Spectrum Healthcare Resources, Inc. (70FA4023R00000001)

B-421325 Mar 21, 2023 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Spectrum Healthcare Resources, Inc., of St. Louis, Missouri, protests the award of a contract to Dentrust Dental International, Inc. d/b/a Docs Health, of Pipersville, Pennsylvania, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70FA4023R00000001, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for medical and behavioral health services. The protester objects to the evaluation of proposals and resulting best-value tradeoff. We sustain 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: Spectrum Healthcare Resources, Inc. File: B-421325 Date: March 21, 2023 Amy Laderberg O’Sullivan, Esq., James G. Peyster, Esq., and David H. Favre, III, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP, for the protester. Nicholas T. Solosky, Esq., and Morgan M. Tapp, Esq., Fox Rothschild LLP, for Dentrust Dental International, Inc. d/b/a Docs Health, the intervenor. Patrick J. Madigan, Esq., and Ekta Patel, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Heather Self, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency’s evaluation of proposals and resulting source selection decision is sustained because record shows the agency evaluated in a manner not consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Spectrum Healthcare Resources, Inc., of St. Louis, Missouri, protests the award of a contract to Dentrust Dental International, Inc. d/b/a Docs Health, of Pipersville, Pennsylvania, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70FA4023R00000001, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for medical and behavioral health services. The protester objects to the evaluation of proposals and resulting best-value tradeoff. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND On October 4, 2022, using the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15, the agency issued the solicitation seeking proposals for “medical professionals to provide Medical and Behavioral Health Services to FEMA employees, Federal partners, Contractors and Visitors under FEMA oversight.” Agency Report (AR), Tab B.4, RFP at 1.[1] The health services are to be provided as part of the agency’s workforce health and safety program for FEMA employees, and will be provided at both fixed non‑disaster sites and disaster sites throughout the United States and its territories. Id. at 14-15. The types of health services to be provided include occupational health center services, medical employability and fitness for duty consultations, immunizations and travel medication, respiratory clearances, commercial drivers’ licenses clearances, behavioral stress counselors, and nursing hours to support the National Recovery Communication Center and Regional Recovery Communication Centers. Id. at 14. The solicitation contemplated the award of a single indefinite‑delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract under which the agency would issue time‑and-materials task orders with fixed labor rates. RFP at 1-2. The contract would have a 1-year base period of performance, four 1-year option periods, and included an option to extend contract services for up to six months under FAR clause 52.217-8. Id. at 3, 59. The awarded IDIQ contract would have a minimum guarantee of $5,000, and a maximum ceiling of $23.2 million. Id. at 15, 19. The solicitation established a two-phased evaluation process with four evaluation factors: (1) technical capability; (2) staffing and management approach; (3) past performance; and (4) price. RFP at 96. The solicitation listed the non-price factors in descending order of importance, and provided that the non-price factors combined were slightly more important than price. Id. at 104. In phase I of the evaluation, the agency would assess offerors’ under the most important factor--technical capability. Id. at 96. Following the phase I evaluation, the agency would provide advisory notifications informing offerors whether their proposals were among the most highly competitive--and should proceed to phase II--or whether their proposals were unlikely to be viable competitors and they should not proceed to phase II. Id. at 98. Offerors advised that their proposals were not among the most highly competitive would still be permitted to submit phase II proposals, however. Id. In phase II, the agency would evaluate offerors under the remaining three factors. Id. at 96. The solicitation provided that the evaluation would “measure the Government’s confidence that the offerors understand the requirement[,] proposes a sound approach[,] and will be successful in performing the contract.” RFP at 106.