Veterans Choice Medical Equipment, LLC (36C26221R0002)

B-419991,B-419991.2 Oct 20, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Veterans Choice Medical Equipment, LLC, a small business of Vista, California, protests the award of a contract to Mid-Cities Home Medical Delivery Service, LLC, a small business of Grand Prairie, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C26221R0002, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for in-home oxygen and ventilator services in the agency's Veteran Integrated Service Network 22 (VISN 22) region in southern California. Veterans Choice contends that the agency's evaluation of the awardee's proposal was unreasonable. 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:  Veterans Choice Medical Equipment, LLC File:  B-419991; B-419991.2 Date:  October 20, 2021 David F. Dowd, Esq., Mayer Brown LLP, for the protester. Peter B. Ford, Esq., Katherine B. Burrows, Esq., Timothy F. Valley, Esq., and Anna R. Wright, Esq., Piliero Mazza PLLC, for Mid-Cities Home Medical Delivery Service, LLC, the intervenor. Daniel McFeely, 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 Protest that the agency unreasonably evaluated the awardee’s proposal under the corporate experience evaluation factor is denied where the agency reasonably interpreted the terms of the solicitation to allow it to evaluate an incomplete corporate experience submission, and where the source selection authority reasonably considered information within the evaluation team’s personal knowledge. DECISION Veterans Choice Medical Equipment, LLC, a small business of Vista, California, protests the award of a contract to Mid-Cities Home Medical Delivery Service, LLC, a small business of Grand Prairie, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C26221R0002, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for in‑home oxygen and ventilator services in the agency’s Veteran Integrated Service Network 22 (VISN 22) region in southern California.  Veterans Choice contends that the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s proposal was unreasonable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The VA issued the RFP on January 19, 2021, as a set-aside procurement for service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses under the commercial item procurement procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12.  Agency Report (AR), Exh. 3, RFP at 4.[1]  The RFP contemplated the award of a fixed‑price, indefinite‑delivery, indefinite‑quantity contract for in‑home oxygen and ventilator services for four VA healthcare systems in southern California for a 1-year base period and seven 1-year option periods.[2]  Id. at 4, 7.  The RFP provided for award on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering two factors: experience and price.  Id. at 76.  The RFP stated that the experience factor was more important than price.  Id.  Relevant to this protest, the RFP instructed offerors to submit a narrative describing their experience providing in-home oxygen and ventilator services.  RFP at 75.  The RFP stated that offerors were to provide certain information--including, e.g., the contract number and the dates the offeror performed the contract--for each contract reference included in the experience narrative.  Id.  The RFP provided that failure to submit the required information may be viewed as evidence of lack of experience.  Id.    Mid-Cities submitted a single contract reference on behalf of its proposed subcontractor, [DELETED], which described a contract where [DELETED] provided in‑home oxygen services in southern California.  AR, Exh. 11, Mid‑Cities Proposal at 32‑35.  Both the experience narrative that Mid‑Cities submitted and the reference for the [DELETED] contract mentioned separate in-home ventilator services that [DELETED] is currently providing to 19 patients for the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, but neither included certain information required by the solicitation, such as a contract number, dates of performance, or point of contact information for these services.  Id. at 13, 34.  The RFP stated that the agency would evaluate each offeror’s experience “providing contracted in-home oxygen services and contracted in-home ventilator services to patients in their place of residence.”  The RFP did not specify an adjectival rating system for the experience factor.  However, the source selection plan (SSP) stated that offerors would be assigned a rating of either good, satisfactory, marginal, or unsatisfactory for the experience factor.  AR, Exh.