make sure that you are 

aware of this resource and that you stay connected to the SBA so 

that we can hopefully get you involved with this opportunity. 

Businesses are—the minority business community as well as the 

small business community is not monolithic, and at the agency, we 

have got to make sure that we have capital programs, capital resources available for businesses wherever they are. Another advantage for your support of the Small Business Jobs Act was the ceiling for our 7(a) program was raised to $5 million and there are 

firms, if they are manufacturing companies, for example, or franchisers, they need those higher-dollar loans. But as I have spoken 

about earlier, we have a large segment of our business community 

that needs the smaller dollar loans. Then there are businesses that 

are looking for an equity infusion and that is where the Impact 

Fund comes in. 

I would be happy to come back and talk to the committee at a 

later date when we have more of the structure of the Impact Fund 

in place, but in the meantime, I am talking everywhere I go about 

the Impact Fund to encourage a very diverse set of interests in the 

fund so that we can, at the end of the day, have a strong and a 

diverse portfolio of managers who are ready and capable of serving 

businesses in underserved communities and across the board. 

Senator HAGAN. Well, in many instances, those smaller loans are 

the hardest ones for small business owners to actually have access 
20 

to, and so I do think it is important that you continue focusing in 

that area—— 

Ms. JOHNS. Yes, Senator—— 

Senator HAGAN [continuing]. Which is what this is. 

Ms. JOHNS. Yes. And if I may, Senator, I mentioned in my opening statement that we are a month ahead of schedule in getting the 

Small Loan Advantage Program up and running, and in fact, just 

yesterday, I learned of one of the first Small Loan Advantage loans 

was taken on by, as it turns out, an African American pharmacist 

in rural Georgia who took out an $80,000-plus Small Loan Advantage loan in order to expand her—it is a working capital loan in 

order to expand her footprint of pharmacies in rural Georgia. So I 

was very excited to get that news because that is exactly the kind 

of thing that we were hoping to see with the Small Loan Advantage and we just look forward to that continuing. 

Senator HAGAN. Thank you. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you. 

We really appreciate your testimony this morning. We are going 

to move to the second panel. Any additional questions can be submitted to Ms. Johns. 

And I just want to submit for the record, following Senator 

Snowe’s comments about the highlights of the GAO study on the 

substantial abuses in the HUBZone program, and this is going to 

be the subject of our hearing the week of April 14, just to give everyone notice. We are going to have a two- or three-hour hearing 

on streamlining fraud and abuse in the SBA. Of course, those questions are always relevant in any meeting that we have, but this 

Chair feels very strongly about some of those same issues and we 

will be going into some detail about the fictitious firms that filed 

addresses for HUBZones using The Alamo in Texas, a public storage facility in Florida, and a city hall in Texas as their principal 

office locations that should have easily been identified as fraud 

when they applied and self-certification. 

Thank you, Ms. Johns. 

The second panel, if you all would come forward and I will introduce you as you are seated. 

To keep us moving, Dr. Robert Fairlie will be testifying first. He 

is a Professor of Economics at the University of California. He has 

done extensive research on entrepreneurship, technology, inequality, labor economics, and education. He testified before the committee last year and we are looking forward to having him testify 

this morning. 

Our second witness is Marc Morial, former Mayor of New Orleans and outstanding leader for the city, region, and nation. He is 

an entrepreneur, lawyer, professor, President of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and is currently serving as CEO of the National 

Urban League. We welcome Mayor Morial to be with us today. He 

is leading a national effort in this regard and we are very pleased 

to hear his strategies this morning. 

Our next witness is Susan Allen. Ms. Allen founded U.S. Pan 

Asian American Chamber of Commerce. She became the National 

President and CEO in 2001 after a 17-year career in law. President 

Bush appointed her to the Council of Administrative Conference of 

the United States. She is a recipient of numerous awards and we 
21 

are looking forward to her testimony, particularly in regards to the 

Asian American community. 

Doyle Mitchell is our next witness. Doyle is President and CEO 

of Industrial Bank, headquartered here in D.C. He also serves as 

Chairman of the National Bankers Association, which was founded 

in 1927 as the trade association for the 103 minority- and womenowned banks in America. We look forward to his testimony this 

morning. 

And Martha Montoya is the owner and partner of three companies, Los Kitos and several others, including a newspaper. She 

serves as Procurement Chair and Board member of the Hispanic 

Chamber. We are looking forward to hearing her testimony, as 

well. 

But why do we not start with Dr. Fairlie to sort of lay the data 

out, and then we will be hearing comments from men and women 

who work in this area to close this gap every day and to hear from 

them the kind of strategies that may be working, the things that 

they see that are not working, or any ideas that they would have 

to share with the committee about how we can continue to expand 

opportunities in the development of minority-owned businesses in 

our country to help close this wealth gap that is quite startling. 

Dr. Fairlie. 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT W. FAIRLIE, PH.D., PROFESSOR OF 

ECONOMICS, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA CRUZ 

Mr. FAIRLIE. Thank you, Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member 

Snowe, and members of the committee. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Could you pull the microphone a little bit closer 

to you, please, and when all of you speak—yes, and pull the seat 

in. Thank you. 

Mr. FAIRLIE. Thank you, Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member 

Snowe, and Senator Hagan. It is an honor to testify in front of you 

on the important topic of wealth and equality and access to capital 

for minority businesses. 

I am a Professor of Economics at the University of California at 

Santa Cruz and have studied small business and entrepreneurship 

issues for almost 20 years. I am here to talk briefly about the findings from my research on the topic. 

The great recession ended in December 2009, more than a year 

ago, but the national unemployment rate remains above nine percent. Fourteen million people are still looking for jobs and a record 

number have been jobless for more than a year. Although many 

people have turned to self-employment in the face of limited employment opportunities, it is not an easy time to start businesses. 

Small businesses are continuing to be hit hard by the sluggish 

economy. The rate of businesses filing for bankruptcies in the 

United States is more than twice as high as it was in mid-2007. 

Contributing to the high rate of business closings are the lingering 

tight credit conditions faced by small businesses. Housing prices 

have also not rebounded from the beginning of the recession, which 

is important because home equity is often used to finance business 

starts. 

Minority-owned businesses are being hit especially hard in the 

current economy. Research that I and others have conducted indi-
22 

cates that minority businesses face significant barriers to entry, 

growth, and survival, even in more favorable economic conditions. 

Minority firms are more vulnerable because they are generally 

smaller and have fewer resources to draw on in difficult economic 

times. The average minority-owned business has revenues of 

$178,000 per year, which is less than 40 percent of the non-minority level. Minority-owned firms also hire fewer employees and have 

lower profit levels. 

One of the most important factors responsible for these disparities in business performance is access to financial capital. A large 

body of research shows that limited access to financial capital 

hinders the formation and growth of minority businesses. Minorityowned businesses have substantially lower levels of financial capital invested in their businesses. 

The first figure I wanted to show is estimates from the Federal 

Reserve, the latest estimates available showing the amount of equity and loan investments in minority firms. And what you see is 

startling low levels of investments, on average. What we find is 

that minority firms have about $3,400 of equity investments in 

their firms, on average, and $46,500 of loan amounts. The levels 

for non-minorities are more than twice that level, okay. What I also 

found doing research on this is these disparities do not go away 

when I control for owner and firm characteristics, and others and 

I have also found this in other data sources. 

One of the major causes of this lack of access to capital is the 

shockingly high level of wealth inequality found in the United 

States. The disparity in wealth between minorities and non-minorities is an order of magnitude larger than income inequality. So estimates of median net worth are displayed in the next figure. What 

we find here is the latest data available are from 2004 from the 

Census Bureau, and what we find is that African American families have $8,700 in median wealth. Latino families have $13,400 in 

medial wealth. White levels are over $100,000 higher and they are 

nine to 13 times higher than these levels. 

These low levels of wealth are a problem. They translate into 

fewer start-ups and undercapitalized businesses because an entrepreneur’s wealth is often used to finance a business. Entrepreneurs 

are also frequently required by investors to invest their own money 

in the business as an incentive. 

