• LinkedIn
  • Google +
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

+1-703-556-0411

Bid Protest Weekly
  • Home
  • Bid Protest Ed Center
    • WHAT is a bid protest?
    • WHO can file a bid protest
    • DO I need an Attorney?
    • WHY Should you file a bid protest?
    • WHEN Must you file a bid protest?
    • WHERE can you file a bid protest?
    • READING the RFP
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • About Us
  • Contact Us

CLS Worldwide Support Services, LLC, B-405298.2, B-405298.3, B-405298.4, September 11, 2012

  • By GCPC GovCon Legal Team
  • October 3, 2012
  • Cost-Technical Trade-OffProposal Evaluation

Link: GAO Decision

Protestor: CLS Worldwide Support Services, LLC

Agency: Department of the Army

Disposition: Denied.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

GAO Digest:

  1. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of proposals is denied where the evaluation was reasonably based, consistent with the solicitation criteria, and treated the offerors equally.
  2. Protest challenging the source selection authority’s (SSA) conclusion that the advantages in the awardee’s non-cost/price proposal merited selection of its higher cost/price proposal is denied where the SSA’s judgments were reasonable, consistent with the stated evaluation scheme, and adequately documented.

General Counsel PC Highlight:

CLS Worldwide Support Services, LLC, (CWS2) protested the award to ManTech Telecommunications and Information Systems Corporation of a contract for mine resistant ambush protected (MRAP) family of vehicles contractor logistics sustainment and support services (CLSS). The RFP divided the performance of the MRAP CLSS effort into four time periods: (1) a phase-in period; (2) an elective early operational readiness (EOR) period; (3) an operational readiness base option period; and (4) an operational readiness option period. A proposed EOR period would end on the same date as the phase-in period, 180 days after contract award. The RFP advised that proposing an EOR period within the phase-in plan may reduce the risk of timely meeting the phase-in requirements.

The Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) conducted a comparative analysis of the proposals, and submitted a report to the SSA with a majority opinion recommending CWS2 for award, and dissenting opinion recommending ManTech. The opinions disagreed as to whether ManTech’s superiority on non-cost/price factors was worth the 3.5 percent price premium attributable to ManTech’s proposal. The SSA, after its own comparative assessment, concluded that ManTech offered several discriminators which collectively resulted in less risk in timely meeting the phase-in requirements within the 180 days. Combined with ManTech’s slight advantage due to receiving a higher number of excellent ratings by customers in response to past performance questionnaires, the SSA concluded that ManTech offered the more advantageous proposal.

The GAO held that the agency’s evaluation of the offerors’ proposals and source selection was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation. It found that the agency reasonably considered risks related to CSW2’s proposed 137-day schedule, finding such consideration reasonably related to the evaluation of the risk of meeting the overall 180-day schedule. The GAO disagreed that the SSEB’s low risk assessment on the 137-day schedule was internally inconsistent with the SSEB’s underlying evaluation, which found no risks to CSW2’s ability to meet the 180-day schedule. It pointed out several areas in which the SSEB had raised concerns, noting that a finding of confidence in CWS2’s ability to perform does not equate to no risk.

The GAO then addressed each of CSW2’s challenges to the discriminators which resulted in ManTech’s phase-in plan having less risk than CSW2’s plan for timely and credibly meeting the phase-in requirements. It found that CSW2’s contentions were merely disagreement with the SSA’s reasonable conclusion that ManTech’s CAC/LOA approach was more advantageous, because it demonstrated a superior understanding of the process by not only explaining its procedures but also setting forth a comprehensive plan and schedule. It found no evidence that the agency based its analysis upon information that was only available to ManTech as the incumbent. The GAO also found reasonable the agency’s evaluation of ManTech’s past performance, disagreeing that negative performance information for a proposed subcontractor of ManTech should have prevented ManTech’s past performance from being a discriminating factor. Finally, the GAO concluded that the agency’s best value determination and award to a higher-rated, higher-priced proposal was reasonable and well documented.

A disappointed offeror should always request a debriefing so as to better understand the agency’s evaluation and source selection decision, and to gain insight which may help the offeror improve their proposals in future procurements.  The debriefing can also give valuable information that will help the offeror determine whether to protest the award.  If an offeror decides to protest the award, they should carefully consider whether there are flaws in the procurement, or if they merely disagree with the agency’s evaluation. The fact that the evaluation team provides conflicting recommendations to the SSA is not grounds alone to sustain a protest, so long as the SSA makes a reasonable and well-documented decision consistent with the evaluation criteria.

