B-297276.2; B-297276.3; B-297276.4, Information Ventures, Inc., March 1, 2006

B-297276.2; B-297276.3; B-297276.4, Information Ventures, Inc., March 1, 2006 TITLE: B-297276.2; B-297276.3; B-297276.4, Information Ventures, Inc., March 1, 2006 BNUMBER: B-297276.2; B-297276.3; B-297276.4 DATE: March 1, 2006 ***************************************************************************** B-297276.2; B-297276.3; B-297276.4, Information Ventures, Inc., March 1, 2006 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: Information Ventures, Inc. File: B-297276.2; B-297276.3; B-297276.4 Date: March 1, 2006 John S. Pachter, Esq., Jonathan D. Shaffer, Esq., Erin R. Karsman, Esq., David S. Stern, Esq., and Tamara F. Dunlap, Esq., Smith Pachter McWhorter & Allen PLC, for the protester. Stuart Turner, Esq., and Joseph P. Hornyak, Esq., Holland & Knight LLP, for BRI Consulting Group, an intervenor. Stuart C. Briles, Esq., Department of Health and Human Services, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest is sustained where agency failed to reconcile contradictory cost and technical evaluations regarding offerors' proposed staffing levels and unreasonably normalized offerors' proposed labor hours under its cost realism analysis. DECISION Information Ventures, Inc. (IVI) protests the award of a contract to BRI Consulting Group under request for proposals (RFP) 2005-N-01874, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for assistance and technical support for the agency's National Center for Chronic Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC). The protester challenges the reasonableness of the agency's evaluation of offerors' cost and technical proposals. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The agency sought proposals to assist the agency with information development and dissemination activities regarding a broad scope of priority cancer efforts. The statement of work required offerors to propose personnel, materials, supplies, equipment and technical support to achieve various assistance and technical support tasks, including response and tracking for government and public information inquiries, website design, content development and maintenance, web site promotion, exhibit design, maintenance and update of information knowledge bases and exhibit inventory, training, events and meeting planning, development of educational materials, publication development and promotion, and development of special reports. RFP at 6-14. The RFP anticipated the award of a cost-plus-fixed fee contract with a base performance period of 1 year, and four 1-year option periods. Id. at 3. The RFP advised offerors that proposals would be evaluated on the basis of technical strength, past performance, and cost, and stated that technical strength and cost would be of "approximately equal value" in the agency's award determination.[1] RFP at 51-52. The technical strength evaluation factor had four subfactors: methodologies and management approach (30 points), technical approach and understanding the requirement (30 points), qualifications of individuals (30 points), and understanding the purpose and objective (10 points). Id. at 51. The agency received and evaluated six proposals, and determined that only IVI's and BRI's proposals were the most highly rated, with scores of 98 and 99, respectively, and should be included in the competitive range. Contracting Officer's Statement at 3. The agency engaged in discussions with each of those two offerors and requested final proposal revisions (FPRs). The agency then conducted a cost realism analysis of IVI's and BRI's FPRs. AR, Tab 8, Cost Realism Analyses.