SelRico Services, Inc., B-286664.4; B-286664.5; B-287481.2; B-287481.3, June 22, 2001

SelRico Services, Inc., B-286664.4; B-286664.5; B-287481.2; B-287481.3, June 22, 2001 TITLE: SelRico Services, Inc., B-286664.4; B-286664.5; B-287481.2; B-287481.3, June 22, 2001 BNUMBER: B-286664.4; B-286664.5; B-287481.2; B-287481.3 DATE: June 22, 2001 ********************************************************************** Decision Matter of: SelRico Services, Inc. File: B-286664.4; B-286664.5; B-287481.2; B-287481.3 Date: June 22, 2001 Johnathan M. Bailey, Esq., Theodore M. Bailey Law Office, for the protester. Devon E. Hewitt, Esq., and Daniel S. Herzfeld, Esq., Shaw Pittman, for Acorn Services, Inc., an intervenor. Kerri A. Cox, Esq., and John D. Inazu, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Christina Sklarew, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Even where price is the least important evaluation factor for award under a best-value procurement, agency may award to an offeror with a lower-priced, lower-rated proposal if it determines that the price premium involved in awarding to an offeror with a higher-rated proposal is too great to justify. DECISION SelRico Services, Inc. protests the reevaluation of proposals and resulting contract award to Acorn Services, Inc. by the Department of the Air Force under request for proposals (RFP) No. F41652-00-R0025 for mess attendant services at Dyess Air Force Base, Texas. SelRico alleges that the "best value" tradeoff decision supporting the source selection was unreasonable and contrary to the RFP's evaluation criteria. SelRico also protests the Air Force's issuance of a purchase order to Acorn to provide these services during the pendency of SelRico's protest of the award to Acorn under the RFP. We deny the protests. The solicitation, incorporating the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clauses applicable to commercial items, provided that the award would be based on an assessment of each offeror's past performance and price, with past performance the more important factor. As relevant here, past performance was to be evaluated on similar contracts completed within the past 3 years or currently in progress, using a past performance survey to determine the quality of work previously performed and to assess the relative capability of the offeror to effectively accomplish the solicitation requirements. The RFP stated that award would be made to the offeror whose proposal represented the best value to the government. Ten offerors, including SelRico (the incumbent contractor), Lewis Services/ Southway Services, and Acorn, submitted proposals. The source selection team evaluated each offeror's past performance risk based on (1) the contractor's record of conforming to specifications and to standards of good workmanship; (2) the contractor's history of reasonable and cooperative behavior including the administrative aspects of performance and commitment to customer satisfaction; (3) the contractor's environmental record; and (4) the contractor's business-like concern for the interests of the customer, using questionnaires completed by references furnished by the offerors. The proposals submitted by SelRico, Lewis, and three other offerors were given the past performance confidence assessment rating "exceptional/high confidence"; Acorn's proposal was rated "very good/significant confidence," and the proposals of the remaining four offerors were rated "neutral/unknown confidence." Acorn's proposal offered the lowest price, while Lewis's price was third low and SelRico's price was fourth low. The Air Force selected Lewis for the award. SelRico and Acorn each protested that award decision; the protests were resolved when the agency agreed to take corrective action by reevaluating the past performance of all offerors. The Air Force gave each offeror the opportunity to submit any additional, relevant past performance information to be considered during the reevaluation. The solicitation itself and previously-submitted proposals were not changed. The source selection team re-evaluated the submissions and submitted its proposal evaluation report to the source selection authority. Acorn's proposal, offering the lowest price ($4,987,136), was again rated "very good/significant confidence" under the past performance factor. SelRico's proposal offered the fourth lowest price ($6,061,519.40) and was again rated "exceptional/high confidence" for past performance. Agency Report, Tab L, Proposal Evaluation Report, at 8-9. The source selection authority (SSA) determined that Acorn's proposal presented the best value to the government, based on a tradeoff between past performance and price, and selected Acorn for award.