The protester argued that the agency improperly assessed the awardee's previous work. It claimed the previous work did not meet the solicitation’s standards for relevance. GAO concluded the agency's determination was appropriate given the awardee's lower price and advantages. Additionally, each past performance reference was adequately reviewed for relevance, and the aggregate performance was fairly considered.
Advanced Computer Learning Company, LLC, GAO, B-423267.2
- Background - The Navy issued a request for proposals (RFP) for support services related to tactical training programs. The agency awarded the contract to the awardee, Linchpin Solutions, Inc. The protester, the incumbent contractor, contested the award on the grounds of improper evaluation of past performance and claimed the source selection was unreasonable. GAO concluded that the Navy's evaluations were reasonable and legally sound.
- Past Performance Evaluation - The protester argued that the agency's evaluation of the awardee's past performance was flawed. According to the protester, Linchpin's past projects lacked the necessary scope and magnitude comparable to the RFP. GAO determined that the agency's evaluation of Linchpin's references was thorough and aligned with the solicitation’s criteria. Each reference was reviewed for relevance, and the evaluation considered the aggregate performance fairly.
- Source Selection Decision - The protester claimed that the agency's source selection decision was based on the flawed past performance evaluation. GAO found that the contracting officer reasonably determined that the assessment showed Linchpin's superior performance approach despite past performance ratings being essentially equal. The decision to select Linchpin was justified due to its lower overall price and advantages in its proposal. This led to the conclusion that the agency's source selection was reasonable and appropriate.
The protester is represented by Devon E. Hewitt, Esq., and Matthew L. Nicholson, Esq., of Potomac Law Group, PLLC. The intervenor, Linchpin Solutions, Inc., is represented by Matthew E. Feinberg, Esq., Katherine B. Burrows, Esq., Jacqueline K. Unger, Esq., Timothy F. Valley, Esq., and Kristine E. Crallé, Esq., of Piliero Mazza, PLLC. The government is represented by James J. Gross, Esq., and Eric Lofquist, Esq., of the Department of the Navy. GAO attorneys Paul N. Wengert, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., participated in the decision.