Meeting — Oct. 25, 2023

The GSA Acquisition Policy Federal Advisory Industry Partnerships Subcommittee convened for a public meeting at 3:00 PM on October 25, 2023, virtually via Zoom, with Kristin Seaver, Chair, and Farad Ali, Co—Chair, presiding.

In accordance with FACA, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App 2, the meeting was open to the public from 3:00 PM to 5:00 PM EST.

Meeting agenda

Allotted Time	Topic	Presenter(s)
3:00 PM - 3:05 PM	Call to Order Roll Call and Quorum	Boris Arratia, Designated Federal Officer
3:05 PM - 3:10 PM	Introductory Remarks Opening Statement	Kristin Seaver, Chair Farad Ali, Co-Chair
3:10 PM - 4:40 PM	Guest Speakers	Tia Perry, Executive Director, AEC Unites John Braze, Managing Partner, Mir Ventures
4:40 PM - 4:45 PM	Public Comments	Public Participants
4:45 PM - 4:50 PM	Closing Remarks Summary Next Steps Adjourn	Kristin Seaver, Chair Farad Ali, Co-Chair Boris Arratia, Designated Federal Officer

Committee Members Present:

Kristin Seaver, Chairman — General Dynamics Information Technology
Farad Ali, Co—Chair — Asociar LLC
Denise Bailey — Philadelphia International Airport
Gail Bassette — Bowie State University
Deryl McKissack — Mckissack & Mckissack
Nigel Stephens — U.S. Black Chambers of Commerce
Keith Tillage — Tillage Construction LLC

Absent: Susan Lorenz—Fisher, Mamie Mallory, Stacy Smedley, David Wagger, Kimberly Wise White

Guest Speakers & Presenters:

Tia Perry — Executive Director, AEC Unites
John Braze — Managing Partner, MIR Ventures

GSA Staff Present:

Boris Arratia — Designated Federal Officer
Stephanie Hardison — Deputy Designated Federal Officer
David Cochinnec — GAP FAC Support
Skylar Holloway — GAP FAC Support
Jean Cregan — Closed Captioner
Jill Lamoreaux — ASL Interpreter
Scott Merk — ASL Interpreter

Call to order

Boris Arratia, Designated Federal Officer, opened the public meeting by welcoming the group before reminding the public that there would be time for comments and statements at the end of the meeting and any written comments can be submitted through regulations.gov. Roll call was performed before the meeting was turned over to Chairperson Kristin Seaver.

Welcome and opening remarks

Chairperson Kristin Seaver welcomed the subcommittee and shared her excitement about the focus of today’s session, which is to fine—tune recommendations from the subcommittee for the GSA on promoting inclusivity and diversity among suppliers, and addressing climate and sustainability issues. She mentions the lighthouse recommendation, which aims to connect various networks to expand GSA’s reach. The group will be hearing from two speakers today.

Tia Perry is the Executive Director of AEC Unites. She drives equity and inclusion to black talent and black—owned architecture, engineering, and construction businesses.

John Braze joins the group from MIR Ventures and is an expert in startups and venture capital focusing on emerging technology and government engagement.

Guest speakers discussion and questions

Tia Perry

Tia discusses AEC Unites, a recently established 501(c)(6) trade association with a focus on advocating for black talent and black—owned businesses within the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry. AEC Unites is unique because it was founded by Deryl McKissick, a GSA Acquisition Policy Federal Advisory Committee (GAP FAC) member with a deep history in the AEC field. The organization has two primary pillars: one centered on supporting black—owned businesses and the other on diversifying the talent pipeline.

AEC Unites officially launched on October 3rd and already has around 50 members, including some of the nation’s top architects, engineers, and contractors. Their commitment revolves around advancing equity and inclusion for black talent and black—owned businesses in the AEC industry. The members pledge to evaluate and improve their processes for fairness and inclusivity, hire black—owned firms as Tier 1 suppliers whenever possible, and set strict goals for using minority suppliers on all projects.

Regarding talent development, AEC Unites is dedicated to addressing the labor shortage by partnering with K—12 programs and industry stakeholders to create a clear pathway for individuals interested in AEC careers. They aim to provide resources, internships, and mentorship opportunities and are developing a website and app to facilitate access to these resources.

