Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc.

B-265708 Dec 19, 1995 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Higher-cost proposal for award where he reasonably determined that proposal's technical advantages were worth the additional cost. Evaluation scheme provided that technical evaluation factors were more important than cost in determining the best value to the government. HBC basically alleges that the evaluation was biased against the firm. The government of the Philippines is undertaking a program to improve the overall operation of the country's energy sector. The objective of DSM activities is "to reduce utility capacity requirements with a corresponding decrease in total generation so that electricity services can be offered efficiently. This DSM project will be funded using a portion of the agency's funding commitment to support the World Bank's Global Environment Facility. View Decision Matter of: Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc. File: B-265708 Date: December 19, 1995 Contracting officer reasonably selected higher technically rated, higher-cost proposal for award where he reasonably determined that proposal's technical advantages were worth the additional cost, and evaluation scheme provided that technical evaluation factors were more important than cost in determining the best value to the government. Attorneys DECISION Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc. (HBC) protests the award of a contract to Resource Management International, Inc. (RMI) under request for proposals (RFP) No. 492-95-07, issued by the United States Agency for International Development to provide technical assistance on an Energy Demand Side Management (DSM) project to the Government of the Philippines. HBC basically alleges that the evaluation was biased against the firm, and also challenges the cost/technical tradeoff. [1] We deny the protest. In response to severe power shortages during the 1990s, the government of the Philippines is undertaking a program to improve the overall operation of the country's energy sector, particularly focusing on supply-side, or end-use, aspects for providing electricity. DSM principles and measures allow electric utilities and their customers to modify their electricity consumption patterns with respect to both the timing and level of electricity demand. According to the RFP, the objective of DSM activities is "to reduce utility capacity requirements with a corresponding decrease in total generation so that electricity services can be offered efficiently, effectively and at least cost." This DSM project will be funded using a portion of the agency's funding commitment to support the World Bank's Global Environment Facility. The RFP contemplated the award of a cost-plus-award-fee, completion-type contract for a 3-year period. Under the RFP, the contractor will (1) validate DSM activity by assessing the potential of DSM activities in the Philippines; (2) provide technical assistance to establish DSM regulatory frameworks; and (3) establish a pilot program in the industrial sector to test findings, demonstrate tangible benefits, and establish proven and replicable models. The RFP described seven tasks, including the National DSM Assessment, requiring the contractor to describe electricity use by primary end-users (commercial, residential, and industrial) in order to provide load forecasting data based on customer consumption, and the Industrial DSM Assessment, requiring the contractor to develop a comprehensive database from which the design of an industrial sector program will be developed. The RFP explained that portions of some of the specific tasks have already been initiated or even partially completed, but emphasized that "[t]he intent of this contract is that there will not be a duplication of effort." Accordingly, the RFP stated that it would be the contractor's responsibility to review, incorporate, and/or utilize all ongoing or completed DSM task-related activities. The RFP stated that the award would be made to the offeror whose proposal was deemed to represent the best value to the government, technical evaluation factors and cost considered. The RFP included the following four technical evaluation factors (and weights, on a 100-point scale): (1) technical approach (35 points); (2) team personnel qualifications (25 points); (3) corporate experience (25 points); and (4) management structure and approach (15 points). Cost was worth 20 points. [2] The RFP provided that the agency would not necessarily award a contract to the offeror proposing the lowest cost or to the offeror with the highest total combined evaluation score. Four firms, including HBC and RMI, submitted initial technical and cost proposals. Technical proposals were evaluated by the agency's technical evaluation committee (TEC), while cost proposals were reviewed by the contracting officer.