top of page

GAO Declines to Adjudicate Protests to Restrict Rather Than Promote Competition

Writer: R.D. Lieberman,ConsultantR.D. Lieberman,Consultant

The Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) has repeatedly dismissed protests where the protester has sought to restrict rather than promote competition, by, for example, seeking to solicit an agency requirement on a sole-source basis.  UpToDate, Inc., B-422550.2, June 24, 2024.


The Defense Health Agency (“DHA”) awarded UpToDate (“UTD”) a contract for a commercial off the shelf point-of-care clinical decision support tool.  Initially, DHA had procured UTD’s product from UTD on a sole source basis, but the reasonableness of those awards (including a “bridge contract”) were protested by another company.  The GAO dismissed the protests when DHA indicated its intent to take corrective action—which corrective action was to terminate the awards and conduct a competitive procurement for this requirement.  UTD challenged the reasonableness of the termination, asserting that it provided the only product capable of meeting DHA’s requirement.


GAO dismissed the protest, explaining that the argument that a protester should be awarded a contract on a sole-source basis because of its belief that it the only source capable of providing the material in the specification is not a matter that the GAO will consider.  GAO, has declined, as a matter of policy to permit a protester “to use the bid protest function to restrict, rather than promote competition.”  GAO has specifically stated that the purpose of its role in resolving bid protests is “to ensure that the statutory requirements for free and open competition for government contracts are met. Therefore, [GAO] will not review the merits of an allegation that a contract should be awarded on a sole-source basis.”  Excell, Inc.-Request for Reconsideration, B-228304, Oct. 19, 1987.  Regardless of how nuanced, a protest that an agency should solicit on a sole-source basis is not for GAO consideration.


Takeaway.  Requesting that the GAO recommend the use of a sole-source to solicit a requirement will not be entertained by GAO and the protest will be dismissed.


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.

 

 

 

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All

Invalid "Final Decision"

Does the absence of a required claim render a Contracting Officer’s (“CO”) “final” decision invalid?.  The answer is simple, such a...

Opmerkingen


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