My Profile   |   Contact Us   |   Sign In   |   Register
WIPP In Action
Blog Home All Blogs
Our organizational blog featuring the most important news in WIPP advocacy for women-owned businesses; federal procurement education, programs, and opportunities; and signature events celebrating and engaging with this powerful community.

 

Search all posts for:   

 

Top tags: Advocacy  membership  leadership  spotlight  federal contracting  President's Message  SBA  COVID-19  legislation  regulatory  cybersecurity  Federal Procurement  Federal Procurement Opportunities  guest post  Action Alert  Congress  FAR  policy  resource  Senate Small Business  Access to Capital  Appropriations  budget  community  microloan  partner  WIPP Works In Washington  women-owned  Access  ChallengeHER 

Cybersecurity Certification Keeps Chugging Along

Posted By Elizabeth Sullivan, WIPP Advocacy Team, Wednesday, September 9, 2020
The last time I wrote about Department of Defense’s (DoD) Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) was back in early March when the DoD released their final version to industry. The pandemic hit shortly after and turned things upside down – except for the rollout of CMMC, which has continued to move forward. 
Elizabeth Sullivan
So, where does everything stand now?

A major step has been taken in moving this process along – training started at the end of August for certification assessors. These 73 assessors, however, are part of a “provisional program” and won’t actually be assigning the companies they evaluate a final CMMC level. Think of these initial assessments as more of a dry run, with the goal of providing feedback to the DoD and CMMC Accreditation Body (CMMC-AB) on any issues that need to be resolved before the real evaluations begin. As a reminder, the body providing the training – the CMMC-AB – is separate from the DoD. The AB is currently operating with a volunteer board and will eventually be a fully staffed organization. 

This step comes in the wake of a rift between the DoD and the CMMC-AB over a new contract that would supersede their existing Memoranda of Understanding (MOU). The tension between the two organizations over the new agreement is centered around responsibilities, which some AB board members felt was undermining their authority. The DoD has said this agreement is a new no-cost contract would provide a more binding relationship between the CMMC-AB and the Department. While this was slated to be resolved by the end of August, stay tuned for the final result.

In the meantime, CMMC requirements showed up in the General Services Administration’s (GSA) $50 billion 8(a) STARS III contract, where GSA indicated that it “reserves the right” to require certifications for small businesses awarded slots on the federal IT vehicle. Although CMMC is only a future requirement for the approximately 300,000 DoD contractors, it has been predicted that adoption of the certification could spill over into civilian acquisitions. The move by GSA is a prime example of this, but is also not very surprising – DoD was one of the biggest buyers on the predecessor contract, STARS II. 

So, where does this leave small business contractors? With a lot of remaining questions. Below are a few that come to mind: 
  • As companies try to prepare for this assessment, who is credible to help them identify gaps to reach a readiness level? There has been a myriad of bad actors popping up, claiming they can guarantee a certain CMMC level with their analysis (which they can’t). 
  • Once the CMMC-AB accredits assessors and their certified third-party assessment organizations (C3PAOs), companies can start to get assessed. What is the actual cost for companies get this assessment? Will all of the accreditors charge the same amount?
  • Once assessors are ready, what is the order in which the 300,000+ businesses will be assessed? Is there a cue? Will it be based on existing contracts? Are small businesses going to pushed to the bottom of the list?  


According to DoD, all contractors will have to be certified by 2025. Advocacy remains crucial on this issue, and WIPP’s Virtual Symposium on Cyber Resiliency from September 31 to October 1 is focusing on these important policy changes for WOSB contractors. Register by September 17 to take advantage of Early Bird pricing and to be eligible for MatchMaker Meetings with almost 20 government agency partners. 

 

 

Tags:  cybersecurity  federal contracting  WIPP Works In Washington 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Section 889 and the U.S. Government Supply Chain

Posted By Laura Berry, Wednesday, August 5, 2020
Updated: Wednesday, August 5, 2020
Elizabeth Sullivan

Amidst the continuing pandemic and negotiations on another round of COVID-19 relief in Congress, one thing remains the same for all federal contractors: Section 889 implementation.

Section 889 is a name that does not mean much to the average person, but carries a lot of weight for federal contractors. This is a section in the FY2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that seeks to eradicate Chinese telecom from the entire U.S. government supply chain. Why write about it now? The part that impacts federal contractors of all sizes (Part B) goes into effect this month. 
 
