[Protest of Two Indefinite Delivery-Type Contract Awards Under Army RFP]

A firm protested the award of two indefinite delivery-type contracts under an Army request for proposals (RFP), contending that the technical evaluation was defective and that the Army improperly included a factor in its evaluation that was not disclosed in the solicitation. The Army acknowledged that it placed emphasis on the level or type of affiliation between offerers and personnel named in their proposals. GAO has held that it will not object to the use of evaluation factors not specified in an RFP if they are reasonably related to the specified criteria. GAO found that the: (1) variance among scores reflected differences in the number of employees affiliated with each firm; and (2) evaluation was consistent with stated criteria and did not lack a reasonable basis. Accordingly, the protest was denied.