GAO Dismisses Protest, Finds Protester Was Not Next in Line for Award
The protester challenged the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s quotation under the technical factor. But GAO determined that the protester was not an interested party since it would not be next in line for an award even if its protest was sustained.
Matter of Modesto Management, LLC, GAO, B-423728
- Background – The VA issued a Request for Quotations (RFQ) for elevator maintenance services set aside for service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSB). After evaluating 17 submissions, Modesto was determined ineligible due to missing required documentation.
- Evaluation Claim – Modesto claimed the agency did not properly evaluate its quotation as technically acceptable. It argued that it had provided required documentation and criticized the awardee’s ability to perform. GAO found Modesto’s arguments speculative and lacking evidence. The agency had concluded that Modesto’s omission of resumes led to its non-acceptance. GAO dismissed the protester’s challenge regarding the awardee’s technical qualification since it was irrelevant to the outcome.
- Interest Party Status – GAO determined that Modesto was not an interested party to pursue the protest. It found that three other vendors had submitted technically acceptable quotes at lower prices than Modesto’s. Even if Modesto’s arguments were accepted, those other offers meant Modesto would not be next for award.
The protester is represented by Eric Dobyne. The awardee, Eleven Bravo Group, LLC, is represented by Jared Levin, Esq., of the Department of Veterans Affairs. GAO attorneys Alexa J. Young, Esq., and April Y. Shields, Esq. participated in the decision.
[pdf-embedder url=”https://staging.pub-k.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/881957.pdf”]
