Quality Control International, LLC

B-417984 Dec 20, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Quality Control International, LLC (QCI), a small business of Federal Heights, Colorado, protests the General Service Administration (GSA), Public Buildings Service's award of a contract to Phoenix Management Inc., of Austin, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 47PJ0018R0027, for facilities maintenance services. QCI challenges the agency's conduct of discussions, and the 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:  Quality Control International, LLC File:  B-417984 Date:  December 20, 2019 David A. Rose, Esq., Law Offices of Rose Consulting, LLC, for the protester.  Kristin E. Zachman, Esq., and Johnathan M. Bailey, Esq., Bailey & Bailey, PC, for Phoenix Management, Inc., the intervenor.  Robert W. Schlattman, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency.  Evan C. Williams, Esq., and Amy B. Pereira, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency misled and coerced protester to increase its price is denied where record shows the agency accurately and in good faith, expressed its concern related to the realism of the protester’s proposed price, and that the protester exercised its own business judgment in raising its prices. DECISION Quality Control International, LLC (QCI), a small business of Federal Heights, Colorado, protests the General Service Administration (GSA), Public Buildings Service’s award of a contract to Phoenix Management Inc., of Austin, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 47PJ0018R0027, for facilities maintenance services.  QCI challenges the agency’s conduct of discussions, and the source selection decision. BACKGROUND On May 1, 2018, the agency issued the RFP, as a small business set-aside, pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation parts 12 and 15.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFP at 1.  The RFP sought proposals to provide maintenance services for multiple GSA facilities in Montana.  RFP at 3.  Under the solicitation, services were to include mechanical maintenance, custodial services, grounds maintenance, snow removal, and pest control services.  Id. at 3, 21.  The RFP contemplated the award of a fixed price contract--to include an indefinite delivery component--with a base period of one year and four option years.  Id. at 99, 133.  The RFP provided that award was to be made on a best-value tradeoff basis to the offeror whose proposal “provides the greatest overall value to the Government, price and other factors considered.”  Id. at 220. Proposals were to be evaluated based on the following non-price factors of equal importance:  staffing plan, management plan, experience, and past performance.  Id. at 220.  The non-price factors, when combined, were to be considered approximately equal to price.  Id. at 220. As relevant to this protest, the RFP stated that proposals would be evaluated for “low price, price reasonableness, price realism and balance.”  Id. at 222.  The RFP further advised that offerors whose prices were unbalanced, unreasonable, or unrealistic, could be rejected as unacceptable.  Id. The agency received multiple proposals prior to the June 6, 2018 closing date, including those of QCI and Phoenix.  Combined Contracting Officer’s Statement and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 2.  The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) evaluated proposals and established a competitive range, including QCI and Phoenix.  Id. at 4.  The agency evaluated QCI’s initial proposal, and as relevant here, the agency’s price evaluation of QCI’s proposal noted multiple issues.  First, the agency found QCI’s proposed general and administrative (commonly referred to as “G&A”), overhead, and profit rates to be unreasonably high.  AR, Tab 3, SSEB Report (Initial Proposals), at 1, 3.  Second, the agency found that several of QCI’s cost elements were potentially unrealistic, and that QCI’s overall proposed price of $6,009,580 was unrealistically low.  Id.