[Protest of Bid Rejection Under Army Solicitation for Scientific and Technical Support Services]

B-219967.2: Dec 27, 1985

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

A firm protested the Army's rejection of its bid for support services, contending that the Army: (1) failed to conduct meaningful negotiations; (2) diluted the importance of cost; and (3) gave undue weight to offerer experience and responsibility during the evaluation process. GAO has held that: (1) where an agency considers a weakness in a proposal to be inherent in the offerer's management judgment, it is not always necessary to include that matter in discussions; (2) agencies may use a variety of evaluation methods, including normalizing methods, in evaluating cost proposals, as long as they provide a reasonable basis for source selection; and (3) there is nothing unreasonable about scoring the cost factor based on relative difference in cost proposals as long as the use of such an approach will not produce a distorted or irrational result. GAO found that: (1) the record supported the conclusion that the weakness in the protester's proposal was such that substantial revision would have been necessary; (2) the cost proposal scores were not inconsistent with the relative merits of the proposals or the evaluation scheme set forth in the solicitation; and (3) the contract specialist did not evaluate the protester's proposal for experience or find it nonresponsible. Accordingly, the protest was denied.

Jan 21, 2021

Jan 19, 2021

Jan 14, 2021

Looking for more? Browse all our products here