Castro & Company, LLC

B-414694 Aug 15, 2017 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Castro & Company, LLC, of Alexandria, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Acuity Consulting Inc., of Alexandria, Virginia, by the Department of Interior (DOI) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. D17PS00029. The procurement was conducted by DOI on behalf of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) to obtain financial statement audit services for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB). Castro challenges the agency's evaluation of quotations and the best-value award decision. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Castro & Company, LLC File:  B-414694 Date:  August 15, 2017 Thomas Castro, for the protester. William B. Blake, Esq., Department of the Interior, for the agency. Paula A. Williams, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the issuance of a Federal Supply Schedule task order to a technically-superior, higher-priced vendor is denied where the record shows the best-value determination was reasonably based on qualitative differences between the competing quotations. DECISION Castro & Company, LLC, of Alexandria, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Acuity Consulting Inc., of Alexandria, Virginia, by the Department of Interior (DOI) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. D17PS00029.  The procurement was conducted by DOI on behalf of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) to obtain financial statement audit services for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB).  Castro challenges the agency's evaluation of quotations and the best-value award decision. We deny the protest.[1] BACKGROUND The agency issued the RFQ as a small business set-aside under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4, to vendors holding indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts under General Services Administration (GSA) Schedule 00CORP, special item number 520-7 (GSA Schedule 520), Professional Services Schedule.  RFQ at 1. According to the RFQ's detailed statement of work (SOW) the successful vendor will provide all staff, including key personnel, necessary to complete the required tasks and deliverables associated with annual financial statement audits.[2]  The annual financial statement audits of NRC and DNFSB are intended to meet current audit requirements for financial statements and to assist agency management and the OIG in assessing the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting and compliance with laws and regulations.  SOW at 1.  The RFQ anticipated the issuance of a single, fixed-price task order with a 1-year base period and four 1-year option periods to the vendor with the quotation representing the best value to the government.  Quotations were to be evaluated under the following factors (and related subfactors[3]) listed in descending order of importance:  (1) past performance; (2) technical and management approach; (3) personnel qualifications; (4) organizational experience; (5) generally accepted government accounting standards (GAGAS) compliance; (6) writing sample; and (7) price.[4]  The RFQ provided that the non-price factors were significantly more important than price and that the government reserved the right to make award to other than the lowest-priced vendor if another superior technical quotation or a quotation with a low performance risk warranted paying a price premium.  RFQ at 13-14. The past performance factor was comprised of three subfactors:  (1) degree to which the past performance provided is recent; (2) vendor's experience and history of successful completion of projects; and (3) likelihood of successful performance.  Id. at 14.  The technical and management approach factor had three subfactors:  (1) vendors' understanding of the objectives of the SOW and planned execution of the project; (2) vendors' understanding of logistics, schedule, and other miscellaneous issues as demonstrated through a detailed transition plan; and (3) evidence of specific methods and techniques for completing each discrete task as detailed in a draft project management plan.  Id.  The personnel qualifications factor was comprised of four subfactors:  (1) the currency, quality, and depth of personnel who will supervise and coordinate the workforce; (2) the currency, quality, and depth of experience of the individual personnel proposed with regards to projects and programs that are similar in magnitude and scope; (3) the experience of key personnel with respect to tasks specified in the SOW and their degree of qualifications; and (4) evidence of appropriate security clearances for proposed personnel.  Id.