Regarding their alignment with the GSA, AEC Unites sees synergies with the GSA’s business pillar, particularly in creating sustainable opportunities for black—owned businesses in the AEC sector. They have diverse members representing various AEC verticals and aim to streamline resources and advocate for black—owned businesses to secure work in the marketplace.

Their year one goals include

• Advocating for policy changes to increase equitable opportunities
• Supporting clients’ commitments with branding
• Creating a playbook for members on procuring sustainable opportunities for black—owned businesses
• Preparing black—owned businesses for scalable growth
• Highlighting top—performing firms
• Creating a database of black—owned AEC firms

AEC Unites began with 12 members passionate about advancing equity, and they have developed strategic and action plans to achieve their goals. The organization aims to partner with other entities to simplify the process of identifying opportunities for minority businesses and individuals interested in AEC careers.

Q: Kristin Seaver — From your experience, what is the importance of building strategic and intentional relationships?

A: Tia Perry — Since our official launch on October 3rd, we’ve received numerous partnership requests, and while it’s a great opportunity, it’s also a challenge to manage. To address this, I recommend establishing specific criteria for the interest groups we choose to partner with. These criteria should align with our strategic plan and mission. Additionally, we’re looking to partner with organizations with a global footprint because AEC Unites is a national organization with members across the U.S. We want to collaborate with entities that can effectively serve our members and offer resources and programs tailored to our membership. To facilitate this strategic approach, we’ve enlisted facilitators to help us bring our vision to life by leveraging the resources of our member companies and ensuring that our expectations are realistic, given our bandwidth and available resources.

Q: Kristin Seaver — From your perspective, is it in your wheelhouse to help these companies work with the government? Do you have any experiences, perspectives, or challenges with helping companies achieve this?

A: Tia Perry — I’ve recently discussed this with our members who have experience working with the GSA. I’ve learned from our members that the administrative requirements for government projects can be quite demanding, especially for smaller businesses with limited staff. Navigating the rules and regulations can be overwhelming and challenging unless they have a dedicated contract officer. There may be opportunities to provide a simplified guide or playbook to help small businesses understand and comply with these requirements. While there are resources online like the SBA and Sam.gov, small businesses might not know where to start. The reporting side of government contracts can be cumbersome, and this heavy reporting burden can deter some contractors from pursuing government work. Our member companies have expressed these challenges to me over the past few weeks.

Q: Kristin Seaver — Are there challenges with climate and sustainability requirements with your members?

A: Tia Perry — While we have a diverse group of companies, we haven’t specifically discussed their approach to climate and sustainability. It’s not something I’ve inquired about or surveyed our members on.

Deryl McKissack voiced that the proposal requirements can be overwhelming for smaller companies. Larger companies may meet specific project criteria, such as having completed five identical projects of the same size in the last five years, but this doesn’t necessarily mean they are the best fit. Smaller companies may have the available workforce but lack the exact project history. Relaxing performance requirements and certification and licensing requirements should be reviewed and adjusted to fit the specific project type, as rigid requirements can prevent smaller companies from pursuing opportunities.

Antonio Doss suggests exploring ways to educate and inform individuals about the federal contracting process, enabling them to make informed decisions about pursuing opportunities. He extends an offer to connect and collaborate with AEC Unites to understand the needs of its members better and explore potential SBA resources or tailored solutions for the group. Tia welcomed the idea of continuing the conversation and emphasized the potential value of workshops and training sessions to help members understand the process and requirements.

Q: Kristin Seaver — Given the presence of larger prime companies and smaller firms, to conduct any mentor protégé partnering?

A: Tia Perry — We aim to provide resources to their member companies about joint ventures, teaming opportunities, and potentially creating a playbook of best practices. GSA might be able to assist with this initiative.

Deryl McKissack — On the business side, AEC Unites seeks to be a clearinghouse for various needs within the AEC industry. This could involve connecting larger companies with mentors and mentees in specific locations or business types and facilitating collaborations for significant projects. The goal is for AEC Unites to become the go—to resource for identifying top—rated firms and firms needing mentoring to foster growth.

