NARCORPS Specialties, LLC (B-422886.2; B-422886.3)

You should not care.

Category: Technical evaluation, past performance, price realism

Date: 28 March 2025

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422886.2

NARCORPS Specialties, LLC, protested TSA’s award of a task order to Vertical Jobs, Inc., under RFQ No. 70T01024Q7670N009 for role player support services used in TSA and DHS training programs. NARCORPS raised three primary objections: the absence of a price realism analysis, Vertical Jobs’ alleged lack of adequate past performance, and insufficient documentation in the agency’s evaluation of the technical approach.

Price realism argument dismissed: GAO found the RFQ did not include any provision requiring or permitting a price realism analysis. While NARCORPS pointed to general language about understanding the complexity of work, GAO reiterated long-standing precedent that without explicit language in the solicitation, agencies are neither required nor allowed to conduct such an analysis for fixed-price or time-and-materials contracts.

Past performance challenge denied: NARCORPS claimed Vertical Jobs lacked comparable experience. GAO disagreed, citing Vertical Jobs’ prior BPAs with DOJ, DHS, and State for similar services. The agency reasonably found this experience relevant, well-documented, and supported by positive references and CPARS data.

Technical evaluation record upheld: GAO rejected the argument that the evaluation was a superficial restatement of quote content. Given the LPTA basis, GAO found the evaluation adequately documented and aligned with the RFQ's acceptability standards.

Protest dismissed in part and denied in part, with no legal error found, and no procedural or evaluation lapses warranting relief.

Digest

1. Protest challenging the agency’s failure to perform a price realism analysis is dismissed where the solicitation neither contained an express price realism provision nor informed vendors that the agency would review prices to determine whether they reflected a lack of technical understanding.
2. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s past performance is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and in accordance with the terms of the solicitation.
3. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s technical approach is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and in accordance with the terms of the solicitation.