Acuity-Exemplar, JV (47PF0019R0115)

B-418428 Apr 07, 2020 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Acuity-Exemplar, JV, of Oxnard, California, a small business, protests the award of a contract to The Severson Group, of San Marcos, California, also a small business, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 47PF0019R0115, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA), Public Buildings Service, for janitorial services and supplies for the Ralph H. Metcalfe Federal Building in Chicago, Illinois. Acuity argues that GSA conducted misleading discussions and made an unreasonable 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:      Acuity-Exemplar, JV File:                B-418428 Date:              April 7, 2020 Mark J. Blando, Esq., Eckland & Blando LLP, for the protester. Joanna M. Obrochta, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Paul N. Wengert, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency conducted misleading discussions is denied where, although the protester increased its price in response, it was not competitively prejudiced because the awardee’s proposal was higher-rated and lower-priced, even before the discussions.  DECISION Acuity-Exemplar, JV, of Oxnard, California, a small business[1], protests the award of a contract to The Severson Group, of San Marcos, California, also a small business, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 47PF0019R0115, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA), Public Buildings Service, for janitorial services and supplies for the Ralph H. Metcalfe Federal Building in Chicago, Illinois.  Acuity argues that GSA conducted misleading discussions and made an unreasonable source selection decision.[2]  We deny the protest.   BACKGROUND The solicitation, issued on September 13, 2019, sought proposals from eligible offerors to provide services under a fixed-priced, indefinite-quantity contract for a base year and 4 option years.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFP, at 8, 152 (¶ L.9).[3]  A contract would be awarded to the offeror whose proposal was evaluated as the best value under two factors:  past performance and price, where past performance was more important than price.  Id. at 156 (¶ M.1).   The RFP stated that the incumbent workforce was covered by a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) that ran through August 2020, and advised offerors to take it into account when preparing a proposal.  Id. at 3; AR, Tab 2, RFP amend. 1, at 13.  Among other things, the CBA provided that while it would not be possible to place all workers on a 35-hour workweek due to inconsistent tasks and scheduling by GSA, nevertheless “the Employer agrees to place as many employees as possible on a thirty-five (35) hour, five (5) day per week schedule.”[4]  Protest at 3 (quoting CBA at 8).  The CBA also specified a monthly health and welfare contribution of $960 for each worker.  In addition to requesting past performance information, the RFP provided both a 4-page pricing matrix and a separate 1-page document labeled “CONTRACTOR’S COST PROPOSAL FORMAT.”  RFP at 148.  That second document provided blanks for the offeror to enter discrete cost elements including vacation, paid sick leave, holidays, “health and welfare,” and “Other Fringe Benefits (pension, education, etc.).”  The form provided lines for the offeror to fill in the number of hours, the hourly rate, and the product of those two (i.e., hours × rate) for each of the cost elements.[5]  Id.  GSA received proposals from 15 offerors, including Severson and Acuity.  In its initial proposal, Acuity offered an evaluated price of $7.7 million, while Severson’s price was $5.9 million.[6]  Id. at 6.  The past performance evaluation summarized the comments of multiple past performance references for each offeror and, for Acuity, concluded that its performance record merited a score of 4,[7] while Severson’s past performance received a score of 4.5.  After the initial evaluation, GSA eliminated one offeror’s proposal for failing to “meet the 8(a) requirements,” and opened discussions with the remaining offerors.  AR, Tab 11, Price Negotiation Memorandum (Jan. 6, 2020) at 1‑2.  For both Severson and Acuity, discussions were held on November 26 to resolve “Contractor Cost Worksheet errors and Schedule B pricing pages corrections.”  AR, Tab 9, Pre-Negotiations Objectives Memorandum (Dec.