Armstrong Elevator Company (36C25623R0094)

B-422123 Dec 28, 2023 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Armstrong Elevator Company, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Largo, Florida, protests the award of a contract to Elevated Technologies, Inc., an SDVOSB of Charleston, South Carolina, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C25623R0094, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), to replace the cart transport elevators in a hospital building in Houston, Texas. Armstrong challenges the agency's evaluation of its proposal under the past performance factor. 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: Armstrong Elevator Company File: B-422123 Date: December 28, 2023 Edward J. Tolchin, Esq., Offit Kurman, P.A., for the protester. Matthew T. Schoonover, Esq., Matthew P. Moriarty, Esq., John M. Mattox II, Esq., Ian P. Patterson, Esq., and Timothy J. Laughlin, Esq., Schoonover & Moriarty LLC, for Elevated Technologies, Inc., the intervenor. Brian R. Reed, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Michelle Litteken, 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 protester’s past performance is denied where the record shows the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Armstrong Elevator Company, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Largo, Florida, protests the award of a contract to Elevated Technologies, Inc., an SDVOSB of Charleston, South Carolina, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C25623R0094, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), to replace the cart transport elevators in a hospital building in Houston, Texas. Armstrong challenges the agency’s evaluation of its proposal under the past performance factor. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the RFP on June 23, 2023, as a set-aside procurement for SDVOSB concerns, seeking a contractor to replace the cart transport elevators, including the controls and machines, in the main hospital building at the Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Houston, Texas. Agency Report (AR), Exh. 2, RFP at 1. The elevators are used to deliver food to patients and sterile surgery equipment directly to operating rooms. AR, Exh. 1, Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1. The scope of work for the requirement included specialized construction labor and supervision for mechanical, structural, electrical, demolition, and elevator installation work. Id. The solicitation established that award would be made using a best-value tradeoff with two factors--past performance and price--with past performance being considered significantly more important than price. RFP at 9. With respect to past performance, offerors were required to provide a detailed summary of three recent and substantially complete contracts for elevator replacement work in an occupied hospital environment.[1] Id. at 10. The RFP identified nine categories of information that the detailed summary should discuss, including, as relevant here: the project performance period (with initial and actual performance dates, schedule impacts, and efficiencies); the names of any subcontractors used, their responsibilities, and the percentage of work performed; and a narrative that demonstrated experience with elevator installations in an environment similar to the Houston VA Medical Center and which included details concerning complexity, magnitude, challenges, and degree of success. Id. at 10-11. The solicitation stated: “Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal.” Id. at 8. The RFP established that the past performance evaluation would assess the relative risks associated with an offeror’s likelihood of success, as indicated by the offeror’s past performance record.[2] Id. at 10-11. The VA received timely proposals from three offerors, including Armstrong and Elevated. COS at 2. The past performance evaluation results for Armstrong and Elevated, and their submitted prices, were as follows:   Armstrong Elevated Relevancy Relevant Very Relevant Confidence Satisfactory Confidence Substantial Confidence Overall Risk Low Risk Low Risk Price $1,922,000 $1,948,710 AR, Exh. 4, Past Performance Evaluation Board (PPEB) Report at 6; AR, Exh. 5, Source Selection Decision (SSD) at 5.[3] In evaluating Armstrong’s past performance, the PPEB reviewed the summaries that the protester provided for five past performance projects,[4] to arrive at overall ratings for relevancy, confidence, and risk. AR, Exh.