In Golden IT, LLc v. United States, COFC 24-1893C, July 14, 2025, a bid protest case, Chief Judge Matthew Solomson opens his decision with the following:

In this Court’s experience, Federal government procurement disputes — colloquially called “bid protests” — all too often arise because of poorly crafted documentation: either the solicitation is so complex and difficult to follow that it requires a Ph.D. to unravel, or the disappointed offeror’s proposal lacks sufficient clarity. Sometimes, the former causes the latter: the solicitation is so confusing that offerors have trouble writing a compliant or responsive proposal. Or, in another variation on the same theme, agency procurement officials have difficulty applying their own solicitation’s evaluation scheme correctly or fairly across competitors. The procurement at issue appears to be plagued by at least some of these problems.

Footnote omitted.

I had stopped routinely reading bid protest decisions. Pointlessly frustrating. But I think I'll start again.

The Judge makes an excellent observation. I’ve seen so many instances across the government where evaluation team members have little understanding of what the solicitation says. They are assigned the task about the time the solicitation closes. Then the Contracting Officer and/or the PM give a brief presentation of the action and inform the evaluators on how to do their job.

But when the evaluation starts, lots of confusion results. There’s no one around to shed light or answer their questions. So the technical evaluation team members get together among themselves and discuss what they think are the meanings and how to apply the evaluation scheme. Usually their conclusions aren’t correct but often gets by unnoticed.

Do the contract specialists or KO’s involved in the source selection know what the solicitation says, what the technical requirements are and what the evaluation factors and criteria mean?