Contributing to the patterns in wealth inequality are low rates 

of minority home ownership and lower levels of home equity. The 

next figure shows the latest data available for 2010 on home ownership rates. What I found is that less than half of minority families have a home, or own a home, whereas three-quarters of nonminority families own a home. So there are major differences in 

home ownership. 

But some new data that I wanted to present shows banking rates 

from a new study by the FDIC and the Census Bureau, and what 

it shows is a striking number of minority families do not have a 

banking account, either through a savings or checking account. 

More than 20 percent of Latino and 20 percent of African American 

families do not have a bank account, whereas the level for whites 

is around three percent. The same data from the FDIC and Census 
23 

Bureau show that minorities are more likely to use higher-cost financing services, such as payday loans. 

Further limiting the ability of minority entrepreneurs to obtain 

financial capital is lending discrimination, which I show in the next 

figure. What I find here is that minority firms are more likely to 

experience loan denials, pay higher interest rates, and are less likely to apply for loans because of a fear of rejection in those loans. 

The minority levels of applying for loans and getting loan acceptances are more than twice as high, and minority firms that do get 

loans pay one-and-a-half percentage point higher interest rates on 

those loans. 

The minority-owned businesses make enormous contributions to 

the U.S. economy. Businesses owned by minorities produce more 

than $1 trillion in total sales, they employ six million workers, and 

have an annual payroll of $168 billion. They also create another six 

million jobs for themselves as the owners of those businesses. 

In closing, although minority-owned firms contribute greatly to 

the economy, there remains a lot of untapped potential among 

these firms. As I have discussed minority entrepreneurs face substantial barriers to obtaining financial capital. These barriers include low levels of wealth, low rates of home ownership, low rates 

of banking, and lending discrimination. Restricting minority businesses in their growth ultimately limits total U.S. productivity, job 

creation, and innovation, which are all essential for getting our 

economy back on track. 

Thank you for the opportunity to present the findings from my 

research. I look forward to hearing your comments. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Fairlie follows:] 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you, Dr. Fairlie. 

Before we move to Mayor Morial, could you present to this committee the Asian American population, because it is helpful to have 

African American, Hispanic, and Asian, and if you can do it today, 

that is great, and if not, if you would just submit it, that would be 

helpful. 

Mayor Morial. 

STATEMENT OF MARC MORIAL, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF 

EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE 

Mr. MORIAL. Thank you very much, Senator Landrieu. Let me, 

first of all, thank you for calling this hearing and also Ranking—— 

Chair LANDRIEU. Can you speak a little bit closer into the microphone? I am sorry. 

Mr. MORIAL. Thank you. Is that better? 

Chair LANDRIEU. It is better. 

Mr. MORIAL. Let me thank you for calling this hearing and for 

inviting me here today. Also, to Ranking Member Snowe, let me 

thank you also for being here today, and both of you for your leadership. 

I want to cover a few areas, and on behalf of the National Urban 

League, we are absolutely committed to the growth and the 

strength of small businesses with a particular focus on the nation’s 

businesses owned by people of color. 

One, I want to outline four key challenges that confront minority-owned businesses in the United States. One is the need for effective communication of programs that are intended to benefit and 

assist Minority Business Enterprises. 

Two, and Dr. Fairlie has talked about this, access to reasonablypriced capital through private sector commercial sources. 

Number three, access to Federal, State, and local contracting opportunities, either prime or subcontracting opportunities. 

And number four, lack of adequately designed measures of assistance, whether they are poorly designed lending initiatives or inadequate forms of technical assistance. 

Let me say this, because this point should not be lost. There is 

tremendous job creating potential in the nation’s black-owned small 

businesses and other MBEs. Why? If one in three of this nation’s 

micro enterprises—just one in three—those are those with fewer 

than five employees—were to add one additional employee, we 

would be at full employment. If one of three of the nation’s micro 

enterprises added one employee, we would be at full employment. 

Number two, self-employed business owners earn more on average than wage and salary workers. And there is evidence that disadvantaged workers have more upward income mobility and faster 

earnings growth than disadvantaged wage and salary workers. 

Number three, black-owned firms outpaced the growth of non-minority firms based on the Census report that just came out, which 

studied the period from 2002 to 2007. These are interesting numbers. The gross receipts of African American firms increased by 55 

percent. Their employment increased by 22 percent. And the number of firms increased by 61 percent. And while most of the firms 

in the black community are very small, African American firms 

with receipts of $1 million or more generate a large percentage of 
33 

all the revenues generated by all African American businesses. The 

fact of the matter is that black-owned businesses in this country 

remain very small. 

Now, if black-owned small businesses reach representative parity, that is, 13 percent of the U.S. adult population, meaning if 

black-owned small businesses were proportionate in size, there 

would have been 3.3 million firms generating $1.4 trillion in gross 

receipts and creating seven million jobs instead of less than a million jobs. 

My point is very simple. Investing in the nation’s minority-owned 

small businesses is a way to create jobs for all. It is a way to build 

the economy of the United States. If minority-owned businesses, 

particularly African American-owned businesses, could grow that 

fast—notwithstanding all of the barriers that have been documented and that will be documented on this panel—it goes without 

saying that if these barriers were lessened, if some of these restrictions were loosened, then these businesses would grow at an even 

more rapid pace, which would be good not only for the African 

American community and the minority business community, but 

good for the nation at large. 

A couple of recommendations that we make as the National 

Urban League to promote the growth of MBEs. One, raising the 

cap for set-aside small business contracts from $100,000 to 

$500,000. 

Unbundling contracts, that would be helpful in assisting small 

and minority-owned businesses to have the opportunity to bid on 

Federal contracts. 

Number three, increasing Federal procurement goals and the development of subcontracting plans as well as a more effective way 

to monitor, create transparency, and push the agencies in the Federal Government towards greater performance in meeting the goals 

that are already on the books. 

And number four, a technical assistance fund, perhaps run 

through the MBDA, that could assist minority and other womenowned businesses. 

And finally, the elimination of SBA guarantee fees, and we suggest the elimination of the guarantee fee on the SBA’s new Advantage Loan initiative. This fee can run from two to 3.8 percent of 

a loan amount, which adds to the cost of borrowing and makes it 

expensive. We applaud the efforts to create new loan products, but 

we urge diligence and vigilance on the cost of these products so 

that on one hand we are not taking a powerful step forward and 

then taking two steps back by simply making capital so expensive 

and so burdensome that it affects growth. 

My final point is to share with you the successes we have had 

at the National Urban League. We operate today nine Entrepreneurship Centers. These are small business assistance centers 

funded with private dollars. We serve approximately 6,000 businesses a year. We have learned through that experience sometimes 

that partnership efforts between the government and the private 

sector can yield more benefits. 

So let me thank you for your time. Thank you for giving me this 

time, and I will be happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Morial follows:] 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you so much for that excellent testimony. 

Ms. Allen. 

STATEMENT OF SUSAN ALLEN, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, U.S. PAN ASIAN AMERICAN CHAMBER OF 

COMMERCE 

Ms. ALLEN. Thank you, Madam Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member Snowe, for the opportunity to testify before you today. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Turn the microphone on. 

Ms. ALLEN. Thank you, Marc. I need a man in my life. 

[Laughter.] 

Thank you, Chair Landrieu and Ranking Member Snowe, for inviting me here to speak to you today. I would like to answer your 

first question to Dr. Fairlie. For the Asian American part, we are 

about 15.1 million of the population and Asian American-owned 

businesses, according to the last Census figure, that was in 2007, 

was 1.3 million around the country. 

I am Susan Au Allen, National President and CEO of the U.S. 

Pan Asian American Chamber of Commerce Foundation. Formed in 

1984, we are the only national organization that represents all 

Asian Americans in various industries, very broad industries. We 

open doors to business opportunities for small and medium-sized 

enterprises, working with the government and corporations. 

For the last 25 years, we have established a very strong record 

of helping our constituents to plan, develop, promote the businesses, and business owners, Federal and State agencies, corporations, the media, academic and research institutions come to us for 

our ability to bring people together from across the country, across 

ethnic lines, and because of the quality of our business development programs. We work in key market areas across the country 

and reach over 15,000 SMEs, small and medium enterprises, 

through our six regional chapters. 