Earlier this year, the Department of Defense (DoD) held a public meeting to hear from industry. Of the salient points made, one resounding theme was that definitions will mean everything for implementation. However, industry hasn’t been able to share any definitional clarity because of the rule release delay. The FAR Council published their interim rule in July – Part B goes into effect before the comment period is over, which means contractors will have to comply with the rule starting on August 13, 2020. Public comments can be submitted until September 14. 
 
Here are the five key components for small/midsize contractors to pay attention to.
 
You’ll have a new box to check in SAM.

Contractors will need to annually check a box in SAM verifying that they do not use any covered telecommunications equipment or services. A contractor can choose to say yes, they do use some of these banned equipment/services, which would require an offer-by-offer representation for contracts and task/delivery orders under IDIQs. It is important to know this ban applies to any equipment, system, or service that uses the covered equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any of a contractor’s systems. Think this rule does not apply to you? Think again – acquisitions of commercial items (including COTS) and contracts at or below the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT) must also adhere to this prohibition. 

 
Definitions are key.

Definitions are critical to the implementation of this rule, which defines words such as “backhaul” and “roaming,” but leaves contractors with uncertainty over what constitutes a covered technology. FAR 4.2101 covers some of these definitions, however there was no further clarity in the rule regarding who is considered “any subsidiary or affiliate of such entities” of the five listed companies (Huawei, ZTE, Hytera, Hikvision, and Dahua). It seems problematic that a small business contractor is expected to research all of the subsidiaries and affiliates of these companies to make sure they are not utilizing any prohibited components. Note to government: why not just provide a list? 

 

Another definitional bone I have to pick is the meaning of “reasonable inquiry.” The rule says that a company is compliant if a “reasonable inquiry” by the company does not show any use of the prohibited equipment or services. So, what exactly does that mean? According to the rule, a reasonable inquiry is something that is designed to uncover any use of these covered telecommunications equipment or services and does not need to be an internal or third-party audit. While I am not a lawyer, I can imagine that every procurement attorney would advise contractors to have some type of legitimate audit of systems in case compliance risks arise.

 
The waiver process is laborious.

Although a waiver sounds reasonable and gives contractors added time to comply (until August 13, 2022), it doesn’t seem designed for small or midsize contractors. In order to get a one-time waiver, the head of an agency has to grant it. Before this happens, a senior agency official for supply chain risk management has to discuss the waiver with the Federal Acquisition Security Council (FASC). And consult with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) to make sure conditions are met. And provide notice to the ODNI and FASC 15 days before granting the waiver. And notify appropriate Congressional committees within 30 days. The FAR Council does acknowledge that this process could take a few weeks and advises to enter at your own risk because “agencies may reasonably choose not to initiate one and to move forward and make award to an offeror that does not require a waiver.” A quick data point: there are 387,967 companies registered in SAM, 74% of which are small. That would mean if every small company decided to submit an offer for a federal award and sought a waiver, that would be 287,096 waivers. 

 
Six contractor actions are necessary for compliance.

A chunk of the rule outlines contractor compliance recommendations. After reading and re-reading these six actions in the rule, I’m left with the same feeling: small contractors need something more detailed than just general guidelines. Generalities like “read and understand the rule and necessary actions for compliance” and “corporate enterprise tracking” sound great, but what exactly does that entail? During more normal times – let alone a pandemic – building out a compliance program can be complicated, not to mention costly. It is important contractors have the detailed information to get it right.

 
Finally, I see dollar signs.

The rule completely underestimates the time it will take contractors to implement and remain compliant with this rule. A whole section is dedicated to this analysis – and quite a few estimates left me scratching my head (you can find these in Section III, Part D). Companies aware of the rule have been spending months trying to prepare and continue to evaluate the components in their government offerings. An important part of complying with the rule to highlight is that a company cannot use any of these prohibited systems/equipment, even if they are not used in its federal contracts. That means no split networks or having one system for U.S. federal business and a difference one for commercial or contracts with other countries. I see more dollar signs.

 
The FAR Council is seeking public comment on the rule – and federal contractors should respond. In Section IV of the rule you can find a list of questions the Council wants industry to answer, and it is worth taking a look at them. One that is also found in the beginning of the rule is whether an expansion of the prohibition should be made to include all company subsidiaries and affiliates. Feedback is also requested on subjects like challenges, costs, and insight into existing systems.
 
