Ernst & Young, LLP (B-423491.2)

You should not care.

Categories: Corrective actions, key personnel, timeliness

Date: 26 September 2025

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423491.2

Ernst & Young protests the scope of corrective action taken by the Army following EY's prior protest of the award of a contract to Guidehouse for support of the Army Financial Improvement program, an IDIQ contract worth up to $250 million. After the Army proposed corrective action (reevaluating proposals and making a new award decision), Guidehouse informed the agency a key person had become unavailable. The Army opened discussions allowing offerors to substitute unavailable key personnel and make limited corresponding proposal revisions. EY argues the corrective action is unreasonably narrow and that a solicitation amendment was required because the Army's needs had materially changed.

Scope of corrective action: GAO found the Army's approach reasonable. Agencies may limit proposal revisions during corrective action so long as the restriction remedies an established or suspected procurement impropriety. The key personnel unavailability arose during the corrective action period and the Army addressed it by permitting revisions to materially affected aspects of the technical and cost/price volumes. EY's narrower reading of the discussions letter—that revisions were limited to passages specifically naming replaced individuals—was rejected as unreasonable because it would render the letter's material-impact provisions surplusage.

Changed requirements: EY argued the Army should have amended the solicitation to reflect an accelerated audit schedule and completed incumbent tasks. GAO dismissed both grounds as untimely. Under 4 CFR. section 21.2(a)(1), challenges to solicitation terms (or failures to amend) must be filed within ten days of when known. EY's knowledge predated the protest by more than ten days.

The protest is denied in part and dismissed in part.

Digest

1. Protest challenging the scope of corrective action is denied where the corrective action reasonably allows for limited proposal revisions to address unavailable key personnel.
2. Protest challenging the agency's decision not to amend the solicitation to address alleged material changes in the agency's needs is dismissed as untimely.