FC Business Systems, Inc., B-278730, March 6, 1998

B-278730 Mar 06, 1998 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights A firm protested an Army contract award for program management support and research and analysis services, contending that the Army's: (1) cost and technical evaluations were flawed; and (2) source selection decision was unreasonable. GAO held that the Army failed to consider the results of a sample delivery order cost evaluation in its source selection decision. Accordingly, the protest was sustained, and GAO recommended that the Army: (1) amend the solicitation, or otherwise establish a uniform basis for preparing and evaluating offers; (2) terminate the awardee's contract and make award to another bidder, if otherwise proper; and (3) reimburse the protester for its protest costs. View Decision Matter of: FC Business Systems, Inc. File: B-278730 Date: March 6, 1998 * Redacted Decision DIGEST Attorneys DECISION FC Business Systems, Inc. protests the award of a contract to Logistics Engineering & Environmental Support Services, Inc. (LESCO) under request for proposals (RFP) No. DAAB07-97-R-6006, issued by the Department of the Army for program management support, and research and analysis services for the Army's Logistics Integration Agency. FC argues that the agency's cost and technical evaluations were flawed and that, as a consequence, the agency's source selection decision was unreasonable. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued for a base year and four 1-year options, contemplated the award of an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) type contract with fixed, fully burdened hourly rates for various types of employees, and travel and material costs reimbursed based on actual costs incurred. Firms were required to submit proposal information that described their technical and management approach, and also were required to include detailed past performance information relating to the firm and its subcontractors; offerors also were required to prepare responses for two sample delivery orders. For cost evaluation purposes, firms were required to complete a matrix for what the RFP called total contract life cost (TCLC). Offerors were required to state the number of hours for each staff-year of contract performance, and to submit loaded hourly rates for various types of employees; these hourly rates were multiplied by the number of hours to arrive at an extended staff-year price for each category of employee, which was then multiplied by the number of staff-years estimated in the RFP for each contract year. In addition to the TCLC matrixes, firms were required to prepare cost proposals for each of the two sample delivery orders. The solicitation provided that the agency would make award to the firm whose proposal represented the best overall value to the government considering price and several non-price factors. The criteria, listed in descending order of importance, were Technical, Past Performance, Price, and Management. The technical evaluation criterion included three subfactors, Logistics Business Process Analysis, Technology Application, and Program Management Support; the first two subfactors were of equal importance and the third subfactor was relatively less important. For cost evaluation purposes, the RFP provided that the agency would consider the TCLC information, as well as the offerors' responses to the sample delivery orders. The solicitation further provided that, in evaluating the sample delivery order cost proposals, the agency would perform a cost realism evaluation. The Army obtained and evaluated best and final offers and arrived at the following adjectival and cost evaluation results for the protester's and awardee's proposals: CRITERION FC Business Systems LESCO TECHNICAL BLUE (Outstanding) BLUE (Outstanding) Logistics Business Process Analysis BLUE (Outstanding) BLUE (Outstanding) Technology Application GREEN Good) BLUE (Outstanding) Program Management Support BLUE (Outstanding) GREEN (Good) PAST PERFORMANCE BLUE (Outstanding) BLUE (Outstanding) TCLC $16,493,852.80 $16,579,863.00 MANAGEMENT YELLOW (Acceptable) GREEN (Good) The Army made award to LESCO, finding that its proposal--despite its slightly higher TCLC--offered the best overall value to the government. The agency's source selection decision found that LESCO's proposal was superior to FC's under the first two technical subfactors (logistics business process analysis and technology application), while FC's proposal was superior under the third technical subfactor (program management support).