Quantum Research International, Inc. (B-423237.2; B-423237.3)

Quantum Research International, Inc. (B-423237.2; B-423237.3)
Photo by Jo Szczepanska / Unsplash

You should not care.

Category: Past performance, technical evaluation

Date: 17 June 2025

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423237.2%2Cb-423237.3

Quantum Research International, Inc., protested the issuance of a task order under a request for quotes (RFQ) from the US Army for program management and related services. The protester alleged that the awardee, PeopleTec, Inc., had materially misrepresented its past performance, contending that this misrepresentation warranted disqualification from the competition. Additionally, Quantum claimed that the agency's evaluation of PeopleTec's quote was unreasonable and that the agency's best value tradeoff analysis was flawed.

GAO found several key issues in the protest. The first was the allegation of a material misrepresentation regarding PeopleTec's role in a past performance effort, which GAO determined did not significantly impact the evaluation. The agency's assessment of PeopleTec’s past performance was found to be reasonable and compliant with the terms of the RFQ. Further, although Quantum argued that the agency's tradeoff decision was flawed, GAO ultimately upheld the agency's determination.

The protest was denied, because GAO found no basis to overturn the agency’s decision, emphasizing that the agency followed proper procedures and evaluations laid out in the RFQ.

Digest

  1. Protest alleging that the awardee’s proposal contained material misrepresentations is denied where, even assuming for the sake of argument that the proposal contained misrepresentations, they had no significant impact on the agency’s evaluation.
  2. Protest challenging past performance evaluation is denied where the agency reasonably evaluated the awardee’s past performance in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria.
  3. Protest challenging the agency’s comparative analysis and source selection decision is denied where the agency’s best-value tradeoff and source selection decision were reasonable, adequately documented, and consistent with the terms of the solicitation.