Facility Services Management, Inc. (W912DY-20-F-XXX)

B-418526,B-418526.2,B-418526.3 May 20, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Facility Services Management, Inc. (Facility), of Clarksville, Tennessee, protests the issuance of a task order to J&J Maintenance, Inc. d/b/a J&J Worldwide Services (J&J), of Austin, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912DY-15-D-00XX, issued by the Department of the Army, United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), for facility operations and maintenance (O&M) services for the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of proposals. 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:  Facility Services Management, Inc. File:  B-418526; B-418526.2; B-418526.3 Date:  May 20, 2020 John C. Dulske, Esq., Ryan Sullivan, Esq., Bonnie Kirkland, Esq., and Joanne Zimolzak, Esq., Dykema Gossett PLLC, for the protester. Adam K. Lasky, Esq., Brad Bigos, Esq., and Emily A. Yoshiwara, Esq., Oles Morrison Rinker & Baker, LLP, for J&J Maintenance, Inc. d/b/a J&J Worldwide Services, the intervenor. Tamar Gerhart, Esq., and Michael A. Graves, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Young H. Cho, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency’s determination that protester’s proposal was technically unacceptable under a task order competition is denied where the record shows that the agency reasonably evaluated protester’s technical proposal. DECISION Facility Services Management, Inc. (Facility), of Clarksville, Tennessee, protests the issuance of a task order to J&J Maintenance, Inc. d/b/a J&J Worldwide Services (J&J), of Austin, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912DY-15-D-00XX, issued by the Department of the Army, United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), for facility operations and maintenance (O&M) services for the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.  The protester challenges the agency’s evaluation of proposals. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP was issued on January 10, 2020, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 16.5, to holders of the Corps’ operations and maintenance engineering enhancement (OMEE) multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts.[1]  Contracting Officer’s Statement and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 1.  The solicitation contemplated the issuance of a fixed-price task order for a 1-year base period, one 1-year option period, and one 6-month option period.  Id. at 2; AR, Tab 1, RFP at 1.[2]  Award was to be made on a best-value tradeoff basis considering the following evaluation factors:  technical/ management (technical); experience; past performance; and price.  RFP at 1.  The technical and experience factors were of equal importance and were significantly more important than past performance.  Id.  The non-price factors when combined were significantly more important than price.  Id.  Relevant here, the RFP warned that proposals assessed with any deficiencies would be found ineligible for award.  Id. Three offerors, including Facility and J&J submitted timely proposals.[3]  AR, Tab 10, Task Order Evaluation Memorandum (TOEM) at 6.  A task order evaluation board evaluated the proposals.  Id.  The results of the agency’s evaluation was as follows:   Facility J&J Technical Unacceptable Outstanding Experience Relevant Relevant Past Performance Substantial Confidence Substantial Confidence Total Price $51,572,268 $52,889,652   AR, Tab 10, TOEM at 18; AR, Tab 13, Facility Post-Award Debriefing at 2.[4] Facility’s proposal was assessed two deficiencies and was assigned an “unacceptable” rating under the technical factor, thus rendering the proposal “unawardable” in accordance with the terms of the solicitation.[5]  AR, Tab 10, TOEM at 18, 19.  After reviewing the results of the evaluation of the non-price proposal and finding that J&J’s price was fair and reasonable, the agency made award to J&J, the only offeror whose proposal remained eligible for award.  Id.