Ostensible Subcontracting  

• What is an ostensible subcontractor?
• A subcontractor that performs primary and vital requirements of the contract or A sub that the prime is unusually reliant upon
• How do it is determined that such an arrangement exists?
• The SBA uses a “Seven Factor” test to determine the size status of the prime/sub relationship



• If it is determined such an arrangement exists, then what?
• If an ostensible subcontractor arrangement does exist, the CO must consider the revenue of both firms in determining if they meet the size standard for the procurement
• For instance, if a procurement had the NAICS code of 541380 with a standard of $10M, the combined revenue of Andromeda and Wiltson exceeded the $10M standard.
• If the combined revenue exceeds the standard, then the company would be considered large business for the purpose of the current procurement.
• The “ Seven Factor” test:
• The seven factor test is includes the following items:
• 1. Which party will be managing the contract?
• 2. Which party possesses the requisite background and expertise to carry out the contract?
• 3. What party pursued the contract award?
• 4. What degree of collaboration was there on the proposal effort?
• 5. Were the tasks allocated to be performed by each party or is there commingling of personnel and material?
• 6. What is the amount of work to be performed by each party?
• 7. Which party will perform the more complex and costly contract functions?

In answering the seven questions, consider these items:

Review a breakdown of management and technical tasks with regard to which firm is performing the “primary and vital” portions of the work. The prime contractor must be doing the majority of the managerial and technical work.

• The work force ratio should look at both the number of employees as well as the wages of those employees, which is in contrast to previous practice of just doing a 49%/51% of the employee head count analysis.
• The overall percentage of work subcontracted out
• Status of the subcontractor
• Are they the incumbent?
• Have they grown in size such that they are now ineligible for award of this contract?


• The past performance of each vendor. The prime must have relevant experience in the area under consideration.
• The allocation of key persons between the prime and subcontractor. Be alert to instances where key persons remain on staff with the subcontractor, especially if that company is the incumbent.
• Which party pursued the award and degree of collaboration on the proposal
• Items of concern:
• Whether the challenged concern identified the firms as a team
• Whether the challenged concern is hiring now-large incumbent’s project management team and subcontracting significant portions of the contract to the incumbent
• Whether the challenged concern failed to identify discrete tasks each concern would perform
• Whether the challenged concern lacks, and subcontractor possesses the qualifications relevant to the contract requirements
• Whether a greater share of labor costs are borne by the ostensible subcontractor
• Whether the challenged concern has inexperience in the primary and vital requirements of the solicitation
• Whether the challenged firm plans to hire a substantial number of the incumbent’s (and ostensible subcontractor’s) employees.

These items can be “red flags” that an ostensible subcontractor arrangement exists

After doing the seven factor analysis:

• In looking at the “totality of circumstances”, if it can be determined that the subcontractor is performing a significant portion of the work or if it can be determined that the prime contractor is not capable of doing the work independently, then an ostensible subcontractor arrangement exists.
• If the CO considers the prime to be LB, she must refer the matter to the SBA for a formal size determination