I speak today to the salient points that our 8(a) members experience, and all of my comments are based upon all the things they 

have been telling me throughout the years and especially the last 

two days. 

First, access to capital. The financial crisis has led to the inability and unwillingness of many financial institutions to extend credit. This is a catch-22 situation. To grow a business, you need 

money—capital to expand, to hire staff, or pay for marketing, R&D, 

and to pay your staff and keep the good ones around, especially, 

and your wage. While some companies find small business loans attractive, many banks will not lend because of perceived risks. Unlike manufacturing companies that have collateral for a loan, small 

companies in the service area do not, so securing a loan is a very 

difficult proposition for them. 

Although the SBA guarantees 90 percent of the loan, a large portion of it must be guaranteed through collateral. The current trend 

is that banks want to avoid exposure. When a business defaults, 

the government may take that bank out of the preferred lenders 

list. They do not want that. They also look at business performance 

through a much stricter asset-liability model, that is, high profit, 

high assets versus liability, net worth versus debt. 
54 

Controlling contract bundling. The Small Business Jobs Act contains language from S. 2989, called the Small Business Contract 

Revitalization Act of 2010, introduced by Senator Landrieu, you, 

and Senator Snowe, that addressed the contract bundling issue. 

However—however—we need strong oversight to ensure accountability and give teeth to this regulation so your intention will be 

truly carried out, Senator. 

In addition, the mindset of some of the Federal key contract evaluators is an issue. In their mind, they think, if I select a prominent 

company, like IBM, I cannot be blamed if the project fails. But if 

I pick some unknown company and the project fails, I could lose 

my job. These evaluators will select prominent or what we call 

dominant companies over successful mid-sized companies. That is 

a very harsh reality that our members face. 

Business development—the SBA now has 8,000 8(a) firms in its 

portfolio and they provide good basic business services to the startups. However, we need to provide a higher level of service that 

links mid-size companies to potential opportunities and help to 

transition soon-to-graduate 8(a) firms into the open market where 

they could not benefit from the set-aside programs. 

To give effective business development assistance, SBA’s Business Development Specialists should have a manageable number of 

companies to help them individually over the nine-year life of the 

8(a) status. In the Washington, D.C. office, there are supposedly 

1,800 8(a) firms assigned to eight or nine specialists. They also 

have to monitor compliance by the 8(a) firms. They multi-task. And 

today, in these days, compliance is priority at the expense of business services. So, therefore, special business services fall short. 

If the SBA focuses on compliance, which is required, which we 

ask for, and leverage community resources, they could work with 

organizations like us, the U.S. Pan Asian American Chamber of 

Commerce, on business development. We provide business development services to the Asian American and other small business community nationwide. We are on the ground every day—— 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thirty seconds more. 

Ms. ALLEN [continuing]. Every day, reaching out to small businesses. We have built a platform conducive to teaming between 

small and mid-sized companies. 

Finally, past performance is a difficult task for those who have 

never gone into Federal contracting but have equally valid commercial experiences. This is another roadblock for small businesses 

who would otherwise be performing very well and create jobs and 

benefit the community. 

Finally, Senator, we know that small businesses also have our 

own role to play. Many got into the 8(a) program and wrongly 

think that they are automatically entitled to a contract. That is 

wrong. We have been talking to our members and other members 

in the small business community that they need to do their own 

due diligence, they need to do their homework, they need to provide 

good services. They cannot cross the law. Then they will succeed. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you. I have submitted a detailed statement. I hope that it will be included in the 

record. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Allen follows:] 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you very much, Ms. Allen, for that very 

powerful testimony, and this committee looks forward to working 

with you more closely in the future. We thank you so much. 

Ms. ALLEN. I do, too. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Mr. Mitchell. 

STATEMENT OF B. DOYLE MITCHELL, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL 

BANKERS ASSOCIATION 

Mr. MITCHELL. Good morning, Madam Chair and members of the 

committee. I am honored to testify before you this morning on closing the gap on minority access to capital. I am B. Doyle Mitchell. 

I am President and CEO of Industrial Bank, a minority-owned 

commercial community bank operating in the nation’s capital and 

in Prince George’s County, Maryland. The issues that I mention 

today are vital to each of the States of the members of this committee, that they represent, and they are vital to the nation as a 

whole. Without decisive action and cohesive leadership from this 

committee, the Senate, House, administration focusing in a cost effective manner in the right place, the economy will continue to 

stagnate. 

Industrial Bank was formed in 1934 by my grandfather to fill the 

gap in lending, which at the time was primarily to African Americans. I am third generation, and we have been successful in achieving our part of bridging that gap, evident by the assets of over $380 

million, a loan portfolio of $210 million to faith-based organizations, home mortgages, small real estate investors, and small businesses. The bank is well capitalized and we have been profitable 

throughout the recession in 2008, 2009, 2010—not by much, 

though. 

Ladies and gentlemen, I also represent another very important 

organization. In January, I assumed the Chairmanship of the National Bankers Association, or the other NBA, as we call it. This 

entity, as you heard, is over 80 years old and consists of nearly 50 

minority-owned, managed, or focused insured financial institutions 

from all over the country, places like Washington, D.C., Maryland, 

Pennsylvania, North and South Carolina, Illinois, Louisiana, and 

the list goes on. 

Our association represents African American banks, Asian 

banks, Hispanic banks, Native American banks, and one American 

Indian bank, and at one point there was even a woman-owned financial institution that was part of our membership until they 

were acquired by another institution. 

Our members and all minority banks focus their lending efforts 

in mostly minority communities where evidence of joblessness is 

way more pronounced than in other communities, even in good 

times. So just imagine what they are going through now. The unemployment rate in many of these communities is at least twice 

the national average. That is everybody’s problem. The effect of unemployment in these neighborhoods impacts us all via crime, 

health care concerns, and benefit programs that provide the necessary safety net for millions of Americans. People would actually 

rather work than draw on government-provided programs. 

State and local governments are paying dearly and will continue 

to pay if the economy stalls. In Prince George’s County, the fore-
65 

closure rate has hit African American families disproportionately to 

other ethnic groups. 

We know that 80 percent of all jobs in this country are created 

by small businesses and the only pathway back to an economy that 

allows private industry to work is to employ them from small businesses. 

As the testimony of Ms. Johns reflects, the SBA provides a very 

important vehicle for small businesses through the banking system. 

Their programs can and have filled the gap that exists in funding 

small businesses. Many of these companies have already tapped 

the equity in their homes, their credit cards, and their savings to 

pursue their dream of entrepreneurship. The SBA, through its programs, leverages the funding tenfold. The returns to the economy 

are tremendous. They should be fully funded. The 90 percent guarantee program should be extended or even reinstituted, if necessary, for another two years, if not made permanent. Also, the 

elimination of the fees or at least the reduction of the fees from the 

traditionally high levels should be instituted. 

Last year, the Industrial Bank provided an SBA loan to an entrepreneur that opened an International House of Pancakes, IHOP 

store. That store created 120 full-time jobs. It is running around 

the clock, 24 hours a day. They even deliver nearby. And many of 

these jobs were young people looking for employment, but many 

were also individuals that had been laid off and been looking for 

a job for a long time. Some had significantly higher-paying jobs, 

but accepted employment there just to make it through these tough 

times, and the store is doing very, very well. 

More money, not less, should be invested in the SBA and its loan 

programs. It is a good government solution that provides returns 

to the economy and taxpayers. 

The Department of Transportation has a short-term lending program, basically for a line of credit, for companies, DBEs, that have 

Department of Transportation contracts. This program should be 

applauded, as well, and financially supported. The committee 

should consider encouraging other agencies that do not have such 

a lending program—— 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thirty seconds, please. 

Mr. MITCHELL [continuing]. To develop similar types of programs. 

Finally, the Small Business Lending Fund that is currently being 

administered by the Treasury Department is an excellent example 

of how government can incent community banks to lend more by 

providing them short-term capital. If I had one suggestion on this 

program, it would be this. The rate resets to nine percent in fourand-a-half years, which is a very high rate and due in a very short 

period of time. I understand the reason for resetting to the higher 

rate to encourage quick repayment to the Treasury. Most small 

businesses have loan repayment terms of five to ten years, the average being about seven. The Small Business Lending Fund would 

be more effective and attractive if the interest rate reset period to 

nine percent were amended to seven percent, and we just ask that 

the committee consider making that minor adjustment in such an 

important program. 

