bid protest | The Contracting Education Academy

April 15, 2020 By cs

Pentagon attorneys say Amazon wants ‘do-over’ in JEDI bid

The Defense Department urged a federal judge to grant its motion — filed in March — for a 120-day remand to reconsider the evaluation for its Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure contract.

In a legal filing April 3, Justice Department attorneys representing the Pentagon said Amazon Web Services seeks a “do-over” of the JEDI contract Microsoft ultimately won in October.

In late March, AWS — which is protesting the JEDI cloud contract award — asked Judge Patricia Campbell-Smith to deny the Pentagon’s motion for a four-month remand over its narrow focus, accusing the Pentagon of attempting to “gerrymander” revisions to the evaluation. AWS wants the Pentagon to address a host of potential evaluation flaws beyond the specific pricing scenario the department has agreed to correct.

In its April 3 filing, the Pentagon stated its proposed remand is “in good faith to reconsider its evaluation and source selection decisions.”

Keep reading this article at: https://www.nextgov.com/it-modernization/2020/04/pentagon-attorneys-say-amazon-wants-do-over-jedi-bid/164398/

March 17, 2020 By cs

Pentagon to take corrective action on JEDI

The Pentagon has asked a federal judge for a 120-day remand to “reconsider its evaluation” and take corrective action on the lucrative JEDI cloud contract it awarded to Microsoft in October, which could be worth as much as $10 billion over the next decade.

In a legal filing Thursday evening, the Pentagon asked Judge Patricia Campbell-Smith for an adjournment to address “various aspects” of its JEDI evaluation highlighted by Amazon, which protested the JEDI award in November.

The Pentagon plans to tweak the JEDI solicitation and accept “limited proposal revisions,” according to the filing, allowing the companies to rebid the contract.

“A remand here is in the interests of justice because it will provide the agency with an opportunity to reconsider the award decision at issue in light of AWS’s allegations, this court’s opinion, and any new information gathered during the proposed remand,” the filing states.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2020/03/exclusive-pentagon-take-corrective-action-jedi/163750/

March 3, 2020 By cs

Overstock.com protest could delay GSA commercial e-marketplace pilots until April or beyond

The General Services Administration (GSA) recently responded to an Overstock.com protest of the agency’s commercial e-marketplace solicitation, which could delay pilots until April — assuming revisions aren’t ordered.

Overstock filed its pre-award bid protest with the Government Accountability Office on Jan. 15 arguing some of the solicitation’s terms are ambiguous and restrict competition. The internet retailer further argued GSA didn’t allow sufficient time for companies to respond, according to a person with knowledge of the situation.

Overstock had until Feb. 24 to respond to GSA’s agency report based on anything it learns. The protest itself is covered by a protective order limiting disclosure to lawyers for the private parties.

Section 846 of the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act directed GSA to work with nontraditional government contractors on allowing agencies to purchase up to $250,000 — the simplified acquisition threshold — in commercial items. GSA’s initial pilot will focus on e-marketplaces like Amazon or Overstock, where competition between sellers occurs at the item level.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.fedscoop.com/overstock-gsa-e-marketplace-protest/

February 25, 2020 By cs

Contractor successfully uses GAO pre-award protest to modify solicitation

When the terms of a solicitation run contrary to the regulations, challenging the solicitation in a pre-award protest may provide contractors the chance to shift the tide in their favor before bids are submitted and an award is made.

In January 2020, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) sustained a pre-award bid protest brought by Noble Supply & Logistics, Inc. that challenged the terms of a General Services Administration (GSA) solicitation. Noble Supply & Logistics, Inc., B-418141, 2020 WL 289546 (Jan. 16, 2020). Noble Supply argued the RFQ’s price evaluation methodology, as written, failed to provide for an evaluation of which offeror presented the best value and the lowest overall cost alternative, in violation of FAR part 8.

In the RFQ, GSA asked holders of GSA 51V Hardware Superstore Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts to bid on four blanket purchase agreements (BPAs) to provide hardware products and services to four military branches. For its price evaluation factor, the RFQ stated that GSA would evaluate price quotations “to ensure that offered pricing, to include flat rates and tiered volume discounts, is fair and reasonable.” The RFQ then stated that GSA would not evaluate whether the award was the “lowest-priced technically acceptable” (LPTA), nor would it conduct a “best value tradeoff source selection methodology.” Thus, GSA would only evaluate the quotes for price reasonableness to determine whether prices were unreasonably high.

Noble Supply argued that this price methodology was contrary to 41 U.S.C. sections 152, 8.404(d) and 8.405-3(a), which require GSA to award BPAs to the awardee that provides the “best value and results in the lowest overall cost alternative.” GAO agreed, explaining that “consideration of the lowest cost is an imperative when using the FSS” and therefore GSA is required to “reach a determination regarding which FSS vendor meets the agency’s needs at the lowest overall cost.” Noble Supply & Logistics, Inc., B-418141, 2020 WL 289546, at *6 (Jan. 16, 2020).

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/Article/891604

February 20, 2020 By cs

To modernize, push for smaller procurements

Sometimes baby steps make sense.

The government is all about investing heavily in technologies like cloud and artificial intelligence. With these massive efforts come massive contracts, but is that necessarily the best way to innovate?

Many modernization efforts have been lackluster because of the way procurements have been structured. Massive, multibillion-dollar contracts spanning years with the same vendor means the government has put all their eggs in one basket; this has led to issues with integrating and implementing these “innovative” procurements. These mammoth contracts open the doors to legal disputes, among other bottlenecks to implementation, illustrated best in the legal battle over the Defense Department’s Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure contract.

Why Big Procurements Aren’t Always Better

Big contracts don’t set the government up for success. Agencies invest millions of dollars without the ability to test the vendor and the technology. Multiyear contracts allow few options for agile pivoting, in case something doesn’t work out and the mission needs to change directions.

Smaller procurements are more flexible and agile, and they also allow for increased competition, which leads to better solutions that are more impactful for government agencies. In addition, when contracts are narrow at a smaller scale, it diminishes the risk of a vendor protesting, which stops the entire project and pulls you into court. Thoughtfully planning smaller procurements can save the protest headache that will suck time and money away from your mission into a wearying process with a side effect of unsavory headlines.

Big contracts also can lead the government to vendor lock, which is problematic for a variety of reasons. When an agency is beholden to one vendor, system integration, maintenance, and future work become nearly impossible. (Big contracts can lead to vendor lock, which results in a lot of the IP struggles we see today.)

Keep reading this article at: https://www.nextgov.com/ideas/2020/02/modernize-push-smaller-procurements/162869/

The Defense Department urged a federal judge to grant its motion — filed in March — for a 120-day remand to reconsider the evaluation for its Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure contract.

The Pentagon has asked a federal judge for a 120-day remand to “reconsider its evaluation” and take corrective action on the lucrative JEDI cloud contract it awarded to Microsoft in October, which could be worth as much as $10 billion over the next decade.

The General Services Administration (GSA) recently responded to an Overstock.com protest of the agency’s commercial e-marketplace solicitation, which could delay pilots until April — assuming revisions aren’t ordered.

When the terms of a solicitation run contrary to the regulations, challenging the solicitation in a pre-award protest may provide contractors the chance to shift the tide in their favor before bids are submitted and an award is made.

Sometimes baby steps make sense.

Search this Website