GAO Case Study Case in Point, File Case Study

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document

Total Length: 742 words ( 2 double-spaced pages)

Total Sources: 1

Page 1 of 2

GAO Case Study

Case in point, File B-293049 and B-293049.2 dated January 23, 2004 is a decision between the United States General Accounting Office and Computer Information Specialists, hereby known as CIS. The document, however, has been subjected to a GAO Protective Order, and therefore only a sanitized version has been approved for public release.

Facts of the Case- Essentially, the case involves a protest by Computer Information Specialists who bid on a contract (RFP NLM-03-101/.SAN). CIS bid on the RFP, which was issued by the National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health to acquire telecommunications support services at the Bethesda, Maryland campus. CIS alleges that the government awarded the contract to the Open Technology Group (OTG) based on misevaluated research and made an unreasonable source decision. CIS holds that they had the more appropriate proposal, much of which was ignored by the government evaluators.

Issues Involved in Case- The review of the decision by the NLM and NIH was made by the U.S. GAO's Comptroller General of the United States. Several relevant facts were uncovered during the investigation:

The agency received a number of proposals and established a range for four firms.

Stuck Writing Your "GAO Case Study Case in Point, File" Case Study?

View All Our Example GAO Case Study Case in Point, File Case Study

Have A Custom Example Essay Written

Each portion of the proposal was assigned a weight, with value being more important than price.

In the matrix, OTG received the highest score of the four, CIS the lowest. However, of five evaluations, four only prepared cursory narrative comments to even support their scoring of the CIS proposals. Any deficiencies brought to CIS's attention were immediately cured, according to the company.

Once these deficiencies were cured, the evaluators raised their scores but provided little or no justification, thus the entire decision on CIS was based on the 5th evaluator (20% of the scoring committee).

The conclusions reached by Evaluator 5 were found to be problematic, unreasonable and based more on subjective opinion and commentary on prose rather than factual data.

The evaluator's further language does not include a technical approach, nor an explanation of such an approach. It was found to be unprofessional and unsubstantiated in relation to decisions necessary.

Decisions (Holdings) -- The appeal of CIS was sustained by the GAO and recommendations ensued.

Decision Support -- The GAO was not in a….....

Show More ⇣

     Open the full completed essay and source list


OR

     Order a one-of-a-kind custom essay on this topic


sample essay writing service

Cite This Resource:

Latest APA Format (6th edition)

Copy Reference
"GAO Case Study Case In Point File" (2012, January 16) Retrieved June 4, 2026, from
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/gao-case-study-case-point-file-53645

Latest MLA Format (8th edition)

Copy Reference
"GAO Case Study Case In Point File" 16 January 2012. Web.4 June. 2026. <
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/gao-case-study-case-point-file-53645>

Latest Chicago Format (16th edition)

Copy Reference
"GAO Case Study Case In Point File", 16 January 2012, Accessed.4 June. 2026,
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/gao-case-study-case-point-file-53645
   

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document
order custom essay example