[Protest of Navy Contract Award for Support Services]

B-258430.2: Jan 27, 1995

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

A firm protested a Navy contract award for support services, contending that the Navy: (1) improperly evaluated its technical proposal; (2) performed an unreasonable cost realism analysis; (3) improperly evaluated the experience of its proposed personnel; (4) improperly downgraded its bid based on its proposed management plan; (5) improperly made award based on initial bids; and (6) improperly evaluated the awardee's financial condition. GAO held that: (1) the Navy reasonably evaluated the protester's bid in accordance with the solicitation's evaluation criteria; (2) the Navy properly determined that the protester's bid presented a high performance risk and its proposed personnel were unsatisfactory; (3) the Navy reasonably evaluated the protester's management plan; (4) the Navy clearly informed the bidders that the award would be made based on initial bids; (5) the Navy reasonably made award to the technically superior bidder; and (6) it would not review the Navy's affirmative responsibility determination, since the protester could not provide evidence of fraud or bad faith. Accordingly, the protest was denied.