B-298840.2, Global Analytic Information Technology Services, Inc., February 6, 2007

B-298840.2 Feb 06, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Global Analytic Information Technology Services, Inc. (GAITS), the incumbent contractor, protests the award of a contract to Information Technology Experts, Inc. (ITE) under request for proposals (RFP) No. AG-3142-S-06-0039, issued by the Department of Agriculture for end-user information technology support services. GAITS asserts that the agency applied an undisclosed factor in evaluating its proposal and improperly engaged in discussions with only the awardee. We sustain the protest. View Decision B-298840.2, Global Analytic Information Technology Services, Inc., February 6, 2007 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: Global Analytic Information Technology Services, Inc. File: B-298840.2 Date: February 6, 2007 William T. Welch, Esq., Barton, Baker, McMahon & Tolle, LLP, for the protester. James H. Roberts, III, Esq., and Carrol H. Kinsey, Jr., Esq., Van Skoyoc Kelly, PLLC, for Information Technology Experts, Inc., an intervenor. Elin M. Dugan, Esq., Department of Agriculture, for the agency. Scott H. Riback, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Agency improperly downgraded protester's proposal for failing to include information showing methods for achieving cost or time savings, where such a consideration was not a stated basis for evaluation. 2. Protest that agency improperly engaged in discussions solely with awardee is sustained where awardee was permitted to submit required price escalation rate after conclusion of its oral presentation, notwithstanding agency's specific instructions that such pricing information be furnished at outset of oral presentation. DECISION Global Analytic Information Technology Services, Inc. (GAITS), the incumbent contractor, protests the award of a contract to Information Technology Experts, Inc. (ITE) under request for proposals (RFP) No. AG-3142-S-06-0039, issued by the Department of Agriculture for end-user information technology support services. GAITS asserts that the agency applied an undisclosed factor in evaluating its proposal and improperly engaged in discussions with only the awardee. We sustain the protest. The RFP contemplated the award of an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract to perform information technology support services for a base year, with four 1-year options. Offerors were advised that the agency would make award to the firm submitting the proposal deemed to be the –best value— to the government, considering price and non-price evaluation factors. Agency Report (AR) at BATES 345.[1] The evaluation factors, listed in descending order of importance, were past performance, methodology, and price. Offerors were to provide pricing in the form of –bare rates— (unburdened hourly labor rates), as well as –overhead rates— (expressed as a percentage of the bare rates) and –capped rates— (burdened rates that could not be exceeded during applicable periods of performance) for various labor categories. Id. at 344. The RFP further provided that the offerors' price structure would be evaluated for completeness, realism, and reasonableness. Id. at 345. Initial proposals were to include pricing information for the base year only. Id. at 344. The RFP provided that initial proposals would be evaluated to establish a competitive range. Offerors whose proposals were in the competitive range would be invited to make oral presentations. The RFP advised that the oral presentations would not constitute discussions, but offerors were advised in the agency's letters inviting them to make oral presentations that certain additional information was required to be provided at the oral presentations--including option-year pricing--and that this information had to be submitted in writing at the start of each firm's presentation. AR at 241-43. Thus, as relevant here, the RFP provided a common cut'off time--the start of oral presentations--for the submission of option year pricing. The agency received and evaluated numerous initial proposals. Based on the initial evaluation, it established a competitive range of 10 proposals, including the protester's and awardee's; both proposals received overall adjectival ratings of exceptional.[2] The agency then afforded the competitive range firms an opportunity to make oral presentations; thereafter, the agency evaluated the presentations and arrived at composite adjectival ratings that considered both the initial proposals and the oral presentations. GAITS included only base year prices in its initial proposal, as the RFP instructed, and then included a pricing sheet covering all contract years in its oral presentation materials.