About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-422094,B-422094.2 Jan 18, 2024 1 (2024-01-18)

handle is hein.gao/gaopuy0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 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: Deloitte Consulting, LLP File: B-422094; B-422094.2 Date: January 18, 2024 David S. Cohen, Esq., John J. O'Brien, Esq., Pablo Nichols, Esq., and Jason W. Moy, Esq., Cordatis LLP, for the protester. Jeffery M. Chiow, Esq., Eleanor M. Ross, Esq., and Cassidy Kim, Esq., Greenberg Traurig LLP, for CGI Federal, Inc., the intervenor. Pavan Mehrotra, Esq., and Christine C. Fontenelle, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Kenneth Kilgour, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that the agency's evaluation of the awardee's technical quotation was unreasonable is sustained where the record shows that, to mitigate an organizational conflict of interest, the awardee eliminated a proposed teaming partner from its quotation, and the agency evaluation contains no evidence that the agency considered the impact on contract performance of the elimination of that firm. 2. Protest that agency conducted unfair discussions is denied where the record shows that the agency's exchanges--conducted only with the awardee--constituted discussions, but the record does not establish a reasonable possibility that the protester was competitively prejudiced by the agency's discussions with the awardee. 3. Protest that the agency conducted an unreasonable consistency analysis is denied where the analysis was consistent with the terms of the solicitation and the contemporaneous technical evaluation. 4. Protest that the agency disparately evaluated quotations regarding the proposed use of innovation is denied where the record shows that the different evaluations reflected quotation differences.

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:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most