NASA Argues With GAO Over SAIC/Wyle Protest Ruling
NASA to GAO on protest over $2B SAIC contract: You got it wrong, Washington Business Journal
“NASA has responded to the Government Accountability Office’s decision to sustain a protest over a nearly $2 billion contract award to Science Applications International Corp. And it’s saying the GAO got it wrong. That response came by way of a motion to reconsider, which was filed with the GAO Jan. 6, 10 days after the watchdog agency decided to sustain a protest over NASA’s $1.76 billion contract for medical, biomedical and health services supporting NASA human spaceflight programs.”
Did NASA screw up a $2B contract award to SAIC?, Washington Business Journal
“Science Applications International Corp. is not the same company it was last summer — something it tried to warn NASA about while bidding for a nearly $2 billion deal. So whose fault is it that the agency opted to ignore the obvious?”
Decision Matter of: Wyle Laboratories, Inc., GAO
“Protest is sustained where the awardee’s proposal, and the agency’s evaluation thereof, failed to reasonably reflect the manner in which the contract will be performed, the level of costs likely associated with performance, and the corporate entity that will perform the contract.”
Wasn’t this the same contract that NASA originally awarded to Wyle based on their long history of successful completion and low costs as well as their lower bid price? Then SAIC protested that their forthcoming reorganization was not considered so NASA said they could resubmit their proposal. NASA then rescinded their earlier award of the contract and instead awarded to SAIC and now the GAO is saying that that award was not propitious?
It sounds like this whole contract selection is so hosed they ought to restart the bidding process.
There actually are people within NASA who have some idea which contractor would be best, or at least which one they want. But their inputs go through two sets of random number generators. First there is the contracting office, composed of inexperienced personnel with little or no understanding of the technical aspects of the contracts they “manage”. Usually they just choose the low bidder, booting the incumbent. Then every award is protested because better than half the time GAO or whoever reviews the protest will find some minor, irrelevant technicality has been violated and reverse it again. An exception is SLS in which Congress simply dictated the winner by law. The only reason Commercial Crew avoided this debacle was that there were two and a half awards, a wise choice Congress has been trying to reverse ever since.
I have a better idea. Just spin a huge wheel like the one on Jeopardy and let it pick the winner. That would provide a better chance of making the best choice.
No no, you have it all wrong… definitely the wheel from Wheel of Fortune or Price is Right.
https://www.youtube.com/wat…
Stick to what you know. The source selection committee is overwhelmingly from the technical org the services will be for. AND if you want a NASA contract, make sure you have the hign technical score (most times, but not here). AND GAO only approves about 1 protest out of 5. AND Congress said ‘if possible’ not ‘thou shalt.’ Othe rthan that, you’re exactly right.