B-179127(1), SEP 6, 1973

B-179127(1): Sep 6, 1973

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

IT IS REPORTED THAT BEFORE THE AWARD WAS MADE. THE BIDS WERE ALSO EVALUATED USING AN EVALUATION WEIGHT OF 13.6 FOR THE MONTHLY LISTING REQUIREMENT (THE CORRECT FACTOR) AND THAT THIS EVALUATION DID NOT DISPLACE DATE-MAIL. AS THE LOW BIDDER WE FIND NO BASIS TO DISTURB THE AWARD BUT THE ADMINISTRATOR NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART HAS BEEN ADVISED TO SEE THAT ADEQUATE PROCEDURES BE INSTITUTED TO INSURE THAT ACCURATE BID EVALUATION FACTORS WILL BE USED IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS. (MLSL) BID WAS IMPROPERLY EVALUATED UNDER THE BID EVALUATION SYSTEM SET FORTH IN THE INVITATION FOR BIDS (IFB). CONVERSION TO CONTRACTOR'S AUTOMATED SYSTEM (THE SUCCESSFUL BIDDER WILL BE FURNISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT A MAGNETIC TAPE COVERING ALL CURRENT LISTINGS AS OF JULY 1.

B-179127(1), SEP 6, 1973

DENIAL OF PROTEST MADE UNDER SOLICITATION NO. 458, ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART. WHILE SOME QUESTION ARISES IN CONNECTION WITH THE EVALUATION OF BIDS AND FACTORS USED, IT IS REPORTED THAT BEFORE THE AWARD WAS MADE, THE BIDS WERE ALSO EVALUATED USING AN EVALUATION WEIGHT OF 13.6 FOR THE MONTHLY LISTING REQUIREMENT (THE CORRECT FACTOR) AND THAT THIS EVALUATION DID NOT DISPLACE DATE-MAIL, INCORPORATED, AS THE LOW BIDDER WE FIND NO BASIS TO DISTURB THE AWARD BUT THE ADMINISTRATOR NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART HAS BEEN ADVISED TO SEE THAT ADEQUATE PROCEDURES BE INSTITUTED TO INSURE THAT ACCURATE BID EVALUATION FACTORS WILL BE USED IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS.

TO MAILING LIST SYSTEMS, LTD.:

WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER DATED JULY 6, 1973, PROTESTING AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF DATA PROCESSING, MAILING AND OTHER RELATED SERVICES, TO DATA-MAIL, INCORPORATED (DATA-MAIL), UNDER SOLICITATION NO. 458, ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART. BASICALLY, YOU ASSERT THAT THE MAILING LIST SYSTEMS, LTD. (MLSL) BID WAS IMPROPERLY EVALUATED UNDER THE BID EVALUATION SYSTEM SET FORTH IN THE INVITATION FOR BIDS (IFB). AS EXPLAINED BELOW, WE DISAGREE.

THE PERTINENT PORTIONS OF THE IFB FOLLOW:

"2. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES AND PRICES

"A. CONVERSION TO CONTRACTOR'S AUTOMATED SYSTEM (THE SUCCESSFUL BIDDER WILL BE FURNISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT A MAGNETIC TAPE COVERING ALL CURRENT LISTINGS AS OF JULY 1, 1973.)

- CALENDAR OF EVENTS/EXHIBITION INVITATIONS LIST PER ADDRESSEE

EA

"B. MAINTAINING THE LIST

- ADDITIONS EA

- DELETIONS EA

- CHANGES EA

- MONTHLY LISTING OF CHANGES, DELETIONS AND

ADDITIONS LISTING

PER 1,000

"C. PRINTING LABELS AND PRODUCING REPORTS

- PRINTING OF LABELS EA

- CARBON COPIES OF LABELS EA

"D. MAILING SERVICES

- AFFIXING OF LABELS EA

- INSERTION OF UP TO TWO PIECES OF MAIL EA

- INSERTION OF ADDITIONAL PIECES EA

- SORTING, TYING, BAGGING, AND MAILING EA

- PICK UP FROM OR DELIVER TO NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART OF INPUT OR MATERIALS TO BE MAILED

TRIP

"3. EVALUATION OF BIDS

AWARD WILL BE MADE IN THE AGGREGATE WITH THE FOLLOWING WEIGHTS APPLIED TO THE UNIT PRICES BID FOR ITEMS A THROUGH D AS LISTED IN PARAGRAPH 2 ABOVE:

BID EVALUATION

ITEM WEIGHT

"A. CONVERSION TO CONTRACTOR'S

SYSTEM 20,000

"B. ADDITIONS 8,000

DELETIONS5,000

CHANGES 600

MONTHLY LISTING OF CHANGES, DELETIONS AND

ADDITIONS 163.2

"C. PRINTING OF LABELS 240,000

CARBON COPIES OF LABELS 140,000

"D. AFFIXING OF LABELS 380,000

INSERTION OF UP TO TWO PIECES OF MAIL 140,000

INSERTION OF ADDITIONAL PIECES 40,000

SORTING, TYING, BAGGING, AND MAILING 380,000

PICK UP FROM OR DELIVERY TO NATIONAL

GALLERY 7"

