Consolidated Safety Services, Inc.

B-418221 Dec 30, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Consolidated Safety Services, Inc. (CSS), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) award of a contract to Bastion Technologies, Inc., pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 80ARC018R0006, to provide various support services for NASA's Ames Research Center at Moffett Field, California. CSS asserts that the agency's evaluation of CSS's proposal was flawed and, based on that assertion, that the best-value tradeoff determination was unreasonable. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Consolidated Safety Services, Inc. File:  B-418221 Date:  December 30, 2019 Joseph Craver for the protester. Barbara S. Kinosky, Esq., David R. Warner, Esq., Tyler J. Freiberger, Esq., and Heather B. Mims, Esq., Center Law and Consulting LLC, for Bastion Technologies, Inc., the intervenor. Grant L. Arnold, Esq., Daniel Hymer, Esq., and Paul H. Kim, Esq., National Aeronautics and Space Administration, for the agency. Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Agency reasonably assessed a weakness with regard to protester’s compensation plan where protester’s proposal specifically stated that the salaries proposed reflected salaries from a geographic region other than the region where the contract will be performed. DECISION Consolidated Safety Services, Inc. (CSS), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) award of a contract to Bastion Technologies, Inc., pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 80ARC018R0006, to provide various support services for NASA’s Ames Research Center at Moffett Field, California.  CSS asserts that the agency’s evaluation of CSS’s proposal was flawed and, based on that assertion, that the best-value tradeoff determination was unreasonable.   We deny the protest.  BACKGROUND In October 2017, the agency issued the RFP, seeking proposals to provide professional support services related to occupational safety, health and medical services, system safety, and mission assurance at NASA’s Ames Research Center.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFP, at 5-10.[1]  The solicitation provided for award on the basis of a best‑value tradeoff, and established three evaluation factors:  mission suitability,[2] past performance, and price.[3]  Id. at 85‑89.  As amended, the solicitation provided for award of a hybrid contract consisting of a fixed-price “core” component, and an indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity component under which fixed-price task orders will be issued during a 1-year base performance period and four 1-year option periods. With regard to evaluation under the most important mission suitability factor, the solicitation required each offeror to submit a total compensation plan which “set forth the salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract.”  RFP at 73.  In this regard, the solicitation warned offerors that:    The Government will evaluate the [compensation] plan to assure it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements.  This evaluation will include an assessment of the offeror’s ability to provide uninterrupted high-quality work.  The professional compensation proposed will be considered in terms of its impact upon recruiting retention, its realism, and its consistency with a total plan for compensation.  Supporting information will include data, such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, used in establishing the total compensation structure.    Id.