B-311265, Hogar Crea, Inc., May 27, 2008

B-311265 May 27, 2008 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Hogar Crea, Inc. (HCI) protests the award of a contract to Volunteers of America, Inc. (VOA) under request for proposals (RFP) No. 200-0951-SE, issued by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) for residential reentry center (RRC) services for federal offenders in the San Juan, Puerto Rico metropolitan area. HCI contends that the BOP's evaluation of the offerors' proposals was unreasonable, and that the source selection decision was flawed. We deny the protest. View Decision B-311265, Hogar Crea, Inc., May 27, 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: Hogar Crea, Inc. File: B-311265 Date: May 27, 2008 Jos- R. Olmo-Rodrguez, Esq., Olmo & Rodr-guez Matias, for the protester. Joseph Summerill, Esq., and David P. Goodwin, Esq., Greenberg Traurig LLP, for Volunteers of America, Inc., an intervenor. Carl Jorgensen, Esq., and Bradley J. Breslin, Esq., Bureau of Prisons, Department of Justice, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and Ralph O. White, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging agency's evaluation of offerors' technical proposals is denied where record supports reasonableness of the evaluations. 2. Protest challenging the reasonableness of the agency's source selection decision is denied where the record supports the agency's determination that protester's high-priced proposal did not merit award despite offering certain strengths as compared to awardee's proposal. DECISION Hogar Crea, Inc. (HCI) protests the award of a contract to Volunteers of America, Inc. (VOA) under request for proposals (RFP) No. 200-0951-SE, issued by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) for residential reentry center (RRC) services for federal offenders in the San Juan, Puerto Rico metropolitan area. HCI contends that the BOP's evaluation of the offerors' proposals was unreasonable, and that the source selection decision was flawed. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP sought proposals to provide RRC services through a comprehensive community-based program for offenders who are in the custody of the BOP, the U.S. Attorney General, or under the supervision of the U.S. Probation Office. The RRC program seeks services to provide employment, residence development, and other self-improvement opportunities to assist federal offenders in becoming law-abiding citizens. Offerors were required to propose all personnel, management, equipment, supplies, and services to operate an RRC, along with the facility where the RRC will be located. The RFP anticipated award of an indefinite-delivery/requirements-type contract with fixed unit prices, with a 2-year base term and three 1-year options. Offerors were advised that proposals would be evaluated on the basis of the following factors: past performance, technical/management, and price. The technical/management evaluation factor had the following equally-weighted subfactors: site location (which had two sub-criteria: site validity and suitability, and community relations program), accountability, programs, facility, and personnel. The RFP stated that for purposes of award, the past performance factor was more important than the technical/management factor, and that those two factors, when combined, were –significantly more important than price.— RFP sect. M.5. As relevant here, offerors were required to submit plans demonstrating their ability to provide an RRC facility within 120 days of contract award. Id. sect. J, Compliance Matrix, at 9. Offerors were also required to submit letters of support from members of the community where the RRC will be located, to notify local government and law enforcement officials of the proposed location, and to document any known concerns or potential opposition from the community to the placement of the RRC. Id. at 5-6. HCI and VOA were the only offerors to submit proposals by the closing date of April 6, 2007. As relevant here, HCI proposed to perform the contract at a location owned by the company, where it currently provides RRC services to the BOP. VOA proposed to perform the contract at a site that required renovations to comply with the solicitation requirements. The agency sent discussions notices to each offeror on July 19, 2007, to address deficiencies and concerns regarding their proposals. Among the concerns identified for VOA were its lack of a final lease agreement, and its lack of evidence that it had received zoning approval for its proposed facility. Agency Report (AR), Tab 3, VOA Discussions Questions, July 19, 2007, at 1-2.