GAO dismisses challenge to Navy’s cost analysis as improper, untimely (AI generated)

In a recent case, Vectrus-J&J Facilities Support LLC (VJFS) lodged a protest against the award of a contract to Amentum Services Inc. by the Department of the Navy. The contract, issued under request for proposals (RFP) No. N62742-21-R-3507, was for multi-function operations support services at various locations in the Philippines and other locations in Asia and Oceania. VJFS contested the Navy's cost realism evaluation, alleging it to be unreasonable and undocumented.

VJFS argued that the agency failed to properly assess whether Amentum’s proposed staffing levels were realistic to meet the requirements of the RFP. The protester noted that Amentum proposed fewer full-time equivalent (FTE) positions than VJFS and fewer than estimated by the agency in the independent government estimate (IGE). VJFS contended that a proper cost realism evaluation would have resulted in upward adjustments to Amentum’s proposed cost.

In response, the GAO [Ed note: house style is GAO without the article.] noted that the aim of a cost realism evaluation is to ensure that each offeror’s proposed costs, including staffing levels, are realistic for the work to be performed, consistent with the methods of performance described in the offeror’s technical proposal. The GAO found that the agency was not required to conduct a further realism analysis comparing Amentum’s proposed staffing to VJFS’s or to the IGE. Therefore, the GAO concluded that VJFS’s assertion that the agency should have used additional types of realism analyses constitutes, at best, disagreement [sic] with the agency’s judgement.

VJFS also contended that the Navy's evaluation of the realism of Amentum’s proposed staffing was inadequate and insufficiently documented. The GAO found that VJFS’s arguments in this regard were untimely as the protester had all the materials necessary to raise this allegation during its first protest. [Ed note: this first protest should have been introduced earlier.]

The GAO denied the protest in part and dismissed it in part. This case reinforces the need for offerors to establish a clear connection between their proposed costs and their technical approach. The decision also underscores the importance of timeliness in raising protest arguments. For the government, the decision highlights the importance of maintaining a comprehensive and well-documented evaluation record.

This summary was automatically generated using Notion’s AI function as part of Chaedrol’s AI Acquisition Institute (AIAI) on 3 May 2024. I reviewed the summary and included the notes in square brackets and the link to the GAO case.