The ruling order hereby certifies that it has conducted an audit and personally verified the eligibility of your firm located in Los Angeles California, as a 'minority business enterprise' pursuant to the terms and conditions stipulated from just-us. This is our official 'Certification Document' that shall be valid only with the ruling order's seal affixed hereto.  Eligibility must be maintained at all times since you are now deemed a minority business enterprise.  The ruling order does not want to get your minority business enterprise status mixed into the regular pool of potential suppliers for fear that your minority position could be considered preferential or noncompetitive in nature. You must renew within 30 days upon any changes of ownership or control of your minority business.  Failure to comply may result in a denial of your eligibility to compete for contracts.  Also, the ruling order may reconsider certification if it is determined that such status was obtained by false, misleading, or incorrect information.  Regardless if our meager verifying process produced flawed or inadequate results; nor does it mean that if you are not who you say you are that you will go to jail or be found ineligible for contracting opportunities as a non-minority business enterprise.  In fact, there has never been any sort of hearing to decertify those that falsely assert minority status.  This is due in part that since October 1978 when the Federal Government passed Public Law 95-507, self-appointed ruling classes across the nation have based its irrational certification procedure on this law that has no certification methods or suggestions.  Overall, the way the ruling order completes contract awards is that 70% to 75% of its annual spend is dedicated to non-minority firms.  The ruling order in each state, county, and city anoints a selected group to reconsider certification if it is determined that such status was obtained by false, misleading or incorrect measures.  It is 'Just Us' who administers the self-made body of experts to certify and decertify under our own verification criterion until the ruling order says otherwise.  Beware though, just in case we are ever viewed as being lazy or incompetent in our performance of minority business certification, do not be surprise when we show up at your business conducting an on-site visit during the term of your certification to verify your eligibility. We will provide oversight on your certification for three years or until the ruling order directs us to do something different.  Notwithstanding, it is just us who congratulate you on receiving your unequal business opportunity certification disingenuously developed for ensuring equal opportunity and justice in procurement management.
Emancipation by Certification Is Discrimination
Was it ever anyone's real intent to expand racial discrimination while implementing race neutral practices?  In the world of supplier diversity improvements, program managers are digging a deeper hole of bias activity than the large hole identified some forty years ago.  The public and private sector's administration of supplier engagement has twisted the purpose so much that supplier discrimination has reached the level of a legal edict. On October 24, 1978, President Carter signed Public Law 95-507, championed by US Member of Representatives, Parren J. Mitchell, amending the Small Business Investment Act of 1958.  This federal legislation serves to make federal procurement contracting more readily accessible to minority business enterprises (MBE). Public Law 95-507 changed the emphasis on contracting activity from voluntary to mandatory and from best efforts to maximum practicable opportunity.  Interesting to note that nowhere in, or subsequently ratified, does this legislation authorize the implementation or construct language requiring ownership certification of minority business enterprises.  A good reason is that the US Small Business Administration in 1969 began the formal 8(a) process which covers ownership certification for small disadvantaged businesses. Notwithstanding, the ownership certification procedures began from the wide spread belief and outcry among procurement personnel that qualified MBE were difficult to find.  It was an unfounded belief and it prompted a number of unscrupulous entrepreneurs to take advantage of buying regulations that accelerated the use of underutilized minority-owned, controlled and operated businesses.  The unscrupulous entrepreneurs earned the dubious label of ‘front’ company.  They falsely presented themselves to buying professionals as MBE and garnered contracts that bolstered false and misleading reports.  This prompted action to promote and develop a greater manageable filter to distinguish authentic minority firms from the shams.  Procurement programs designed to engage more minority business wanted to maintain integrity in their formal reports to show parity and economic growth of MBE.  Thus, verifying business backgrounds began to weed out front firms by giving hard challenges to test the ownership, management, and control of MBE. So, interpreting Public Law 95-507 made swift action in a skewed direction for social and economic change.  When reviewed, the ownership certification process ironically builds an unfortunate case of anti-growth away from the spirit and intent of encouraging and retaining minority business.  [Back to Top]	The actual utilization of minority firms in federal contracting activity has not grown proportionately with the increased level of certified minority firms.  It is therefore easy to point out that ownership certification agencies have outgrown their purported usefulness.  Whereas, most organizations that report their respective use of minority activity show a contrary trend in expenditures with minority owned firms.  For example, the top contract awards reported by any major buying organization list total dollars awarded from highest to lowest in the order of business ownership; White females, Asians, Latinos, Blacks, and Native Americans.  Although, when you review major databases of certified MBE the results go in the opposite direction; going largest to smallest certifications are black firms, Latinos, Asians, White Women and then Native Americans.  The compelling fact is that MBE programs are spending an exorbitant amount of resources on meeting a nonexistent component of the impacted Public Law 95-507.  Likewise, a major portion of talented technical resources has been absorbed into the ownership certification management, where these skills could be place into better use on small business operational assistance. The verification audit to certify or decertify the ownership of firm requires a mountain of detailed paperwork, and it becomes quite time consuming for the business under review.  