About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

B-415940.11,B-415940.15,B-415940.16,B-415940.19,B-415940.24,B-415940.25 1 (2018-07-02)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadvcx0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 



G     A     O       U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
441 G St. N.W.                                                  Comptroller General
Washington, DC 20548                                             of the United States
                                          .......................................................................................................................
                                             DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
                                           The decision issued on the date below was subject to
Decision                                   a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has
                                           been approved for public release.


Matter of:   Dewberry Crawford Group; Partner 4 Recovery
File:        B-415940.11 ; B-415940.15; B-415940.16; B-415940.19; B-415940.24;
             B-415940.25

Date:        July 2, 2018

Terry L. Elling, Esq., Gregory R. Hallmark, Esq., Elizabeth N. Jochum, Esq., and
Rodney M. Perry, Esq., Holland & Knight LLP, for Dewberry Crawford Group; Kevin P.
Connelly, Esq., Kelly E. Buroker, Esq., Marques 0. Peterson, Esq., and Tamara Droubi,
Esq., Vedder Price, P.C., for Partner 4 Recovery, the protesters.
Sharon L. Larkin, Esq., and Elizabeth A. Ferrell, Esq., Larkin Ferrell LLP, for Serco, Inc.,
the intervenor.
Hillary J. Freund, Esq., and Nathaniel J. Greeson, Esq., Department of Homeland
Security, for the agency.
Paula J. Haurilesko, Esq., Young H. Cho, Esq., and Laura Eyester, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
DIGEST

1. Protest that the agency unreasonably assigned significant weaknesses to the
protesters' proposals is denied, where the record shows that the agency reasonably
concluded that the proposals did not meet the solicitation requirements.

2. Protest that the agency engaged in unequal treatment is denied, where the
differences in ratings stemmed from actual differences between the offerors' proposals.

3. Protest that the agency improperly determined the relevance of the awardee's past
performance is denied, where the protesters cannot demonstrate prejudice as a result
of the agency also relaxing past performance evaluation criteria to the protesters'
benefit.

4. Protest that the awardee gained an unfair competitive advantage based on the hiring
of a former government employee is denied where the record does not support the
allegation.

What Is HeinOnline?

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.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most