Language Line Services

1. Describe Language Line’s bid protest.

In Language Line’s bid protest they alleged that the Department of General Services should not have made an award to LSA because 1.) LSA inappropriately classified employees as independent contractors. They further stated that because the interpreters had been improperly classified, LSA employed more than 100 employees. Therefore they did not meet the small business criteria and was not eligible to receive credit as a small disadvantaged business, 2.) Language Line also argued that the procedure utilized by DGS to award to LSA violated procurement code because “fair and equal” means that all responsible offerors must be accorded the same opportunity, therefore all responsible offerors should have been given an opportunity to submit a Best and Final Offer, and 3.) Language Line further stated that LSA did not meet several mandatory nonwaivable RFP requirements, such as the qualifications of the program manager.

2. Did Language Line’s bid fully comply with the solicitation, if not, why not.

Language Line’s bid did not fully comply with the solicitation. The solicitation listed five criteria for selection, Language Line did not respond to the third criteria, disadvantage business participation (DB). Therefore, Language Line did not receive any points in the DB area. Although they tied for first place in the cost category and second in the technical proficiency category, since they did not respond to the DB criteria, they scored fifth overall.

3. Why did the court agree with the Deputy Secretary of DGS to deny the bid protest.

It was the responsibility of the court to determine whether errors of law were committed, whether constitutional rights were violated, and whether necessary findings of fact were supported by evidence when the Deputy Secretary of DGS made her decision to deny Language Line’s protest. The court agreed that the decisions made by the Deputy Secretary were appropriate and that she did...