One thing all contractors, regardless of size, have in common: they want to be compliant so they can compete. Given the uphill battle small and midsize contractors face when it comes to compliance with Section 889 and many other contracting requirements, advocacy on this issue is critical. WIPP continues to elevate this critical information to policymakers, asking them to consider the needs of women-owned businesses to comply with this new requirement. 

Tags:  Advocacy  federal contracting  leadership  regulatory  WIPP Works In Washington 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Top Five Reasons to Support Advocacy Now More Than Ever

Posted By Ann Sullivan, WIPP Chief Advocate, Wednesday, July 8, 2020
AnnSullivan

If you have been attending WIPP’s Intersectionality Series webinars on COVID-19, it should be pretty obvious that WIPP is on top of Congressional and federal agency actions related to the pandemic that continues to plague us personally and professionally. Not as evident, perhaps, is the role of advocacy beyond reporting the latest news. We give you five reasons why your support for WIPP is important.

 

  1. There’s More to Come. The government isn’t finished providing assistance to businesses.  The Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDL) remain key to retaining employees and providing capital but expect another stimulus bill later this summer.
  2. If You’re Not at The Table, You’re on the Menu. In other words, there are consequences to sitting on the sidelines. If you aren’t represented in decision-making, you are vulnerable to adverse consequences—you are at risk. WIPP is at the table.
  3. Interpreting Federal Actions Requires Context. A perfect example of this are the actions the Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Department of Treasury issued on PPP. Much was made of an audit of loans over $2 million — Treasury guidance (see question #31) issued in response to high-profile public companies who got the PPP loans. Unfortunately, small companies got scared of a government audit and returned money they needed and should have kept. This could have been avoided, had they understood the intent of the rule/Congress.
  4. Access to Decision-Makers Requires Consistent Attention. Advocacy requires constant communication with a consistent message. It is not all that different than a business relationship—you need to remind people who you are and what you offer. Cold calling during a crisis is unlikely to be effective. WIPP’s Advocacy Team keeps women business owners front and center so Congress turns to WIPP for its point of view during a crisis. Big difference.
  5. A Combined Voice is Far More Effective Than One Voice. The mission of WIPP is to provide a voice for women business owners. Its message resonates with policymakers because we represent women from all over the country, from different political views and every size of business. Your individual message to Congress is important. But as Helen Keller once said, “Alone we can do so little, but together we can do so much.”

 


Tags:  Advocacy  federal contracting 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Advocacy Update: Third COVID-19 Relief Bill

Posted By Elizabeth Sullivan, WIPP Advocacy Team, Thursday, March 26, 2020

The Senate passed the third bipartisan COVID-19 relief bill H.R. 748: Coronavirus aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act last night. The House is expected to vote on the legislation tomorrow. WIPP Members should pay attention to an important federal contracting provision and stay tuned for advocacy action steps. 


Legislation breakdowns from Committees:

Additional resources from the Advocacy Team:

Tags:  Advocacy  COVID-19  federal contracting  legislation 

Share |
Permalink
 

Guidance for Federal Contractors During COVID-19

Posted By Elizabeth Sullivan, WIPP Advocacy Team, Wednesday, March 25, 2020
Multiple documents have been issued – and expect more in the coming days – with guidance for agencies and contractors on how to operate with the disruptions from COVID-19. Make sure to check wipp.org/coronavirus for ongoing business resources, and for the most up-to-date information on this list below, visit the MSGI websiteElizabeth Sullivan


Office of Management and Budget (OMB):

Memorandum to the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on Managing Federal Contract Performance Issues Associated with the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) – Margaret Weichert, Deputy Director for Management

  • Agencies should be flexible in providing extensions to performance dates if telework or other flexible work solutions, such as virtual work environments, are not possible, or if a contractor is unable to perform in a timely manner due to quarantining, social distancing, or other COVID-19 related interruptions

Harnessing Technology to Support Mission Continuity – Margaret Weichert, Deputy Director for Management 

  • Administration directs that agencies utilize technology to the greatest extent practicable to support mission continuity

Department of Defense (DoD):

