Yahoo España Búsqueda web

Search results

  1. 11 de feb. de 2022 · 02.11.22. On February 4, 2022, the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) issued a decision that rejects GAO precedent regarding whether contractors must notify the awarding agency of changes to key personnel availability during the time the agency is evaluating the contractor’s proposal before award.

  2. 17 de jun. de 2022 · GAOs decision is notable for at least two reasons. First, it signals GAOs continued willingness to sustain bid protests when key personnel become unavailable after proposal submission. In fact, it arguably extends the doctrine, as even prospective future unavailability can now be problematic.

  3. 30 de nov. de 2021 · GAO found that the awardee had actual knowledge of the unavailability of one of its quoted key personnel during the corrective action period, and failed to notify the agency. Specifically, the key person resigned from the awardee during the corrective action period.

  4. 8 de feb. de 2022 · WHAT: In a decision released on February 4, 2022, the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) declined to follow the Government Accountability Office’s (GAOs) rule that offerors are obligated to inform agencies when proposed key personnel become unavailable after proposal submission but before contract award or else risk being found to ...

  5. United States, 157 Fed. Cl. 680 (2022), the COFC rejected the GAOs rule that offerors had to notify agencies of changes in the status of their proposed key personnel after submission of final proposal revisions, describing that rule “as without legal basis and ‘unfair.’”

  6. 3 de mar. de 2022 · GAOs Findings. The GAO sustained the protest on both grounds. Specifically, the GAO found that the Awardee’s proposal included a material misrepresentation, and that the Agency disparately evaluated the management approach factor despite similar approaches for “back-fill” vacancies.

  7. The Situation: The U.S. Government Accountability Office ("GAO") recently sustained a bid protest concluding that a company was ineligible for award because of "key personnel unavailability."