Decision Released in Protest Denial of Naval Sea Systems Command Professional Support Services Requirement

DIGEST

Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s proposal under the technical and management factor and the cost realism factor is denied where the record shows that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation and applicable procurement law and regulation.  2.  Protest challenging the agency’s best-value tradeoff decision to select a lower technically rated proposal at a lower cost/price is denied where the record shows that the agency’s decision was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation.

DISCUSSION

CACI challenges various aspects of the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s proposal under the technical and management factor, the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s proposal for cost realism, and the agency’s award decision.  In its various protest submissions, CACI has raised arguments that are in addition to, or variations of, those specifically discussed below.  While we do not specifically address all of CACI’s arguments, we have fully considered all of them and find no basis to sustain CACI’s protest.3  Technical and Management Factor, Technical Capabilities and Approach Subfactor  First, CACI challenges the three strengths assessed in Sayres’s proposal under the technical capabilities and approach subfactor, which was the most important subfactor under the technical and management factor.  As a representative example, CACI argues that “the most glaring error” and “a blatant departure from the RFP’s evaluation criteria” was the agency’s assessment of a strength “based primarily on the experience of [a named] individual proposed employee.”  Comments and Supp. Protest at 5.  In this regard, CACI contends that the RFP “expressly excluded any consideration of individual employees’ experience from” the evaluation under this subfactor.  Id. at 6.  CACI further contends that this individual’s “experience was irrelevant to the evaluation of” the awardee’s approach under this subfactor because this individual was discussed under the management approach subfactor in the awardee’s proposal.  Id.  In response, the agency argues that “CACI’s attempt to conflate one example of an individual’s experience while at the same time discounting the knowledge, capability, and experience credited throughout the strength is nothing more than mere disagreement with agency evaluators.”  Supp. MOL at 8.  The agency argues that the assessment of this strength was based on several considerations and consistent with the terms of the RFP.  For the technical capabilities and approach subfactor, the RFP provided that the agency “will evaluate the degree to which the proposal demonstrates specific knowledge, capability, technical approach, and corporate experience (not individual employees) for both Prime and Subcontractors in performing all aspects of the SOW/PWS [Statement of Work/Performance Work Statement].”  RFP at 122.  The RFP defined a strength as “an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or…

DECISION

CACI, Inc.-Federal, of Chantilly, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Sayres and Associates, LLC, of Washington, D.C., under task order request for proposals (RFP) No. N0016422R3005, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command, for professional support services.  The protester challenges various aspects of the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s proposal and the agency’s award decision.  We deny the protest.

See the decision here.

🔊 Listen to Story