In an unpublished order, the Court of Federal Claims permanently enjoined the government from excluding a protester from the competitive range, because the protester was prejudiced by the government's misleading debriefing and arbitrary technical evaluation, and the protester satisfied the criteria for injunctive relief. In granting the protester's motion for judgment on the administrative record, the court first found the government's debriefing letter misled the protester in violation of FAR 15.506 by effectively informing the protester that its proposal contained too many housekeeping staff. The government subsequently raised the staffing levels for the contract, and it was under a duty to correct misleading communications.
The court also concluded the evaluation of the protester's proposed method of communication was arbitrary. The technical evaluation panel found the protester's discussion of communications did not address the need for immediate telephone access or daily interactions, but these findings were contradicted by objective evidence in the record and were the product of inconsistent subjective judgments. Finally, the misleading statements and arbitrary evaluation prejudiced the protester. These errors led to a reduction in points, and the protester would have otherwise been among the most highly-rated offerors. In granting permanent injunctive relief, the court also ordered the government to allow the protester to submit a revised proposal. The court's ruling will be discussed in greater detail in a forthcoming opinion. (East West, Inc. v. U.S., FedCl, 56 CCF ¶79,904)