Providing Extra Data is Not a Deficiency

In the multiple ID/IQ contract to provide support services, the RFP instructed offerors to describe their management and staffing plans and to include proof of organizational-level accreditation by providing staffing plans to include “at a minimum” the percentage of staff with third party certifications. The agency determined that protester EM&I (1) did not provide proof of its accreditation and (2) did not provide a percentage of staff with third party certifications where instead, it provided the number of staff with certifications. EM&I argued it did provide proof of accreditation, which the agency eventually agreed it had and its failure to provide a percentage of staff was not a deficiency arguing its submission of actual staff number exceeded the minimum requirement. It further argued that a percentage gives no insight into the actual number possessing certifications giving an example that a 50 percent figure would not show whether there were 5 out of 10 or 50 out of 100 certified employees. The Comptroller General sided with EM&I ruling the agency improperly rejected as unacceptable the offer that provided a better understanding of the offeror’s capabilities. It found the agency would have rated EM&I’s proposal as acceptable but for the identified deficiencies so, at a minimum, it would have to consider EM&I’s proposal as part of a technical/price tradeoff to determine a best value offer (Eng’g Mgmt. & Integration Inc., Comp. Gen. Dec B-400356.4)

{TAG_FORM_TITLE}