Share

Related Posts

Peak-a-Boo, I see You! – An Agency’s Undocumented Best Value Analysis.

February 1, 2023

Matter of Science Applications International Corporation

February 28, 2022

Matter of WRG Fire Training Simulation Systems, Inc.

January 12, 2022

Matter of Patronus Systems, Inc.

December 3, 2020

Comments are closed

Search Bid Protest Weekly

Need help with a bid protest?

Call us at: 703-556-0411 Or fill out this form:

Categories

  • 8(a) Sole Source Awards
  • Acknowledging Amendments
  • Adequately Written Proposal
  • Adverse Agency Action
  • Adverse Impact Analysis
  • Agency Tender
  • Alternate or Previously-Approved Product
  • Alternative Dispute Resolution
  • Ambiguity in Solicitation
  • Attorney's Fees
  • Bad Faith in Evaluation
  • Below-Cost Offer
  • Best Value
  • Beyond the Scope
  • Bias
  • Bid and Proposal Costs
  • Bid Bond
  • Bid Compliance
  • Bid Protest Decisions
  • Bid Protest Jurisdiction
  • Bid Protests
  • Bidding Best Practices
  • Blanket Purchase Agreement
  • Blanket Purchase Order
  • Blog Articles
  • Bona Fide Needs Rule
  • Brand Name or Equal
  • Broad Agency Announcement
  • Brooks Act
  • Bundling or Consolidation
  • Buy American Act
  • Cancellation of a Solicitation
  • Capability of Contractor
  • CCR Registration
  • Certificate of Competency (COC)
  • Certification Requirements
  • Changes Clause
  • Clarifications
  • Clear and Convincing Evidence
  • Clearly Meritorious Protest
  • Clerical Error
  • Commercial Item Acquisition
  • Competitive Range
  • Compliance
  • Conflict of Interest
  • Construction Design-Build
  • Construction Services
  • Contract Administration
  • Contract Modifications
  • Contracting Preference
  • Contractor Responsibility
  • Corporate Capability
  • Corrective Action
  • Cost Accounting System
  • Cost Evaluation
  • Cost Realism
  • Cost Reimbursement Contract
  • Cost-Technical Trade-Off
  • Customary Commercial Practice
  • CVE
  • DCAA Audit
  • Debriefing
  • Default Termination
  • Deficient Price Proposal
  • Delivery Order jurisdiction
  • Delivery Schedule
  • Designated Employee Agent
  • Disclosure of Price
  • Disclosure of Source Selection-Sensitive Information
  • Discussions
  • Disqualification
  • Documentation of Evaluation
  • Domestic Production Requirement
  • Education Center Articles
  • Electronic Filing
  • Evaluation Criteria
  • Evaluations
  • Events
  • Executive Order Compliance
  • Experience of Contractor
  • Experience Requirement
  • Facility Clearance
  • Fair Market Price
  • FASA
  • FedBizOpps
  • Federal Prison Industries (FPI)
  • Filing Deadlines
  • Final Evaluation
  • Final Proposal Revisions
  • Financial Responsibility
  • Fixed Price Contract
  • Former Government Employees
  • FSS Contract
  • GAO Bid Protest Review
  • GAO Jurisdiction
  • GAO Standard of Review
  • Government Contracts
  • Government Office Closings
  • Government Surplus Material
  • GSA Lease
  • HUBZone
  • ID/IQ
  • Impaired Objectivity
  • In-Sourcing
  • Incentive Fee
  • Inclement Weather Delay
  • Incomplete Proposal
  • Incorporation by Reference
  • Incumbent Capture
  • Incumbent Status
  • Independent Government Estimate (IGE)
  • Individual Environmental Report
  • Industrial Mobilization
  • Innovations
  • Interested Party
  • Invitation for Bid
  • Invited Contractor
  • Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act
  • Joint Venture
  • Key Personnel
  • Labor Hours
  • Labor Rate Pricing
  • Late Proposals
  • Late Submissions
  • Level of Effort
  • Licensing Requirements
  • Limitation on Subcontracting
  • Liquidated Damages
  • Lost Proposal
  • Lowest Price Technically Acceptable
  • Mail-Box Rule
  • Management Planning
  • Market Research
  • MAS Contracts
  • Material Misrepresentation
  • Material Solicitation Amendment
  • Material Solicitation Terms
  • Meaningful Discussions
  • Micro-Purchase Threshold
  • Minimum Requirements
