Decision released in protest sustainment related to DHS USCG contractor support services requirement

DIGEST

1. Protest that agency unreasonably evaluated technical proposals is sustained where the report of the evaluation contained a factual error regarding proposal content, and where the evaluation findings did not accurately reflect the record.
2. Protest that agency conducted a flawed best-value tradeoff analysis is sustained where the award was based on evaluation errors, and the record demonstrates a reasonable possibility that the protester was prejudiced by those errors.

DISCUSSION

Insight argues that the TET report inaccurately summarized its evaluation of THOR’s corporate experience references, crediting the awardee’s proposal with better corporate experience than the evaluation found, and that the USCG then carried that inaccurate finding through to the source selection decision.  The protester further contends that the agency unreasonably and disparately evaluated offerors’ corporate experience references by finding that two of THOR’s proposed subcontractors demonstrated ABS and NVR experience, without also finding that two of Insight’s proposed subcontractors demonstrated that same experience.  Finally, Insight argues that these evaluation errors resulted in a flawed best-value tradeoff analysis that prejudiced the protester.  As explained below, we find that the record supports these allegations.  As a result, we sustain the protest.5

TET Characterization of Relevance of THOR’s Contract References

Insight argues that the TET inaccurately summarized its evaluation of the awardee’s contract references when the TET stated that all four references showed the highest degree of relevance.  Supp. Comments at 11-12.  This was unreasonable, the protester asserts, when the TET’s own findings regarding THOR’s contract reference 4 did not support a finding that contract reference was highly relevant.  Id.

In reviewing protests of an award in a task order competition, we do not reevaluate proposals, but examine the record to determine whether the evaluation and source selection decision are reasonable and consistent with the solicitation’s evaluation criteria and applicable procurement laws and regulations.  Ohio KePRO, Inc., B-417836, B-417836.2, Nov. 18, 2019, 2020 CPD ¶ 47 at 4…

DECISION

Insight Technology Solutions, LLC, of Annapolis, Maryland, protests the issuance of a task order to THOR Solutions, LLC (THOR), of Arlington, Virginia, under task order request for proposals (TORFP) No. 70Z02323R45900001, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, United States Coast Guard (USCG), for contractor support services.  Insight asserts that the agency’s proposal evaluation report contained a factual error regarding proposal content, that the agency unreasonably and disparately evaluated technical proposals, and that the agency conducted a flawed best-value tradeoff analysis.  We sustain the protest.

See the decision here.

🔊 Listen to Story