Violation of GAO Protective Order Did Not Prejudice Protester’s Challenge; GAO B-412860.4, Imagine One Technology & Management Ltd.

Protest challenging the evaluation of the offerors’ technical proposals is denied, where the challenges to the agency’s assignment of strengths and the relative weight afforded these strengths generally amounted to disagreement with the agency’s judgment, but provided no basis to sustain the protest; and protest challenging the evaluation of the realism of the offerors’ proposed costs is denied, where the protester merely pointed out the awardee’s historical rates were slightly higher than its proposed costs, without challenging the reasonableness of the agency’s evaluation;  and protest that the awardee received an advantage arising from the improper disclosure of information by its outside counsel, in violation of a GAO protective order, is denied, where despite the improper disclosure, the awardee did not gain any advantage in a related protest challenging its size status, and where no prejudicial violation of any procurement law or regulation occurred; and protest that the agency improperly allowed the awardee to revise its proposal beyond the scope of instructions during discussions is denied, where the instructions did not limit how offerors could revise their proposals in relation to their proposed key personnel, but merely required supporting documentation for any changes.