Matter of Apprio, Inc. Decided: June 30, 2022 Agency: Department of Homeland Security Disposition: Protest Sustained Keywords: Cost Realism; Documentation of Evaluation; Technical Evaluation Protest Insight Generally, cost realism and assessment of unreasonable weakness challenges are rarely successful protest grounds. However, this matter shows that is not an absolute rule. The largest issue for
Matter of Vertex Aerospace, LLC Decided: November 23, 2021 Agency: Department of the Air Force Disposition: Protest Sustained Keywords: Documentation of Evaluation, Restructuring, Mergers & Acquisitions Protest Insight This protest is notable because it showcases that, although the GAO is highly deferential to agency evaluations, the GAO will sustain a protest if it finds
Matter of WRG Fire Training Simulation Systems, Inc. Decided: November 19, 2021 Agency: Department of the Navy Disposition: Protest Sustained Keywords: Documentation of Evaluation; GAO Bid Protest Review; Proposal Evaluation Protest Insight This protest highlights that, although the GAO is highly deferential to agency evaluations, it does find agencies conduct unreasonable evaluations. Here, GAO found
Matter of Marquis Solutions, LLC Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs Disposition: Protest Sustained Decided: September 14, 2021 Keywords: Best-Value Tradeoff Basis, Documentation of Evaluation; Source Selection Decision General Counsel, P.C. Protest Insight This protest is notable because it showcases that, although the GAO is highly deferential to Agency evaluations, the GAO does find unreasonable evaluations.
Matter of: AT&T Corporation Agency: Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau Disposition: Protest Sustained Keywords: Evaluation Criteria; Documentation of Evaluation Decided: October 5, 2017 General Counsel P.C. Highlight: It is essential that evaluation and source selection decisions are adequately documented. Where the agency engages in discussions, they must be fair and equitable to all parties
Link: GAO Opinion Agency: United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Disposition: Protest denied. General Counsel P.C. Highlight: GAO denies the protest of Crown Agents USA, Inc., regarding the exclusion of its proposal from the competitive range under a request for proposals (RFP), issued by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to obtain
Link: GAO Decision Protestor: NikSoft Systems Corporation Agency: Department of the Treasury Disposition: Protest Denied. _________________________________________________________________________ GAO Digest: Agency reasonably concluded that protester’s responses to agency’s discussions questions introduced risk regarding the level of resources that protester was committing to perform the fixed-price portion of the solicitation requirements. Agency reasonably evaluated protester’s past performance as
Link: GAO Decision Protestor: NikSoft Systems Corporation Agency: Department of Justice Disposition: Protest Sustained. ______________________________________________________________ GAO Digest: In a procurement conducted under Federal Supply Schedule procedures, where a statement of work is included, protest that an agency improperly made upward adjustments to the protester’s level of effort as part of its analysis to establish a
Link: GAO Decision Protestor: Phillips Healthcare Informatics Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs Disposition: Protest Sustained. ______________________________________________________________ GAO Digest: Final proposal revision is late where it was received by the agency after the time set for submission. Protest that agency’s evaluation of past performance was unreasonable is sustained where the record does not contain any evidence
Link: GAO Decision Protestor: Clark/Foulger-Pratt JV Agency: Department of State Disposition: Protest Sustained. _________________________________________________________________________ GAO Digest: In a negotiated procurement which provided for award on a best value basis, a source selection official’s (SSA) selection of a lower-priced proposal over a higher-rated proposal on the basis that the two offers are essentially technically equal is