Monbo Group International, Ltd. (15F067-22-R-0000048)

B-420829.3 Dec 05, 2022 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Monbo Group International, a small business of Owings Mills, Maryland, protests the rejection of its proposal by the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), under request for proposals (RFP) No. 15F067-22-R-0000048, for subject matter expertise support services. The protester argues that the agency improperly rejected its proposal for failing to submit required price information. According to Monbo, the agency's decision to reject its proposal was based on an unreasonable interpretation of the solicitation's price submission requirements. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Monbo Group International File: B-420829.3 Date: December 5, 2022 Dee Monbo for the protester. Marcela A. Liddick, Esq., Department of Justice, for the agency. Heather Weiner, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that the agency unreasonably rejected the protester’s proposal as noncompliant with solicitation’s price submission requirements is denied where the record shows that the agency’s determination was made in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Monbo Group International, a small business of Owings Mills, Maryland, protests the rejection of its proposal by the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), under request for proposals (RFP) No. 15F067-22-R-0000048, for subject matter expertise support services. The protester argues that the agency improperly rejected its proposal for failing to submit required price information. According to Monbo, the agency’s decision to reject its proposal was based on an unreasonable interpretation of the solicitation’s price submission requirements. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the RFP on March 8, 2022, as an 8(a) set-aside, for subject matter expert support for the FBI.[1] The RFP contemplated the award of multiple indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts, each for a base year and four 1-year option periods.[2] Agency Report (AR), Tab 3, RFP at 36. Award was to be made on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering management/technical approach, past performance, security, and price. Id. at 51. The RFP instructed offerors to submit proposals with four volumes. RFP at 37. As relevant to this protest, the price volume was to include a Microsoft Excel pricing spreadsheet that was provided to offerors as an attachment to the RFP. Id. at 38. The pricing spreadsheet identified labor category positions and surge labor category positions for the base year and each option year as contract line item numbers (CLINs) 0001 through 4001, and required offerors to provide pricing for each CLIN. Id. at 47; RFP, attach. D, Pricing Spreadsheet. The FBI received proposals from eleven offerors, including Monbo, by the March 28, 2022, due date for receipt of proposals. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 2; AR, Tab 8, Monbo Debrief Letter at 1. After evaluating proposals, the FBI awarded contracts to two offerors. AR, Tab 8, Debrief Letter at 1. Two unsuccessful offerors protested to our Office, challenging the agency’s evaluation and award decision. Halcyon Group Int’l, LLC, B‑420829, July 5, 2022 (unpublished decision); BrightPoint, LLC, B-420829.2, July 6, 2022 (unpublished decision). In response, the FBI notified GAO that it would take corrective action by reevaluating proposals and issuing a new award decision, if appropriate. Id. Our Office dismissed the protests as academic on July 5 and 6, respectively. Id. During corrective action, the agency determined that Monbo’s proposal was “non-compliant with RFP paragraph L.4.4.” Protest, exh. 2, Notification of Non-Compliance at 1. As relevant here, RFP paragraph L.4.4 provided: A complete and accurate cost/price proposal shall be submitted using the provided Excel RFP Attachment (See Section J – Attachment D – Pricing Spreadsheet). The submitted cost/price proposal must adhere to the provided instructions, format and content contained in the specified RFP Attachment. . . . Compliance with these instructions is mandatory, and failure to comply may result in rejection of the Offeror’s proposal. RFP at 44-45. In particular, the agency found that Monbo’s proposal “did not provide hourly rates for the surge positions under CLINS 0001-4001 in [a]ttachment D,” the pricing spreadsheet. Protest, exh. 2, Notification of Non-Compliance at 1. The agency explained that the “failure to provide this information prevents the Government from evaluating these hourly rates for fair[ness] and reasonableness or realism.” Id.