The RFP for masonry repair asked offerors for references consisting of at least three “relevant” previously performed contracts but did not specifically state that past performance of proposed subcontractors would not be considered.  Singleton’s proposal was rejected because only two previous contracts were performed by it along with three contracts performed by the firm’s proposed major subcontractor.  In its protest citing the agency’s failure to consider subcontractor’s past performance the government argued the RFP referred to evaluation of “offerors” past performance and that FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii) does not mandate consideration of subcontractor past performance.  The GAO rejected this argument noting that under the FAR section quoted a past performance evaluation “should take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel with relevant experience or subcontractors that will perform major” parts of the contractor.  The Court added that it previously ruled that an agency’s consideration of a subcontractor’s past performance was permissible where the solicitation neither prohibited nor mentioned such information.  The GAO indicated both the government and Singleton’s positions were reasonable and recommended the government amend the solicitation to clearly state what types of past performance information would be considered (Singleton Enterprises, GAO B-298576).

{TAG_FORM_TITLE}