Richard Group, LLC

B-422701.2 Sep 18, 2025 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Richard Group LLC, of Chicago, Illinois, protests its exclusion from the competition and the award of a contract to Billy W. Jarrett Construction Company, Inc. (Jarrett), of Prattville, Alabama, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C77624R0087, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for construction of an outpatient clinic. The protester argues that the agency improperly eliminated Richard Group from the competition. We deny the protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Richard Group, LLC File: B-422701.2 Date: September 18, 2025 Thomas O. Crist, Esq., Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP, for the protester. Aron C. Beezley, Esq., Nathaniel J. Greeson, Esq., Eugene J. Benick, Esq., and Winni Zhang, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for Billy W. Jarrett Construction Company, Inc., the intervenor. Natica Chapman Neely, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Samantha S. Lee, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging protester's elimination from the competition is denied where the protester was not a certified service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses at the time of award, as required by the solicitation. DECISION Richard Group LLC, of Chicago, Illinois, protests its exclusion from the competition and the award of a contract to Billy W. Jarrett Construction Company, Inc. (Jarrett), of Prattville, Alabama, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C77624R0087, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for construction of an outpatient clinic. The protester argues that the agency improperly eliminated Richard Group from the competition. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On May 10, 2024, the VA issued the RFP as a full and open solicitation, seeking proposals for the construction of a replacement outpatient clinic at the Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 1, 3.[1] On June 25, before the deadline for submission of proposals, a firm protested the terms and conditions of the solicitation with our Office, asserting that the procurement should have been set aside for competition among service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSBs). KEE Sols., LLC, B‑422701, Aug. 2, 2024 (unpublished decision). In response, the agency advised our Office that it intended to take corrective action; specifically, the agency proposed to “publish an amendment revising the RFP to be set aside for SDVOSB concerns” and make other changes to the evaluation criteria. Id. at 1. The agency would then permit submission of proposals and provide offerors that had already submitted proposals “an opportunity to submit revised proposals.”[2] Id. Based on the agency's proposed corrective action, we dismissed the protest as academic on August 2. Id. On September 18, the agency issued amendment 8 to the solicitation. COS at 1. The amendment replaced the initial solicitation entirely. Id. The stated purposes of the amendment were to, among other things, “reopen” the competition and “change the RFP from unrestricted to a SDVOSB set aside.” Agency Report (AR), Exh. 2, RFP at 1. As amended, the RFP contemplated making award to the proposal that represented the best value, considering only past performance and price. Id. at 11. Past performance was significantly more important than price. Id. By the October 3 deadline for proposal submission, the VA received proposals from only Richard Group and Jarrett. COS at 1. The VA subsequently issued two more amendments to the solicitation, each time providing an updated wage determination and inviting revised price proposals. Id. at 1-2. Final proposal revisions were due by March 25, 2025. Id. at 2. After reviewing the offerors' representations and certifications in the System for Award Management, the contracting officer emailed Richard Group to inquire about the firm's status as an SDVOSB. Id. The protester advised the contracting officer that “[e]ntering 2025,” the firm was “a large business” but “for projects submitted originally in 2024 through DEC 31st, we are considered a small business SDVOSB per SBA [Small Business Administration] guidelines.” AR, Exh. 8, Emails at 4. The VA ultimately found that Richard Group was not eligible for award under the solicitation: “Richard Group was not SDVOSB at time of award. VAAR [VA Acquisition Regulation] 852.219-73 requires SDVOSBs to be eligible at time of submission of offerors and at time of award.” AR, Exh. 9, Notice of Award at 2. The VA therefore awarded the contract to Jarrett for $21.8 million.