US21, Inc.

B-415045.9 Sep 10, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights US21, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the award of a contract to Blue Force, Inc., of Hampton, Virginia, under solicitation No. SAQMMA-17-R-0213, issued by the Department of State for support services for the agency's mission in supporting the Palestinian Authority Security Forces (PASF) program. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably evaluated Blue Force's past performance. We sustain the protest. We sustain 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:  US21, Inc.   File:  B-415045.9  Date:  September 10, 2018 Christopher R. Shiplett, Esq., Randolph Law, PLLC, for the protester. Daniel P. Hanlon, Esq., and Ronald S. Perlman, Esq., Holland and Knight, LLP, for Blue Force, Inc., the intervenor. Kathleen D. Martin, Esq., Department of State, for the agency. Mary G. Curcio, Esq., and Laura Eyester, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s past performance is sustained where the record shows that the evaluation was inconsistent with the terms of the solicitation and not adequately documented. DECISION US21, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the award of a contract to Blue Force, Inc., of Hampton, Virginia, under solicitation No. SAQMMA-17-R-0213, issued by the Department of State for support services for the agency’s mission in supporting the Palestinian Authority Security Forces (PASF) program.  The protester contends that the agency unreasonably evaluated Blue Force’s past performance.  We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The Department of State, Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), is working in partnership with the United States Security Coordinator towards strengthening the skills, competencies, and abilities of the Palestinian Authority to provide law enforcement, security, and public safety in the West Bank.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 2A, Statement of Work (SOW), at 2.  The contractor selected under this solicitation will support the Department of State in this mission.  Among other things, the contractor will be required to conduct investigations into matters concerning security, safety, property accountability, misconduct, employee injuries and automobile accidents; ensure coordination and cooperation with other programs operating in the West Bank; provide suitable lodging to contractor personnel; provide morale, welfare, and recreation services for training mentors and subject matter experts; provide a warehouse to receive and store supplies and equipment; recruit qualified training mentors and subject matter experts; provide interpreters and translators; provide mentoring and advice to Palestinian counterparts to enhance the capabilities of the PASF to provide public security and law enforcement in the West Bank; provide specialized training to members of the PASF; and procure and deliver equipment.  Id. at 2-4, 16-17.  The solicitation, a small business set-aside issued on March 1, 2017, provided for the award of a contract on a best-value tradeoff basis considering price, and the following non-price factors:  technical approach; personnel management; and past performance and capacity.  AR, Tab 1, Request for Proposals (RFP), at 69.[1]  As relevant here, with respect to past performance and capacity, the solicitation required offerors to identify at least four contracts performed within the past 5 years that demonstrated relevant past performance.  Id. at 60, 70.  Past performance information could also be submitted for subcontractors.  AR Supp., Tab 6, amend. 3, at 1.  For each past performance example, offerors were required to include the instrument number, the name of the organization, a reference’s contact number, the funding amount, the performance period, the place of performance, and a brief description of the work performed.  RFP at 60.  The solicitation advised offerors that past performance would be evaluated for contracts that were consistent with the size, scope, and complexity of the solicitation’s objectives.  Id. at 70.  The solicitation further advised that contracts that were technically relevant to PASF training and logistics, and similar in size, scope, and complexity to the instant solicitation, would receive greater consideration than less relevant contracts.  Id.  Past performance was to be assigned a rating of substantial confidence, satisfactory confidence, unknown confidence, limited confidence, or no confidence.[2]  Id.