Shelby's Gourmet Foods

B-270585 Mar 22, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Which is designed to use commercial practices and commercial items to the greatest extent possible. Indefinite delivery contract to supply food to five military bases in North Carolina. [1] There were 64 delivery points at the five military installations. The estimated cost of supplying the food to the five specified bases was $25.1 million per year for a base and 3 option years. Which were used to determine each offeror's total price. [2] The RFP stated a "best value" evaluation scheme. In which technical quality was more important than price. The technical evaluation was based upon 6 factors and 14 subfactors as follows: A. Small Entrepreneurial Enhancement Development (SEED) Program The technical factors were listed in descending order of importance. View Decision Matter of: Shelby's Gourmet Foods File: B-270585 Date: March 22, 1996 Agency reasonably eliminated the protester's seriously deficient proposal from the competitive range in a prime vendor procurement to obtain full line food supplies for five military bases, where the proposal did adequately describe how the protester would satisfy a contract of this scope and complexity. Attorneys DECISION Shelby's Gourmet Foods protests the rejection of its proposal from the competitive range and the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. SPO300-95-R-4000, issued by the Department of Defense (DOD), Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), to obtain a "prime vendor" to supply a full line of food products to various military installations in North Carolina. We deny the protest. In 1993, DOD introduced the Prime Vendor acquisition method of procuring food products, which is designed to use commercial practices and commercial items to the greatest extent possible. Traditionally, DOD purchased a single food item or a limited number of items per solicitation; used military specifications to define the item(s); and provided for delivery to DOD depots where the government would store and redistribute the food in response to customer requests. In contrast, under the Prime Vendor acquisition method, a single contractor supplies a full line of commercially available food products; uses electronic catalogues and an electronic ordering system; and employs a commercial distribution system. Under such a distribution system, each military installation orders its immediate food requirements from the contractor, who supplies the food directly to the installation in routine, bulk shipments. The instant prime vendor RFP, issued on an unrestricted basis, contemplated an indefinite quantity, indefinite delivery contract to supply food to five military bases in North Carolina. [1] There were 64 delivery points at the five military installations, and each delivery point required three weekly deliveries composed of any of the 3,000 items on the RFP schedule. These 3,000 food items encompassed the entire range of food products, e.g., fish, meat, poultry, fresh fruits and vegetables, dairy products, chilled foods, frozen foods, semi-perishable and canned foods, baked goods, and confections. The estimated cost of supplying the food to the five specified bases was $25.1 million per year for a base and 3 option years. The RFP advised that, of the 3,000 solicited food items, 120 items would probably account for 80 percent of the total amount spent under the contract. The RFP provided quantity estimates for these 120 items, for which it requested unit and extended prices, which were used to determine each offeror's total price. [2] The RFP stated a "best value" evaluation scheme, in which technical quality was more important than price. The technical evaluation was based upon 6 factors and 14 subfactors as follows: A. Distribution, Delivery System, and Location 1. Product Availability 2. Ordering System 3. Location 4. Surge/Mobilization Capability 5. Product Sourcing B. Corporate Experience 1. Past Performance and Experience 2. Organizational Support C. Quality Program 1. Quality Control Procedures 2. Inspection Procedures 3. Storage Procedures 4. Supplier Selection 5. Product Descriptions D. Socioeconomic Considerations E. Procurement Pricing Plan 1. Purchasing Procedures 2. Unit Pricing F. Small Entrepreneurial Enhancement Development (SEED) Program The technical factors were listed in descending order of importance. The RFP thoroughly described what the government expected the offeror to demonstrate under each technical factor and subfactor. Furthermore, the RFP authorized the government to conduct site visits to verify information in the offerors' proposals. Under the evaluation plan for this procurement, an offeror could earn a rating of "highly acceptable," "acceptable," "marginally acceptable," or "unacceptable," under the various factors and subfactors. The agency received three proposals by July 27, 1995. Shelby's, a small business, submitted the low-priced proposal.