Brandan Enterprises, Inc. (B-423385)

You should not care.

Category: Technical evaluation, exchanges, discussions

Date: 16 June 2025

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423385

Brandan Enterprises, Inc. (BEI), protested the Army’s award of a task order to Quality Innovation, Inc. (Qi2), for visitor operations services at Arlington National Cemetery under a human resource solutions IDIQ. BEI took issue with the Army’s handling of discussions—arguing they were not meaningful—and challenged the assessment of a significant weakness resulting from its proposed staffing levels. The protest also contested the best value tradeoff:

• Conduct of discussions: BEI was specifically advised twice during discussions that its proposed labor hours were insufficient; BEI insisted its approach was adequate and declined to increase hours. GAO found the Army's discussions both meaningful and fair—compliant with FAR subpart 16.5, which does not require full "spoon-feeding" by the agency.
• Significant weakness in staffing: The Army assessed a significant weakness because BEI’s proposal failed to account for pre- and postshift tasks and vacancies, exposing the government to performance risk. GAO determined this assessment to be reasonable and based directly on the requirements outlined in the solicitation.
• Best value tradeoff: The protester’s argument that the award should have gone to the lowest price offeror was denied as derivative; because the technical evaluation was reasonable, the tradeoff was not improper.

The protest was denied in a routine “deference to the agency” finding.

Digest

1. Protest challenging conduct of discussions as not meaningful is denied where agency informed protester its labor hours were insufficient, protester chose not to adjust its labor hours, and the final evaluation reflects a more detailed rationale for the stated concern--insufficient labor hours--not an unrelated and undisclosed concern, as claimed by protester.
2. Protest challenging assessment of a significant weakness in protester's staffing approach is dismissed in part as an untimely challenge to the terms of the solicitation. Remaining protest allegations are denied where the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation.