HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobacyhz0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
I
G A 0Comptroller General
A- Accountability * Integrity * Reliability of the United States
United States General Accounting Office
Washington, DC 20548
Decision
Matter of: FitNet International Corporation
File: B-291986
Date: May 19, 2003
J. Raul Espinosa for the protester.
Maj. Arthur J. Coulter, Department of the Army, and Capt. Karri L. Garrett,
Department of the Air Force, for the agency.
John L. Formica, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General
Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
DIGEST
Agency's determination to award a contract to a firm other than the protester is
unobjectionable and does not evidence bad faith where the protester concedes that
its proposal, which was evaluated as unsatisfactory with high risk by the agency
under the technical factor, was incomplete, and the protester failed to submit a
final revised proposal after discussions, as the agency requested.
DECISION
FitNet International Corporation protests the award of a contract to FitnessAge
Services, Inc., under request for proposals (RFP) No. DAHA90-02-R-0018, issued by
the National Guard Bureau, for a composite physiological fitness assessment
program.
We deny the protest.
The RFP, issued as a set-aside for small businesses, provided for the award of a
fixed-price contract for a systematic program for the collection of fitness
assessment data, a final individual fitness assessment summary and executive
management reports. RFP at 11. The RFP stated that award would be made to the
offeror whose proposal represented the best value to the government, based upon
technical, past performance, and price evaluation factors. The solicitation informed
offerors that [n] on-price factors, when combined, are significantly more important
than price, RFP at 1, and included an evaluation matrix listing numerous evaluation
criteria to be considered by the agency in the technical and past performance
evaluations.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobacyhz0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)