Thank you. 
66 

[The biography of Mr. Mitchell follows:] 
67 
68 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. Mitchell, and we appreciate 

that and that is very timely as we try to implement the concepts 

of that program. Some adjustments may need to be made. 

Ms. Montoya. 

STATEMENT OF MARTHA MONTOYA, PROCUREMENT CHAIR 

AND BOARD MEMBER, U.S. HISPANIC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 

Ms. MONTOYA. Madam Chair, it is an honor to testify before the 

Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. My 

name is Martha Montoya. I am the President of several enterprises, Los Kitos Produce, in the business of growing and getting 

fruit from the field to the supermarkets and restaurants and commissaries. In fact, we have farms in North Carolina, converting 

them from tobacco to strawberry growers. 

Currently, 95 percent of our Hispanic businesses do not fit the 

lending profile of banks. We are too small for private equity funds, 

receive minimal attention from venture capital firms, yet we are 

the fastest-growing segment of the entire country. Even the landscape and alarming lack of capital available for Hispanics and entrepreneurs, we are coming up with capital solutions for you on behalf of the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. 

With regards to the public sector, the biggest solution we see is 

the CRA, the Community Reinvestment Act, funding into our communities. Let me give you an example. Under the CRA program, 

Rabobank retained us to bring financial management training to 

Hispanic and minority growers at the local level throughout California. They needed this training because they grow things well, 

but they are not good in financial management and do not manage 

their banking relationships well. This is a key reason why they are 

unable to get banking financing. 

I have very capable growers who are struggling to even get the 

crops into the ground without adequate financing. In fact, I have 

one grower for Washington State present today. I have seen good 

growers unable to get their products to markets because they could 

not afford to pay the packing house fees as a result of their not 

being able to get a line of credit from the bank. 

This story of lack of access of capital is repeated everywhere 

across the U.S. for Hispanic growers. It is a crying shame, because 

there are over 80,000 Hispanic growers in the United States and 

they are doubling per year. With proper access to capital and bank 

financing, Hispanic growers can make a significant contribution to 

the food supply of the country. Needless to say, farmers were the 

original entrepreneurs of this country. 

It is clear that CRA funding could serve as a vehicle for the following reasons and actions. One, equity funds for local banks, investment funds, and others with more flexibility to deploy funds 

and with a higher level of patience for returns. 

Second, large-scale banks to deploy the CRA funding themselves 

and work the ground while training the next generation of minority 

bankers. 

Third, request a minimum of 25 percent of CRA funding to go to 

rural areas. Why? It will motivate and unlock the creativity in our 

rural areas and growth. 
69 

Fourth, match CRA funding with local financial tools from SBA 

and others. That way, the burden of infrastructure capital will create sustainable jobs for the next two to five years. 

In terms of private sector, we need more companies to demonstrate the leadership that we see from Goldman Sachs in the creation of Goldman Sachs 10,000 Businesses Program. Visionary corporate leaders like Lloyd Blankfein and Warren Buffett understand 

that America’s small businesses are the backbone. 

I would say, also, the third is the access to contracts and access 

to capital are a symbiotic relationship. You need both simultaneously in order to give and survive business. However, they seldom arrive at the same time, and because of this, only companies 

that become completely creative can adapt to the environment. A 

business is required to demonstrate financial stability and growth 

in order to become a supplier, yet the bank will not talk to you unless you already have a significant track record. 

We need more training through the small business or the financial. I, for example, received through Walmart Corporation a Dartmouth Tuck University program called Building a High-Performance Minority Growth in all the financial tools to grow the business. 

I think that more important is the fact after 25 years traveling 

around the world and seeing how many of our programs go to those 

countries and are so flexible for the business, yet in this environment, the minorities is less flexible. 

I thank you so very much for your time. I trust and hope that 

my personal community and business experience allow you to 

glimpse of what I see the terms and solutions that are just at our 

hand. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Montoya follows:] 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you, Ms. Montoya. The Hispanic community is very fortunate to have you as a leader, and all of our country is. We really appreciate the passion. 

And I am so excited about this testimony and the many specific 

recommendations that we have heard about ways that we can reduce the barriers that I outlined just a few of them, and you all 

have really built upon that and I really appreciate it. 

I wanted to ask, starting with you, Ms. Montoya—— 

Ms. MONTOYA. Yes, ma’am? 

Chair LANDRIEU. I, too, am familiar with this Goldman Sachs initiative and am very impressed with it. One of the reasons I happen 

to be familiar is because one of the cities that they happened to 

choose is New Orleans, so much to my joy and happiness, they 

have established this initiative in New Orleans and I think in 20 

or 30 other communities around the country. 

Could you describe just briefly, and we are going to do this for 

another five or ten minutes and then go to our third panel, but 

could you describe briefly why you are impressed with the program, 

the components of it? And I think, Marc, you are familiar with it, 

too, and I would like to ask—you are on the Advisory Board. I 

would like to ask you to comment about it, as well. 

Ms. MONTOYA. Being on the ground, I will talk from the ground, 

bottom up. They have been working with the local community leaders, meaning that they really, instead of using bankers of their 

own, they come to the local community leaders and then they use 

organizations that have been on the ground longer with a little bit 

of track history, understanding that there is some flexibility that 

you need, that sometimes your score is not that great, that sometimes your interest in the employees, the way you report employees, are not that great, different angles that you normally, you 

need to buffer in order to be able to present to a bank. So it has 

allowed the organizations to have that patience to clean them up 

in order to bring them into the banking system. So that is number 

one. 

And number two, because they are definitely being patient with 

the program, because it is a different type of program than the regular banking program, and that gives them a little bit of flexibility 

for reporting to the institutions here and their regulators. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Okay. 

Mr. Morial. 

Mr. MORIAL. Let me—should raise the profile of the Goldman 

Sachs 10,000 Small Business Program, and I would say its promise 

and its success is based on, number one, it is a partnership between Goldman Sachs, people at universities like Wharton, and 

community-based organizations, of which the National Urban 

League, the U.S. Hispanic Chamber, and other organizations are 

part of it. 

Secondly, its focus is, in effect, an entrepreneurs’ boot camp 

where businesses are selected to participate in what is probably 

about a four- to six-month highly intensive technical assistance, 

hands-on training regimen, the result of which is to develop for 

each business that participates in the program a growth plan, if 

you will. 
78 

A couple of observations. One, the investment in a very specific 

curriculum designed primarily by Wharton, which is designed for 

the hands-on entrepreneur, it is not overly academic nor too pedestrian. It was designed to fit the entrepreneur who wants to grow 

their business. 

Number two, it is not a program for the start-up. It is a program 

for the person who has made a commitment to entrepreneurship 

and has, in effect, fallen down, gotten up, has, in effect, some sweat 

in the game already. 

And then I think, number three, with the endorsement of Goldman and people like Warren Buffett and an advisory board and 

partnerships, the hope is that they are going to be able to connect 

those businesses with capital opportunities. One focus area that I 

know this committee is familiar with is the CDFI community, the 

Community Development Financial Institutions, of which there are 

many. The National Urban League is just in the process of creating 

one. So they try to connect these businesses at the conclusion of the 

program, at the successful completion of the program, with CDFIs. 

I would also point out that we at the National Urban League, in 

fact, hired a firm that graduated from the program to provide security at one of our special events. And so this is a great program 

and I would emphasize that it is the kind of thing that demonstrates what the private sector can do in a very real way, and 

there is no government money but there is significant government 

endorsement and support towards this program. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Well, I appreciate that. 

My last question, and then I will turn it over to Senator Snowe, 

is for Dr. Fairlie. This Goldman program, I think, can serve as a 

model of the kind of partnership that I am hoping the SBA and our 

community banks and other potential partners can develop. We 

will be interested to see how it pans out, because at the end of the 

program, I think, you actually get $25,000 or $35,000 or some significant amount of money to invest in your business. 

