[Protest of Army Contract Award for Handbook Update]
B-255318: Feb 18, 1994
- Full Report:
A firm protested an Army contract award for handbook update services, contending that the Army: (1) did not follow the specified evaluation scheme and improperly determined that the awardee's higher-priced bid was technically superior; (2) failed to give it appropriate credit for its innovative approach, computer capabilities, and superior proposed personnel; and (3) provided preferential treatment to the awardee. GAO held that: (1) the Army reasonably evaluated the bids and followed the specified evaluation scheme; (2) the Army reasonably determined that the awardee's technically superior bid represented the greatest value to the government; and (3) there was no evidence of preferential or unfair action by the Army towards the awardee. Accordingly, the protest was denied.