We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
Under the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984
("CICA"), GAO is required to report annually to Congress
on each instance in which (1) a federal agency did not fully
implement a recommendation made by GAO in connection with a bid
protest decision, or (2) a final decision in a protest was not
rendered within 100 days after the date the protest was submitted
to the Comptroller General, during the prior fiscal year. GAO
reported no such instances for Fiscal Year 2018.
CICA also requires the Annual Report to include "a summary
of the most prevalent grounds for sustaining protests" during
the preceding fiscal year. For 2018, GAO reported the most
prevalent reasons for sustaining protests were: (1) an unreasonable
technical evaluation, (2) an unreasonable cost or price evaluation;
and (3) a flawed selection decision.
Finally, the Annual Report includes statistical data for GAO
filings during FY2018, as well as a comparison to such filings from
FY2014 to FY2017. Highlights include:
2,607 cases were filed with GAO
during FY2018, which represents a slight increase (less than 1%)
from FY2017. Of these, 2,474 were bid protests (up from 2,433 in
FY2017), with the balance being cost claims or requests for
reconsideration.
622 cases resulted in a decision on
the merits. This is up from 581 (a 7% increase) in FY2017.
Of the protests resolved on the
merits during FY2018, only 15% were sustained. This is down from
17% in FY2017 and 23% in FY2016.
There was a significant reduction in
the number of evidentiary hearings. Only 5 cases went to hearing,
representing 0.51% of the cases closed during the fiscal year. The
prior four years had seen 17 (FY2017), 27 (FY2016), 31 (FY2015) and
42 (FY2014) hearings conducted. These represented, respectively,
1.70%, 2.51%, 3.10% and 4.70% of the cases closed in those
years
The FY2018 effectiveness rate of
protests, which is based on a protester obtaining some form of
relief from the agency, either as a result of voluntary agency
corrective action or GAO sustaining a protest, was 44%. This is a
decrease of 3% from FY2017.
As the foregoing statistical data demonstrate, pursuing a
successful protest at GAO continues to be the exception, not the
rule, with the vast majority of protests proceeding to a final
decision resulting in a denial or dismissal. But even when
voluntary agency corrective action is considered (i.e.,
where the protestor gets some sort of remedial relief, but GAO does
not rule on the ultimate merits of the protest), less than half of
all protests result in any kind of relief. In many cases where
corrective action ensues, whether voluntarily or a result of a GAO
decision, that corrective action generally gives the successful
protester only a "second bite" at the proverbial
"apple," usually in the form of a re-evaluation or a
reopening of the competition. In other words, "winning a
protest" is not the same as "winning a
contract."
Accordingly, contractors considering filing a protest should
work closely with their counsel to evaluate the merits of their
case and the probability of success before filing, and to ensure
that if they file, their strongest protest grounds are presented
clearly and convincingly before GAO.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
This series, taught by two experts in the field, will walk participants through the most important issues facing government contractors as they navigate the fast-changing issues of cybersecurity.
Starting with a survey of the current threats confronting all companies in the cyber world, and ending with a session about how to deal with a breach of your systems, this series will also delve into the new government contracting rules relating to cybersecurity, as well as the new twists on existing technology and privacy laws in light of today’s cyber events.
The annual seminar addressing changes and developments in state and federal wage and hour laws is a unique one-day program and hundreds of California employers, personnel managers, controllers, attorneys, payroll managers, and supervisors attend each year.
This year registrants will receive a free copy of the New 2019 Edition of the WAGE AND HOUR MANUAL FOR CALIFORNIA EMPLOYERS by Attorney Simmons (over 1020 pages). The book is the only one of its kind and is widely recognized as the leading text in its field.
The seminar is designed to provide a guide to Human Resource Officials, Personnel Specialists, Consultants, Supervisors and other management officials through the ever-increasing maze of state and federal employment discrimination laws.
The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the FEHC have both recognized the value of this manual and obtained copies for investigators, consultants and supervisors throughout California.
AML and sanctions compliance enforcement costs remain in the billions as financial institutions in the US continue to be challenged by new regulatory requirements and continuing enforcement action
When it was enacted in August 2018, the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018(FIRRMA) overhauled the US law governing CFIUS national security reviews for the first time in 11
years
PODCAST: What's The Deal With Federal Contractors And The OFCCP? The Basics