Class Deviation – Progress Payment Rates – Kim Herrington, Acting Principal Director for Defense Pricing and Contracting

  • Pentagon will temporarily increase the percentages paid to contractors, known as periodic progress payments
    Increases the rate for contracts from 80% to 90% of incurred costs for large businesses
    For small businesses the rate will go from 90% to 95%

Defense Industrial Base Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce – Ellen Lord, Under Secretary for Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment

  • If you work in a critical infrastructure industry, as defined by the Department of Homeland Security, you have a special responsibility to maintain your normal work schedule
  • The Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce for the DIB includes workers who support the essential products and services required to meet national security commitments to the Federal Government and the U.S. Military

Contract Place of Performance – Kim Herrington, Acting Principal Director for Defense Pricing and Contracting 

  • DoD providing maximum telework flexibility for contractors 

Additional Agencies:

Additional Resources:

Tags:  COVID-19  federal contracting 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Ringing In the New Year with New Mass Mods

Posted By Courtney Fairchild, President & Co-Founder, Global Services; WIPP Board of Directors, Vice Chair, Wednesday, January 8, 2020
Updated: Wednesday, January 22, 2020

This is the second in a series of blog posts on the GSA MAS Consolidation. Read the first blog post.

 

Phase 1 of GSA’s Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) Consolidation was implemented on October 1, 2019. That change had no impact on existing GSA Schedule holders—but as GSA gears up for the next phases in January 2020, contractors should prepare for changes coming their way. 


Courtney Fairchild

Phase II

 

At the end of January, GSA will initiate a Mass Modification (Mod) where all existing contract holders will be instructed to accept the new Terms and Conditions (T&C) under the Consolidated Multiple Award Schedule. Accepting the new T&C will not change any other components of a contractor’s Schedule.


Contractors will retain their contract number(s) and previously negotiated factors such as Basis of Award (BOA) and customer/delivery discounts. However, changes will be made to GSA sites such as eMod, eBuy, eLibrary, and GSA Advantage, to reflect the new solicitation items. Contractors will have the ability to update their contracts, but the Add/Delete SIN option will be unavailable on eMod until early March to ensure that all Phase II Mods are processed first. 

 


Phase III

 

Phase III, anticipated around July, will affect contractors who have more than one current GSA Schedule Contract. Prior to this Mod, GSA will contact affected contractors with consolidation options specific to their held contracts. During this Phase, contractors will work to consolidate their separate Schedules (e.g. PSS and IT) into a single MAS Consolidated Schedule. GSA and contractors will work together to decide how to best consolidate their offerings through the addition/deletion of SINs on the contractor-selected singular surviving contract. 


How to Prepare

 

Prior to any Mod, contractors should:

 

  • Join the MAS community on GSA’s Interact site.

  • Review the new solicitation.

  • Review the new SIN structure via Available Offerings attachment.

  • Ensure contract is up-to-date.

  • Ensure completion of all previous Mods.

  • Review and understand your Pricelist.


If you have questions about the Phase II or Phase III Mod, you can reach out to GSA’s MAS Program Management Office (PMO) at MASPMO@GSA.gov. For questions specific to your contract, it’s best to email your assigned Contracting Officer (CO) directly to discuss. These changes can be jarring, but please remember there is a support system in place to guide you. 

 

 

Want to know more?

View the free ChallengeHER on-demand webinar from Courtney Fairchild

 

 

Tags:  federal contracting  Federal Procurement  Federal Procurement Opportunities 

Share |
Permalink
 

The GSA MAS Consolidation: Catalyst for Change in GovCon

Posted By Laura Berry, Wednesday, December 25, 2019
Updated: Wednesday, January 22, 2020

This is the first in a series of blog posts on the GSA MAS Consolidation. Read the second blog post.

 

On October 1, 2019, GSA released their much anticipated Consolidated Schedule. The GSA Schedules Program, which previously included 24 Schedules, is now an overarching Solicitation (#47QSMD20R0001, Refresh #0000) with 12 Large Categories/various Subcategories. 


Courtney Fairchild

When consolidating all 24 Schedules into one, GSA selected the list of major contenders (the Government’s most purchased goods/services) and divided them into Large Categories, which resemble GSA’s Category Management Initiative. Within each Large Category, complementary services/products are further divided into subcategories, and these subcategories are further broken down into Special Item Numbers (SINs). For those of you who have had a contract for years these changes can be overwhelming, but I’m here to break it down for you.


