Jefferson Consulting Group, LLC

B-417555,B-417555.2 Aug 16, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Jefferson Consulting Group, LLC, of Washington, D.C., protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) and award of an initial task order (TO 0001) by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to Garud Technology Services (GTS), pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ) No. 70FA2019Q00000003, for acquisition management support services. Jefferson protests various aspects of the agency's evaluation and source selection decision. 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:  Jefferson Consulting Group, LLC File:  B-417555; B-417555.2 Date:  August 16, 2019 Stuart W. Turner, Esq., Kristen E. Ittig, Esq., and Michael E. Samuels, Esq., Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, LLP, for the protester. John E. Jensen, Esq., and Robert C. Starling, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, for the intervenor. Rina E. Martinez, Esq., and Hillary J. Freund, Esq., Department of Homeland Security,  for the agency. Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., John Sorrenti, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Agency reasonably evaluated the protester’s and awardee’s corporate experience as only somewhat relevant, where neither contractor’s experience was comparable to the size of the protested procurement. 2.  Agency reasonably assigned a weakness/risk to protester’s proposed staffing for proposing only senior-level labor categories, where solicitation provided that the agency would consider the efficiency of a contractor’s proposed approach. 3.  Agency reasonably concluded that awardee’s proposed staffing levels, which were lower than the level reflected in the independent government cost estimate, did not present risk where the agency determined that the awardee’s approach reflected innovations and efficiencies. 4.  Agency was not required, nor permitted, to perform a price realism evaluation where the solicitation did not provide for that assessment. DECISION Jefferson Consulting Group, LLC, of Washington, D.C., protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) and award of an initial task order (TO 0001) by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to Garud Technology Services (GTS), pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ) No. 70FA2019Q00000003, for acquisition management support services.  Jefferson protests various aspects of the agency’s evaluation and source selection decision.  We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On December 10, 2018, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4, the agency issued RFQ No. 70FA2019Q00000003 to contractors holding General Services Administration (GSA) professional services schedule contracts with special item number (SIN) 874-6 for acquisition management services, seeking a contractor to “support and enhance Mitigation and Insurance procurement related activities.”  Agency Report (AR), Tab D, RFQ attach. A, at 50.  The single-award BPA and TO 0001 are intended to provide acquisition management support services for FEMA’s Federal Insurance Mitigation Administration (FIMA)[1] during a 12‑month base period and four 12‑month option periods.  The solicitation advised contractors that the BPA had an estimated total value of $70 million.  RFQ at 2.  The RFQ provided that the BPA and TO 0001 would be awarded concurrently, and identified various “performance objectives” for both the BPA and TO 0001.[2]  As part of their quotations, contractors were directed to provide a performance work statement (PWS) for TO 0001 that addressed the contractor’s approach to meeting the stated TO 0001 objectives.[3]  The RFQ provided for award on the basis of a best-value tradeoff, and established the following evaluation factors, listed in descending order of importance:  (1) corporate experience; (2) PWS for TO 0001; (3) past performance; (4) key personnel; (5) BPA management plan/technical approach; and (6) price.[4]  RFQ at 46‑49. On or before the February 28, 2019 closing date, quotations were submitted by five contractors, including Jefferson and GTS.[5]  Thereafter, the quotations were evaluated, and the agency assigned adjectival ratings under each evaluation factor that reflected the quotation’s evaluated strengths/benefits and/or weaknesses/risks.[6]  GTS’s and Jefferson’s quotations were evaluated as follows:   GTS Jefferson Corp. Experience Some Relevance Some Relevance TO 0001 PWS Excellent Good Past Performance High Confidence High Confidence Key Personnel Excellent Excellent BPA Mgmt./Tech.