CFC Faults GSA's False Statistical Precision In Major Evaluation
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 03.10.08
In Serco Inc. v. United States (Mar. 5, 2008), Judge Allegra sustained protests brought by eight unsuccessful offerors for GSA's $50 billion government-wide acquisition contract for IT products and services after finding unequal treatment in the gathering of past performance information and flaws in the price evaluation and best value tradeoff analysis. Raising an issue never before considered in a bid protest, the court held that false statistical precision in the combined technical scores "intensified the need for the agency to make reasoned decisions considering price and, relatedly, best values."
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.15.26
GAO Indicates Reasonable Conflict of Interest Investigation Must Include Inquiry of Involved Firm
The U.S. Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recent decision in Viderity Inc.—Costs, B-424422.5, Sept. 1, 2026, offers useful insight into what constitutes a legally sufficient conflict of interest investigation. The decision arose in an unusual procedural posture: Viderity initially protested, alleging that an agency evaluator had a personal conflict of interest. After the agency took corrective action, Viderity filed a cost entitlement claim requesting that GAO direct the agency to reimburse Viderity’s protest costs. In evaluating that claim, GAO assessed whether Viderity’s underlying protest ground was “clearly meritorious.”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 09.15.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.14.26
AI in Life Sciences: Ten Legal Considerations and Risks of AI Use in Drug Discovery and Development
Client Alert | 6 min read | 09.14.26
Mental Health Parity Bulletin Restates Best Practices for Evaluating Compliance
