Undercover Training, LLC (W912LP-19-R-0010)

B-418170 Jan 09, 2020 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Undercover Training, LLC, a small business, of Brunswick, Georgia, protests the award of a contract to Professional Law Enforcement Training, LLC (PLET), a small business, of Dallas, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912LP-19-R-0010, which was issued by the Department of the Army, for the acquisition of technical instruction services for an "Undercover for Narcotics" course for the Midwest Counter Drug Training Center at Camp Dodge, Iowa. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of its proposal. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Undercover Training, LLC File:  B-418170 Date:  January 9, 2020 Charlie Fuller, for the protester. Captain Brian C. Habib, and Scott N. Flesch, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency Evan D. Wesser, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, 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 because the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Undercover Training, LLC, a small business, of Brunswick, Georgia, protests the award of a contract to Professional Law Enforcement Training, LLC (PLET), a small business, of Dallas, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912LP-19-R-0010, which was issued by the Department of the Army, for the acquisition of technical instruction services for an “Undercover for Narcotics” course for the Midwest Counter Drug Training Center at Camp Dodge, Iowa.  The protester challenges the agency’s evaluation of its proposal. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On August 8, 2019, the Army issued the RFP seeking commercial technical instruction services for undercover narcotics officers using the streamlined acquisition procedures under Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 12.6.  RFP at 1.  The procurement was set aside for small businesses and contemplated the award of a fixed-price contract, with a base period from the date of award through May 31, 2020, and four, 12‑month option periods.  Id., attach. No. 1, Performance Work Statement (PWS), at 1. Award was to be made on a best-value basis, considering three factors:  (1) technical; (2) past performance; and (3) price.  Id., attach. No. 2, Provisions & Clauses, at 6.  Technical and past performance, when combined, were approximately equal to price.  Id.  Only the technical factor is relevant to the issues presented in the protest. Under the technical factor, the agency was to assess the offeror’s ability to provide the PWS’ required course of instruction.  Id. at 8.  The technical factor included two equally weighted subfactors:  (1.1) course content; and (1.2) offeror/instructor qualifications.  Id.  Under the course content subfactor, the agency would evaluate the offeror’s inclusion of required course topics and ability to achieve the PWS’ learning objectives.  Id.  The PWS identified nine required courses/learning objectives, including undercover department policy and standard operating procedures and ethics.  Id., attach. No. 1, PWS, at 9.  The RFP warned offerors that the failure to submit the required course content information would result in a negative technical rating for the subfactor.  Id., attach. No. 2, Provisions & Clauses, at 8. As to offeror/instructor qualifications, the RFP set forth requirements for both the offeror and its proposed instructors; only the instructor qualifications are relevant here.  Offerors could propose the number of required instructors, but the RFP warned that “[e]ach proposed instructor must meet the minimum qualifications.”  Id. (emphasis in original).  The RFP required instructors to have a law enforcement training background, and to be currently engaged in training civilian law enforcement officers on basic and advanced street gang courses similar in length to the RFP’s requirements.  Id.  The RFP required instructors to have a minimum of 15 years of total law enforcement experience, including 10 years as a civilian gang enforcement officer, and 5 years as a civilian narcotics officer.  Id. at 9.  Instructors were also required to have at least 5 years of experience teaching basic and advanced street gang courses similar to the RFP’s requirements.  Id.  The RFP warned offerors that the failure to submit required instructor qualification information would result in a negative technical rating.  Id. The Army received five proposals in response to the RFP.  Army Request for Dismissal (RFD), exh.