Venture Productions, B-280872.2; B-280872.3, December 9, 1998

Venture Productions, B-280872.2; B-280872.3, December 9, 1998 BNUMBER: B-280872.2; B-280872.3 DATE: December 9, 1998 TITLE: Venture Productions, B-280872.2; B-280872.3, December 9, 1998 ********************************************************************** DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Matter of:Venture Productions File: B-280872.2; B-280872.3 Date:December 9, 1998 Andrew J. Mohr, Esq., and John J. O'Brien, Esq., Cohen Mohr, for the protester. Jed. L. Babbin, Esq., and Sharon L. Babbin, Esq., Tighe, Patton, Tabackman & Babbin, for Film House, Inc., an intervenor. Mary E. Clark, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. Ralph O. White, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency assessment of past performance is denied where the record shows that the evaluators performed a reasonable assessment of proposals in accordance with the solicitation's evaluation scheme, and did not deviate from the solicitation's scheme by using a past performance rating plan different from the rating plan used for the other evaluation factors. DECISION Venture Productions protests the award of a contract to Film House, Inc. by the Television-Audio Support Activity, Defense Logistics Agency, pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. MDA113-97-R-0018, issued to purchase creative development, scripting, and production services associated with brief informational radio and television segments, known as "spot announcements," for use by the Armed Forces Radio and Television Service (AFRTS). Venture argues that the agency's evaluation of past performance was unreasonable. We deny the protest. The RFP, issued on February 5, 1998, anticipates award of a 1-year indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract with four 1-year option periods, to the offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the government. The RFP sets forth five evaluation factors: (1) organizational experience; (2) organizational past performance; (3) ability as demonstrated by samples of recent spot announcements; (4) ability as demonstrated by a creative proposal for two mock spot announcements; and (5) price proposal for the mock spot announcements. RFP, amend. 0001, sec. M.2. The first four factors are approximately equal in importance, and collectively are significantly more important than the price factor. Id. at sec. M.3. For each year of the contract, the RFP anticipates ordering a minimum of $3.5 million and a maximum of $5 million of spot announcements. RFP sec. B. In evaluating proposals, the agency used a source selection plan that assigned 200 points to each of the four non-price evaluation factors. Although the total number of points assigned to each factor was the same, the agency used two different assessment schemes for assigning the points. For all of the evaluation factors except organizational past performance (including the price proposal factor), the 200 available points were allocated equally to the two subfactors under each factor.[1] Under each subfactor, the evaluators assigned adjectival ratings and point scores in five-point increments as set forth below: Rating Point Range Excellent 85/90/95/100 points Very Good 65/70/75/80 points Good 45/50/55/60 points Fair 25/30/35/40 points Poor 0/5/10/15/20 points For the organizational past performance factor, however, no subfactors were evaluated, and the 200 available points were allocated as follows: Rating Points Excellent 200 points Good 150 points Inconclusive 100 points Marginal 50 points Poor 0 points Evaluation Plan at 5-7. At the conclusion of the evaluation, the proposals of Venture and Film House were the most highly rated.