Logan Currito, LLC (36C78624R50078)

B-422729.2 Dec 23, 2024 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Logan Currito LLC, an economically disadvantaged, minority, and service-disabled veteran-owned small business of Woburn, Massachusetts, protests the award of a contract to Yellowstone Enterprises, LLC, an economically disadvantaged, service-disabled veteran-owned small business of Billings, Montana, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C78624R50078, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for grounds maintenance services at the Nashville National Cemetery. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of proposals and resulting best-value tradeoff source selection decision. 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: Logan Currito, LLC File: B-422729.2 Date: December 23, 2024 Jonathan D. Shaffer, Esq., and John Tanner, Esq., Haynes and Boone, LLP, for the protester. Krishon Gill-Edmond, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Samantha S. Lee, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protester’s challenge to the agency’s technical and past performance evaluations are denied where the record shows that the evaluations were reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Logan Currito LLC, an economically disadvantaged, minority, and service-disabled veteran-owned small business of Woburn, Massachusetts, protests the award of a contract to Yellowstone Enterprises, LLC, an economically disadvantaged, service-disabled veteran-owned small business of Billings, Montana, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C78624R50078, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for grounds maintenance services at the Nashville National Cemetery. The protester challenges the agency’s evaluation of proposals and resulting best-value tradeoff source selection decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the RFP on March 22, 2024, as a combined synopsis/solicitation in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12, in conjunction with the simplified acquisition procedures prescribed in FAR part 13. Agency Report (AR), Tab 1.1, RFP at 2, 6, 11.[1] The VA issued the solicitation as a service-disabled veteran-owned small business set-aside, seeking proposals for grounds maintenance services at Nashville National Cemetery. Id. at 7. The RFP contemplated the award of a single indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract with a 1-year base and four 1-year options. Id. Using the comparative evaluation process outlined in FAR section 13.106-2(b)(3), the agency intended to award the contract “to the responsible Offeror whose proposal provides the best benefit to the Government,” when considering three evaluation factors: technical approach and understanding of the work (technical), past performance, and price. Id. at 11. The VA received 11 proposals by the solicitation’s April 22, deadline. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1. On June 27, the agency awarded the contract to Yellowstone. Id. Following notification of the award decision, Logan Currito filed a protest with our Office challenging the agency’s evaluation of proposals and resulting best-value tradeoff source selection decision. Logan Currito LLC, B-422729, Aug. 5, 2024 (unpublished decision). In response, the agency notified our Office that it intended to take corrective action; specifically, the agency stated that it would reevaluate the proposals of Yellowstone and Logan Currito and conduct a new comparative analysis between the proposals. Id. We dismissed the protest as academic on August 5. Id. Subsequently, the contracting officer, who was the source selection authority (SSA), concluded that Yellowstone’s proposal represented the best value to the government. AR, Tab 1.10, Award Decision at 6-8. The SSA found Yellowstone’s proposal was superior to Logan Currito’s under the technical and past performance factors, and the advantages associated with Yellowstone’s proposal “justified” awarding the contract to Yellowstone based on a proposed price of $5,375,650--a premium of $1,121,686 over Logan Currito’s proposed price of $4,253,964. Id. On September 13, the agency again awarded the contract to Yellowstone. COS at 2. This protest followed. DISCUSSION Logan Currito challenges multiple facets of the agency’s evaluation of proposals under the technical factor as well as under the past performance factor. Comments at 10-29. Additionally, the protester contends that these alleged errors undermined the best value decision. Id. at 29-32.