Government Contractors Obtain Relief in More than Half of GAO Bid Protests

In late December, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) published its Bid Protest Annual Report to Congress for Fiscal Year 2020. The statutorily mandated report contains an array of information about GAO’s bid protest forum over the prior fiscal year, including the most prevalent reasons GAO sustained protests along with a variety of statistical data.

Most notably, GAO reports an “Effectiveness Rate” of 51% for fiscal year 2020, which is the highest rate since GAO began reporting this metric in 2001. The Effectiveness Rate reflects the percentage of protest matters in which the protester obtained some form of relief, either due to voluntary agency corrective action or a GAO decision sustaining the protest. In other words, in more than half of the cases GAO resolved in fiscal year 2020, the bid protest forum was an effective avenue for the protester.

The Annual Report further highlights that last year 2,149 protests, cost claims, and requests for reconsideration were filed; 545 cases were resolved on the merits; and GAO sustained 15% of the merits cases. While GAO only held a hearing in nine cases—likely due to the coronavirus pandemic—GAO used alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in 124 protest matters, a 210% increase over the prior fiscal year. For more on ADR at GAO, please review our recent article on the topic published by Law360.

GAO reports that the most prevalent reasons for sustaining bid protests during fiscal year 2020 were: (1) unreasonable technical evaluation; (2) flawed solicitation; (3) unreasonable cost or price evaluation; and (4) unreasonable past performance evaluation. This is the first time GAO cited improprieties in solicitations as a frequent basis for sustaining protests. It is also noteworthy that flawed selection decision, unequal treatment, and inadequate documentation of the record did not make the list this year despite being popular bases for sustain decisions during the past several years.

Jenner & Block’s Government Contracts and Grants lawyers have extensive bid protest experience, including prior service as a supervising bid protest hearing officer at GAO, and stand ready to support any challenges to the award of a government contract or the terms of a government solicitation.

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

Government Contractors Obtain Relief in More than Half of GAO Bid Protests

In late December, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) published its Bid Protest Annual Report to Congress for Fiscal Year 2020. The statutorily mandated report contains an array of information about GAO’s bid protest forum over the prior fiscal year, including the most prevalent reasons GAO sustained protests along with a variety of statistical data.

Most notably, GAO reports an “Effectiveness Rate” of 51% for fiscal year 2020, which is the highest rate since GAO began reporting this metric in 2001. The Effectiveness Rate reflects the percentage of protest matters in which the protester obtained some form of relief, either due to voluntary agency corrective action or a GAO decision sustaining the protest. In other words, in more than half of the cases GAO resolved in fiscal year 2020, the bid protest forum was an effective avenue for the protester.

The Annual Report further highlights that last year 2,149 protests, cost claims, and requests for reconsideration were filed; 545 cases were resolved on the merits; and GAO sustained 15% of the merits cases. While GAO only held a hearing in nine cases—likely due to the coronavirus pandemic—GAO used alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in 124 protest matters, a 210% increase over the prior fiscal year. For more on ADR at GAO, please review our recent article on the topic published by Law360.

GAO reports that the most prevalent reasons for sustaining bid protests during fiscal year 2020 were: (1) unreasonable technical evaluation; (2) flawed solicitation; (3) unreasonable cost or price evaluation; and (4) unreasonable past performance evaluation. This is the first time GAO cited improprieties in solicitations as a frequent basis for sustaining protests. It is also noteworthy that flawed selection decision, unequal treatment, and inadequate documentation of the record did not make the list this year despite being popular bases for sustain decisions during the past several years.

Jenner & Block’s Government Contracts and Grants lawyers have extensive bid protest experience, including prior service as a supervising bid protest hearing officer at GAO, and stand ready to support any challenges to the award of a government contract or the terms of a government solicitation.

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

News and Insights

Podcasts

Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon Discusses Fintech Enforcement, Debanking, and Regulatory Risk on Fintech Layer Cake Podcast

Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon was featured on the Fintech Layer Cake podcast, where she discussed how fintech enforcement and prosecution actually work in practice, and what exposes fintechs and banks to regulatory risk.

July 15, 2026

Publications

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Private Rights of Action Under the Investment Company Act, Private Equity Law Report

Partners Charles Riely, Todd C. Toral, and Martin Glass authored a guest article for Private Equity Law Report examining the US Supreme Court's June 11, 2026, ruling on the scope of private rights of action under the Investment Company Act of 1940.

July 14, 2026

Publications

Emily Loeb Discusses Congressional Oversight Preparedness in Bloomberg Law

Partner Emily Loeb, co-chair of Jenner & Block's Congressional Investigations Practice, spoke with Bloomberg Law article about how companies can prepare for potential oversight exposure ahead of this fall's midterm elections.

July 7, 2026

Publications

In New York Law Journal, The True Lender Doctrine and the OppFi Decision

Partners Jeremy Creelan, Michael Ross, Megan Poetzel, and Laurel Loomis Rimon, and Associate Molly Oberstein-Allen authored an article for the New York Law Journal examining the "True Lender" doctrine in light of a May 2026 California decision that provides the most detailed judicial framework to date for evaluating bank-nonbank lending partnerships.

July 1, 2026

Event

Partner Michael Vernick to Speak at NACUA's 2026 Annual Conference

On July 1, Partner Michael Vernick will speak on a panel at the National Association of College and University Attorneys (NACUA) 2026 Annual Conference in Nashville.

July 1, 2026