Corrective Action Needs Correcting
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.12.05
In Resource Consultants, Inc. (June 2, 2004 http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/2930733.pdf), the GAO sustained a protest because the agency had "abandoned" one of the ground rules for the re-evaluation of proposals, a re-evaluation that had been conducted as corrective action in response to an earlier protest. According to GAO, while the terms of the re-evaluation permitted offerors to submit revised price proposals only, revisions to the awardee's staffing costs were so extensive as to constitute technical proposal revisions; therefore, the agency should have permitted all offerors to submit revised technical proposals.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.19.25
GAO Cautions Agencies—Over-Redact at Your Own Peril
Bid protest practitioners in recent years have witnessed agencies’ increasing efforts to limit the production of documents and information in response to Government Accountability Office (GAO) bid protests—often will little pushback from GAO. This practice has underscored the notable difference in the scope of bid protest records before GAO versus the Court of Federal Claims. However, in Tiger Natural Gas, Inc., B-423744, Dec. 10, 2025, 2025 CPD ¶ __, GAO made clear that there are limits to the scope of redactions, and GAO will sustain a protest where there is insufficient evidence that the agency’s actions were reasonable.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 12.19.25
In Bid to Ban “Woke AI,” White House Imposes Transparency Requirements on Contractors
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.19.25
Navigating California’s Evolving Microplastics Landscape in 2026
Client Alert | 19 min read | 12.18.25
2025 GAO Bid Protest Annual Report: Where Have All the Protests Gone?
