Avantus Federal, LLC (70CDCR24R00000009)

B-423010 Jan 02, 2025 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Security's issuance of a task order to Salient CRGT, Inc., pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 70CDCR24R00000009, to provide "analytic and program management services in support of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) Directorate." Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, Initial RFP at 1. Avantus challenges the agency's evaluation of Avantus's proposal under the corporate experience factor and the agency's evaluation of Salient's proposed price. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Avantus Federal, LLC File: B-423010 Date: January 2, 2025 Carla Weiss, Esq., Logan Kemp, Esq., and Annie Hudgins, Esq., Nichols Liu, LLP, for the protester. James Y. Boland, Esq., Lindsay M. Reed, Esq., Emily R. Marcy, Esq., and Kelly M. Boppe, Esq., Venable LLP, for the intervenor. Gabriel E. Kennon, Esq., Javier Farfan, Esq., and Patrick J. Madigan, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Agency’s assessment of risks in protester’s proposal under the corporate experience evaluation factor was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 2. Agency’s consideration of awardee’s price in making the source selection decision was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Avantus Federal, LLC, of McLean, Virginia, protests the Department of Homeland Security’s issuance of a task order to Salient CRGT, Inc., pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 70CDCR24R00000009, to provide “analytic and program management services in support of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) Directorate.” Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, Initial RFP at 1.[1] Avantus challenges the agency’s evaluation of Avantus’s proposal under the corporate experience factor and the agency’s evaluation of Salient’s proposed price. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On April 4, 2024, pursuant to the provisions of section 16.505 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the solicitation was issued to contractors holding General Services Administration OASIS (One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services) contracts.[2] The solicitation contemplated award of a single fixed-price labor-hour task order[3] to perform a wide range of support services,[4] and provided that source selection would be based on a best-value tradeoff between the following evaluation factors: corporate experience, technical/management approach, and price.[5] AR, Tab 13, RFP amend. 002 at 11-12. The solicitation also provided that the procurement would be conducted in two phases. In phase I, offerors submitted proposals to be evaluated under the corporate experience factor; after evaluation of the phase I proposals, the agency made advisory down-select recommendations to the offerors regarding whether they should proceed to phase II. In phase II, each offeror submitted its proposed technical/management approach, followed by a 90-minute oral presentation, and submitted its price proposal using a “pricing workbook” that was included in the solicitation. Id. at 5-9. With regard to the corporate experience factor, offerors were permitted to submit information regarding up to four recent projects[6] that demonstrated their relevant experience. Id. at 6. The solicitation provided that the agency would “evaluate the extent to which an offeror has demonstrated relevant experience within the last five (5) years performing projects similar in size, scope, and complexity to this requirement.” Id. at 12. Based on its evaluation of each offeror’s demonstrated experience, the agency assigned confidence ratings of high confidence, some confidence, or low confidence.[7] Id. at 13. With regard to the technical/management approach factor, the solicitation identified various elements that offerors were expected to address, including a proposed 60-day transition plan, and provided that the agency would assess each offeror’s proposed technical/management approach and oral presentation with regard to its “effectiveness, completeness, and the validity of the proposed technical and management approaches to meet the requirements of the solicitation.” Id. at 8, 12. Based on the evaluation of this factor, the solicitation again provided that the agency would assign ratings of high confidence, some confidence, or low confidence.[8] With regard to price, the solicitation contained an attachment that listed multiple labor categories, with differing seniority levels, along with an estimated/ceiling number of hours applicable to each listing. AR, Tab 17, RFP attach. 4, Pricing Workbook.