But, Dr. Fairlie, anything you want to add? You submitted some 

wonderful testimony, but is there anything that you think the 

panel did not touch on that you would like to add, and then I am 

going to turn it over to Senator Snowe. 

Mr. FAIRLIE. Well, I guess one of the things that, you know, in 

your kind of opening remarks that I think was really interesting 

is this issue about how people are very surprised by the wealth inequality. One of the things that I found in preparing for this testimony is that it has actually gone up, right. The difference before 

was $80,000, roughly, between non-minorities and African Americans and Latinos, and now that wealth disparity has increased to 

$100,000, at least the latest data that are available from the Census Bureau. 

And home ownership, I looked at those trends and they really 

have not changed, either. We really do not see this kind of improving trend. And I think that, as you mentioned before, that we want 

to kind of encourage responsible home ownership, I think that is 

actually really important as kind of a long-term strategy here. 

And the new numbers that I found from the FDIC on banking 

rates were shocking in the sense that 20 percent of industry families do not have a bank account. I mean, that just seems kind of 
79 

like a basic part of our attachment to being able to build wealth, 

to being able to kind of participate in kind of financial services. 

And I also mentioned about the payday loans. A lot of minority 

firms also use credit cards to finance their businesses. These are 

higher-cost financial services, and there are a lot of alternatives out 

there and it seems like that maybe financial literacy or some kind 

of programs that could help that would really be useful. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you so much. 

Senator Snowe. 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you. 

I will continue with you, Dr. Fairlie. In your research as well as 

in your testimony, you indicated that minority-owned firms are 

more likely not to apply for conventional loans from conventional 

lenders due to rejection fears, and you said among firms with gross 

receipts under $500,000, 33 percent of minority firms did not apply 

for loans because of fear of rejections, compared to 17 percent of 

non-minority firms. 

What would you say with respect to the SBA’s track record, 

which I think is reasonably good when you look at specifically, as 

I mentioned in my testimony, regarding the micro loans, 46 percent 

of SBA micro loans went to minorities. There were 21 percent 504 

loans, 22 percent of the SBA’s 7(a) loans. What would you think 

about the average minority entrepreneur—and I would ask others, 

as well—on behalf of your constituencies, about how they view the 

SBA’s lending track record and do they apply, or do they view 

these loans as obtainable, or do they fear rejection from the SBA, 

as well? 

Mr. FAIRLIE. You know, that is a good point. The data do not 

have that kind of information in them, unfortunately, so it is not 

clear of this 33 percent of minority firms that are not applying for 

a bank loan because of fear of rejection, if that is directly for an 

SBA-backed loan or if it is kind of a more sort of traditional loan 

from a bank account. That would actually be very useful information to know. I have not really heard any kind of anecdotal evidence on that, either, unfortunately. 

Mr. MITCHELL. The fact of the matter is, you have to go through 

a bank to get to the SBA, so—— 

Senator SNOWE. That may be the starting point. 

Mr. MITCHELL [continuing]. It is not as if they would go around 

the bank. 

Senator SNOWE. Okay. So that may be—the point of entry 

still—— 

Mr. MITCHELL. Absolutely. 

Ms. MONTOYA. Still the bank. 

Senator SNOWE. Yes, Ms. Montoya. 

Ms. MONTOYA. And I think the important point for us in the Hispanic community, the bankers are not culturally sensitive or language adaptable, and so in our case, going, it is a waste of time 

and it is like talking two different languages and two different cultures. So that, I think, is the biggest thing. That is why I insisted 

on the training through the CRA programs for the banks, because 

we need the banks to train more people on the ground. 

Senator SNOWE. I see. 

Ms. Allen. 
80 

Ms. ALLEN. Yes. This is anecdotal. Two points. Some of our members who have expressed to us that getting a loan through the SBA 

just costs too much money than getting the private market. 

Second, there are some banks who are very aggressive, like Wells 

Fargo Bank is, I think, is the number one lender of SBA loans. I 

do not know what they did, but they have been very successful. 

Maybe there are some best practices there that we could—— 

Senator SNOWE. Who was that? 

Ms. ALLEN. The Wells Fargo Bank. 

Senator SNOWE. Oh, Wells Fargo. Okay. 

Ms. ALLEN. They might have some best practices that we can 

learn from. However, overall, other folks that I have talked to in 

the Asian American business community is, if I cannot get it from 

the regular bank, I ain’t going to the SBA because it costs me a 

few more points. 

Senator SNOWE. That is interesting. Well, it is clearly something—Mr. Morial? 

Mr. MORIAL. I would just affirm everything that has been said, 

but also to highlight the need for greater visibility for the SBA programs. 

Senator SNOWE. Yes. 

Mr. MORIAL. Mr. Mitchell made a very important point. You go 

to the bank. So in the mind of the business, unless you go to the 

bank, you are not even going to be aware of, perhaps, the availability of loans through the SBA. So there is a greater need for visibility about all of the programs that exist and that are available. 

Senator SNOWE. Well, that is an interesting point. We have that 

problem sometimes across the board, interestingly enough, in communicating and getting the message out overall to entrepreneurs 

and probably more especially among minority communities. So that 

is clearly something we have to figure out, which leads me to the 

next question, because as you heard Ms. Johns refer to the new 

programs that were created, were any of your organizations consulted in the drafting or the development of these two programs, 

and by using other lenders, like CDCs, the Certified Development 

Companies and so on, does that help in any way, or is that still 

a barrier? 

Mr. MITCHELL. We were—Industrial Bank, we were—and the 

National Bankers Association—we were not consulted. But I have 

to say this about the SBA, that over the years, and particularly in 

the last two or three years, the SBA has improved its processing 

times tremendously. I believe that these new programs are very 

much needed programs. In meeting with Ms. Johns and Michael 

Grant, the President of the NBA, about a month or so ago, I was 

very impressed with how they have changed the administration at 

the SBA. They do need funding so that they can eliminate or reduce some of their fees, because traditionally, they are very expensive. 

Senator SNOWE. Ms. Montoya. 

Ms. MONTOYA. In L.A., we had a wonderful Hispanic guy who 

was the number one SBA gentleman, but I understood why, and we 

discussed this, it is precisely because of the fact that he is culturally sensitive to the variables that happen. So, no, we were not 

consulted, but I understand that they are overwhelmed. 
81 

And these programs in particular, we are hearing about it 

through the different people, but not really because they are targeting through the banks or the banks are not coming to us. I am 

concerned about that. Why is it that the banks are not visiting us? 

I think that there is one suggestion I have. There is the famous HR 

one that is about the training, workforce training, that might be effective, and my suggestion was to try to get the banks to apply for 

this type of workforce training so we can train more bankers. 

Senator SNOWE. That is a good point. 

Ms. Allen. 

Ms. ALLEN. We have a regional chapter in California that covers 

the Western Region. We have a very good, close working relationship with the SBA in San Francisco. The L.A. office has some leadership changes and we are still trying to figure out who to work 

with. 

But unfortunately for the headquarters here, in the last two 

years, we have not been reached, and this is the first time I have 

met Marie Johns. I tried to call her, and I told her today, I said, 

I am glad I got to meet you. I had to come here to meet you. I hope 

that the SBA would be more proactive in reaching national organizations like us. I do not know about Marc, but we have absolutely 

been absent at the table. During President-Elect Obama’s transition, I was at the table for seven meetings from the SBA to the 

International Trade, and all of a sudden, they just dropped dead. 

They were so concerned with compliance or whatever. 

And they had a conference or a summit in California where I 

have a major chapter. I did not know about it until—when I found 

out, the registration was closed. So maybe with your influence, 

they could reach out more. 

Senator SNOWE. Absolutely. That is a message we will definitely 

convey, if they have not already heard it right now. Absolutely. 

Very important. 

Mr. MORIAL. In our case, our position papers were consulted, 

so—— 

[Laughter.] 

We have a 12-point jobs plan. We last year had a six-point jobs 

plan. And we have advanced some of the ideas that the SBA has 

embraced in creating new, more available and accessible loan products, and we think those are important steps in the right direction. 

