Chaedrol GAO Protest Log 20240819: ICF, NextStep, SPA (updated AI edition)

ICF Incorporated, LLC - B-422526, B-422526.2

You should care.

Category: Task order competition

Date: July 18, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422526%2Cb-422526.2

In this protest, ICF Incorporated challenged the General Services Administration's (GSA) technical evaluation of its proposal for a task order under the GSA Alliant 2 contract. The protester contended that the agency failed to recognize strengths in its proposal and improperly assigned weaknesses related to its technical approach and staffing plan. GAO analyzed the protester's claims and concluded that GSA's evaluation was reasonable and adhered to the solicitation's criteria. Specifically, GAO noted that the agency's consensus rating process appropriately reconciled individual evaluators' assessments. Ultimately, the protest was denied, reinforcing the principle that agencies have broad discretion in evaluating proposals and that mere disagreements with evaluations do not constitute grounds for sustaining a protest.

Digest

Protest challenging agency's technical evaluation is denied where the agency evaluated the proposals in accordance with the terms of the solicitation.

NextStep Technology, Inc. - B-421743.2

You should not care.

Category: Submittal

Date: August 16, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-421743.2

NextStep Technology, Inc. protested the agency's denial of its reimbursement request for costs associated with filing a bid protest. The core argument centered on the timeliness of the request, which NextStep claimed was improperly dismissed by the agency. GAO emphasized that the request was submitted to the agency more than seven weeks after the dismissal of the initial protest and not in accordance with the required procedures. GAO's analysis highlighted the strict regulatory timeline for reimbursement requests under 4 C.F.R. § 21.8(e), which NextStep failed to adhere to. Consequently, the request was deemed untimely and dismissed, underscoring the importance of procedural compliance in government contracting protests.

Digest

Request for recommendation that agency reimburse protester's costs associated with filing and pursuing its bid protest is dismissed as untimely where the request was submitted to the agency, and not GAO, more than seven weeks after GAO dismissed the protest following the agency's corrective action.

Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc. - B-421967.2

You should care.

Category: Task order competition

Date: July 30, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-421967.2

In the protest by Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc. (SPA), the firm challenged the agency's technical evaluation after being rated unacceptable due to failure to address solicitation amendments in its proposal. SPA contended that the agency's communications suggested that revisions were optional, claiming that this misunderstanding led to its unfavorable rating. However, GAO found that the agency followed its established evaluation criteria and that the solicitation clearly required offerors to address all changes. The GAO emphasized that SPA's interpretation of the agency's response was unreasonable and that the agency was not obligated to reopen discussions after identifying the deficiency. Ultimately, the protest was denied, reinforcing the importance of adhering to solicitation requirements and the discretion agencies hold in evaluations.

Digest

1. Protest challenging the agency's technical evaluation is denied where the record shows that the agency's evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria.

2. Protest challenging the agency's conduct of discussions is denied where the agency's exchanges in a task order competition were not misleading.