In your experience, does the GAO, as long as each item is appropriately specific, look upon "multiple issues within a protest" negatively? If there is a procurement for which there were multiple issues of mismanagement, would it be a mistake to include all issues within the same protest?Or is it typical to include one protestable issue?

We will not be getting legal representation. This ordeal has cost us enough already.

I wrote the other day requesting information on where I could see sample protest letters. If anyone has an idea of where one could be viewed on the web, that would be a huge help.
Thank you.

By Vern Edwards on Friday, March 14, 2003 - 10:19 pm:

Throw all your issues into the pot. There is no tomorrow.

By Anonymous on Saturday, March 15, 2003 - 12:43 am:

I second Vern's advice. 3rd, 4th, and 5th it too if multiple issues are there.

By joel hoffman on Saturday, March 15, 2003 - 09:26 am:

The GAO will consider each issue on it's own merit, within a protest.

However, it generally won't make your case for you. You need to carefully describe and document each issue and describe what policy (often established in previous Decisions), RFP provision, law or acquisition regulation was not followed. That's where an attorney is helpful and sometimes essential.

If it is a matter of poor judgement, in your opinion, here is a little advice. Unless it was gross, the GAO doesn't routinely second guess the judgement of the source selection official, provided that they documented their decision and followed the evaluation rules and scheme outlined in the RFP. Note that if you prevail, the GAO often (usually?) awards protest costs to the protestor. You could speak to a protest attorney concerning this - for free. happy sails! joel hoffman

By Vern Edwards on Saturday, March 15, 2003 - 11:02 am:

Anonymous:

I agree with Joel that you should consult an attorney. You don't need one to win, but you need to have your act very together. For one thing, you must file a protest to the GAO within ten days of the date on which you knew or should have known the bases for your complaint, whichever is earlier. See 4 CFR 21.2(a)(2). You first wrote to Wifcon Chat on March 11. Today is March 15. That's five days. Presumably you knew the bases for your protest on March 11 or earlier. In short, you are running out of time, if you are not out of time already.

In my opinion, most protests are not worth the time and effort that is put into them. The GAO typically sustains fewer than 20 percent of all protests that go to decision. And even if you win the protest, that does not mean that you win the contract; it just means that you will get a second chance to win the contract. What do you think your chances would be, really? My guess is that the odds are lower than 1 chance out of 100.

You tried; you lost; move on.

I should say that many persons will disagree with me on this.

By Anonymous on Saturday, March 15, 2003 - 07:18 pm:

Actually the debriefing has not yet occured. I am prepping early-- in anticipation of the elements that I know about and those that I will hear.

By formerfed on Monday, March 17, 2003 - 09:00 am:

Anonymous,

I agree with Vern in that you won't win a protest. One reason is the success rate with GAO is low is that the protestor must demonstrate where the Government went wrong. In other words, the standard of proof is showing where the Government made the mistake. As Joel stated it's not a matter of the government exhibiting poor judgment - it's demonstrating such things that the government failed to evaluate proposals in accordance with how they announced or the CO violated proper procedures or law.

You won't stand a chance. You aren't going to talk with an attorney. You ask people in this forum for sample letters. All you are going to do is create a lot of work for the government. In the end, the protest will be denied.

If I were you, I would go into the debriefing with an open mind. I would check my emotions and go in with a genuinely sincere attitude of wanting to know why I lost. I would avoid making the Government be defensive. Instead I would ask questions in such a manner so that I want to find out how and why I lost. I wouldn’t hold back any questions. I would bring up everything I see and don’t like. Most CO’s would rather face the issues openly and in a protest. Then I would go back and think through it all. If I still thought the procurement wasn't conducted properly, I would consult with an attorney then.

By Anonymous on Tuesday, March 18, 2003 - 03:00 pm:

One other thing relating to your original question about which issues to include in the protest:

If your original protest does not assert a particular issue, and additional information (such as the Agency report) does not cause that issue to arise anew, GAO will not consider that issue. So you only get one shot to raise an issue, the original protest. You can amplify issues orignially raised in response to the Agency report but not raise additional issues.

By Anonymous on Wednesday, March 19, 2003 - 05:01 am:

What types of charges are there for protests?Besides incurring potential wrath.

By formerfed on Wednesday, March 19, 2003 - 07:24 am:

Here is an article that looks at protests from a different and maybe more realistic perspective:

http://www.washingtontechnology.com/news/17_21/federal/20018-1.html

By Anonymous on Wednesday, March 19, 2003 - 08:49 pm:

Thank you. That is a great reference. Thank you for finding it for me. I appreciate it.I understand the thoughtful and considered advice.
:-)

By Vern Edwards on Wednesday, March 19, 2003 - 09:28 pm:

Hey, Anonymous, I told you the very same thing as that article in fewer words on March 15 and you never said thanks. And you certainly didn't give me a happy face!

By Anonymous on Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 09:57 am:

Thank you to you too. I was not ready to see the reality at that time. Thank you for all the great advice you give to people. It is an incredibly worthwhile and helpful thing.

By Vern Edwards on Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 10:12 am:

Anonymous:

I guess seeing it in a magazine makes it true. Where's my happy face?

Vern

By cm on Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 10:22 am:

Only if its the New York Sun

By Eric Ottinger on Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 08:39 pm:

Anon,

I am going to risk a few contrarian thoughts. I suspect that the success rate for well founded protests is much higher than the rates indicated above. Most protests fail because the protester or counsel pursues unsound arguments.

If I had a slam-dunk protest issue I would first meet with the PCO, the PCO’s boss and agency counsel. Agency counsel doesn’t like to lose in public. Hence, there is a high probability that agency counsel will recommend some kind of corrective action.

Certainly, if you have more than one strong issue, you should pursue all of the strong issues. However, I would not try the Comp. Gen.’s patience with a barrage of weak and tendentious arguments. My impression from reading cases is the “everything and the kitchen sink” approach doesn’t work very well with the Comp. Gen.

My view is usually from the Government’s side of the table. My advice is to be as open as possible, to put the emphasis on basic fairness rather than procedural perfection. Make it clear that nobody ever really won a protest on a technicality. Be confident.

The contracts person should come across with a take charge/ take responsibility attitude. The unsuccessful offeror basically wants to find out whether he got a fair shake. An evasive, bureaucratic, “I’m just a cog in a machine” attitude does not give the offeror much reassurance.

Be gracious, don’t belittle the offeror. A losing proposal is a large investment in time and talent.

I think you can turn all of this around to get an idea of what you should be looking for. Do you get a sense that the agency is trying to be fair? Is somebody in charge, willing to take responsibility? Are there big diconnects or inconsistencies in the agency’s story?

A lot of protests are based on doctrine which is no longer current or the idea that there is only one way to do something. A different opinion is not a basis for a protest. If you won’t get a reality check from counsel, at least get a reality check from an experienced contracting person before you go off half-cocked. (WIFCON is not a good place. We shouldn’t be involved in actual cases.)

Don’t get into personal attacks. You may find out that you have impugned the one person who voted for you.

Eric

By Vern Edwards on Thursday, March 20, 2003 - 10:37 pm:

Anonymous:

Thanks for the happy face. That was very kind of you.

Vern

By Anonymous on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 09:58 pm: