American Artisan Productions, Inc., B-278450, January 30,

B-278450 Jan 30, 1998 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Protester is not competitively prejudiced by the confusing evaluation scheme in a procurement conducted under simplified acquisition procedures that did not list technical approach as an evaluation criterion. The awardee's technical approach was reasonably found to be clearly superior to the protester's technical approach so as to reasonably offset the protester's modest price advantage. American Artisan contends that the Park Service's evaluation was not in accordance with the stated evaluation factors. The exhibits were required to be constructed and installed in accordance with detailed specifications and construction drawings keyed to each exhibit. The award is to be made on a best value basis in which the "offeror's quotation will be evaluated under two areas of consideration. View Decision Matter of: American Artisan Productions, Inc. File: B-278450 Date: January 30, 1998 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION American Artisan Productions, Inc. protests the award of a contract to Turner Exhibits, Inc., under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 1443-RQ- 8530-97-027, issued by the Department of the Interior, National Park Service, for fabricating museum exhibits for the Loomis Museum, Lassen Volcanic National Park, California. American Artisan contends that the Park Service's evaluation was not in accordance with the stated evaluation factors. We deny the protest. The RFQ, issued under simplified acquisition procedures, required the contractor to fabricate and install a set of seven exhibits related to volcanic activity to be exhibited at the Loomis Museum, including necessary labor, materials, professional services, facilities, and travel. The exhibits were required to be constructed and installed in accordance with detailed specifications and construction drawings keyed to each exhibit. Under section IX.3(1) of the RFQ, the award is to be made on a best value basis in which the "offeror's quotation will be evaluated under two areas of consideration; namely, technical and cost." Under section VIII.7, "INSTRUCTIONS FOR TECHNICAL SUBMITTAL," the RFQ states: the offeror shall submit . . . Supplemental Technical Evaluation Information as indicated in Part IX [EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD]. Offerors should ensure that their technical responses are clear, concise, and fully address all of the evaluation factors listed. The submittal must also fully conform to the statement of work and clearly define an approach and methodology. Mere indication of an intent to conform will not be considered as acceptable. The technical submittal should be specific, detailed, and complete enough to clearly and fully demonstrate that you have a thorough understanding of the effort required and have a valid and practical plan for performing the work and should be sufficiently detailed to show how it will comply with the specification requirements. Section IX.3(2) states: BASIS FOR AWARD. Award will be made to the offeror who the Government determines can best accomplish the necessary work to satisfy the objectives and requirements set forth in the Request for Quote Specifications in a manner most advantageous to the Government. The documentation that is submitted by the offeror in response to the Request for Quote will receive a thorough evaluation. Offerors must convey to the Government that the offeror is able to accomplish the work in a coordinated and timely fashion such that technical requirements will be achieved. Finally, section IX.3(4) states: TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. The following paragraphs identify the criteria. A rating of "unacceptable" for any criteria may eliminate the offer from further consideration, regardless of [the] rating for any other criteria. Criteria items and factors to be considered for evaluation are listed in descending order of importance, as follows: A. Past performance: Demonstrated past and recent experience in fabricating visitor center exhibits. B. Qualifications: Professional qualifications of the principals and staff proposed for the award. The Park Service received seven quotations in response to the RFQ, ranging in price from $50,022 to $164,992. American Artisan's quotation price was $81,993 and Turner's price was $85,844. An evaluation team, after reviewing the quotes, determined that Turner's quote represented the best value in terms of technical and cost, and that the quotes priced lower than Turner's quote, including American Artisan's, were technically inferior to Turner's. According to the contemporaneous evaluation documentation, labeled "Technical Evaluation Summary," the agency found that Turner's quote represented the best value because it: addresses all of the criteria and exceeds our qualifications in terms of experience and expertise.