Chaedrol GAO Protest Log 20240830: IntelliBridge and Peraton (AI)

IntelliBridge, LLC - B-421560.9

You should not care.

Category: Proposal evaluation

Date: August 8, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-421560.9

In the case of IntelliBridge, the protester challenged its elimination from a competition for digital and IT services, arguing that the agency's decision was unreasonable and that it should have been given an opportunity to rectify its quotation. GAO found that the agency's evaluation was consistent with the terms of the solicitation, particularly regarding pricing and staffing deviations, and while IntelliBridge acknowledged discrepancies, it claimed they were immaterial. However, GAO emphasized that the agency followed the RFQ's strict guidelines, which prohibited any deviations and deemed IntelliBridge's proposal noncompliant. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to solicitation requirements, as one never knows which instance of noncompliance will trigger disqualification.

Digest

Protest challenging agency’s decision to eliminate the protester’s quotation from the competition is denied where the record shows that the protester’s quotation had several deviations between pricing and staffing, and the agency reasonably concluded that the quotation failed to comply with the terms of the solicitation.

Peraton Inc. - B-422585; B-422585.2; B-422585.3

You should care.

Category: OCIs

Date: August 30, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422585%2Cb-422585.2%2Cb-422585.3

Peraton protested the issuance of a task order to Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. by the U.S. Army, claiming Booz was improperly determined to be a responsible offeror having gained an unfair competitive advantage through the employment of a former government official. GAO thoroughly reviewed the allegations of ignored evidence and potential conflicts of interest, ultimately finding that the agency's evaluations were reasonable and consistent with procurement regulations. GAO noted that the contracting officer's determinations were within her discretion and supported by adequate documentation. The protest was denied, providing an example of an agency navigating RFP OCI language and assessments in a protest-resistant competition.

Digest

1. Protest challenging agency’s affirmative determination of responsibility of awardee is denied where the protester has not shown that the contracting officer unreasonably ignored information that would be expected to have a strong bearing on whether the awardee should be found responsible.

2. Protest alleging that awardee gained an unfair competitive advantage based on employment of a former government official is denied where the agency, after investigating the alleged conflict of interest, reasonably concluded that the former official did not have access to non-public, competitively useful information.

3. Protest challenging agency’s evaluation of technical proposals is denied where the record shows the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation criteria, and the protester was not competitively prejudiced by any evaluation error.

4. Protest of agency’s best-value tradeoff decision is denied where the protester has not shown that the underlying evaluation was unreasonable.