The protester objected to the award of a contract, alleging improper procurement practices. The request for proposals did not conform to sound procurement practice when it failed to advise offerers of the relative importance of major criteria to be discussed in the technical proposals. The award of a fixed-price contract was not most advantageous to the Government since the method of evaluation resulted in the selection of the offerer having a slight technical advantage at a significantly higher price. The evaluation method failed to conform to the request for proposals which clearly implied that award would be made to the lowest-priced, technically acceptable offerer. Since the contract was substantially performed by the time the protest was developed, no effective relief was available.
Skip to Highlights