National Sourcing, Inc.

B-411703.2 Mar 22, 2016 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights National Sourcing, Inc. (NSI), of Tampa, Florida, protests the Department of the Navy's award of a task order to Strategic Data Systems (SDS), of San Diego, California, pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ) No. N00024-15-R-3063 for services supporting the Naval Personnel Command's (NPC) customer service center. NSI, the incumbent contractor, asserts that the agency improperly evaluated NSI's quotation with regard to NSI's performance approach, and improperly evaluated SDS's quotation with regard to SDS's past performance. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision 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:  National Sourcing, Inc. File:  B-411703.2 Date:  March 22, 2016 Antonio R. Franco, Esq., Kathryn V. Flood, Esq., Julia Di Vito, Esq., and Jacqueline K. Unger, Esq., PilieroMazza PLLC, for the protester. Richard B. Oliver, Esq., J. Matthew Carter, Esq., and Meghan D. Doherty, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, for Strategic Data Systems, an intervenor. Paul C. Scheck, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest that agency unreasonably evaluated protester’s quotation as merely acceptable under the performance approach evaluation factor is denied where the agency reasonably identified multiple weaknesses in the protester’s quotation, including its inadequately-supported intent to significantly reduce staffing levels. 2.  Protest that agency unreasonably found awardee’s past performance to be relevant is denied where solicitation expressly advised vendors that past performance would be considered in the aggregate, and the awardee’s aggregate past performance was reasonably similar to the solicitation requirements.  DECISION National Sourcing, Inc. (NSI), of Tampa, Florida, protests the Department of the Navy’s award of a task order to Strategic Data Systems (SDS), of San Diego, California, pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ) No. N00024-15-R-3063 for services supporting the Naval Personnel Command’s (NPC) customer service center.  NSI, the incumbent contractor, asserts that the agency improperly evaluated NSI’s quotation with regard to NSI’s performance approach, and improperly evaluated SDS’s quotation with regard to SDS’s past performance.  We deny the protest. BACKGROUND In December 2014, the agency issued RFQ No. N00024-15-R-3063 to contractors holding SeaPort Enhanced (SeaPort-e) indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts.  The solicitation contemplated award of a task order to provide various services supporting NPC’s customer service center for a 12-month base period and four 1-year option periods.[1]  RFQ at 9.  The solicitation’s performance work statement (PWS) identified various tasks the contractor must perform within the following areas:  (1) customer service operations; (2) knowledge management system development, maintenance support, and CRM (customer relationship management) analytics; (3) emergency coordination center support; (4) transaction processing support; (5) remote location support; (6) website content/application development, maintenance and support; (7) site management support; and (8) other tasks.  RFQ at 10-19.  The solicitation provided for award on a best-value basis, considering the following evaluation factors:  performance approach, past performance, socio-economic, and cost/price.[2]  RFQ at 59. With regard to performance approach, the solicitation directed offerors to “provide in detail a performance approach that will successfully accomplish the requirements of the solicitation.”  RFQ at 56.  The solicitation elaborated that “[p]erformance [a]pproach is rated on how you plan to perform this effort, i.e., it is forward looking.”  Id. With regard to past performance, the solicitation directed vendors to identify up to 3 relevant contracts performed within the past 5 years, and defined “relevant” as performance “that is of similar scope and magnitude to that which is described in the solicitation.”  Id.  The solicitation specifically provided that “references will be evaluated in the aggregate in order to allow offerors who may not have the entire scope and magnitude of the requirement under one individual contract to still be considered acceptable if past performance with the full scope and magnitude of the requirement can be demonstrated within the allotted number of references.”  Id. With regard to cost/price, the solicitation identified various labor categories that were previously used to perform the required tasks and provided level-of-effort estimates, by contract period, for each labor category.[3]  RFQ at 4-5....