Washington Adventist Hospital, B-294371.3; B-294371.4, January 21, 2005

Case: B-294371.3 Agency: Protester: Washington Adventist Hospital, B Date: 2005-01-21 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
Washington Adventist Hospital, B-294371.3; B-294371.4, January 21, 2005 TITLE: Washington Adventist Hospital, B-294371.3; B-294371.4, January 21, 2005 BNUMBER: B-294371.3; B-294371.4 DATE: January 21, 2005 ********************************************************************** Decision Matter of: Washington Adventist Hospital File: B-294371.3; B-294371.4 Date: January 21, 2005 Paul M. Vincent, Esq., and E. John Steren, Esq., Ober, Kaler, Grimes & Shriver, for the protester. Douglas W. Kornreich, Esq., Department of Health and Human Services, for the agency. Mary G. Curcio, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST In solicitation for hospital to partner with agency in establishing cardiothoracic surgery branch, geographical restriction requiring hospital to be within 10-minute walk or 5-minute drive from agency campus is reasonable where record shows restriction is necessary to meet agency's programmatic needs, which include quick accessibility to campus and hospital due to frequent interaction between program members in different locations. DECISION Washington Adventist Hospital (WAH) protests the geographical restriction in solicitation No. NHLBI-HI-05-18, issued by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), for a hospital to partner with the agency in establishing a cardiothoracic surgery branch (CTSB). We deny the protest. Prior to 1990, as part of its intramural research branch, NHLBI included a CTSB, which linked basic laboratory research and clinical investigation and served as a research and training program for surgeons. NHLBI desires to reestablish the CTSB, but does not have the facilities or staff to provide treatment for patients requiring acute or emergency cardiac care. As a result, the agency determined that the best way to accomplish its goals was to collaborate with an outside hospital, with surgeries taking place there and research being performed at the hospital and at the NHLBI laboratory. NHLBI further determined that it would be necessary for the hospital to be in close proximity to the agency's research laboratory, in order to minimize the time spent by program participants traveling between the two facilities, and to maximize the time they could devote to research activities while also responding to patient needs. Consequently, in its November 4, 2004, "sources sought" synopsis, the agency announced its intention to award a sole-source contract to Suburban Hospital, the only hospital a short distance from NHLBI. Among other things, the synopsis stated the requirement that the offeror be within a 5-minute drive or a 10-minute walk of the NHLBI campus; only Suburban Hospital meets this restriction. WAH, which is approximately 9.2 to 10.8 miles and 15 to 22 minutes from the campus by car (the protester's and agency's calculations differ), challenges the proposed sole-source award on the basis that the geographical restriction is not warranted. WAH asserts that its facilities are close enough to the NHLBI campus for the program to succeed, and that it would bring other benefits to the program--such as its experience as a leading cardiac-surgery institution and the fact that, unlike Suburban Hospital, it has existing facilities--that, overall, would make it a better choice than Suburban Hospital. A contracting agency has the primary responsibility for determining its minimum needs and the best method of accommodating them. Daniel Tech., Inc., B-288853, Dec. 13, 2001, 2001 CPD P 203. An agency properly may restrict a procurement to offerors within a specified area if it shows that the restriction is reasonably necessary for the agency to meet its needs. Imperial 400 Motor Inn, B-227270, Aug. 21, 1987, 87-2 CPD P 192. NHLBI has shown that the geographical restriction here is necessary to meet its needs. Key to the CTSB that the agency has in mind is the concept--based on the academic model--of a medical campus, where close proximity of the hospital and laboratory will facilitate the close daily interaction between NHLBI personnel, hospital personnel and patients that is necessary to permit the desired intellectual integration between basic science, clinical investigations and patient care. More specifically, it is intended that the surgeons in the laboratory will collaborate with the basic investigators in the Division of Intramural Research in the NHLBI building. The research products will then be translated into clinical investigations at the collaborating hospital in a "bench-to-bedside" approach. Draft Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition at 2.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...