Change Agents 360, LLC--Reconsideration

B-424114.2 Apr 07, 2026 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Change Agents 360, LLC, a small business of Atlanta, Georgia, requests reconsideration of our decision in Change Agents 360, LLC, B-424114, Dec. 23, 2025 (unpublished decision), in which we dismissed its protest of the award of a contract to Oready LLC, of Las Vegas, Nevada, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 19M03025Q0022. The RFQ was issued by the Department of State for commercial training services to prepare consulate staff for the planned relocation of the United States Consulate in Casablanca, Morocco. Change Agents argues that our decision contained errors of fact that warrant reconsideration. We deny the request for reconsideration. View Decision Decision Matter of: Change Agents 360, LLC--Reconsideration File: B-424114.2 Date: April 7, 2026 Erik Reynolds, for the requester. Danielle K. S. Lindermuth, Esq., Department of State, for the agency. Christopher Alwood, Esq., and Alexander O. Levine, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Request for reconsideration is denied where the requester has not shown that our prior decision contained an error of fact or law warranting reversal or modification. DECISION Change Agents 360, LLC, a small business of Atlanta, Georgia, requests reconsideration of our decision in Change Agents 360, LLC, B‑424114, Dec. 23, 2025 (unpublished decision), in which we dismissed its protest of the award of a contract to Oready LLC, of Las Vegas, Nevada, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 19M03025Q0022. The RFQ was issued by the Department of State for commercial training services to prepare consulate staff for the planned relocation of the United States Consulate in Casablanca, Morocco. Change Agents argues that our decision contained errors of fact that warrant reconsideration. We deny the request for reconsideration. BACKGROUND The Department of State issued the RFQ on September 16, 2025, seeking quotations for the development and delivery of a “condensed change management training program for all staff” at the United States Consulate in Casablanca. RFQ No. 19M03025Q0022 at 1, 5. The solicitation provided that award would be made on a lowest‑price, technically acceptable basis. Id. at 1. Change Agents submitted a quotation in response to the RFQ and, on September 30, State notified Change Agents that its quotation was not selected for award. Protest attach., “Bid and Post Award Emails.pdf” at 3‑4. On October 3, Change Agents requested a debriefing. Id. The agency did not provide a debriefing to Change Agents; however, on November 17, State notified Change Agents that the contract award and solicitation had been canceled due to a lack of funding. Protest attach., “Intent to Protest and Cancellation Emails.pdf” at 1. The agency stated that if “funding becomes available again and the requirement is reopened, we will make sure it is re-announced through [] SAM.gov.”[1] Id.  On November 24, Change Agents filed a protest with our Office, arguing in part that the award was improper because the agency had abandoned the RFQ's lowest‑priced, technically acceptable award criteria to award the contract to a higher priced firm based on a best‑value tradeoff.[2] Change Agents 360, supra at 2. We dismissed these challenges to the agency's award decision as academic based on the agency's cancellation of the solicitation and contract. Id. at 2. Our decision explained that the “cancel[l]ation of a solicitation renders a protest of the award of a contract under that solicitation academic.” Id. (citing Ferris Optical, B-403012.2, B-403012.3, Oct. 21, 2010, at 2). Change Agents separately contended that the agency improperly canceled the solicitation because the cancellation occurred in response to the protest. Id. at 3. Our Office found that the agency's stated lack of funding provided a reasonable basis for cancellation. Id. (citing James M. Carroll--Recon., B‑221502.3, Mar. 24, 1986, at 3). This request for reconsideration followed. DISCUSSION Change Agents requests reconsideration of our decision dismissing its protest and contends that the decision contained errors of fact. Req. for Recon. at 1‑2. In this regard, the requester asserts that the agency has not canceled the contract award and therefore the agency's actions did not meet our standard to dismiss Change Agents's protest as academic. Id. The requester also argues that the agency improperly canceled the solicitation without a reasonable basis to avoid any resolution of the merits of the protest. Id. at 3‑4. For the reasons discussed below, we find no basis to reconsider our decision. Under our regulations, to obtain reconsideration, the requesting party must set out the factual and legal grounds upon which reversal or modification of the decision is deemed warranted, specifying any errors of law made or information not previously considered.