Firstly, goodbye random SIN Numbers, hello NAICS-forward SINs! Up till now, understanding the GSA Schedules meant learning a complicated and arbitrary set of SIN numbers and descriptions. Under the new solicitation, GSA reworked the SIN numbers to align with the much more familiar NAICS code system. Under the legacy solicitation, for example, one just had to know that Perpetual Software Licenses was SIN 132-33, with a NAICS code of 511210. Now, the Software Licenses SIN is just 511210. 

 

 For the most part, there’s a clear, one-to-one correspondence like this between the old and new SINs. For those mappings that aren’t so clear, keep an eye out for GSA’s updated Old SIN vs. New SIN Crosswalk to decipher which SIN numbers you are proposing this go around. 

 

Want to know more?

View the free ChallengeHER on-demand webinar from Courtney Fairchild


Secondly, GSA has broadened past performance options! Previously, contractors had to demonstrate successful past performance by purchasing an Open Ratings, Inc. Report. For companies with pre-existing Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), the Open Ratings requirement was redundant—why get a new report when the Government already has documentation of your performance? GSA listened: now, a Schedule offer requires three or more CPARs, if you have them. And while the Consolidated Schedule solicitation still allows for Open Ratings Reports, as of December 6, 2019, Open Ratings is no longer accepting new orders. If you have an existing, valid Open Ratings Report already, you may use it. Otherwise, offerors who cannot demonstrate Past Performance via CPARs will instead need to provide a Past Performance Narrative containing brief project descriptions and points of contact. 


Thirdly, what happens in the legacy program, stays in the legacy program. Previously, any rejected submission had to be provided and narratively addressed during the next submission attempt. Contractors are now no longer required to disclose pending, current, or rejected submissions. 


Lastly, most submissions now only require only one Relevant Project Experience narrative per proposed SIN, EXCEPT the Large Category IT, which requires two. (Note: some IT Subcategories also have additional requirements beyond that—always check the SIN’s requirements!). Under the legacy solicitation, contractors had to provide anywhere from one to three projects, depending on which Schedule and SIN they were pursuing. This made it hard for younger companies without a long history of Project Experience to get on Schedule. 


I am very excited to see how GSA has listened to stakeholder feedback in this endeavor. I believe this new MAS Solicitation will make the submission process more readily available for industry partners and more user-friendly for government buyers. And with less redundancy and confusion, contractors will see more benefit in getting on Schedule. Change is good.

Tags:  federal contracting  Federal Procurement  Federal Procurement Opportunities 

Share |
Permalink
 

Regulations & Rules Update - December 2019

Posted By Advocacy Team, Monday, December 23, 2019
Updated: Wednesday, December 18, 2019

Regulatory Recap: Flurry of Federal Contracting Regulations You Should Know About

 

In the past several months, SBA has taken significant actions on contracting policy that affect small government contractors. They are in various stages—some are proposed rules, some are finalized. WIPP Chief Advocate Ann Sullivan outlined the summaries and status of the actions federal contractors should be following. 



Wide-Reaching FAR Rule Touches Every Government Contractor


In the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Congress directed federal agencies to stop using products and services from six Chinese companies in Section 889 of the bill, in order to combat national security and intellectual property threats that face the United States. Moving quickly, the FAR Council issued an interim final rule in August to implement this change, which has the potential of impacting all government contractors, large or small. Any government action that affects 139,730 small entities will have wide-reaching effects.


Learn more about how it will directly impact your business.

Tags:  federal contracting  regulatory 

Share |
Permalink
 

Advocacy Update: Legislation Introduced to Encourage Agencies to Use Small Businesses

Posted By Advocacy Team, Wednesday, December 18, 2019

The WIPP-supported bill, The Promoting Rigorous and Innovative Cost Efficiencies for Federal Procurement and Acquisitions (PRICE) Act of 2019 (S. 3038)was introduced this week, which addresses agency utilization of small businesses in the federal marketplace. We are thrilled to see this bill introduced by Senators Gary Peters (D-MI) and Joni Ernst (R-IA) and will continue to advocate for its passage. 

 

Read WIPP’s combined letter of support for the bill.


