B-310716, Group GPS Multimedia, January 22, 2008

Case: B-310716 Agency: Protester: B Date: 2008-01-22 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-310716 Jan 22, 2008 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Group GPS Multimedia protests the award of a contract to K-MAR Industries, Inc., under request for proposals (RFP) No. W9124N-07-R-0004, issued by the Department of the Army, for audio-visual products and services. The protester argues that the agency's evaluation and selection of K-MAR's proposal for award were unreasonable. We deny the protest. View Decision B-310716, Group GPS Multimedia, January 22, 2008 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: Group GPS Multimedia File: B-310716 Date: January 22, 2008 Ryan P. Angle, Esq., for the protester. Capt. Megan E. Yoss, Department of the Army, for the agency. John L. Formica, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Awardee's proposal submitted in response to a solicitation for audio-visual products and services was reasonably evaluated, where the agency reasonably considered the awardee's proposed approach consistent with the evaluation factors set forth in the solicitation. 2. Awardee's proposal that included a particular labor category to perform service contract work was not legally objectionable where the proposal, submitted in response to a solicitation that provided for the award of a fixed-price contract, did not violate any solicitation provisions; contention that the use of the proposed labor category would violate the Service Contract Act will not be considered by GAO because it is a matter for consideration by the Department of Labor and whether contract requirements are met during the performance of the contract is a matter of contract administration. DECISION Group GPS Multimedia protests the award of a contract to K-MAR Industries, Inc., under request for proposals (RFP) No. W9124N-07-R-0004, issued by the Department of the Army, for audio-visual products and services. The protester argues that the agency's evaluation and selection of K-MAR's proposal for award were unreasonable. We deny the protest. The RFP, issued as a 100-percent set-aside for small businesses, provided for the award of a fixed-price contract for a base period of 11-months with four 1-year options. The contractor will be required to –provide all personnel, management, supervision, equipment, tools, supplies, materials, transportation, and any other items necessary— (with the exception of certain government-furnished property and services) to furnish the audio-visual products and services in accordance with the solicitation's performance work statement (PWS). RFP at 29. The tasks listed in the solicitation to be performed by the contractor include, for example, still photography products and services, video products and services, audio products and services, as well as media duplication and technical support. Id.The RFP also incorporated by reference Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) sect. 52.222-41, –Service Contract Act [SCA] of 1965,— and a wage determination applicable to the contract that established the minimum applicable SCA wages and benefits. RFP at 57-67, 121. The solicitation informed offerors that award would be made to the offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value to the government based upon the evaluation factors of technical capability, past performance, and price. The technical capability factor was comprised of three equally important evaluation subfactors: quality control plan, organizational structure/staffing, and management plan. The evaluation results under the technical capability factor were considered significantly more important than the evaluation results under the past performance factor, and the non-price factors combined were considered equal in importance to price, in determining which proposal represented the best value to the government. RFP amend. 4, at 44-45. The agency received proposals from seven offerors, including Group GPS and K'MAR. The record reflects that the two members of the technical evaluation team were unable to reach a consensus with regard to the overall rating to be assigned to the proposals of Group GPS and K-MAR under the technical capability factor, and given this, each evaluator prepared a memorandum detailing the bases for their respective determinations as well as their summary evaluation results.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...