Madison Services, Inc. (140P8623Q0106)

B-423030.2,B-423030.3 Jun 25, 2025 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Madison Services, Inc., a small business of Madison, Mississippi, protests the award of a contract to Unify Now, Inc., a small business of Oakland, California, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 140P8623Q0106, issued by the Department of the Interior, National Park Service (NPS) for preventative maintenance services. Madison challenges the agency's evaluation of quotations, price reasonableness determination, and best-value tradeoff. 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: Madison Services, Inc. File: B-423030.2; B-423030.3 Date: June 25,2025 Lynn Patton Thompson, Esq., and Christopher Solop, Esq., Biggs, Ingram & Solop, PLLC, for the protester. Jon M. DeVore, Esq., Birch, Horton, Bittner & Cherot, P.C., and Jonathan Simon, Esq., Van Ness Feldman LLP, for Unify Now, Inc., the intervenor. James L. Weiner, Esq., and Jacob A. Borton, Esq., Department of the Interior, for the agency. Suresh S. Boodram, Esq., and Evan D. Wesser, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of quotations is denied where the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 2. Protest that the agency performed a flawed best-value determination is denied where the agency’s tradeoff was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Madison Services, Inc., a small business of Madison, Mississippi, protests the award of a contract to Unify Now, Inc., a small business of Oakland, California, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 140P8623Q0106, issued by the Department of the Interior, National Park Service (NPS) for preventative maintenance services. Madison challenges the agency’s evaluation of quotations, price reasonableness determination, and best-value tradeoff. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On September 22, 2023, the agency issued the RFQ for preventative maintenance services on Alcatraz Island, a designated National Historic Landmark within the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA).[1] Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFQ at 1; Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1-2.[2] The RFQ, which was amended three times, contemplated the issuance of a fixed-price contract with a 1-year base period and four 1-year option periods. RFQ at 3. The RFQ provided that award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis considering price and two non-price evaluation factors: technical approach; and past performance.[3] Id. at 36. For the technical approach factor, the RFQ initially instructed vendors to describe their respective proposed technical approaches for the project in narrative form in five pages or less. Id. at 40. This factor consisted of various subfactors including whether the vendor demonstrated an understanding of: (1) project requirements, the scope of work, and the contract documents; (2) how to organize, staff, and manage the contract, as well as the means and methods; and (3) project requirements for safety, sustainability, energy efficiency, and risk management. Id. With respect to the past performance factor, vendors were to use a “[p]ast [p]erformance [q]uestionnaire” form attached to the RFQ to provide information regarding the vendor’s or its proposed subcontractors’ performance of key trades or other activities. Id. at 41-42. The agency would then evaluate past performance in the areas of recency, relevance, and quality. Additionally, the agency could also review past performance information from other sources, including the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Id. at 36. Finally, under the price factor, vendors’ prices were to be evaluated for reasonableness and balance. Id. The RFQ informed offerors that the agency would evaluate price reasonableness based upon comparison with previously proposed prices, competitive published price lists, and with the independent government estimate (IGE), along with other measures. Id.