B-296307; B-296307.2, Delta Dental of California, July 28, 2005

B-296307; B-296307.2, Delta Dental of California, July 28, 2005 TITLE: B-296307; B-296307.2, Delta Dental of California, July 28, 2005 BNUMBER: B-296307; B-296307.2 DATE: July 28, 2005 *************************************************************** B-296307; B-296307.2, Delta Dental of California, July 28, 2005 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. Decision Matter of: Delta Dental of California File: B-296307; B-296307.2 Date: July 28, 2005 Patricia A. Meagher, Esq., Neil H. O'Donnell, Esq., Thomas D. Blanford, Esq., Mark A. Kahn, Esq., and David F. Innes, Esq., Rogers Joseph O'Donnell & Phillips, and Robert S. Ryland, Esq., and Nicole E. Goldstein, Esq., Kirkland & Ellis, for the protester. David P. Metzger, Esq., Michele Mintz Brown, Esq., Anand V. Ramana, Esq., and Stuart Turner, Esq., Holland & Knight, for United Concordia Companies, Inc., an intervenor. Rhonda L. Bershok, Esq., and Kenneth Lieb, Esq., TRICARE Management Activity, Department of Defense, 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 Protester's allegation that the agency's evaluation of its proposal was unreasonable, unfair, and inconsistent with the stated evaluation criteria is denied where the record shows that the agency's evaluation was reasonable, and that the solicitation's evaluation criteria were fairly and consistently applied in the agency's assessment of both the protester's and the awardee's proposals. DECISION Delta Dental of California protests the award of a contract to United Concordia Companies, Inc. (UCCI), by the Department of Defense's (DOD) TRICARE Management Activity, pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. H94002-04-R-0002, issued to procure dental insurance services for eligible beneficiaries who volunteer to enroll in TRICARE's dental plan. Delta argues that the agency conducted a flawed evaluation of technical proposals, and failed to perform a reasonable price realism evaluation. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND Under 10 U.S.C. sect. 1076(a) (Supp. II 2002) the Secretary of Defense is authorized to establish a voluntary enrollment dental plan (hereinafter, the TRICARE dental program) for eligible family members of active duty uniformed services personnel, members of the Selected Reserve and the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), their eligible family members, and certain eligible survivors. Agency Report (AR) at 1. For some program participants the government pays a share of the premiums assessed for enrollment in the program; for others, the government does not pay a share. Specifically, the government pays 60 percent of the premium for family members of active duty personnel, Selected Reserve members and mobilized members of the IRR, and 100 percent of the premiums for eligible survivor beneficiaries, but pays no share of the premium charged to non-mobilized IRR members and eligible family members of Reservists. Contracting Officer's (CO) Statement at 2-3. The RFP for a contractor to operate the TRICARE dental program was issued on September 15, 2004. The contractor will be required to provide dental insurance services, establish a network of participating dental providers, and provide claims processing and customer service functions. The RFP anticipated the award of a fixed-price plus award fee requirements contract for a base period followed by up to five 1-year options.[1] RFP at 2-8, 53, 72. The price for this contract, in essence, is the sum of the government's share of premiums charged by the contractor to enrolled beneficiaries. The range of dental benefits to be provided to eligible beneficiaries who elect to enroll in the TRICARE dental program are not only set forth in the solicitation, but are prescribed by the statute and by the implementing regulation, which were incorporated by reference into section C of the RFP. RFP at 9. In addition, section C included a statement of objectives representing "the desired outcomes of this contract." Id. The introduction to the statement of objectives explained that "[t]he objectives are supported by technical requirements throughout section C." The objectives of this contract are described as follows: Increase [TRICARE dental program] enrollment and increase utilization of diagnostic and preventive services by enrolled members. Increase enrollment of Selected Reserve and Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) personnel in pay grades E-1 through E-4.