Integrity Management Consulting, Inc.

B-417942 Dec 16, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Integrity Management Consultants, Inc., of Tysons, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) under the Federal Supply Schedule with Booth Management Consulting, LLC, of Columbia, Maryland, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 28321319Q00000343, issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA) for professional acquisition, budget, and finance support personnel. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably found Integrity's price to be unrealistic. 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:  Integrity Management Consulting, Inc. File:  B-417942 Date:  December 16, 2019 Thomas K. David, Esq., Kenneth D. Brody, Esq., and Katherine A. David, Esq., David, Brody & Dondershine, LLP, for the protester. Dorothy M. Guy, Esq., and Tal Kedem, Esq., Social Security Administration, for the agency.  Kenneth Kilgour, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protester’s contention that the agency unreasonably evaluated the protester’s price as unrealistic is denied where the record reflects that the agency’s evaluation adhered to the solicitation’s evaluation scheme. DECISION Integrity Management Consultants, Inc., of Tysons, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) under the Federal Supply Schedule with Booth Management Consulting, LLC, of Columbia, Maryland, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 28321319Q00000343, issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA) for professional acquisition, budget, and finance support personnel.  The protester contends that the agency unreasonably found Integrity’s price to be unrealistic. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFQ, issued pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation § 8.405‑3 and set aside for small businesses, contemplated the establishment of a single blanket purchase agreement for professional support services with the vendor whose quotation was most advantageous to the government, considering past performance, corporate experience, and price.  Agency Report (AR), exh. 1, RFQ at 40, 94-96.  Each vendor’s quotation was to be submitted in two volumes--one was termed a technical volume and the other a business volume.  Id. at 92.  Notwithstanding the instructions to vendors to provide a “technical volume,” past performance and corporate experience were the only non-price matters to be addressed in the technical volume; the RFQ’s evaluation scheme did not include a technical approach factor.  The RFQ provided that past performance was more important than corporate experience; those two non-price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price.  Id. at 96-97.  The BPA would have a total possible term of 5 years--a 1-year base period and four 1-year options.  Id. at 41. In their business volumes, the RFQ required vendors to complete a pricing table spreadsheet found at section D, attachment 2 of the RFQ.  Vendors were required to identify their labor category that met the RFQ’s requirements for particular positions.  The agency provided the estimated required hours.  Vendors were to fill in their discounted rates for each labor category.  The solicitation requested no other information regarding pricing.  See RFQ at 94.  The RFQ advised vendors that the agency sought “price reductions” in the vendor’s GSA schedule labor rates.  Id. at 94.  The RFQ included the following note, in red, regarding price quotations:  “Note:  Although we seek price reductions, schedule contractors are strongly discouraged from providing discounts that result in rates that are so low that they could reflect a lack of technical understanding.”  Id.  (emphasis in original).  The agency would derive a total price for each vendor by having the spreadsheet multiply the total estimated hours for each labor category by the quoted discounted labor rates to derive an estimated annual price per labor category.  Id. at 97.  The totals for each labor category would then be added together to arrive at a total price per period.  Id.  In addition to calculating a total price, the RFQ advised vendors that the agency would perform a price realism analysis to determine whether the hourly rates for each labor category “are so low that they do not accurately reflect the prevailing market rates for individuals with the qualifications” sought, and therefore evidence a lack of technical understanding.  Id. at 97-98.  The RFQ stated that “[a] quotation will be rejected for offering excessively low rates that demonstrate a lack of technical understanding.”  Id.