Software Engineering Services Corporation

B-415694 Feb 13, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights SysVets, LLC, a service-disabled veteran-owned business (SDVOSB) joint venture, located in Oxen Hill, Maryland, challenges the elimination of its proposal from consideration for award pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. QTA0016AWA0001, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) as an SDVOSB set-aside, to establish the Veterans Technology Services 2 government-wide acquisition contract to provide customized information technology (IT) services and IT services-based solutions. SysVets challenges the agency's evaluation of its proposal. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  SysVets, LLC File:  B-415694 Date:  February 13, 2018 Greg Yette, for the protester. Kenneth Brody, Esq., Thomas David, Esq., and Katherine David, Esq., David, Brody & Dondershine, LLP, for All Points Logistics, LLC, the intervenor. James T. Van Biber, Esq., and Fallyme E. Guerrero, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Nora K. Adkins, Esq., and Amy B. Pereira, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the protester’s proposal is denied where the proposal failed to comply with the solicitation requirement to provide documentation of an adequate accounting system for each joint venture member. DECISION SysVets, LLC, a service-disabled veteran-owned business (SDVOSB) joint venture[1], located in Oxen Hill, Maryland, challenges the elimination of its proposal from consideration for award pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. QTA0016AWA0001, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) as an SDVOSB set‑aside, to establish the Veterans Technology Services 2 government‑wide acquisition contract to provide customized information technology (IT) services and IT services‑based solutions.  SysVets challenges the agency’s evaluation of its proposal. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On April 21, 2016, the GSA issued the RFP pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation part 15.  RFP at 1[2].  The solicitation contemplated the award of up to 70 indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts on a best-value basis using a highest technically rated with a fair and reasonable price evaluation scheme.  Id. at 75, 105.  Under this scheme, offerors were to assign themselves points in the following categories:  relevant experience; past performance; systems, certifications, and clearances; and risk assessment.[3]  Id. at 109-110.  The RFP provided a total of 100,000 possible points under these categories, and further provided a detailed explanation of the point scheme, including the elements that make up the categories, and an explanation as to the required supporting documents.  Id. at 78-111. As relevant to this protest, the RFP provided 5,000 possible points for an offeror’s “Cost Accounting System.”  Id. at 110.  In order to establish that an offeror was entitled to the 5,000 points, the RFP stated that an offeror’s supporting documents must include verification from the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), or any Cognizant Federal Agency (CFA) of an acceptable accounting system that has been audited and determined adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract or order.  Id. at 96.  Offerors were required to provide the name, address, phone number, and email of the representative at their cognizant DCAA, DCMA, or CFA and submit, if available, a copy of the Pre-Award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System.  Id.  If the pre-award survey was not available, the offeror was required to submit a letter received from the auditing agency, on auditing agency letterhead, indicating unequivocally that the offeror’s accounting system was audited and determined adequate for cost reimbursement contracting.  Id.  With respect to joint ventures, the solicitation required documentation of a cost accounting system audit in the name of the joint venture itself or documentation in the name of each member of the joint venture.  Id. at 85. According to the RFP’s evaluation scheme, the agency would first rank all offerors by highest point score to lowest point score using the offeror’s self-scoring worksheet.  Id. at 106.  After the top 70 firms were identified, the evaluation team would evaluate and verify the supporting documentation for each evaluation element that was assigned points by the offeror in the self-scoring worksheet.  Id.  Once the offerors were evaluated and verified, the evaluation team would analyze the offerors’ pricing to determine whether it was fair and reasonable.  Id.