Evaluator's Criticism Found "Unreasonable" Somebody at the National Institutes of Health just didn’t like Computer Information Specialist Inc., which provided telecommunications support for the National Library of Medicine. But the General Accounting Office ruled that the company should not have lost the contract on the basis of a single evaluator’s “unreasonable” opinion When the contract was re-competed, one of the five evaluators attacked CIS’s proposal in unusually harsh language, calling portions of it “a pipe dream” filled with “profound lack of intellect” and “lack of respect.” The evaluator concluded, “I certainly would not wish upon any government representative the responsibility of confronting or dealing with any proposer who allows or perhaps promotes such attitudes or such behavior.” The other four evaluators commented favorably on CIS’s proposal, but the unfavorable comment carried the day. The contract for telecommunications support was awarded to a rival bidder, OTG. GAO said, “Having read the proposal, we are at a loss to understand the basis for the evaluator’s observations.” It said the criticisms were “unsupported and therefore unreasonable.” GAO sustained CIS’s protest and recommended that NIH either make a new source selection decision or ask for revised proposals. The case is file numbers B-293049 and B-293049.2, released January 23.