As many small businesses find that agencies continue to be reluctant to use small business programs, this bipartisan bill addresses this prevailing issue by requiring the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to convene the existing Chief Acquisition Officers Council (CAOC) to identify and disseminate best practices in non-defense small business contracting in the federal government. The CAOC would also be required to solicit public input and engage with governmental and nongovernmental experts.

The PRICE Act will positively impact the way in which this valuable information is gathered and shared with the public and across the federal government, as well as provide increased opportunities for small businesses by educating the acquisition workforce on best practices for using small business programs.

 

 

Tags:  Advocacy  federal contracting  Federal Procurement  Federal Procurement Opportunities  legislation 

Share |
Permalink
 

Wide-Reaching FAR Rule Touches Every Government Contractor

Posted By Ann Sullivan, WIPP Chief Advocate, Tuesday, November 19, 2019

In the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, Congress directed federal agencies to stop using products and services from six Chinese companies in Section 889 of the bill. Those companies include: Huawei, ZTE Corporation, Hytera Communications Corporation, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Company, and Dahua Technology Company. 


Moving quickly, the FAR Council issued an interim final rule, Prohibition on Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment, which became effective on August 13, 2019, and broadly prohibits federal agencies from using telecommunications or surveillance equipment or services from these six companies.

AnnSullivan

Next year, step two, which prohibits any government contractor from using any components or services from these companies is expected to go into effect. Known as Section 889, this action has the potential of impacting all government contractors, large or small—even micropurchases.  


While no one doubts that these companies pose a threat to the nation’s cybersecurity, any government action that affects 139,730 small entities will have wide reaching effects. That was the theme of my participation on a panel at GSA on Section 889. I joined five other panelists to speak about how Section 889 will affect government contractors, especially small businesses.

 

 Think for a minute about complying with this new requirement. For example, do you know who manufacturers your desk phones? Do you know what brand the surveillance equipment in your building? If you travel internationally, do you know the telecom carrier you use in your office or hotel? Replacement of equipment will surely carry a cost, but figuring out usage of any components or services from these six companies will prove to be difficult.


The new FAR rules will not only impact your employees and your physical facility, it will also extend to your workforce comprised of 1099 contractors. A small business owner shared that this new Section 889 requirement could result in her contractors opting out of federal work because the new requirements will be too tough to comply with.


One of my fellow panelists joked that these new requirements will provide full employment to lawyers and compliance experts for years to come. Small businesses will likely need to hire a compliance specialist as well as a specialist to source equipment to stay in compliance with the new rule. One small business stated that it will cost them $10,000 to conduct an audit and provide governance structure, $10,000 for new equipment, and $10,000 to change all of her contracts and educate her 1099s. An audience participant estimated a cost of $150,000 just for new equipment alone.


My greatest concern is that small businesses will not understand the implications of this new requirement until it smacks them in the face—until they don’t qualify for federal work or a prime contractor demands a certification of compliance.  


So, what can the government do to increase awareness among industry about the potential impact of Section 889? First, the government can use small business offices (OSDBUs) and small business specialists to share information about Section 889. Second, GSA can do informational webinars about the impact of the new rule. Third, the government should involve the Small Business Administration (SBA) and Procurement Technical Assistance Centers (PTACs) network. And finally, the government should engage organizations, like WIPP to spread the word about the new Section 889 rule.


Staying on top of acquisition policies, like Section 889, directly affects your bottom line. That’s the beauty of WIPP – we are dedicated to keeping you informed and engaged.


Tags:  advocacy  FAR  federal contracting 

Share |
Permalink
 
Page 1 of 2
1  |  2
more Calendar

9/29/2020 » 10/1/2020
WIPP Virtual Symposium on Cyber Resiliency

10/14/2020
WIPP Advocacy Update - October 2020

10/19/2020
WIPP Intersectionality Series

10/21/2020
WIPP Community Connections - October 2020

11/11/2020
WIPP Advocacy Update - November 2020

Featured Members
Tina PattersonPrincipal, Jade Solutions, Germantown, MD — August 2020 Member Spotlight
Jeanette Prenger (Hernandez)President & CEO, ECCO Select, North Kansas City, MO — September 2020 Member Spotlight

Privacy Policy / Disclaimer    |    © WIPP  |    888-488-WIPP

Association Management Software Powered by YourMembership  ::  Legal