Ahtna Professional Services, Inc (70FA2022R00000002)

Case: B-421164 Agency: Department of Homeland Security : Federal Emergency Management Agency Protester: Ahtna Professional Services, Inc Date: 2023-01-11 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-421164,B-421164.2 Jan 11, 2023 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Ahtna Professional Services, Inc. (APSI), an 8(a) small business of Anchorage, Alaska, protests the award of a contract to IMAQ Walden JV (IWJV), also an 8(a) small business of Anchorage, Alaska, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70FA2022R00000002, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, for security guard services for the Center for Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama. The protester contends the agency's evaluation of proposals was unreasonable, and the resulting best-value tradeoff decision was flawed. The protester also contends that the awardee engaged in an impermissible "bait and switch" tactic with respect to its proposed key personnel. We deny the protest in part, and dismiss it in part. 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: Ahtna Professional Services, Inc. File: B-421164; B-421164.2 Date: January 11, 2023 Ryan C. Bradel, Esq., and Michael E. Hatch, Esq., Ward & Berry, PLLC, for the protester. Jonathan D. Shaffer, Esq., Smith Pachter McWhorter PLC, for IMAQ Walden JV, the intervenor. Patrick J. Madigan, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, 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 1. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of proposals is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. 2. Protest alleging awardee engaged in impermissible “bait and switch” is dismissed where protester fails to demonstrate awardee “baited” the agency by proposing key personnel the awardee knew or should have known to be unavailable to perform the contract. DECISION Ahtna Professional Services, Inc. (APSI), an 8(a) small business of Anchorage, Alaska, protests the award of a contract to IMAQ Walden JV (IWJV), also an 8(a)[1] small business of Anchorage, Alaska, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70FA2022R00000002, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, for security guard services for the Center for Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama. The protester contends the agency’s evaluation of proposals was unreasonable, and the resulting best-value tradeoff decision was flawed. The protester also contends that the awardee engaged in an impermissible “bait and switch” tactic with respect to its proposed key personnel. We deny the protest in part, and dismiss it in part. BACKGROUND The agency issued the solicitation as an 8(a) set-aside on May 10, 2022. Agency Report (AR), Tab F, RFP at 1. The RFP contemplated the award of a fixed-price contract with a phase-in period of 1 month, a base period of 11 months, and four 12‑month option periods. RFP at 1‑3. The due date for proposals was June 16, 2022. Id. at 1, 50. The RFP provided for the submission of proposals in two volumes: technical and business. Id. at 45, 48. The technical volume was to address six factors: (1) work plan, (2) management plan, (3) staffing plan and key personnel, (4) corporate experience, (5) quality control plan, and (6) past performance. Id. at 45‑48. The business volume was to consist of a price proposal that included pricing for all material, equipment, and labor hours associated with performance of this contract. Id. at 48. The contract was to be awarded on a best-value tradeoff basis where the work plan, management plan, and staffing plan and key personnel (factors 1‑3) were the most important factors and of equal importance relative to each other. Id. at 50. Corporate experience, quality control plan, and past performance (factors 4‑6) were less important than factors 1-3, and were listed in descending order of importance. Id. The technical factors, when combined, were approximately equal to price. Id. at 51. The agency received eight proposals by the closing date for receipt of proposals, including proposals from APSI, which is the incumbent contractor for the services, and IWJV. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 4, 20.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...