Rather, we will review the record only to determine whether the agency's evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the stated evaluation criteria and applicable procurement statutes and regulations. In reviewing a protest challenging an agency's evaluation, our Office will not substitute our judgment for that of the agency, as the evaluation of proposals is a matter within the agency's broad discretion.
We discuss the protester's primary arguments below. Although we do not discuss all of the protester's contentions, we have reviewed all of Calibre's arguments and find that none provides a basis to sustain the protest. Calibre contends that these errors resulted in a flawed best-value tradeoff and an improper award to BAH. The protester further asserts that the VA failed to evaluate proposed prices in accordance with the RFP. The protester also challenges the evaluations of its own and the awardee's proposals under the past performance factor. The agency provided a debriefing to Calibre on June 9, 2017, and this protest followed.Ĭalibre challenges the agency's evaluation of its proposal under the technical approach and project management plan factors. The contracting officer, acting as the source selection authority, performed a best-value tradeoff and concluded that the benefits of BAH's higher-rated proposal merited paying the associated price premium. The final proposal revisions (FPRs) were evaluated as follows:ĪR, Tab 12, Best Value Determination, at 26. AR, Tab 8, Calibre Discussion Information, at 33. At the conclusion of discussions, the contracting officer requested final proposal revisions. at 2 AR, Tab 8, Calibre Discussion Information, at 9-15. The offerors were also provided an opportunity to engage in an in-person discussion.
Both offerors received written discussion letters that detailed all evaluated weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and various other issues identified in the proposals. After an initial evaluation, the contracting officer established a competitive range that included only Calibre and BAH. Contracting Officer's Statement of Facts (COSF) at 1. The VA received multiple proposals, including those from Calibre and BAH by the October 17, 2016, closing date. The non-price factors, when combined, were to be significantly more important than price. The solicitation provided that award would be made to a responsible offeror whose proposal was found to be most advantageous to the government based on the agency's evaluation of the following five factors in descending order of importance: technical capability, project management plan, past performance, small business subcontracting plan, and price. The RFP contemplated the award a single hybrid fixed-price and time-and-materials contract for a 9-month base period and four option years. The agency issued the RFP on September 9, 2016, as a commercial item solicitation under the procedures in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) parts 12 and 15, seeking proposals to provide governance, operations, curriculum development and revision, training, plans, and analysis services to support TAP world-wide. The program provides a variety of services including pre-separation counselling, benefits briefings, and job market skills seminars. The VA administers the TAP program in coordination with several military and civilian agencies to ensure service members who are transitioning to civilian life are "career ready." RFP at 7. Calibre, the incumbent contractor, challenges the agency's evaluation of its own proposal and the award decision. VA119A-16-R-0159, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for support services to continue administration and program management for the VA's Transition Assistance Program (TAP). (BAH), of McLean, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. Calibre Systems, Inc., of Alexandria, Virginia, protests the award of a contract to Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.
0 kommentar(er)
