Comprehensive Health Services, LLC (70RDAD20R00000012)

B-419183.2 Feb 16, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Comprehensive Health Services, LLC (Comprehensive), of Reston, Virginia, protests the exclusion of its proposal from the competitive range of the competition conducted under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70RDAD20R00000012, which was issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), for COVID-19 test kits and related services. Comprehensive argues that the agency's evaluation relied on an unstated evaluation criterion. 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:  Comprehensive Health Services, LLC File:  B-419183.2 Date:  February 16, 2021 Elizabeth N. Jochum, Esq., Zachary D. Prince, Esq., and Nora K. Brent, Esq., Smith Pachter McWhorter PLC, for the protester. Matthew D. McKenzie, Esq., and Brian C. Habib, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and Laura Eyester, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Challenge to the assignment of a weakness to the protester’s proposal, and exclusion from the competitive range, is denied where the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION   Comprehensive Health Services, LLC (Comprehensive), of Reston, Virginia, protests the exclusion of its proposal from the competitive range of the competition conducted under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70RDAD20R00000012, which was issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), for COVID-19 test kits and related services.  Comprehensive argues that the agency’s evaluation relied on an unstated evaluation criterion. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND DHS issued the solicitation on June 22, 2020, seeking proposals to provide COVID-19 testing kits and related services.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 14, RFP amend. 7 at 1, 4-5.[1]  The agency requires “in-vitro diagnostics for the detection and/or diagnosis of the virus that causes COVID-19” for individuals including DHS personnel, DHS contractors, persons within DHS custody, and persons being repatriated.  Id. at 5.  The statement of work (SOW) identified three functional categories under which services will be provided:  (1) managed testing services, (2) molecular diagnostic test kits and testing services; and (3) antigen testing kits and testing services.  Id. at 7-10.  Offerors could submit proposals for any or all of the functional categories.  Id. at 7.  The RFP anticipated the award of multiple indefinite-delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts with base periods of 1 year and four 1-year options.  Id. at 13, 84.  Orders under the IDIQ contracts will be issued on a fixed-price or time-and-materials basis.  Id. at 4.  The maximum cumulative ceiling value of all contracts is $2 billion.  Id. at 16. The RFP provided for a two-phase evaluation; proposals were required to address both phases.  Id. at 84.  Phase one instructed offerors to provide adequate documentation demonstrating that the following two requirements were met:  (1) a Food and Drug Administration approval or Emergency Use Authorization for the test kits; and (2) a letter of supply or other documentation substantiating the offeror’s relationship as an authorized reseller of its proposed manufacturer’s test kit.  Id.  Proposals that met the phase one requirements would be evaluated in phase two.  Id. The phase two evaluation required offerors to complete a capability questionnaire, which contained 20 questions, plus an additional four questions for firms proposing for functional category 1, managed testing services.  Id.; AR, Tab 3a, RFP attach. A, Capability Questionnaire at 1-4.  The RFP stated that the agency would review the questionnaire responses as follows: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s capability by considering the questionnaire responses from the offeror to determine:  (1) the extent to which the offeror demonstrates a thorough understanding of the background, Does your offering create or store dascope, objectives, and work requirements of the SOW; (2) the extent to which the offeror supports how each functional category will be fully performed; and (3) the reasonableness and usability of the solutions the offeror provides in their responses. RFP at 84-85. For purposes of award, the RFP stated the agency intended to “award multiple IDIQ contracts to the responsible offerors submitting an overall proposal that is determined to be amongst the highest technically rated offers with fair and reasonable prices.”  Id.