Protest Against Agency Rejection of Proposal

A firm protested the rejection of its proposal and the award of a contract to another firm. The firm's proposal, one of two received, was rejected by the agency because it did not adequately describe how the work would be done or provide an explanation of cost factors, budgeting, or facility utilization. The proposed price and manhours of effort were lower than the Government estimate and lower in comparison with similar work being accomplished in the area. The protester suggested that the award was deficient because there was not adequate price competition and the contracting officer made no attempt to determine the cause of the limited number of responses. While adequate price competition is desirable, it is not required by regulation. The firm disagreed with the contracting agency's technical evaluation of its proposal. However, the fact that the protester disagreed with the evaluation did not establish that the evaluation had no reasonable basis. There was a significant difference between the proposals in manhours and the level of expertise offered. The request for proposals did indicate that, in evaluating the proposal, the offeror's understanding of the problem and the comprehensiveness of the technical approach would be taken into consideration. The protester alleged that it was not advised of the deficiencies in its proposal before it was requested to furnish a best and final offer. The agency contended that this allegation was not true, and the protester did not sustain its burden of proof in this matter. A protester complaint that the agency did not conduct a preaward survey of its facility was dismissed, as the request for proposals clause which referred to the survey applied only to technically acceptable bidders. The protester contended that the awardee's proposal should not have been accepted as it was unresponsive to the request for proposals in several areas. GAO does not evaluate proposals and make determinations as to their acceptability. That is the function of the contracting agency and will not be disturbed absent a clear showing that it was arbitrary or unreasonable. The protest was denied.