I would again point out the guarantee fee, which means a good 

product, you could add an expense and a cost to it that makes it 

burdensome and makes it more expensive. 

And secondly, just indicate the need for continued extensive outreach. Ms. Johns did share with me today that they are about to 

do some—take some steps toward outreach, and I think organizations like ours are just an incredible resource, because we touch 

6,000 small businesses in nine cities and probably another, you 

know, I am sure, 5,000 to 6,000 in other communities, and people 

come to our organizations as trusted conduits for information. 

Where can I go? What can I do? Because we are not the government and we are not the bank, so people sort of look for us to say, 

this is a program. Maybe that one may not be so good. Why do you 

not check out this person at that bank, because that is the SBA 

lender at that bank in your community. 
82 

So we are a continuing resource for you here at the committee, 

for the SBA, and for everyone that wants to really, really grow our 

businesses. 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you. 

Mr. MITCHELL. If I may just add, given all the conversation, I 

think—— 

Chair LANDRIEU. We need to conclude this panel. We want to get 

to the third panel. 

Mr. MITCHELL. Yes. I think it makes it evident, the importance 

of minority banks and community banks all around the country, because community banks are the ones that are really doing the lending to small businesses and that is on what I call Main Street and 

Urban Street, and that is where our banks operate. Thank you 

very much. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Well, thank you, and I know that Senator 

Snowe will join me in opportunities to promote this outreach, potentially by the two of us doing some field hearings or conferences 

specifically bringing organizations like this together with the SBA, 

because we are very serious about making these connections. 

We thank you for the work that you do. We want to make sure 

the Federal Government is doing its part. Thank you so much. 

And we will get to the third panel. Thank you so much. Our 

third panel today are two representatives of the Federal Government. One is the Inspector General for the Small Business Administration, Ms. Peggy Gustafson, and our final witness today is Mr. 

Greg Kutz, Managing Director of Forensic Audits and Special Investigations for GAO. His report has been referenced several times 

today. 

If you all would come forward, we thank you so much on the second panel. 

Ms. Gustafson, we will start with you. We thank you for being 

here and for waiting patiently, both of you, for this third panel. 

We are going to probably continue this hearing until ten or 15 

minutes after 12:00. We will give you all time for your opening remarks. I know you prepared five minutes. If you can shorten it at 

all, that would be great and we will get right to questions, but 

please feel free. You have been very patient. 

STATEMENT OF PEGGY GUSTAFSON, INSPECTOR GENERAL, 

U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Senator Landrieu and Senator Snowe, thank 

you very much for the opportunity to come speak to you today. 

Based on my discussions with committee staff, I am going to 

focus my testimony on issues we found both through the investigations and audits in the government contracting procurement area, 

though, of course, I am always happy to answer any questions you 

may have about SBA programs and issues we may have in those 

programs. 

Now, getting right to the area of the criminal investigations that 

we undertake involving procurement fraud, generally, most of 

these cases involve people who are either making false representations in order to be accepted into a program where preference is 

given to those types of contractors or there are schemes set up or 

illegal deals, as it were, between a small company and a large com-
83 

pany where basically the small company is simply being used as 

a pass-through and actually the money from the government and 

the work is being done by the large company, and in many instances, of course, contrary to the regulations and to the laws. And 

so those are most of the types of cases we see. 

For example, we recently had a guilty plea where there was an 

8(a) firm that was actually being managed and controlled by a nondisadvantaged individual against the regulations that specifically 

state how the firms are supposed to be managed and had obtained 

over $5 million in Federal contracts and eventually was convicted 

of that. 

We have had an instance where there were people—there was a 

person claiming falsely to be a service-disabled veteran and, again, 

was receiving that preference and had received over $16 million in 

Federal contracts and has now been indicted for that fraud. 

And we have had actions under the False Claims Act where companies are claiming to be in a HUBZone, Historically Underutilized 

Business Zone, and again receiving contracts on that. We have gotten some recoveries, including a recovery of over $1 million from 

one company who was falsely claiming to be in that HUBZone. 

Now, many times, our ability to prosecute this type of contracting 

fraud is hindered by the fact that, in general, the government is 

not assumed to have suffered a loss in these instances, which is to 

say the government paid for services and they got services in return. And many times, that makes these cases very unattractive to 

prosecutors who are dealing with the Federal Sentencing Guidelines that are ending up with these cases resulting in very small 

fines, little or no jail time. 

I do want to thank the committee for their hard work in getting 

the presumption of loss language that has been discussed briefly 

into the bill. I will suggest to you, as you know from my testimony 

and from conversations we have had, we do have legislative proposals that we hope the committee is able to take that would go 

even further and would actually make it—would statutorily mandate that when a contract is awarded to a company that has gotten 

that under false pretenses, the amount of loss is not just presumed 

to be the amount of the contract, which is sometimes rebuttable. 

They can come back and say, well, no, you got services in return. 

Instead, it is. It defines it as the loss and it takes away their ability to rebut that presumption. 

And I think that would go a long way to getting some much more 

serious jail time and some much more hefty fines from these companies. A lot of times, nothing is a better deterrent than the proverbial perp walk of somebody going in cuffs, and especially if they 

are getting time or if it is really hitting their pocketbook, because 

these are big contracts. The more that you can do that, the greater 

impact you are going to have. 

As mentioned prior in this hearing, suspension and debarment is 

a key tool that the government has to stop some of this activity, 

because if you can cut off the ability of these wrongdoers to get government contracts, you are really hitting them where it hurts. 

Senator Snowe, there has been some discussion about some statistics. I will tell you that we will work with the agency to get you 

the statistics and make sure that we are doing apples-to-oranges 
84 

and you know exactly where these cases are, because I think there 

is a little confusion going on there and I just want to make sure 

that we will do that. 

We do applaud the agency. I think they are doing a better job. 

I think they were doing such a not better job for a long time that 

there is a way to go, but I appreciate that the agency has reached 

out to us. We are working with them and the proof will be in the 

pudding. And so it will be interesting going forward to continue to 

have this discussion and see how we do. 

To give the agency a little credit, I have to say, suspension and 

debarment government-wide is a widely under-used tool, so they 

are not the only ones who really need to get a lot better at it. 

I am going to cut it short there. Again, I am happy to talk to you, 

look forward to talking to you about any audits. 

Looking forward to April and hopefully the next hearing, because 

I am very appreciative of, Senator Landrieu, your commitment to 

doing oversight hearings. I am here when you want me and I look 

forward to it, so thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Gustafson follows:] 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you. 

Mr. Kutz. 

STATEMENT OF GREG KUTZ, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF FORENSIC AUDITS AND SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING OFFICE 

Mr. KUTZ. Madam Chair, Ranking Member Snowe, thank you for 

the opportunity to discuss the 8(a) program. Today’s testimony 

highlights the results of our 2010 investigation into allegations of 

fraud and abuse in this program. 

My testimony has two parts. First, I will discuss cases of fraud 

and abuse, and second, I will discuss the importance of having effective fraud prevention controls. 

First, we receive dozens of allegations and leads related to fraud 

and abuse in the 8(a) program. We invested 14 of these cases, as 

Senator Snowe mentioned, which often included more than one 

firm. We found that as of January 10, these 14 ineligible firms had 

received $325 million of 8(a) sole source and set-aside contracts. In 

addition, they received $1.2 billion of other Federal contracts, including $17 million related to the Recovery Act. 

The key program eligibility requirements we looked at as part of 

this fraud investigation, just to go over those again, include, first, 

firms must be owned at least 51 percent and controlled by socially 

and economically disadvantaged individuals. Second, the firms 

must have reasonable potential for success. Third, firms must perform 15 to 50 percent of the work on their own. And fourth, they 

must be a small business. 

A few examples of the fraud and abuse that we identified include 

one owner misrepresenting her ethnicity; another owner failing to 

report joint ownership in over $4 million of real estate; another 

owner with a $2.5 million home on a private island, a Lamborghini, 

and a $450,000 yacht; another owner whose tax return showed over 

$1.9 million of wages and over $100,000 of tax-exempt interest income; and finally, front companies funneling 8(a) contracts to an 

ineligible firm that had left the program in 2001. 

