Sterling Medical Associates, Inc. (36C24219R0013)

B-418384,B-418384.2 Mar 26, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Sterling Medical Associates (Sterling), of Cincinnati, Ohio, protests the award of a contract to Valor Healthcare, Inc. (Valor), of Addison, Texas, pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C24219R0013, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for the operation of an outpatient clinic in the agency’s Veteran Integrated Service Network 2 (VISN 2) region in Jamestown, New York. Sterling challenges various aspects of the agency’s source selection process, including the agency’s evaluation under the technical and past performance factors. 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:  Sterling Medical Associates, Inc. File:  B-418384; B-418384.2 Date:  March 26, 2020 Barbara A. Duncombe, Esq., Suzanne Sumner, Esq., Brandon Dobyns, Esq., and Erin Davis, Esq., Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, for the protester. Stuart B. Nibley, Esq., Amy Conant Hoang, Esq., Erica L. Bakies, Esq., and Sarah F. Burgart, Esq., K&L Gates LLP, for Valor Healthcare, Inc., the intervenor. Kathleen Ellis, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Christopher Alwood, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protests alleging that agency misevaluated proposals and made an unreasonable source selection decision are denied where the record shows that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Sterling Medical Associates (Sterling), of Cincinnati, Ohio, protests the award of a contract to Valor Healthcare, Inc. (Valor), of Addison, Texas, pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C24219R0013, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for the operation of an outpatient clinic in the agency’s Veteran Integrated Service Network 2 (VISN 2) region in Jamestown, New York.  Sterling challenges various aspects of the agency’s source selection process, including the agency’s evaluation under the technical and past performance factors. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The VA issued the RFP on July 12, 2019, under the commercial item procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12.  Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1.  The RFP contemplated the award of a fixed-price, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract for the operation of a community based outpatient clinic (CBOC) in Jamestown, New York, for a 1-year base period and nine 1-year option periods.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 3, RFP at 1, 8-10, 163.  The RFP provided for award on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering the following evaluation factors, listed in descending order of importance:  (1) technical capability, (2) past performance, (3) service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB)/veteran-owned small business (VOSB) status, and (4) cost/price.  Id. at 166‑170.  All non-cost/price factors, when combined, were stated to be significantly more important than cost/price.  Id. at 166.  Proposals would be evaluated under each factor for strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies.  Id.  The technical capability factor consisted of four subfactors:  (1) quality, (2) management, experience, and staffing, (3) transition/start-up plan, and (4) geographic location.  RFP at 167-168.  The technical capability subfactors were of equal importance to one another.  Id.