A firm protested two Public Health Service (PHS) contract awards for health and alcoholism treatment programs, contending that: (1) the awardee did not meet solicitation requirements regarding Indian ownership and control; (2) the awardee could not properly manage the contracts; and (3) poorly written, vague specifications in one of the solicitations rendered any award arbitrary. GAO held that the protester: (1) failed to show that the PHS determination regarding the awardee's ownership was improper; and (2) untimely filed its protest regarding alleged solicitation defects. GAO would not consider the protest regarding the awardee's management competency, since it concerned bidder responsibility. Accordingly, the protests were denied in part and dismissed in part.
Skip to Highlights