Development Services Group, Inc. (283230589A)

B-421310 Mar 15, 2023 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Development Services Group, Inc. (DSG), a small business of Bethesda, Maryland, protests the agency's determination that it submitted a non-compliant proposal in response to request for task order proposals (RFTOP) No. 283-23-0589A, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), for training and technical assistance support services. The protester argues that the agency's determination that its proposal was non-compliant was unreasonable, represents an unduly harsh elevation of form over substance, and that the solicitation was latently ambiguous. 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: Development Services Group, Inc. File: B-421310 Date: March 15, 2023 Todd M. Garland, Esq., Smith Pachter McWhorter PLC, for the protester. Jennifer Yang, Esq., Tony Ross, Esq., Eno-Obong Essien, Esq., Department of Health and Human Services, for the agency. Michael P. Price, Esq., and John Sorrenti, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s determination that the protester’s proposal was non‑compliant is denied where the agency reasonably found that the protester omitted required information and otherwise failed to follow the solicitation’s instructions. DECISION Development Services Group, Inc. (DSG), a small business of Bethesda, Maryland, protests the agency’s determination that it submitted a non‑compliant proposal in response to request for task order proposals (RFTOP) No. 283-23-0589A, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), for training and technical assistance support services. The protester argues that the agency’s determination that its proposal was non-compliant was unreasonable, represents an unduly harsh elevation of form over substance, and that the solicitation was latently ambiguous. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND SAMHSA issued the RFTOP on November 9, 2022, to certain holders of SAMHSA indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts.[1] AR, Tab 03a, RFTOP Transmittal Email. The solicitation was issued under the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 16, and sought task order proposals for training and technical assistance support services. AR, Tab 03a, RFTOP Attachment 3 Proposal Instructions at 10; RFTOP Attachment 1a Performance Work Statement at 1. The RFTOP contemplated the award of a cost-reimbursement contract for one base year and up to four 1-year options. AR, Tab 03a, RFTOP Attachment 3 Proposal Instructions at 1, 9. The solicitation identified eight core tasks and four optional tasks, with most tasks being further broken down into detailed subtasks. AR, Tab 03a, RFTOP Attachment 1a Performance Work Statement at 3-23. The RFTOP provided that a task order would be awarded to the responsible offeror whose proposal was most advantageous to the government, considering cost and technical factors.[2] AR, Tab 03a, RFTOP Attachment 3 Proposal Instructions at 10‑12. To that end, the RFTOP required offerors to submit separate business and technical proposals. Id. at 1. The RFTOP included detailed instructions concerning the preparation and submission of proposals. The RFTOP generally advised that proposals should be submitted as separate electronic files and include: 1) [t]he complete technical proposal – PDF[[3]]; 2) the complete business proposal (to include prime and subs) – PDF; 3) the prime budget excel[[4]] worksheets (Breakdown of Proposed Estimated Costs); 4) each subcontractor budget excel worksheets (Breakdown of Proposed Estimated Costs); 5) Summary of Cost and Hours (excel); and 6) IT [information technology] Worksheets (excel). Id. at 1-2. Additionally, the RFTOP stated that business proposals should be submitted as a “fully assembled electronic copy” and contain the following: One complete electronic copy in PDF (to include budget narrative and budget worksheets) and Excel budget sheets to include 1) prime budget excel worksheets (Breakdown of Proposed Estimated Costs); 2) each subcontractor budget excel worksheets (Subs Breakdown of Proposed Estimated Costs); 3) Summary of Cost and Hours (excel); 4) IT Worksheets (excel). Id. at 3-4. With respect to the “Breakdown of Proposed Estimated Costs” Excel worksheets, the RFTOP specified that: ALL OFFERORS are required to submit, as part of their Business Proposal, a Breakdown of Proposed Estimated Costs spreadsheet . . .