Noblis MSD, LLC (B-423599, B-423599.2)

You should care.

Category: SF-33, organizational experience, past performance, best value tradeoff

Date: 11 September 2025

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423599%2Cb-423599.2

Noblis MSD challenged the Navy’s single‑award CANES engineering, technical, and programmatic support IDIQ, arguing the awardee Solute should have been rejected for failing to sign the SF‑33 and that the agency misevaluated organizational experience, past performance, and the best value tradeoff.

Intent to be bound despite unsigned SF‑33: GAO agreed the SF‑33 lacked a signature, but the proposal included a signed cover letter from the same authorized official binding the offer for 240 days and taking no exceptions, plus a fully completed SF‑33 naming that signer. Taken together, those documents provided material evidence of Solute’s intent to be bound, making the missing SF‑33 signature a waivable informality rather than a fatal defect.

Organizational experience and risk: Both offerors showed strong experience across four key technical areas. Solute’s experience in application integration and development (area 4) carried some performance risk, but evaluators still found overall adequate experience with strengths, while Noblis was slightly stronger. Across all areas, both proposals earned top‑level ratings.

Past performance “too‑close‑at‑hand” theory rejected: Noblis urged GAO to treat alleged negative incumbent performance as information the Navy could not ignore. GAO found the cited contract was already included in Solute’s past performance package and had Satisfactory CPARS. The officials with first‑hand knowledge were not part of this source selection, so there was no undisclosed “too‑close‑at‑hand” adverse information the evaluators were required to consider.

Tradeoff on near‑parity proposals: The source selection authority acknowledged some added risk in Solute’s Area 4 experience but reasonably viewed both proposals as essentially equal on non‑cost factors. With Solute’s evaluated cost about seven percent lower, the Navy reasonably chose the lower‑priced proposal.

Digest

Noblis MSD, LLC, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, challenges the award of a contract to Solute, Inc., of San Diego, California, under request for proposals (RFP) No. N66001‑24‑R‑0022, issued by the Department of the Navy for engineering, technical, and programmatic support services. The protester alleges the agency erred in its evaluation and best-value tradeoff decision in numerous respects.