Q: Keith Tillage — Is it correct to assume that when joint ventures are established, they will eventually enable smaller companies to stand on their own, similar to a mentor—protégé relationship?

A: Tia Perry — That assumption is correct. We are developing criteria, but our goal is to provide equitable opportunities, not just set—asides. AEC Unites aims to offer resources that help our members succeed based on their merits and compete effectively in the marketplace, promoting legitimate partnerships and self—sufficiency.

Deryl discussed the process of narrowing down the focus of AEC Unites. She highlights the decision to concentrate on supporting the Black community specifically due to data showing Black individuals consistently facing disparities. Despite various ways to approach diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), prioritizing the Black community was made based on the idea that it would benefit everyone if they could uplift the group at the bottom. This approach could be replicated for other underrepresented groups like Latinos, women, Asians, and more. Influential co—chairs in the program, including CEOs of major companies, support focusing on the Black community. There is a need to select a few key initiatives and execute them effectively rather than spreading efforts too thin. The goal is to create attainable and impactful initiatives that can make a difference in the AEC industry.

Q: Stephanie Hardison — Can you provide more information about AEC Unites’ board members and recruitment strategy, focusing on finding the right people?

A: Tia Perry — We are actively recruiting members who can help advance their mission. AEC Unites is open to AEC companies and corporate clients interested in getting involved. The focus is on active participation rather than just financial contributions. Companies are encouraged to join and contribute to either the talent pillars, which address challenges minority businesses face. Deryl will provide more insights into the selection process of the founders.

A: Deryl McKissack — We aimed for a cross—section of architectural, engineering, and construction firms. AEC Unites founders were chosen to possess a comprehensive understanding of AEC operations since the certification process for minority firms often lacks a thorough understanding of their business. This group comprises firms that do all three elements (architectural, engineering, and construction) and includes national minority firms. These founders were already involved in promoting DEI within their own companies. There is a need for best practices from all firms to ensure that DEI initiatives are carried out effectively across the industry.

The founding group of firms made financial contributions to get the initiative off the ground. As AEC Unites continued to bring in more members, they introduced a “Directors Circle” for large companies expressing interest in joining. A “Corporate Council” group is emerging, composed of major corporations interested in fostering sustainable work opportunities for Black businesses. These corporations are contribute significant funding and want to work with other companies to achieve their DEI goals. It’s important to provide sustainable opportunities rather than check the box when working with Black businesses, as this approach will help close the wealth gap between Black and white communities in the country.

Gail Bassette expressed her appreciation for AEC Unites and identified a similar challenge in the HBCU (Historically Black Colleges and Universities) context. She mentions that many of the same issues exist for HBCUs; in some cases, the challenges are even more pronounced.

Deryl responds by highlighting the HBCU focus and the potential to find jobs for HBCU graduates in the AEC industry, which faces a significant labor shortage. There is an urgency to attract underutilized talent, especially from minority communities, to address workforce needs. She stresses the importance of ensuring diversity in infrastructure projects that impact communities. She believes it is vital to incorporate insights and perspectives from residents by having engineers and architects from those communities work on these projects. It would be greatly beneficial to have an effective campaign to engage students in STEM fields and encourage connecting organizations working on STEM education to ensure a seamless pathway for students from a young age through college and into the workforce. She envisions an app that guides students through the various stages of education and career development in the AEC industry, promoting job opportunities and supporting underprivileged students.

Kristin thanked Tia for participating with the subcommittee before moving to the next speaker, John Braze.

John Braze

John Braze introduced himself as a speaker and outlined the business areas relevant to technology companies, focusing on Mir Ventures and Mir Meridian, which supports tech companies in optimizing their go—to—market strategies. He has a role in founding a global angel network with 500 members, who actively evaluate and potentially invest in thousands of technology companies annually.

Mir Ventures primarily works with early—stage technology companies with annual revenues ranging from $500,000 to $3 million. These companies are typically B2B or B2G—oriented and employ recurring revenue models. They also foster partnerships with startup accelerators, angel networks, venture capital firms, universities, and tech transfer offices, and collaboration with corporations and industry groups.

