Golden Key Group, LLC (36C10X20R0028)

B-419001 Nov 16, 2020 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Golden Key Group (GKG), of Reston, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to CALIBRE Systems, Inc., of Alexandria, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C10X20R0028, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), for support services to aid in the VA's transition assistance program (TAP). The protester contends that the agency's evaluation of its proposal was arbitrary and capricious. 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:  Golden Key Group, LLC File:  B-419001 Date:  November 16, 2020 Anthony H. Anikeeff, Esq., and Michael D. Maloney, Esq., Williams Mullen, for the protester. Ambika J. Biggs, Esq., William L. Walsh Jr., Esq., and Andrea I. Mousouris, Esq., Hirschler Fleischer, for CALIBRE Systems, Inc., the intervenor. Krishon Gill-Edmond, Esq., and Aleia Barlow, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Jacob M. Talcott, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the evaluation of protester’s proposal is denied where agency’s evaluation was reasonable and in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Golden Key Group (GKG), of Reston, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to CALIBRE Systems, Inc., of Alexandria, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C10X20R0028, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), for support services to aid in the VA’s transition assistance program (TAP).  The protester contends that the agency’s evaluation of its proposal was arbitrary and capricious.  We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On May 14, 2020, the VA issued the solicitation, which contemplated the issuance of a task order under the General Services Administration’s (GSA) Human Capital and Training Solutions multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract.  The solicitation was issued on an unrestricted basis and in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12 and subpart 16.5.  Contracting Officer’s Statement of Fact (COSF) at 1.  The agency sought proposals for onsite support services for the VA’s TAP, a program that assists military personnel in their transition from military service to civilian life.  Agency Report (AR), Tab A, RFP at 6.  The RFP provided that the agency would evaluate proposals on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering price and non-price factors.  COSF at 10.  The RFP further provided that the agency intended to evaluate offers and award a contract without discussions.  RFP at 97.  The due date for proposals, as amended, was June 22.  COSF at 1.  The RFP required offerors to submit their proposals in five separate volumes: experience; technical capability; past performance; evaluation factors for service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSBs) and veteran-owned small businesses (VOSBs); and price and other documents.[1]  RFP at 100.  As relevant here, the technical capability volume required offerors to explain how they intended to satisfy the requirements in the performance work statement (PWS).  Among other things, offerors were to submit biographies for proposed key personnel that “clearly demonstrate” the personnel would meet the requirements provided in the PWS.  Id. at 102.  Specifically, the RFP required that proposed program managers possess 12 years of experience, plus either a certification in project management or four more years of experience in a related field.  Id. at 25.  For past performance, the RFP required offerors to identify up to three relevant contracts.  Id.  The RFP provided that the agency would determine relevancy based on the “size, scope, and complexity of [the] requirement.”  Id. at 103.  Proposals would be assigned performance risk ratings.  Id. at 106. For the evaluation of proposals, the RFP provided a two-phased evaluation structure.  Id. at 111.  Under phase one, the VA would evaluate an offeror’s experience on a pass/fail basis.  Id. at 105.  If any proposal failed to demonstrate “positive experience” for volume one, the VA would eliminate that proposal from the competition.  Id.