[Complaint Alleging Vague Evaluation Criteria in New York State Solicitation]

A professional standards review organization (PSRO) complained that a solicitation for the review of medical services issued by a state health department contained impermissibly vague evaluation criteria and was biased. In addition, it complained that: (1) other sole-source contracts for the review of the services were improper; (2) the technical evaluators used two undisclosed evaluation criteria; and (3) the state improperly failed to conduct discussions with the offerers. GAO found that the protester was not sufficiently interested to complain of unrelated problems in the evaluation of offers even though it was a proposed subcontractor. With respect to the other complaints, GAO held that: (1) the protester failed to show bias in the procurement; and (2) the state made a good-faith effort to resolve any differences and to solicit the protester for the competition. However, GAO agreed with the protester's position that the evaluation factors did not provide potential offerers with sufficient information required by federal regulations and that the grantee improperly used undisclosed evaluation factors in the evaluation. However, GAO found that these errors did not have a significant effect on the evaluation and the protester failed to show how it was prejudiced by the errors. Furthermore, since the contract was near completion, GAO found that there was no opportunity for corrective action. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed in part, denied in part, and sustained in part.