A college protested an Army contract award for educational services, arguing that: (1) the solicitation improperly included a subjective performance requirement for measuring pupil learning and contractor compliance; (2) the student grade level requirement was ambiguous; and (3) the Army unreasonably retained control over the curriculum and materials. GAO held that, while standardized testing is not necessarily an objective measuring device, it is the most accepted means to measure learning and gauge compliance. GAO also held that: (1) since the student grade level requirement was clearly stated, the allegation had no merit; and (2) although the solicitation provided for Army control over the curriculum and materials, it did not prevent the contractor from augmenting those factors. Accordingly, the protest was denied.
Skip to Highlights