“A Government Accountability Office (‘GAO’) bid protest decision highlights an important aspect of ‘best value’ in government contracting: a proper tradeoff decision must provide a rational explanation as to why a superior technical proposal warrants paying a higher price.
The protest of Alpha Omega Integration, LLC, B-419812; B-419812.2, August 10, 2021, 2021 CPD ¶ 302 involves a challenge to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (‘Agency’) award under a solicitation for information technology services. The solicitation used a best-value source selection process with a two-phased approach: (1) past performance and (2) technical, oral presentations, and price. [1] Following evaluations, the Agency assigned the protester and awardee identical non-price adjectival ratings and the protester’s evaluated price was $586,211.58 lower than the awardee’s price. [2]…”
“In its protest, the protester challenged various aspects of the Agency’s evaluation and best value tradeoff decision. Regarding the tradeoff, the protester argued that the Agency failed to adequately document its tradeoff and that the record did not show that the Agency ‘performed a qualitative and comparative assessment of acceptable quotations.’ In other words, the source selection decision ‘failed to explain what capabilities or features in Synergy’s quotation warranted paying a price premium.’
The Agency argued that its decision was reasonable, that the contracting officer ‘extensively exercised independent judgment throughout the evaluation and award process,’ and that the protester’s arguments were a mere disagreement with the Agency’s reasonable (and ‘textbook’) tradeoff analysis. [3] Ultimately, however, GAO agreed with the protester and sustained the protest because “’he selection decision [did] not explain, beyond references to the adjectival ratings, the capabilities or features identified to justify the tradeoff decision.’…”
“This decision provides a great reminder on an agency’s obligation to adequately document its tradeoff analysis. In order to select a higher-priced offer where the technical approaches were evaluated equally (at least from an adjectival standpoint), an agency must still explain why the higher-priced offeror provides the best value (i.e., through a qualitative and comparative assessment). Without more, GAO will likely find that the decision was not adequately documented and unreasonable…” Read the full article here.
Source: GAO: Agencies Must Adequately Explain Why a Superior Technical Offer Warrants Paying a Higher Price – January 27, 2022. Maynard Cooper Gale.