With respect to fraud prevention, we found some strengths and 

weaknesses at the SBA. For example, several strengths in the application process helped prevent three of the bogus applications 

that we filed from being approved. The review of these applications 

appropriately raised questions about our firm’s income, assets, and 

potential for success. However, we were successful in obtaining certification for a fourth bogus firm. 

Key weaknesses that we identified include SBA’s lack of independent validation of key owner information, including assets and 

net worth. In addition, SBA often does not perform thorough annual reviews for 8(a) eligibility. For example, case file information 

had tax returns that showed that the firms were no longer eligible 

for the program. And as Ms. Gustafson said with respect to enforcement, historically, enforcement has not been necessarily an effective tool here for this program. 

We have provided six recommendations to SBA to strengthen 

their fraud prevention controls and they have taken action on some 

of those recommendations, while implementation of others is in 

progress. 
92 

In conclusion, for just 14 cases, we identified $325 million of 

fraud and abuse in this program. The victims of this fraud and 

abuse are not only taxpayers, but legitimate socially and economically disadvantaged firms. And along the lines of the hearing today, 

one way to expand access to legitimate firms to the 8(a) program 

is to prevent the kind of fraud and abuse that we identified. 

Madam Chair and Ranking Member Snowe, that ends my statement and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kutz follows:] 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you very much. 

I appreciate, Ms. Gustafson, your testimony as being confirmed, 

I guess, over a year and a half ago now—— 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. About so, yes. 

Chair LANDRIEU [continuing]. By this committee. What would 

you say you found when you came into the SBA in terms of oversight for fraud and abuse and what you are finding now, I mean, 

in comparison to existed prior to you getting there and now? I am 

going to ask you the same, Mr. Kutz. 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Senator Landrieu, as you noted, I was confirmed in September. I started in October. And so what I found 

when I got there, I would say, is a longstanding attitude of SBA 

that enforcement was really kind of anathema to what their mission was, and in some ways it is because they are there to promote 

small businesses, make sure that the small businesses are getting 

the contracts and the access to capital that they need. And often, 

enforcement, both in the lending area and the contracting area, is 

contrary to that in some ways because you are—it runs counterintuitive to promoting as much as you can and encouraging as 

much as you can. 

I have been heartened in the year and a half that I have been 

there by the attitude and by some of the actions that have been 

taken since I have been there, like the insistence that they will be 

serious about enforcement. I think the message from the top has 

been exactly the right message. I think the movement that they 

have done in the suspension and debarment area to really shore it 

up and to be not as afraid to suspend companies as they were, because I think they had had a traditional theory of unless there was 

a conviction, you know, they would suspend or debar you if you had 

been convicted of something, but before that, there was a real hesitancy, and I think they have made definite indications that they 

are willing to protect the government’s interest before that happens, which is why suspension and debarment is there. 

Again, there has been some very good movement. The right 

things are being said. It is a big battleship, like everything else, 

that takes a while to turn, and that is why I look forward to continuing the oversight of our office, to having the authorizing committees kind of keep them on their toes, because it is hard to 

change a culture and there is a little bit of a culture change that 

has to be done and seems to be being done in SBA. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Mr. Kutz, you have been with the GAO since 

1991, so you have got over a ten-year history—well, it would be 20 

years—— 

Mr. KUTZ. Almost 20, unfortunately. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Almost 20. 

Mr. KUTZ. Yes. 

[Laughter.] 

Chair LANDRIEU. Getting tired—— 

Mr. KUTZ. I had a lot more hair when I started. 

[Laughter.] 

Chair LANDRIEU. I should be able to add that, at least. But over 

20 years. Is your view the same as Ms. Gustafson just testified, or 

do you see it differently as opposed to the change over the last, let 

us say, ten years or so? 
104 

Mr. KUTZ. My experience with SBA only goes back three or four 

years, so even though my GAO experience is 20. But I would say 

when we started three to four years ago, the culture of advocacy 

versus enforcement was clearly there, and it still is to some extent. 

But service-disabled and HUBZone were basically self-certification, 

rubber stamp-type programs. HUBZone has moved forward and 

they are making good progress, although there are still issues, as 

you mentioned earlier, about The Alamo, et cetera. Eight-A had the 

strongest controls of the three programs that we have looked at, 

but as our report last year shows, there is still room to grow there. 

So I think they have taken some steps in the right direction, but 

there is still quite a ways to go. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you. 

Senator Snowe. 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you both for outstanding work. Again, it 

is essential we make sure that all of the taxpayers’ dollars are 

being spent efficiently and legally, and that is the key here, and 

all the more so given the fact that we have enormous deficits, and 

so trying to exact the oversight that is essential, especially now. 

But more importantly is, to the point that you were making, Ms. 

Gustafson, about the idea that we have to create an environment 

to make sure that we do not create any disincentives, whereby people or companies or organizations feel that they can utilize and 

take advantage of these programs illegally or unethically. So I 

think that this is the issue that we need to revamp, especially on 

the question of how we can increase the penalties, and also to exact 

responsibility on the part of the agencies, as well, not make it so 

optional in terms of whether or not they take action. 

Now, on the 26 that you cited and that I referred to earlier to 

Ms. Johns, can you explain to me in any way at this point about 

the three in which they did take action, but what happened to the 

remaining 23? 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Yes, Senator Snowe. I do have some information 

on that and I think that there was some confusion about my testimony, and I apologize for that, in that the three that I was discussing that I was giving the agency credit for because they deserved credit for being out there on that was not the only subset 

of the 26 where action had been done. 

So just—what I can give you right now, and again, I will get 

back to you with more specifics, of the 26 universe with more specificity, the agency has declined to do anything in six of those cases. 

They have suspended eight. There are two pending. They have 

debarred six. Two of those cases were actually debarred by somebody else while SBA was kind of deciding what to do. And two, 

there were warning letters sent. So there was more action taken 

than was, I guess, implied by—— 

Senator SNOWE. What generally is the reason for an agency not 

taking action? Too expensive, or they do not have the personnel? 

What is the issue here, because I am not sure that I understand, 

even if somebody is out of the program. 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. I really think it is a mind—— 

Senator SNOWE. The fact that they violated the law—— 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. I really think it is a mindset. There is a risk 

aversion to doing something affirmative like suspension and debar-
105 

ment. And again, I think it is probably government-wide. That 

really is not warranted, given what the suspension and debarment 

program is supposed to do, which is to say—it is a tool there preconviction. Before you can get to the point where you have proven 

somebody guilty by reasonable doubt, there are ways to protect the 

government’s interest when you think that somebody is acting 

unethically or illegally, you know, doing things in opposite to the 

way the program is to be run, and I am kind of amazed at that. 

I mean, I am kind of amazed at that because you really do need 

to be out there and be a stronger protector for the interests, and 

that is why I say I do think the current General Counsel, the Deputy General Counsel, they have been very aggressive in these matters and we as an office have been very appreciative of that, because they have reached out to us. 

But again, when I talk about turning the ship, there are people 

who have been there who just are honestly almost terrified of the 

thought of getting out there and suspending or debarring people. 

That is the best that I can explain because I do not explain it— 

I cannot—I do not understand it past there. 

Senator SNOWE. Right. I understand what you are saying—— 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Right. 

Senator SNOWE [continuing]. But that is very helpful to us in trying to determine how to proceed on those issues—— 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Okay. 

Senator SNOWE [continuing]. Because, clearly, action is warranted and we have to reverse that culture, any inhibition that exists in taking proactive action, frankly. 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Right. 

Senator SNOWE. I mean, when you are talking—just thinking 

this cumulatively across government-wide, all the agencies—— 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Right. 

Senator SNOWE [continuing]. The millions, if not the billions, that 

might be out there that have been misappropriated, you know, utilized illegally. 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Exactly. Yes. 

Senator SNOWE. So I appreciate your work in that regard and we 

would like to have those numbers that you have. 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Oh, absolutely, yes. 

Senator SNOWE. You will? You will submit them? 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Yes, I will. 

