Platinum Business Corporation

B-415584 Jan 18, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Platinum Business Corporation (PBC), of Laurel, Maryland, protests the award of a contract to Vesa Health & Technology, Inc., of San Antonio, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. HSCG23-17-R-P1C000, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, United States Coast Guard, for multidisciplinary personal healthcare services. PBC asserts that the agency improperly waived material solicitation requirements when evaluating the awardee's price proposal. 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:  Platinum Business Corporation File:  B-415584 Date:  January 18, 2018 A. Jeff Ifrah, Esq., George R. Calhoun, Esq., and Whitney A. Fore, Esq., Ifrah PLLC, for the protester. Barbara A. Duncombe, Esq., Suzanne Sumner, Esq., and Erin R. Davis, Esq., Taft Stettinius & Hollister, LLP, for Vesa Health & Technology, an intervenor. William H. Butterfield, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Todd C. Culliton, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest is denied where the record shows that the agency did not waive material terms of the solicitation and the protester failed to demonstrate that it suffered any competitive prejudice resulting from the agency's actions. DECISION Platinum Business Corporation (PBC), of Laurel, Maryland, protests the award of a contract to Vesa Health & Technology, Inc., of San Antonio, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. HSCG23-17-R-P1C000, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, United States Coast Guard, for multidisciplinary personal healthcare services.  PBC asserts that the agency improperly waived material solicitation requirements when evaluating the awardee's price proposal. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The Coast Guard issued the RFP on April 28, 2017, as a small business set-aside, for multidisciplinary personal healthcare services to be performed within three regions (i.e., North, South, and West).  The RFP contemplated one fixed-price contract award for all three regions or separate fixed-price contract awards for each region.  RFP at 37.  Services were to be performed over a 1-year base period and four 1-year option periods.  RFP at 4.  Proposals were to be evaluated, on a best-value tradeoff basis, using three factors:  technical and management approach, past performance, and price.  RFP, amend. 00002 at 2-4.  Following the close of the solicitation period, the agency distributed pricing spreadsheets to all offerors.  Contracting Officer's Declaration, Nov. 15, 2017, at 1.  The offerors were provided the following instruction: You are being contacted because you submitted a timely response to the United States Coast Guard Solicitation for Multidiscipline Healthcare Services under Request for Proposal Number #HSCG23-17-R-P1C000.  If you are still interested in your proposal being considered for award, you SHALL COMPLETE AND RETURN the information on the attached spreadsheet to [agency officials no later than] MIDNIGHT, EST, MONDAY[,] SEPTEMBER 18, 2017.  If you DID NOT propose on a specific region, you are asked to annotate on the specific worksheet.  You are instructed NOT to change the NTE FIXED amounts stated for the ADDITIONAL SERVICES or the TRAVEL. E-mail from Agency to Offerors, Sept. 15, 2017.  The e-mail cautioned that any offerors who failed to complete and return the pricing spreadsheet would have their proposals evaluated as non-responsive and would be eliminated from consideration for award.  Id. The pricing spreadsheet contained eight tabs.  Agency Report (AR), attach. 3, Vesa Pricing Spreadsheet.  Tab 1 requested identifying information, including the offeror's name, address, and contact information.  Id.  In Tabs 2-6, offerors were required to provide pricing for the base period and the option periods.  Id.  These tabs also included fixed amounts for additional services in all three regions and travel in the West region.  Id.  Tab 7 required offerors to provide any phase-in pricing information.  Id.  Tab 8 required offerors to provide the total price for all base and option periods.  Id. PBC and Vesa both submitted pricing spreadsheets in response to the e-mail.  PBC's spreadsheet included all requested information but was not formatted to include the fixed amounts for additional services and travel in its total price.  Agency Request for Dismissal, PBC Pricing Spreadsheet.  Vesa's spreadsheet did not include a completed Tab 1, but the requested identifying information was provided in its e-mail cover letter.  AR, attach.