Protest Sustained Because Agency Unreasonably Evaluated Weaknesses In Protester's Proposal
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 09.19.06
In Intercon Assocs., Inc. (Aug. 10, 2006, http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/298282.pdf), the GAO held that the GSA acted unreasonably and without adequate support in evaluating several weaknesses in the protester's proposal, tainting the agency's source selection decision. The GAO found that five out of the six weaknesses identified by GSA were unreasonable, either because the agency's evaluation was "factually incorrect" (e.g., GSA erroneously identified technical disadvantages in proposed software), "internally contradictory" (e.g., GSA downgraded proposal for certain technical features on which agency also commented favorably), "cryptic" (e.g., GSA criticized a software function for "look[ing] weird"), or otherwise "unreasonable" (e.g., GSA downgraded proposed software for having a limitation that was present in all offerors' products).
Insights
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.10.26
In Appeal of Bahadir (a C&M case), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals denied the government’s motion to dismiss in its entirety, ruling in favor of the contractor on both key issues raised by the government. The case arises from a contract for construction work at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, under which Appellant alleged government-caused delay and filed certified prolongation claims using a “windows analysis” methodology. The government moved to dismiss, arguing that Appellant failed to state a sum certain for each of what the government characterized as 38 distinct claims, and separately that four claims had not been properly presented to the Contracting Officer.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.10.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.07.26
Missouri AG Sues Kansas City Over Race- and Sex-Based Contracting Program
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.06.26