His company is not a government vendor but has assisted tech companies in getting onto the GSA Multiple Award Schedule when they aim to sell to the government.

He shares his thoughts on the two initiatives the subcommittee is undertaking. He suggests that GSA should focus on raising brand awareness and leveraging its strengths, especially for niche tech companies. John also emphasizes the importance of intentionality in engaging with diverse communities, suggesting that building a larger network can lead to fruitful partnerships.

Q: Nigel Stephens — One of the problems we’re trying to solve is identifying smaller and more diverse firms for federal marketplace opportunities. How can we identify smaller, diverse entities and engage with them? Are there specific places or organizations we should be looking at to reach these smaller firms?

A: John Braze — Universities can serve as an early pipeline, especially for startups, while the Angel networks may help find more mature companies ready to be suppliers. Combined with a brand awareness campaign, these approaches help identify and engage with smaller and more diverse firms.

Q: Kristin Seaver — Can you elaborate on your perceptions of the challenges that arise due to the discrepancy between the expected metrics of an emerging company and the perception of the government’s long sales cycle and need for consistent revenue?

A: John Braze — Tech companies often need help targeting large enterprise clients like GE or Google due to long sales cycles, difficulty breaking in, and uncertain returns. While there are advantages in potential growth within these large organizations, startups must be cautious to spend only some of their resources and time exclusively pursuing these large accounts, as they might run out of capital before securing them. In terms of making it easier for early—stage tech companies, a roadmap could help. By outlining specific milestones and expectations for demonstrating the value of their technology, companies can have a more quantifiable understanding of what to expect. This could include clarifying how initial contracts could lead to future growth opportunities, minimizing the uncertainty surrounding pilot projects, and proofs of concept, which are often unprofitable and yield uncertain outcomes.

Q: Kristin Seaver — I’ve shared our first recommendation about creating a challenge pipeline. When designing prizes for these competitions, what would be the most beneficial for emerging innovative startups?

A: John Braze — These prizes should align with GSA’s goals. For instance, many emerging tech companies have a cloud component in their products. However, the barrier to entry for government contracts related to cloud—based technology often involves the time—consuming, complex, and expensive FedRAMP certification process. Small companies with limited resources can struggle to implement this on their own, sometimes requiring costly consultants. An idea for prizes would be to offer awards that help offset these costs and burdens, especially for providing cloud—based solutions to the government. Instead of offering cash prizes, which the government might not prefer, consider providing support or services with a tangible monetary value. This way, the incentives directly align to facilitate startups’ entry into the government supplier base, making them more valuable and practical.

Q: Nigel Stephens — Would offering grants and technical support for small businesses, especially for tasks like obtaining FedRAMP or addressing regulatory hurdles when entering the government market?

A: John Braze — This could be very helpful. However, a comprehensive study would likely be needed to understand the exact costs and efforts involved for these smaller companies. We’ve been discussing FedRAMP, but there are other barriers they might face. Even getting on a Multiple—Award Schedule can be challenging, mainly because it can be difficult to figure out what to do the first time around. Grants and technical assistance for tasks like FedRAMP would be useful. Additionally, having support, like a Sherpa or liaisons, to guide them through getting on a schedule, for instance, would also be valuable.

Q: Kristin Seaver — If your investment group was looking for companies involved in climate risk mitigation and sustainable products, where would you typically go to find them? Would you approach the GSA for this purpose?

A: John Braze — Typically, entrepreneurs understand the ecosystem, and they are the ones who come to us. Our organization is quite well—known within this space. We get a significant number of companies contacting us regularly because they know where to find us. We are active on various platforms, have the right keywords in our profiles, and engage with the digital communities where these entrepreneurs reside.

Q: Kristin Seaver — Where can we find these companies?

A: John Braze — When these companies are young and in their growth phase, they are often very proactive about seeking partners to help them expand their business. They are excellent at finding you if they know you’re in that space and can assist with their goal. They actively reach out, make calls, and engage with potential partners because they are eager to grow their business. They will proactively try to seek you out as long as they know that you can provide what they need and that it aligns with their goals.

