The agency gave the protester’s product low scores. The protester said the evaluation was unreasonable because the agency had not watched instructional videos for the protester’s product. GAO denied the protest. The protester had not explained how watching the videos would have improved the product’s scores.
Tactical Revolution, LLC, GAO B-422269
- Protester Eliminated – The protester submitted a proposal in response to a solicitation for ballistic-resistant shields. The agency tested the protester’s shields. The protester did not score highly and did not move on to the next phase of the evaluation.
- Protest Argument – The protester had included links to instructional videos in its proposal. The protester contended the agency should have watched those videos as part of the evaluation. The protester believed that if the agency had watched the videos, it would have better understood the protester’s shields, and the protester would have received a higher rating.
- Agency Was Not Required to Watch Videos – GAO rejected the protester’s argument. The solicitation did not contemplate a qualitative evaluation of offerors’ instruction videos. Moreover, other than vague assertions, the protester had not meaningfully explained how viewing the videos would have resulted in a higher rating.
Theodore K. Pernal and Timo Tervola represent the protester. The agency is represented by Robert D. English, Carlos Pedraza, Ethan S. Chae, and Camille Small-Simon of the Department of Justice. GAO attorneys Nathaniel S. Canfield and Evan D. Wesser participated in the decision.
–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor
