The LEADS Corporation, B-292465, September 26, 2003

B-292465 Sep 26, 2003 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The order was issued to CACI under its General Services Administration Federal Supply Schedule contract. Assuring that sole-source actions are justified. (Task 3) assure that award documents are detailed. That awards are made in a timely manner. Who will provide direction and oversight to staff and "will also process a workload". Although the RFQ indicated that "[c]ontracting personnel will be responsible for all pre & post award functions. All contracting personnel were required to be proficient in the use of the Standard Procurement System (SPS) (also known as the Procurement Desktop Defense (PD2)). The technical factors when combined were approximately equal in importance to price. View Decision The LEADS Corporation, B-292465, September 26, 2003 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION The LEADS Corporation protests the Defense Contracting Command-Washington's (DCC-W) issuance of an order (DASW01-03-F-0810) to CACI, Inc.-Federal for support services. The order was issued to CACI under its General Services Administration Federal Supply Schedule contract. LEADS challenges DCC-W's acceptance of CACI's organizational conflict of interest (OCI) mitigation plan and the evaluation of proposals. We deny the protest. DCC-W furnishes contracting support to numerous Department of Defense components in the Military District of Washington, processing over 10,000 contract actions in fiscal year 2002. Although the RFQ here generally described the required work as furnishing acquisition services, contract management oversight, evaluation services, and assisting DCC-W in receiving, tracking, and processing acquisition packages, contracts, and delivery orders, RFQ 1.2, the statement of work (SOW) specifically required the contractor to provide approximately 20 contracting personnel, equivalent to a GS-1102 contracting specialist, and set forth the following tasks: (Task 1) recommend the appropriate contracting strategy for any assigned requisitions, including whether to award a new contract, modify an existing contract, or place an order against a contract; (Task 2) implement the contracting strategy, including coordinating an approach with DCC-W assets (e.g., the legal department and small business office) and the requiring activity, reviewing statement of work packages for completeness and quality, and assuring that sole-source actions are justified; (Task 3) assure that award documents are detailed, clear and understandable, and that awards are made in a timely manner; (Task 4) perform contract administration functions, including monitoring contract performance, and assisting the agency in recording past performance evaluations and completing contract closeouts; (Task 5) furnish sufficient management, including a task manager and a full-time site/functional lead, who will provide direction and oversight to staff and "will also process a workload"; (Task 6) develop a system to allow monitoring of open contracts; (Task 7) review and assess the completeness of documentation, including statements of work and task packages; (Task 8) provide acquisition administrative support, including arranging travel, maintaining calendars, and maintaining files; and (Task 9) start full or near full performance within 2 weeks of award. RFQ Secs. 1.2, 3.2; Question and Answer No. 13. Although the RFQ indicated that "[c]ontracting personnel will be responsible for all pre & post award functions," it cautioned that in no circumstances would the contractor be responsible for the inherent government functions of a contracting officer. Id. All contracting personnel were required to be proficient in the use of the Standard Procurement System (SPS) (also known as the Procurement Desktop Defense (PD2)), a computer software system for automating the procurement process. The RFQ provided that quotations would be evaluated on the basis of price and three technical factors, including (in descending order of importance) technical approach, personnel qualifications, and corporate capability/past performance. The technical factors when combined were approximately equal in importance to price. In addition, the RFQ provided for submission of a quality control plan and OCI mitigation plan to be evaluated on a pass/fail basis. RFQ Sec. 16.2. Three vendors submitted quotations. After one vendor subsequently withdrew its quotation, the remaining two--LEADS and CACI--made oral presentations. DCC-W then requested the submission of revised quotations. Based on its evaluation of revised quotations and oral presentations, DCC-W determined that CACIs quotation was most advantageous.