Advanced Computer Learning Company, LLC (B-423267.2)

You should not care.

Category: Past performance, technical evaluation

Date: 2 September 2025

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423267.2

Advanced Computer Learning, the incumbent contractor, protested the Navy's award of a contract to Linchpin Solutions for support services and data link training for the Joint Tactical Operations Interface Training Program, arguing the Navy misevaluated Linchpin's past performance and made an unreasonable source selection decision. This protest followed corrective action on an earlier challenge.

The protester contended the Navy unreasonably found Linchpin's past performance references similar in scope and magnitude to the solicitation requirements. Advanced argued the agency should have required Linchpin's references to demonstrate performance of each task and subtask in the performance work statement, and should have excluded subcontractor work when assessing contract magnitude. The protester also challenged the quality assessment of Linchpin's past performance.

Evaluation of relevance: GAO found the solicitation did not require past performance references to match every PWS task or subtask to be considered relevant. The agency reasonably determined that Linchpin's three references—one as subcontractor and two for its proposed subcontractor—showed work involving development, maintenance, and delivery of courseware curriculum material related to multitactical data link network planning and operations, which was essentially the same scope as the PWS. When evaluating magnitude, the agency properly considered the total contract value including subcontractor work, not just work performed by the prime's own employees.

Aggregation of references: The solicitation expressly provided for the agency to evaluate past performance references in aggregate should they demonstrate a meaningful degree of relevance individually. GAO found each of Linchpin's references was at least somewhat relevant, making aggregation appropriate and resulting in an overall assessment of very relevant past performance.

Quality of performance: The contracting officer supplemented the evaluation with personal knowledge of both Linchpin and its proposed subcontractor's performance, providing what the officer described as an "extraordinarily strong basis" for assessing substantial confidence in Linchpin's capability. The source selection decision reasonably concluded that Linchpin's superior performance approach factor rating combined with its lower price justified selection despite the firms being essentially equal in past performance.

The protest was denied. GAO found the Navy's past performance evaluation reasonable and consistent with solicitation criteria, and the source selection decision properly supported.

Digest

Protest that agency misevaluated awardee's past performance and made an unreasonable source selection decision is denied where the record shows the agency reasonably evaluated the awardee's past performance as relevant and properly considered the quality of its past performance in assessing the firm's past performance overall as essentially equal to the protester's, and where that evaluation supported the agency's source selection judgment that the awardee's better overall non-price evaluation and its lower evaluated price justified its selection as the best value offeror.