Senator SNOWE. Okay. Mr. Kutz, on the 14 ineligible firms, what 

happened within the agency? I noted in the report here, as well, 

that there was an indication the SBA staff who were responsible 

for assessing firms’ continued eligibility did not always follow established program criteria during the annual review process. So 

what was the case? So were there existing standards and criteria 

by which these ineligible firms could have been initially detected? 

Mr. KUTZ. Yes. I mean, someone making $1.9 million a year, 

based upon historical case law and now in the new regulations, I 

believe, would not be eligible for the program. Yet there were case 

files that SBA had reviewed, and in several cases had seen and we 

had talked to them about, and they did nothing to address those 

at that time. There were three of those where they knew and they 

left them in the program, and they got new contracts afterwards. 
106 

Senator SNOWE. Boy, that is really hard to understand. That is 

amazing, because, really, it was a simple effort, but you also pointed it out to them and they did nothing. 

Mr. KUTZ. Right. I mean, you had deception in most cases, but 

in several cases, right there in the file was the information—— 

Senator SNOWE. It was transparent and obvious. 

Mr. KUTZ [continuing]. It was there, and then even once we made 

them aware, they did not really take action. That gets into the culture a little bit, too, I think, of not taking aggressive action, especially when those companies that we know are ineligible got new 

contracts after that. 

Senator SNOWE. Well, you know, that is amazing. It is like 

shrugging your shoulders, oh, so what? I mean, that is just unacceptable and that is very important that we address, because the 

bottom line is that those who are legitimate firms that should be 

eligible for these funds are not able to get them because somebody 

else is using them illegally. So it diverts the funds from the good 

actors because of the bad actors—— 

Mr. KUTZ. I agree. 

Senator SNOWE [continuing]. Let alone what they are doing with 

taxpayers’ money. 

Mr. KUTZ. Yes. 

Senator SNOWE. So we have to aggressively pursue this, not only 

in this agency, in every agency with respect to how we deal with 

individuals and companies inappropriately using taxpayers’ dollars. 

It really is stunning, to be honest with you that agencies are not 

aggressively pursuing it. 

Finally, the SBA has developed two new programs that Ms. 

Johns referred to. One of the programs requires lenders to maintain at least 60% of their loan portfolio in low to moderate communities, including to businesses with 50 percent of their workers residing in low to moderate communities. Is there a way of making 

that determination? I mean, through self-certification, is that not 

a prescription for more fraud? 

Mr. KUTZ. Yes, that would be the same thing as a service-disabled veteran-owned small business now, with the exception that 

VA has that bid certification process. But the rest of the servicedisabled program is still essentially self-certification, just like that, 

and we have seen massive potential for fraud in that program. 

Senator SNOWE. Yes? 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. I would just add, it is also kind of similar to the 

HUBZone program. One of the biggest weaknesses in the HUBZone 

program is there is a requirement that a certain percentage of the 

people in the company getting the contract live or attempt to maintain a residence in that area. 

Honestly, I am not sure how you enforce that. I mean, I am not 

sure how you go and prove beyond a reasonable doubt there has 

not been this attempt to maintain and where these workers are living, and do you stop them from moving or do you fire them? I 

mean, that is, I think, an inherent weakness when it is that kind 

of measure. 

Senator SNOWE. I see. Yes, that kind of measure. 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Yes. 
107 

Senator SNOWE. So that probably should be adjusted and a different standard. 

Any other recommendations? The SBA implemented five of the 

six recommendations. 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. Mm-hmm. 

Senator SNOWE. Have they set up an appropriate measurement 

for accountability and certification, and do you—— 

Mr. KUTZ. Yes. One of the things that the first witness mentioned is they have tightened up certain regulations that are effective, I think, March 14, and that has addressed certain more specifics about eligibility, social and economic disadvantage, et cetera, 

and along with additional steps being taken. So they are headed 

in the right direction, but again, I think 8(a) is—of the programs 

we have looked at at SBA, is the strongest of them from a standpoint of fraud prevention. 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. If I could just—— 

Senator SNOWE. Well, is that all relative? So, obviously, we have 

got to do a lot on all these programs. 

Mr. KUTZ. Well, it is relative. I mean, if you look at service-disabled government-wide, it is basically at almost zero because you 

have no controls. HUBZone is between three to five, maybe, on a 

scale of ten. And 8(a) is better than that. So that is kind of how 

I would assess where they are. 

Senator SNOWE. Well, what could we do better, then? That is 

what we have to figure out, is how best to attack this problem. 

What would be your recommendation? In other words, to get them 

up to the level where they should be? 

Mr. KUTZ. Well, it is program by program. Like service-disabled, 

one of our recommendations, which really is a government-wide 

one, is to have everybody utilize this VetBiz certification process. 

Why recreate the wheel when you have got someone already setting a process up? VA does know who is a legitimate service-disabled veteran to start. So I think SBA is trying to work with VA 

on that and it needs to—that is a government-wide solution rather 

than a stovepiped agency-specific solution. 

Senator SNOWE. Right. Good point. Excellent point. 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. And just to kind of build on those comments 

just quickly, if I may—I am sorry—but as Mr. Kutz has said, the 

8(a) program has the most strict, I think, requirements to get into 

the program, which is to say it is an older program and there really 

are—the agency takes a very active role and does a lot more review 

before you even get into the 8(a). Where I think the agency definitely needs to do better is as the participants go along and the reviews, like the annual reviews that Mr. Kutz talked about and how 

they need to do a better job of those. 

And if I could just quickly reference the audit that I mentioned 

in my written testimony on the surveillance reviews, and just very, 

very briefly, surveillance reviews are undertaken by the Small 

Business Administration of other procuring agencies to see how 

well those agencies are running the small business contracting part 

of their contracting portfolio. We were very interested to see how 

well—how thorough those reviews were, because, really, that is one 

of the few checks that SBA has kept as the procuring agencies have 

taken more of the execution of the contracts, of the 8(a) contracts. 
108 

The check that SBA has retained is doing these surveillance reviews. This is an audit that we have already discussed with the 

agency. Again, it is referenced. 

We were very concerned about what we saw. I mean, we definitely think the agency needs to do a much better job at doing a 

very thorough risk analysis and making sure these surveillance reviews really are checking on how the 8(a) program is being administered and how these contracts are being seen. We were very disappointed in the thoroughness of these reviews or lack thereof. 

Some of the employees undertaking these reviews did not realize 

they were supposed to kind of be sure to be looking at 8(a). 

So that is something that I think is really crucial for SBA. I 

mean, that is really one of the few checks they maintain to make 

sure that this program that is such a big part of government contracting and so important, especially when it comes to access to 

these opportunities, to make sure that this is being undertaken the 

correct way. So that is something that I want to point to that we 

are going to continue to look at and we will definitely make sure 

that the committee is aware of—— 

Senator SNOWE. Are these annual reviews required by law? 

Ms. GUSTAFSON. The annual reviews of every 8(a) firm are required by law. The surveillance reviews are not. That is one of the 

things that the agency sets. However, the agency, when they talk 

about their oversight of the 8(a) program, they speak to these surveillance reviews and how this is such an important tool for them, 

and that is why I think it is important that they do a very thorough review and make sure that the employees undertaking these 

reviews—I mean, if this is how they are going to make sure the 

agencies are doing the 8(a) program right, then these reviews take 

on import, whether or not they are legally required, and they place 

a lot of reliance on these reviews, so they are really crucial. 

Senator SNOWE. Yes. Thank you all. Thank you both very, very 

much. 

Chair LANDRIEU. Thank you very much. 

The meeting is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:18 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 
(109) 

APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 
110 
111 
112 
113 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 
122 
123 
124 
125 
126 
127 
128 
129 
130 
131 
132 
133 
134 
135 
136 
137 
138 
139 
140 
141 
142 
143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
151 
152 
153 
154 
155 
156 
157 
158 
159 
160 
161 
162 
163 
164 
165 
166 
167 
168 
169 
170 
171 
172 
173 
174 
175 
176 
177 
178 
179 
180 
181 
182 
183 
184 
185 
186 
187 
188 
189 
190 
191 
192 
193 
194 
195 
196 
197 
198 
199 
200 
201 
202 
203 
204 
205 
206 
207 
208 
209 
210 
211 
212 

Æ