The ISDC Issues Annual Report on Federal Suspension and Debarment Activities and Trends
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.19.22
On April 18, 2022, the Interagency Suspension and Debarment Committee (ISDC) issued its annual report to Congress on federal suspension and debarment activities for Fiscal Year (FY) 2020. During FY 2020, the ISDC continued to focus on promoting the fundamental fairness of the suspension and debarment process, increasing transparency and consistency, enhancing suspension and debarment practices and alternatives, and encouraging more effective compliance and ethics programs by government contractors and nonprocurement participants. The ISDC also formed a subcommittee to provide recommendations and assistance to the Federal Acquisition Regulatory (FAR) Counsel drafting team to better align suspension and debarment procedures in the FAR with the Nonprocurement Common Rule (NCR).
Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the report notes that the number of debarments in FY 2020 increased from FY 2019. However, suspensions, proposed debarments, and referrals of new matters all decreased, which was a result of several factors, including delays in mail service, travel restrictions, and postponements in court proceedings. With the exception of pre-notice letters, the metrics also indicate that agencies relied more heavily on alternatives to suspension and debarment, such as administrative agreements, voluntary exclusions, post-notice engagements, and declinations. Notably, the agencies that executed alternatives to suspension and debarment varied from FY 2019, demonstrating that the government applies administrative remedies based on the particular facts presented in each case.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
On April 30, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a significant ruling in an insurance coverage dispute between a commercial general liability insurer and its policyholder. The decision addresses several critical issues in insurance law, including the scope and continuity of the duty to defend and the standard for insurer reimbursement of defense costs in mixed-claim actions. The court ruled largely in favor of the insured, SVO Building One, LLC ("SVO"), and the matter now heads toward settlement or trial on SVO's remaining counterclaims.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
Client Alert | 5 min read | 05.29.26
Clover Insurance v. HHS: S.D. of Georgia Holds 20 Star Ratings Measures Unlawful
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.29.26




