GAO’s key personnel rule is well-known—and often a source of frustration— amongst government contractors. Proposed key personnel who become “unavailable” prior to contract award—especially where they have accepted employment with a different company—may doom an offeror’s proposal by rendering it noncompliant with solicitation requirements. But GAO’s recent decision in FYI – For Your Information, Inc., B-423774, B-423774.2 (Dec. 19, 2025) provides some potential relief from that rule.
In FYI, the protester alleged that the awardee’s proposed program manager—a key personnel requirement—had accepted employment with a different company and, thus, was ”unavailable” prior to award, such that the awardee’s proposal should have been disqualified consistent with GAO’s key personnel jurisprudence. GAO rejected this argument. In so doing, GAO noted that notwithstanding his departure, the key person in question had indicated his intent to return to the awardee to perform on the contract by way of an email stating that, although he had accepted another job “to ensure stability for myself and my family,” he was not “closing the door on the opportunity” and that “if things change, [he] would absolutely welcome the opportunity to lend [his] expertise to [the] team.” GAO found that email sufficient to demonstrate his ongoing “availability” to the awardee even after his departure, especially in light of the fact that after award, consistent with his email, the key person executed a non-contingent employment agreement with the awardee to serve as the program manager. Taken together, GAO concluded that the key person remained available to perform on the awarded contract notwithstanding his acceptance of employment with a different company during the proposal evaluation stage.
This decision is important, as FYI highlights a potential path for offerors to avoid proposal rejection under GAO’s key personnel rule through maintaining dialogue with proposed key personnel to ensure possible availability to perform should the offeror receive the contract. This decision may also give a little breathing room for individuals proposed as key personnel, indicating that they might not be foreclosed from accepting new employment opportunities if they keep the door open on returning.