Clapp & Mayne, a Division of Renaissance Information Systems, Inc., B-292904, December 29, 2003

B-292904 Dec 29, 2003 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Protester's proposals were properly excluded from the competitive range where agency reasonably identified multiple deficiencies and/or weaknesses in protester's proposed technical approach to performing the solicitation requirements for each performance sector. BACKGROUND The solicitation was issued on January 17. The solicitation stated that separate competitions would be conducted for each of the performance sectors and offerors were invited to submit separate proposals for any or all of the competitions. Offerors were advised that contract awards would be made on a "best value" basis and that proposals would be evaluated with regard to cost/price and the following technical factors. View Decision Clapp & Mayne, a Division of Renaissance Information Systems, Inc., B-292904, December 29, 2003 * REDACTED DECISION DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Clapp & Mayne, a Division of Renaissance Information Systems, Inc. (C&M), protests the U.S. Agency for International Development's (USAID) exclusion of C&M's proposals from the competitive range under request for proposals (RFP) No. M/OP-02-026 to provide technical assistance and support in furtherance of USAID objectives to stabilize world population and protect human health. C&M protests that the agency improperly determined that C&M's technical proposals contained multiple weaknesses and/or deficiencies. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation was issued on January 17, 2003, seeking proposals to provide technical assistance and support to USAID in the following three performance "sectors": (1) child health, maternal health and nutrition, population, human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) and infectious diseases (collectively referred to as the "global health" sector); (2) tuberculosis; and (3) media relations, public opinion, polling and advocacy (collectively referred to as the "media" sector). Agency Report, Tab 5, RFP, at 9-10. The solicitation stated that separate competitions would be conducted for each of the performance sectors and offerors were invited to submit separate proposals for any or all of the competitions. The agency stated that it intended to make multiple awards of indefinite-quantity contracts for each sector. With regard to source selection, offerors were advised that contract awards would be made on a "best value" basis and that proposals would be evaluated with regard to cost/price and the following technical factors, listed in descending order of importance: personnel, technical approach, past performance, and management plan. /1/ Agency Report, Tab 5, RFP, at 78. The solicitation provided that the technical factors would be "significantly more important" than cost/price. Agency Report, Tab 5, RFP, at 76. With regard to the evaluation factor for assessing proposed technical approach, offerors were required to respond in two parts. First, offerors were directed to address various sample tasks contained within the solicitation. /2/ Second, offerors were required to discuss their understanding and general approach to performing the contract requirements of each performance sector. /3/ On or before the March 24 closing date, the agency received 5 proposals, including C&M's, responding to the tuberculosis requirements, and 12 proposals, including C&M's, responding to the global health sector requirements. /4/ Thereafter, separate technical evaluation panels (TEP) evaluated the proposals for the respective sectors. /5/ In evaluating C&M's proposal to perform the tuberculosis requirements, the TEP identified multiple weaknesses and/or deficiencies under each of the technical evaluation factors; /6/ C&M's technical proposal was ranked 4th of the 5 proposals submitted. More specifically, in evaluating C&M's tuberculosis proposal under the single evaluation factor for assessing technical approach, the TEP identified [deleted] deficiencies and [deleted] "significant" weaknesses, /7/ and assigned C&M's proposal an adjectival rating of [deleted] under that evaluation factor. Agency Report, Tab 12, at 4-6. Similarly, in evaluating C&M's proposal to perform the global health requirements, the TEP identified [deleted] significant weaknesses under the various technical evaluation factors; /8/ C&M's technical proposal to perform the global health requirements was ranked 11th of the 12 proposals submitted.