top of page
  • Writer's pictureR.D. Lieberman,Consultant

GAO Activity in Bid Protests Remains Stable in Fiscal 2021

The Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) released its annual bid protest report to the Congress for fiscal year 2021 on November 16, 2021 (B-158766). The GAO actually received 2,017 protests in fiscal year (“FY”) 2021 but dismissed or immediately denied a substantial number of them, while actually considering and issuing decisions on 581protests, known as “merit decisions.” This was a small increase compared to FY 2020.


The GAO sustain rate remained stable at 15 percent in both FY 2020 and FY 2021.


The other key GAO bid protest statistics for fiscal years 2017-2021 were as follows:


GAO Bid Protest Statistics for Fiscal Years 2017-2021



FY2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021

Merit decisions 581 622 587 545 581

Sustained 99 92 77 84 85

Sustain rate 17% 15% 13% 15% 15%

Effectiveness rate 47% 44% 44% 51% 48%

Alternative Dispute

Resolution (ADR)

cases 81 86 40 124 76


ADR success rate 90% 77% 90% 82% 84%

Hearings (% of cases) 2% 0.5% 2% 1% 1%

(no. of hearings) 17 5 21 9 13



The “effectiveness rate” declined somewhat, from about 51 percent in 2020 to 48 percent in 2021. These are protests where the protester obtains some form of relief from the agency, either as a result of voluntary agency corrective action or the protest being sustained.


The percentage of cases where the GAO conducted a hearing remained small—generally only 1 or 2 percent of the cases.


GAO also reported that, as required by law:

· There were no instances in which a federal agency did not fully implement a GAO recommendation in FY 2020; and

· GAO issued its decision on every protest within 100 days, as required by law.


Finally, the GAO reported on the most prevalent reasons for sustaining protests that were actually resolved on the merits in FY 2021. These were:


1. Unreasonable technical evaluation;

2. Flawed solicitation;

3. Unreasonable cost or price evaluation; and

4. Unequal treatment.


The GAO also noted that a significant number of protests it received did not reach a decision on the merits because agencies voluntarily took corrective action rather than elect to defend the merits of the agency action. Agencies need not and do not report any of the many reasons they decide to take voluntary corrective actions. However, voluntary corrective actions taken by agencies are included in the “effectiveness rate” discussed previously.


For other helpful suggestions on government contracting, visit:

Richard D. Lieberman’s FAR Consulting & Training at https://www.richarddlieberman.com/, and Mistakes in Government Contracting at https://richarddlieberman.wixsite.com/mistakes.


3 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Asserting Duress in Signing a Modification

Sand Point Services, LLC brought two claims before the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, both involving modifications.  Sand Point Servs., LLC, ASBCA Nos. 61819, 61820, January 4, 2024.  The f

Requirements Contracts: Words of Exclusivity

The Federal Circuit recently clarified that an agency’s contract may still contain requisite language to make it a requirements contract, even if the contract does not include the required Federal Acq

The website of Richard Donald Lieberman, a government contracts consultant and retired attorney who is the author of both "The 100 Worst Mistakes in Government Contracting" (with Jason Morgan) and "The 100 Worst Government Mistakes in Government Contracting." Richard Lieberman concentrates on Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) consulting and training, including  commercial item contracting (FAR Part 12), compliance with proposal requirements (FAR Part 15 negotiated procurement), sealed bidding (FAR Part 14), compliance with solicitation requirements, contract administration (FAR Part 42), contract modifications and changes (FAR Part 43), subcontracting and flowdown requirements (FAR Part 44), government property (FAR Part 45), quality assurance (FAR Part 46), obtaining invoiced payments owed to contractors,  and other compliance with the FAR. Mr.Lieberman is also involved in numerous community service activities.  See LinkedIn profile at https://www.linkedin.com/in/richard-d-lieberman-3a25257a/.This website and blog are for educational and information purposes only.  Nothing posted on this website constitutes legal advice, which can only be obtained from a qualified attorney. Website Owner/Consultant does not engage in the practice of law and will not provide legal advice or legal services based on competence and standing in the law. Legal filings and other aspects of a legal practice must be performed by an appropriate attorney. Using this website does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Although the author strives to present accurate information, the information provided on this site is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date.  The views expressed on this blog are solely those of the author. FAR Consulting & Training, Bethesda, Maryland, Tel. 202-520-5780, rliebermanconsultant@gmail.com

Copyright © 2024 Richard D. Lieberman

bottom of page