Continuity Global Solutions, LLC (B-422939.3)

You should not care.

Categories: Past performance, corrective action,

Date: 17 November 2025

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422939.3

Continuity Global Solutions protests the Army's reaffirmation of a contract award to incumbent Pond Security for armed guard security services at US Army garrisons in Germany—the Germany Wide Guards procurement, an IDIQ contract valued at approximately €978 million. The reevaluation was ordered by the Court of Federal Claims after finding the Army had applied unstated evaluation criteria (performance in Germany and for DOD) in assessing past performance relevancy. On reevaluation, the Army removed those criteria but arrived at the same ratings: satisfactory confidence for Continuity and substantial confidence for Pond.

Continuity argued that unchanged ratings proved the agency had not complied with the court's order. GAO disagreed. The reevaluation record showed the evaluators independently assessed each reference for scope, magnitude, and complexity as defined in the solicitation. None of Continuity's references involved essentially the same scope, magnitude, and complexity—the standard for very relevant—because they lacked specific task areas (random antiterrorism measures, motorized escort, access control) and had substantially lower annual values and fewer access locations than the GWG requirement.

Continuity also challenged the SSA's best value tradeoff as improperly elevating technical over price. The SSA explicitly stated that Pond's technical superiority alone justified the price premium—even if the past performance ratings had been equal. GAO found this within the SSA's broad discretion.

The protest is denied.

Digest

1. Protest challenging the agency's reevaluation of past performance proposals as part of corrective action is denied where the reevaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation; the protester's challenges are based largely on its disagreement with the evaluators' findings, which is insufficient to sustain the protest.
2. Protest of agency's best-value tradeoff decision is denied where the tradeoff was reasonable, consistent with the solicitation, and adequately documented.