Inflowlogistics LLC (B-422811.3)

You should not care.

Categories: Technical evaluation, professional employee compensation, best value

Date: 20 January 2026

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422811.3

Inflowlogistics protested an Air Force task order for TRIPLECROWN II cyberreadiness and training support at Joint Base San Antonio—Lackland. The protest challenged the agency’s technical evaluation, its review of Cherokee Nation Strategic Programs’ professional employee compensation, the use of interchanges, and the best value decision.

GAO denied the core challenges. It found the Air Force reasonably assessed weaknesses in Inflow’s proposal under the teamwork and best practices scenario, because the proposal did not adequately explain several required functions, including support for the standardization and evaluation area. GAO also upheld the agency’s realism review of CNSP’s professional employee compensation, concluding the agency reasonably found the proposed rates did not create a significant performance risk and reasonably used a market rate when the incumbent benchmark for a changed labor category was unreliable.

GAO dismissed the unequal-discussions argument as untimely because the solicitation itself expressly reserved the right to conduct interchanges with one, some, or all offerors. With both firms tied on technical score, CNSP’s lower price carried the day. The protest is denied in part and dismissed in part.

Digest

1. Protest challenging the agency's technical evaluation of the protester's proposal is denied where the record demonstrates the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation.
2. Protest challenging the agency's realism analysis of the awardee's professional employee compensation is denied where the record shows that the agency reasonably determined the proposed labor rates did not pose a significant risk to performance and reasonably used a market rate to evaluate proposed rates when the incumbent rate for a changed labor category was unreliably high.
3. Protest that the agency engaged in unequal discussions by engaging in interchanges with only one offeror is dismissed as an untimely challenge to terms of the solicitation where the solicitation expressly stated that the agency intended to make award without engaging in interchanges but reserved the right to engage in interchanges with only one, some, or all offerors.
4. Protest challenging the best-value tradeoff is denied where the record shows that the selection decision was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation.