Welcome to FloridaProcurements.com (FlaProc), your authoritative resource for navigating Florida’s government contracting landscape, with particular focus on transportation and technology opportunities. FlaProc provides free, expert guidance to help companies identify and secure state contracting opportunities throughout Florida.
This resource is maintained by Attorney Sean Gellis of Gellis Law, PLLC, one of less than 75 attorneys Board Certified in State and Federal Government and Administrative Practice by The Florida Bar. Mr. Gellis brings unique insight to government contracting, having served as the Chief of Staff of the Florida Department of Management Services (DMS), General Counsel of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and Deputy General Counsel of the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation – positions that provided direct oversight of technology initiatives and issues of statewide importance. His record in bid protest litigation reflects the sophisticated advocacy and strategic thinking he brings to government contracting matters, particularly in complex transportation and technology procurements. Sean also leads Procurement Insider, a confidential subscription service that provides technology vendors with strategic intelligence and insider analysis of Florida government opportunities. Learn more about transforming your approach to government contracting at www.gellislaw.com/procurement-insider
UPDATE: DMS PRODUCES RECORDS
March 26, 2025
DMS has produced the notices of intent to protest and the score sheets for the Management Consulting RFP. Below you will find a list of the companies who protested, and their respective counsel, if applicable.
We are still waiting on communications showing the reasons why the decision was made. Until that time, if it ever happens, I will leave you with this longstanding quote from a 1978 appellate case involving a FDOT bid dispute. The Court overturned the agency’s rejection of all bids because it was based on a desire to avoid controversy and litigation.
“In December the Department thought to avoid controversy and delay by rejecting all bids. Appeasement and expediency are rarely fruitful as government policies, and they were not in this case; the Department obviously and erroneously assumed that the bids could be rejected without accountability under Chapter 120” Couch Construction Co. v. Dep’t of Transp., 361 So. 2d 172, 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
Accenture
Atlas Recovery Consulting
Carr, Riggs & Ingram, LLC, represented by J. Stephen Menton, Rutledge Ecenia
CDR Maguire, Inc., represented by John M. Lockwood, Lockwood Law Firm
CGL Management Group, LLC
ConvergeOne
CSA Consulting Group, LLC
Digital Intelligence Systems, LLC
Elite Business Strategies, LLC
First Data Government Solutions, LP
Health Management Associates, Inc.
Health Tech Solutions
Indelible Solutions, LLC, represented by Eduardo S. Lombard, Lombard Law
KD Dynamic Solutions LLC
Kyndryl
Marcman Solutions
Mauldin & Jenkins, LLC
Rosales Group
Ruvos LLC
SGS Technologie, LLC, represented by William D. Hall, III, Jones Walker
Strategic Optimization and Research LLC
Tal Search Group
Thrive Operations, LLC
Wheeler EMC
Download the PDFs HERE.
When Nine Months of Procurement Effort Vanishes in Three Days
In the world of government contracting, few scenarios frustrate vendors more than investing significant resources into a competitive procurement only to have the agency suddenly reject all proposals. Yet that’s exactly what happened with Florida’s recent Management Consulting Services solicitation—a procurement that followed a puzzling and concerning trajectory.
Here’s the timeline that has the government contracting community asking questions:
- June 5, 2024: DMS issues RFP No. 24-80101500-RFP for Management Consulting Services
- Nine months of procurement activity: Vendors prepare extensive proposals; DMS conducts evaluations
- March 4, 2025: DMS issues Notice of Intent to Award
- March 7, 2025 (just three days later): DMS withdraws the Notice of Intent to Award and rejects all proposals
This abrupt reversal raises serious questions about procurement integrity, transparency, and the responsible use of both vendor and government resources.
The Procurement That Vanished
The Management Consulting Services contract was no minor procurement. The scope encompassed thirteen distinct service categories spanning everything from strategy development to project management to expert witness services. The contract established five professional levels—from Principal Consultant to Program and Administrative Support—each with specific experience requirements and functional responsibilities.
Vendors responding to this solicitation invested hundreds of hours preparing comprehensive proposals that addressed these extensive requirements. The state likewise dedicated significant resources to evaluating submissions over many months.
For all this effort to be nullified just three days after award notices were issued is both unusual and troubling.
The Mystery of the Rejected Awards
The Department’s notice provided minimal insight into its decision:
“Pursuant to section 120.57(3), Florida Statutes, the Florida Department of Management Services (Department) hereby provides notice of its decision to withdraw the Notice of Intent to Award for the Management Consulting Services Request for Proposals RFP No. 24-80101500-RFP (RFP) issued on March 4, 2025, and reject all proposals received for this RFP, as contemplated in section 2.9 of the RFP, with the intent to resolicit.”
This raises several critical questions:
1. What Changed in Three Days?
If there were fundamental flaws in the solicitation, why weren’t they identified during the nine-month evaluation period rather than after award notices were issued?
2. Who Protested, and Why?
Did the Department receive protests that prompted this sudden reversal? If so, what issues were raised that were so significant they warranted rejecting all proposals rather than addressing specific concerns?
3. What was the Actual Basis for Rejection?
While agencies have broad discretion to reject all bids, this authority is not unlimited. The basis should be rational and documentable.
4. Why the unusual legal firepower?
The Department has retained outside counsel from Lawson, Huck, Gonzalez—a high-profile firm—to handle public records requests related to this procurement. This is an unusual step that suggests the Department anticipates significant scrutiny.
The Public Records Battleground
In response to this concerning sequence of events, my firm has submitted public records requests for both the notices of intent to protest and, critically, communications about the decision to reject all bids. The latter may prove particularly contentious.
Section 119.071(1)(b)3., Florida Statutes provides:
“If an agency rejects all bids, proposals, or replies submitted in response to a competitive solicitation and the agency concurrently provides notice of its intent to reissue the competitive solicitation, the rejected bids, proposals, or replies remain exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such time as the agency provides notice of an intended decision concerning the reissued competitive solicitation or until the agency withdraws the reissued competitive solicitation. A bid, proposal, or reply is not exempt for longer than 12 months after the initial agency notice rejecting all bids, proposals, or replies.”
This provision clearly protects the proposals themselves from disclosure—but it does not exempt communications about why the decision to reject all bids was made. The public has a legitimate interest in understanding why a nine-month procurement process was scrapped just days after awards were announced.
The Department’s decision to engage a prominent law firm for what should be routine public records responses suggests this distinction may become a significant legal battle.
The Real Costs of "Reject All"
When an agency rejects all proposals after a lengthy procurement process, the costs extend far beyond the agency itself:
- Vendor Resources: Companies invested hundreds of staff hours and tens of thousands of dollars preparing comprehensive proposals—resources they cannot recover.
- Market Confidence: Each time an agency completes an evaluation only to reject all proposals, vendor confidence in the procurement system erodes. Some qualified vendors may choose not to participate in the resolicitation.
- Agency Resources: The Department dedicated significant staff time to evaluating proposals over many months—all of which must now be repeated.
- Delayed Services: The state's need for updated management consulting services remains unfilled, potentially delaying important initiatives across multiple agencies.
- Competitive Integrity: The resolicitation process raises questions about whether information from the original proposals will influence the new solicitation, potentially creating unfair advantages.
The Path Forward: Transparency and Accountability
While agencies have the legal authority to reject all bids when circumstances warrant, this authority should be exercised judiciously and transparently. When an agency conducts a nine-month procurement process, issues award notices, and then abruptly reverses course just days later, the public deserves to understand why.
The communications surrounding this decision are not protected by the exemption for rejected proposals. They represent core government decision-making that should be subject to public scrutiny.
As this situation develops, we will continue to seek answers about:
- The specific basis for rejecting all proposals
- Whether protests were filed that influenced this decision
- Why the problem wasn’t identified during the nine-month evaluation period
- What changes will be made in the resolicitation
Florida’s procurement system depends on transparency, integrity, and the responsible use of both vendor and government resources. The curious case of the Management Consulting “reject all” raises troubling questions about whether these principles were upheld in this instance.
We will provide updates as more information becomes available.
Sean Gellis is a Board Certified specialist in State and Federal Government and Administrative Practice with over a decade of government experience, including service as Chief of Staff of the Department of Management Services (DMS), General Counsel of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and Deputy General Counsel of the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation (OIR). Through Gellis Law, PLLC, he provides strategic counsel on government procurement, administrative law, and regulatory matters. Sean also leads Procurement Insider, a confidential subscription service that provides technology vendors with strategic intelligence and insider analysis of Florida government opportunities. Learn more about transforming your approach to government contracting at GellisLaw.com/ProcurementInsider.
