Close X
Attorney Spotlight

Find out which two countries Cheryl Palmeri gets the most questions about related to International Trade in today's market? Find out more>


Close X


Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

In June 2016, AmSurg Corp. and Envision Healthcare Holdings, Inc. (Envision) announced they have signed a definitive merger agreement pursuant to which the companies will combine in an all-stock transaction. Upon completion of the merger, which is expected to be tax-free to the shareholders of both organizations, the combined company will be named Envision Healthcare Corporation and co-headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee and Greenwood Village, Colorado. The company's common stock is expected to trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol: EVHC. Bass, Berry & Sims served as lead counsel on the transaction, led by Jim Jenkins. Read more.

AmSurg logo

Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Inside the FCA blogInside the FCA blog features ongoing updates related to the False Claims Act (FCA), including insight on the latest legal decisions, regulatory developments and FCA settlements. The blog provides timely updates for corporate boards, directors, compliance managers, general counsel and other parties interested in the organizational impact and legal developments stemming from issues potentially giving rise to FCA liability.

Read More >

GovCon Blog: GAO Releases Annual Bid Protest Report: Corrective Actions on the Rise?


November 21, 2014

This week, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its annual Bid Protest Report for Fiscal Year 2014. GAO is required by the Competition in Contracting Act to submit this annual report to Congress. The report contains some information which may be of interest to contractors, particularly the bid protest statistics.

According to GAO, while the number of bid protests filed increased 5% versus FY2013, the number of sustained decisions decreased quite a bit. From FY2010 through FY2013, GAO sustained an average of 17.7% protests. The number of sustained protests fell sharply in FY2014, as less than 13% of cases were sustained.

However, this decrease in the sustain rate should not serve as a deterrent for potential protesters. The sustain rate only includes cases that make it all the way to a decision on the merits (sustain or deny). It does not include the instances where the protester received some form of requested relief, through a voluntary corrective action taken by the agency.

When factoring in voluntary corrective action, as well as sustained protests, protesters were "successful" on 43% of GAO protests in FY2014. This number has remained fairly steady over the past five years, falling in at either 42% or 43% each year.

Given the static nature of the "success" rate of protests and the decrease in sustained decisions, it can certainly be inferred that contracting agencies were much more willing to undertake voluntary corrective action in response to a protest. It is unclear if this trend will continue in the future, but those with an optimistic view would see this as a sign that agencies are becoming more likely to admit to and correct a mistake in a procurement. The pessimists among us would surely say that agencies are becoming more adept at using corrective action to fix weak spots in their procurement decisions. Whether the truth is one extreme or the other, or somewhere in the middle, this is certainly a trend worth monitoring.

For more Government Contracts information, visit 

Related Professionals

Related Services


Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.