THE NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART MULTIPLIED YOUR $150,00 UNIT BID PRICE FOR "LISTING PER 1,000" BY THE BID EVALUATION WEIGHT FACTOR OF 163.2, WHICH RESULTED IN A WEIGHTED BID OF $24,480.00 FOR THAT ITEM. WHEN ADDED TO THE TOTAL OF WEIGHTED BIDS ON ALL OTHER ITEMS ($5,228.00), YOUR AGGREGATE BID WAS $29,708.00. DATA-MAIL SUBMITTED A UNIT BID PRICE OF $20.00 FOR "LISTING PER 1,000" ON THE "MONTHLY LISTING OF CHANGES, DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS" ITEM, WHICH RESULTED IN A WEIGHTED BID OF $3,264.00 FOR THAT ITEM. WHEN THIS AMOUNT WAS ADDED TO DATA MAIL'S TOTAL OF WEIGHTED BID PRICES ON ALL OTHER ITEMS ($5,307.50), DATA-MAIL'S AGGREGATE BID WAS FOUND TO BE $8,571.50. THEREFORE, DATA MAIL WAS AWARDED THE CONTRACT.

YOU CONTEND THAT SINCE THE IFB STATED THAT THE BID EVALUATION WEIGHTS WOULD BE "APPLIED TO THE UNIT PRICES BID", AND SINCE THE PRICE OF THE "MONTHLY LISTING OF CHANGES, DELETIONS AND CONDITIONS" WAS REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN IN TERMS OF A "LISTING PER 1,000", THE BID EVALUATION WEIGHT (163.2) SHOULD HAVE BEEN MULTIPLIED, IN YOUR CASE, BY $ .15 ($150.00 DIVIDED BY 1,000) AND IN DATA-MAIL'S CASE BY $ .02 ($20.00 DIVIDED BY 1,000). HAD THE BIDS BEEN EVALUATED IN THAT MANNER YOUR BID AND DATA MAIL'S BID FOR THAT ITEM, WOULD HAVE BEEN $24.48 AND $3.26, RESPECTIVELY. WHEN ADDED TO THE TOTAL OF THE WEIGHTED BIDS FOR ALL OTHER ITEMS, THE AGGREGATE WEIGHTED BIDS WOULD HAVE BEEN AS FOLLOWS:

TOTAL OF WEIGHTED WEIGHTED BID FOR

BIDS FOR ALL OTHER MONTHLY LIST OF AGGREGATE

ITEMS CHANGES, ETC. BID

DATA-MAIL $5,307.50 $ 3.26 $5,310.76

MLSL $5,228.00 $24.48 $5,252.48

YOU ASSERT THAT SINCE THE ABOVE METHOD OF EVALUATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN UTILIZED, MLSL SUBMITTED THE LOW AGGREGATE BID AND WAS ENTITLED TO THE AWARD.

WE BELIEVE THAT THE IFB MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE PRICE SOUGHT FOR THIS ITEM FOR EVALUATION PURPOSES WAS A UNIT PRICE BASED UPON FURNISHING A MONTHLY LISTING OF A COMPOSITE 1,000 CHANGES, DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS, AND NOT A PRICE FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL CHANGE, DELETION AND ADDITION. THE BLANKS SET FORTH IN THE IFB IMMEDIATELY ABOVE THE ITEM IN QUESTION ALREADY PROVIDED FOR PRICES FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL CHANGE, ADDITION AND DELETION.

IN THIS CONNECTION WE NOTE THAT THE SUM OF THE EVALUATION WEIGHTS LISTED FOR INDIVIDUAL CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS IS 13,600 (8,000 PLUS 5,000 PLUS 600). AS STATED IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT, THE BID EVALUATION WEIGHT FOR THE MONTHLY LISTING OF CHANGES, DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS LOGICALLY SHOULD HAVE EQUALED THE SUM OF THE EVALUATION WEIGHTS LISTED FOR THESE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS DIVIDED BY 1,000 OR 13.6, RATHER THAN 163.2. IT IS FURTHER REPORTED, HOWEVER, THAT BEFORE THE AWARD WAS MADE, THE BIDS WERE ALSO EVALUATED USING AN EVALUATION WEIGHT OF 13.6 FOR THE MONTHLY LISTING REQUIREMENT AND THAT THIS EVALUATION DID NOT DISPLACE DATA -MAIL, INCORPORATED, AS THE LOW BIDDER.

UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND NO BASIS TO DISTURB THE AWARD. YOUR PROTEST IS THEREFORE DENIED. HOWEVER, WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO THE ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART, BY LETTER OF TODAY (COPY ENCLOSED) THAT ADEQUATE PROCEDURES BE INSTITUTED TO INSURE THAT ACCURATE BID EVALUATION FACTORS WILL BE USED IN FUTURE PROCUREMENTS.