[Protest of Army Contract Award for Food Services]
B-255115: Feb 9, 1994
- Full Report:
A firm protested an Army contract award for food services, contending that the Army: (1) improperly evaluated the bids and failed to assess the relative strengths and merits of each bid; (2) failed to conduct meaningful discussions; (3) should have rejected the awardee's bid, since its proposed personnel had a conflict of interest; and (4) was biased in favor of the awardee. GAO held that: (1) the Army's evaluation was unreasonable and inconsistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria; (2) it would not review whether adequate discussions were held, since the bids were improperly evaluated; and (3) the protester failed to provide any evidence that would support its allegations of bias or that the awardee's proposed personnel had a conflict of interest. Accordingly, the protest was sustained in part and denied in part and GAO recommended that the Army: (1) revise its evaluation scheme; (2) reevaluate the bids; (3) award the contract to the most qualified bidder; and (4) reimburse the protester for its protest costs.