John added additional key points for the subcommittee.

He highlighted the issue with certain innovation scouting programs run by technology startup accelerators. These programs sometimes focus on finding tech startups but don’t necessarily align incentives to ensure the successful implementation and adoption of those technologies within the organizations, like large enterprises or government agencies. They’re often motivated to identify technology, and the startups introduced to them may not end up in a situation where they secure contracts and engage with the right people. These programs should be more oriented toward building traditional vendor—buyer relationships, ensuring that the effort results in startups successfully selling their products to the government. Regarding the lighthouse initiative, he appreciates seeking organizations interested in helping startups succeed rather than just making introductions for a fee.

Q: Boris Arratia — Could you share some thoughts on how we can effectively use RFIs for our market research, considering the traditional approach?

A: John Braze — One aspect to consider is how startups, who might not be familiar with government contracting, can find those RFIs. Most companies already involved in government contracting have figured out how to access RFIs, typically through mailing lists or other channels. However, RFIs may not reach those who are new to government business.

Regarding the content of RFIs, it’s important to make them more accessible to entrepreneurs. They often prefer focusing on problem—solution descriptions and use cases rather than lengthy descriptions laden with government jargon. Use cases help entrepreneurs understand the problem you’re trying to solve and allow for creative solutions. If you present a problem and outline a broad box for potential solutions, entrepreneurs can propose various ways to address it. This way, you can choose the most suitable solution. Providing an idea of the market opportunity within the RFI can attract startups. If you specify the market size, it can motivate entrepreneurs to respond.

John left the subcommittee with a final parting comment.

Regarding marketing initiatives, the ultimate goal of any marketing campaign is to get the recipient to respond. Sometimes, it might be necessary to downplay your identity to encourage that initial reply initially. Once you have their attention, the next step is to engage them. So, consider strategies to get that initial response, which is smart. You don’t have to hide your identity, but it’s worth emphasizing if it’s beneficial, especially for specific agencies with prominent brand names facing certain issues. John expressed his appreciation to have the opportunity to address the subcommittee.

The group moved to the Jamboard to capture sentiments from both speakers they heard today. The group came up with the following:

• The Importance of connecting a solution with a real problem — Deryl’s example of the AEC industries needing to hire 600K — there is a labor shortage.
• Linking with HBCUs — how can we do this intentionally? Definitely need to include academia and HBUCs in our lighthouse recommendation.
• Building a stronger, sustainable industrial base requires strong support for the entrepreneurs and the labor component is also highly important.
• Leverage universities and Angel networks.
• Narrow down focus to something tangible.
• A facilitated strategy discussion helped AEC United set meaningful priorities.
• Partnership with the right players is vital.
• Problem solution — use case description RFI/brand awareness.
• Need ways to demystify the government marketplace by simplifying processes to get more entrants from underrepresented groups.
• Some groups reach emerging tech startups — Angel networks — and tech transfer groups associated with universities.
• Innovation scouting and matchmaking.
• Brand awareness.
• Addressing the heavy administrative burden of working with the government.
• AEC might create a model that could be replicated for other specific groups/microsegments, including more environmentally focused industries.
• Finding firms right where they are.
• The importance of intentionality.
• Addressing the volatility of government contracts in attracting innovators.
• Educating underrepresented groups on government processes and expectations can help save small firms time and money.

Kristin will organize the group’s thoughts while adding more to the list. She encouraged the members to send her more thoughts to add to the list should they have any. The group will work on providing a visual example of what they discussed, making it easier to convey their ideas.

Public comments

The subcommittee opened the discussion to the public; however, there were no comments or questions.

Closing remarks

Kristin thanked the committee members actively participating and bringing today’s speakers to the meeting.

Boris adjourned the meeting at 5:00 PM EST.

I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing minutes are accurate and complete.

Digitally signed by Kristin Seaver 3/25/2024
Kristin Seaver
Chairperson
GAP FAC Industry Partnerships Subcommittee

Digitally signed by Farad Ali 3/19/2024
Farad Ali
Co—Chairperson
GAP FAC Industry Partnerships Subcommittee