Tag Archives: GAO

SmallGovCon Week in Review: February 28- March 4, 2022

Posted on by

Hello, Readers. As we move into spring, we at SmallGovCon have been observing the optimism of nature as winter releases its grip. Small green plant shoots are pushing their way up towards the sunshine and the trees are preparing to bud as our temperatures warm up. The birds are getting involved as well. There’s no doubt that they are enjoying the warmer weather and looking forward to spring, too. Hope you are able to observe equally inspiring things in your neck of the woods.

As usual there was a lot of news in federal government contracting, this week including articles on the future of federal government contracting, cybersecurity bills, and news on GSA multiple award contracts. Have a great weekend!

Continue reading →

Can’t Pad Key Personnel Résumé, Says GAO

Posted on by

GAO recently sustained a protest to the evaluation of an awardee’s management approach based on a material misrepresentation in its proposed key personnel experience (that the protester found on Linkedin, no less). And GAO found the misrepresentation was material because the agency relied upon it, and it significantly impacted the agency’s evaluation. Let’s take a closer look.

Continue reading →

GAO: Agency Has Discretion on Type of Socioeconomic Set-Aside for Procurement

Posted on by

From a recent GAO decision it appears that the ends can, in fact, justify the means; at least when it comes procurement set-asides for HUBZone companies. The decision is Foxhole Technology, Inc. B-419577 (May 12, 2021). In this matter, Foxhole Technology, Inc., a service-disabled veteran-owned small business, protested the Department of Education’s decision to set aside an RFQ to supply cybersecurity services for HUBZone businesses. In its protest, Foxhole argued that the agency’s decision to set aside the procurement for HUBZone small business concerns was based on inadequate market research and was therefore not justified. GAO denied the protest.

Continue reading →

GAO: Unequal Exchanges With Offerors by Agency Leads to Sustained Protest

Posted on by

An agency providing an opportunity to substantially revise a proposal can seem too good to be true. And sometimes, it is. It is a fundamental principle of procurement law that offerors must be treated equally. When one offeror is given an opportunity to “fix” the deficiencies in its proposal, but the other offeror is not, that is fundamentally unfair.

As one offeror found out, despite submitting everything to the agency as it was asked, GAO still sustained the protest.

Continue reading →

Too Little Too Late Taken Literally When It Comes To Agency-Level Protests

Posted on by

In a recent decision, GAO dismissed a protest challenging the USDA’s issuance of a lease contract as untimely where the protester’s communications with the agency did not constitute an agency-level protest, and the protest was filed more than 10 days after the notice that formed the basis of its protest was received by the protester.

Continue reading →

You May Dig Yourself into the Mud by Failing to Use the Standard Form for Your Bid Bond

Posted on by

When required, bid bonds are an essential aspect to a proper bid. Under FAR 52.228-1, they secure the liability of a surety to the government by providing funds to cover the excess costs of awarding to the next eligible bidder if the successful bidder defaults by failing to fulfill these obligations.

There is a standard form for bid bonds. Though it’s not required, using the standard form is probably the safest bet to avoid possible rejection of a bid, as one contractor learned the hard way.  

Continue reading →

Playing Games? GAO Requires NASA to Scratch $650 Million Contract Due to Foosball Snafu

Posted on by

While most of our get-togethers these days involve mask wearing, social distancing, and even virtual happy hours, spending time with friends is a great way to keep spirits light. Unfortunately for one group of friends, their weekly hangouts led GAO to conclude in its recent decision, Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc., B-418835 (Sept. 25, 2020), that NASA had to cancel a more than $650 million deal and start the procurement process all over.

Continue reading →