NITAAC’s Acting Director Brian Goodger released an update on the long awaited CIO-SP4 Request for Proposals (RFP) today. He provided some insight as to the delays in the RFP’s release and assured everyone that they expect the last signature on the final RFP next week.Continue reading
Tag Archives: CIO-SP3
Persistence Pays: GAO Sustains After Fourth Protest Due to Unreasonably Narrow Corrective Action
In its recent decision, Peraton, Inc., B-416916.8, et al. (Aug. 3, 2020), GAO ultimately sustained a protest that the Department of State’s corrective action was unreasonably limited—recommending the protester be reimbursed its protest costs in the process.
For more on how it reached this result, buckle up! Because it was a long road for the protester to reach the GAO sustain.Continue reading
Missing Password Doesn’t Sink CIO-SP3 Proposal
A Maryland contractor nearly lost a contract with $20 billion ceiling because of a password protected encrypted document.
After much back and forth, and for somewhat obscure reasons, GAO said that it was unreasonable for the agency to ask for the password and then not use it.Continue reading
No Protest of CIO-SP3 SB Order Below $10 Million, Says GAO
A CIO-SP3 SB contract holder could not protest the award of a task order to a competitor because the order was valued at less than $10 million.
In a recent bid protest decision, the GAO confirmed that civilian task order awards–including those under CIO-SP3 SB–generally cannot be protested unless the value of the order exceeds $10 million.
Ambiguous Contractor Teaming Agreement Sinks CIO-SP3 Proposal
Joint venture partner or subcontractor? An offeror’s teaming agreement for the CIO-SP3 GWAC wasn’t clear about which tasks would be performed by joint venture partners and which would be performed by subcontractors–and the agency was within its discretion to eliminate the offeror as a result.
A recent GAO bid protest decision demonstrates that when a solicitation calls for information about teaming relationships, it is important to clearly establish which type of teaming relationship the offeror intends to establish, and draft the teaming agreement and proposal accordingly.