  • Misleading Discussions
  • Mistake
  • Mitigation Strategy
  • Multiple Awards
  • NAICS Code
  • National Security
  • Negotiation
  • News
  • Non-Procurement Instruments
  • Novations
  • Offeror Representations
  • OMB Circular A-76
  • Option Exercise
  • Oral Presentations
  • Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)
  • Page Limitations
  • Past Performance
  • Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)
  • Performance Based Standards
  • Permits and Responsibilities
  • Personal Conflicts of Interest
  • Post-Award Changes to the Contract
  • Post-Protest Re-Evaluations
  • Practicable Alternative
  • Pre-Award Protest
  • Pre-award vs. Post-award Requirements
  • Pre-Qualification of Offerors
  • Pre-Solicitation Notice
  • Prejudice
  • Price Calculation Error
  • Price Calculation Error
  • Price Evaluation
  • Price of FSS Task Order Quote
  • Price Realism
  • Price Reasonableness
  • Price Reduction
  • Procurement Announcement
  • Procurement Integrity
  • Product Testing
  • Proposal Acceptance Period
  • Proposal Detail
  • Proposal Evaluation
  • Proposal Extension
  • Proposal Standards
  • Proposals
  • Protest Terms of Solicitation
  • Protester Comments
  • Public-Private Competition
  • Randolph-Sheppard Act (RSA)
  • Rate Tenders
  • Re-Certification of Size Status
  • Reconsideration
  • Reevaluation
  • Reevaluation Standards
  • Reimbursed Attorney's Fees
  • Reimbursement of Protest Costs
  • Rejection of Proposal
  • Relaxation or Waiver of Requirement
  • Relevancy of Past Performance
  • Reliance on the Proposal
  • Remedies
  • Requirements Contract
  • Responsibility
  • Responsiveness
  • Restricted Competition
  • Resumes
  • Revision of Proposal
  • Revision of Proposals
  • Risk
  • Rule of Two
  • SBA Status protest
  • Scope of GAO Review
  • SDVOSB Set-Asides
  • Significant Issue Exception
  • Simplified Acquisition Procedures
  • Site Visit
  • Size Determination
  • Size Protest
  • Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program
  • Small Business Set-Asides
  • Small Business Subcontracting Goals
  • Sole-Source Award
  • Solicitation Amendment
  • Solicitation Requirements
  • Source Approval
  • Source Selection Authority
  • Source Selection Decision
  • Source Selection Plan
  • Sources Sought Notice
  • Staffing Plan
  • State and Local Requirements
  • Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA)
  • Subcontract Protest
  • Subcontractor Experience
  • Suspension and Debarment
  • Taking Exception to RFP Requirements
  • Task Orders
  • Teaming Agreement
  • Technical Acceptability
  • Technical Evaluation
  • Technical Evaluation
  • Termination of Award
  • Terms of the Solicitation
  • Timeliness of Protest
  • Timely Filing
  • Timely Performance
  • Timely Proposal Submission
  • Trade Agreement Act
  • Unbalanced Pricing
  • Unduly Restrictive Terms
  • Unequal Access to Information
  • Unequal Treatment of Offerors
  • Uniform Time Act of 1996
  • Unstated Evaluation Criteria
  • Unusual and Compelling Urgency
  • Use of Appropriated Funds
  • Veterans First
  • VIP Database
  • VOSB Set Asides
  • Wage Determination

Get Help


Talk to an
attorney who
specializes
in bid protests:

+1-703-556-0411
Email

Keep up to date
on bid protest
decisions and
policies:

© 2023 Bid Protest Weekly

  • LinkedIn
  • Google +
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Home
  • Bid Protest Ed Center
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Bid Protest Ed Center
    • WHAT is a bid protest?
    • WHO can file a bid protest
    • DO I need an Attorney?
    • WHY Should you file a bid protest?
    • WHEN Must you file a bid protest?
    • WHERE can you file a bid protest?
    • READING the RFP
  • Blog
  • Topics
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • LinkedIn
  • Google +
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

+1-703-556-0411