In addition, the certified firm expends extra costs for bookkeeping, clerical, or notary public services that their competing white-owned firms do not have to spend.  Coupled with this are the seemingly invasive questions to a business owner’s privacy to submit board minutes, tax returns, birth certificates, bank signature cards, negotiated lease agreements, etc. The benefits promulgated by certification is that once verified these businesses have higher-level clearance to pursue competitive bid opportunities.  In addition, major buyers will access the verified firm’s information through periodic visits to the database.  The largest benefit touted by ownership verification managers is that the competitive bidding feature is in a range of 10% - 25% of the total procurement dollars available for certified firms.  Arithmetically, that means that 90% - 75% of the competitive dollars go to firms excluded from the certification process, thereby making non-minorities the larger benefactors of the program, excluded freely from the ownership certification process. [Poor auditing practices of business owned,, controlled, and operated background checks is employed by the National Minority Supplier Development Council (NMSDC) and its regional affiliates.  These groups conduct certifications for a fee to MBE ranging from $150 to $250, plus an annual renewal charge to stay classified as a certified MBE.  [Back to Top]	Many NMSDC members request minority firms to have this certification completed and updated before talking with their respective buyers about opportunities.  Instilling yet another diversion from open access and inclusion to contracting opportunities for MBE. Our professional consulting services center in California, a state that is rapidly approaching one million MBE.  The number of MBE at the last census was 980,878, complimented by a large number of business ownership certifying agencies, including but not limited to the following: Bay Area Rapid Transit* California Department of Transportation* California Pubic Utilities Clearinghouse City of Fresno* City of Los Angeles* City of Oakland City of San Diego* Central Costa County Transit Authority* Contra Costa County Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District Los Angeles County Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority* Los Angeles Unified School District National Minority Supplier Development Council Orange County Transportation Authority* Port of Oakland San Diego County Regional Airport Authority* San Francisco International Airport* San Francisco Municipal Railway* San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission* San Mateo County Transit District* Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority* United States Small Business Administration Women's Business Enterprise National Council Yolo County Transportation District* *Indicates that the agency participates in the California Unified Certification Program. Paralleling civil rights and certification may seem like a stretch to some, but as we review the results for certified firms that win contracts, there is an encroachment on civil principles for doing business.  Large organizations publish reports that exclude the pool of certified firms versus the actual number of certified firms that receive a contract.  These reports describe the firms utilized and the awarded dollars by a percentage to the total.  Clearly if you have a certified database of firms numbering around 5,000, and less than 500 of them receive contracting opportunity, there is an unwarranted use of the certification process. Certified MBE do not automatically receive bid opportunities from the very agencies that certified them.  Conversely, a number of MBE working profitable contracts with major buying organizations have never attempted to complete a certification test. Where the latter reinforces the true spirit and intent of Public Law 95-507, which is to have open-access to contracts in federal contracting.  Offered on 02/07/06 by: Dean L. Jones, C.P.M. [Back to Top]
This analysis demonstrate a positive outcome to develop best ‘viable’ practices toward improving the verification of business ownership and management process. What are the advantages of MBE certification?Certification as a MBE provides greater exposure for work opportunities on public and private projects. The names of all certified MBEs appear in the MBE Directory, a reference manual that is widely disseminated to each purchasing administrator, other departments, contractors and to the public. Contractors use the MBE Directory as a basic resource for soliciting minority participation on projects. If a firm is not certified, a contractor cannot receive credit toward achievement of the MBE participation goal by using that firm." [Source: State of Maryland DOT 2006] [Back to Opening]

Best Viable Practice

Our first class United States Postal Service (USPS) rate is Forty Two cents (42¢).  The Internal Revenue Service has found the US Postal Service’s system quite efficient in its annual collection process, because it knows that once sealed the envelop contents are purported true by the sender.  Because it is mail fraud under section 18 U.S.C. 1341, that makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to use U.S. mails in carrying out a scheme to defraud.  Such as if, a person knowingly and willfully did it to obtain money, (purchasing contracts), by means of a false representation.  In addition, if the person used the U.S. Postal Service by mailing his/her ownership verification papers for executing the scheme to defraud the buying organization to gain an advantage in the bidding process, it would subject a liability to their firm to this legal statute.

The Best Viable Practice is to use an uncomplicated 42¢ U.S. Postal Service stamp that will take care of unfairness, invasiveness, and front companies.  By placing, the certification form in the US Postal Service system protects everyone concerned, and the certification dollar savings can go toward improved technical assistance, outreach, and sensitivity training services that better meet the purpose of Public Law 95-507. Additionally, a requesting organization that wants to verify its new supplier business ownership can add a statement of definitions to its US Internal Revenue Service W-9 Form.  It is appropriate and separate from the W-9 information, that provides an efficient method for gathering ownership classification.