B-310797; B-310797.3, CETENAGROUP, February 14, 2008

B-310797; B-310797.3, CETENAGROUP, February 14, 2008 TITLE: B-310797; B-310797.3, CETENAGROUP, February 14, 2008 BNUMBER: B-310797; B-310797.3 DATE: February 14, 2008 **************************************************** B-310797; B-310797.3, CETENAGROUP, February 14, 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: CETENAGROUP File: B-310797; B-310797.3 Date: February 14, 2008 Andrew A. Honegger, Esq., Husch & Eppenberger, LLC, for the protester. Daniel S. Koch, Esq., David P. Shapiro, Esq., and Tracey L. Perrick, Esq., Paley, Rothman, Goldstein, Eig & Cooper Chartered, for Lincoln Group, LLC, the intervenor. Lt. Col. David Newsome, Jr., Department of the Army, for the agency. Nora K. Adkins, Esq., Guy R. Pietrovito, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST An agency's evaluation of technical proposals is a matter within the agency's discretion since the agency is responsible for defining its needs and the best methods for accommodating them. DECISION CETENAGROUP protests the award of a contract to Lincoln Group, LLC by the Department of the Army under request for proposals (RFP) No. W91B4N-07-R-0060 for services supporting the agency's Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) information campaign effort. We deny the protest. JIEDDO was established to coordinate efforts among agencies to help eliminate the threat posed by improvised explosive devices. To this end, the RFP sought proposals for the synchronized and phased dissemination of approved billboards, flyers, posters, newspaper advertisements, television advertisements, radio messages, 60-minute television programs, and video compact discs in Afghanistan; this campaign seeks to, among other things, separate "the bomb makers and users from the support of the populace" and to "encourage the local populace to take responsibility for their communities and report suspicious activities." Contracting Officer's Statement at 1; RFP, Statement of Work (SOW), at 18. Issued under the simplified acquisition procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 13.5, the RFP provided for the award of a fixed-price, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract for a 6-month base period and one 6-month option period. Agency Report (AR) at 3. Offerors were informed that award would be made on the basis of a cost/technical tradeoff, and the following evaluation factors were identified: past performance, technical capability, Afghan socioeconomic plan, and price. The non-cost factors were stated to be of equal importance and when combined to be significantly more important than the price. Offerors were also informed that the agency intended to make award without conducting discussions. RFP at 67. Sixteen offerors, including the protester and awardee, submitted proposals in response to the RFP. CETENAGROUP's and Lincoln Group's proposals were evaluated as follows: +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | | CETENAGROUP | Lincoln Group | |------------------------------+--------------------+--------------------| |Past Performance | High Confidence | High Confidence | |------------------------------+--------------------+--------------------| |Technical Capability | Exceptional | Very Good | |------------------------------+--------------------+--------------------| |Afghan Socioeconomic Plan | Very Good | Very Good | |------------------------------+--------------------+--------------------| |Price | $17.8 million | $14.3 million | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ AR, Tab 23, Source Selection Decision, at 11. The source selection authority (SSA) concluded that although CETENAGROUP's proposal was rated higher under the technical capability factor than was Lincoln Group's, this superior technical evaluation rating did not outweigh Lincoln Group's $3.5 million price advantage. Id. at 12. Award was made to Lincoln. Following a debriefing, CETENAGROUP filed an agency-level protest, which the Army denied. AR at 2.