Following the agencys corrective action, the agency attempted to contact two additional organizations identified by GMCS in its proposal as past performance references. Given this, we find the record does not support the protesters contention that the agency failed to contact any of its past performance references GMCS provided. As noted above, the RFP defined adverse as "past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comment received from sources without a formal rating system." RFP at 333. For instance, in the 2011-2012 CPAR, in addition to the comments cited by the PPET, the CPAR evaluator noted that Dyn Corp's "weakness lies in the areas of Aircraft Maintenance and Logistical Support." AR, Tab 17, Dyn Corp PPI for INL/A Contract, at 13. The CPARs did not include other comments relevant to the PPET's assessment under the supply support element or indicate that Dyn Corp's approach to logistics improved during performance.The record shows that the agency reached one of these references and recorded its input. To the extent the crux of the protesters complaint is that the agencys attempts to contact its references were inadequate, such that the agency was required to contact the other past performance references the protester had provided, there is no requirement that an agency contact all of an offerors references. In this respect, contrary to Dyn Corp's arguments, the CPAR ratings alone did not control whether an offeror's past performance record included adverse issues. In addition, the relative merits of an offeror's past performance information is generally within the broad discretion of the contracting agency. This same weakness regarding logistical support remained in the 2012-2013 CPAR, and the 2013-2014 CPAR highlighted the related concerns cited by PPET, discussed above. In fact, the PPET's March 2016 interview with the program COR (contracting officer's representative) discussed Dyn Corp's "ongoing problem with supply support." Id. According to the interview record, the COR reported that Dyn Corp "displayed a negative trend in providing parts and supply for the Beechcraft aircraft that were and are stationed in Afghanistan and Iraq." Id.(Dyn Corp International LLC B-414647.2, B-414647.3: Nov 1, 2017)Our Office will question an agencys past performance evaluation where the record indicates that the agency either failed to evaluate, or otherwise unreasonably considered, the relevance of past performance references in accordance with the solicitations stated evaluation criteria.
CLS Worldwide Support Servs., LLC, B-405298.2 et al., Sept. The evaluation of past performance, by its very nature, is subjective and we will not substitute our judgment for reasonably based evaluation ratings; an offeror's disagreement with an agency's evaluation judgments does not demonstrate that those judgments are unreasonable. VNT identified in its proposal five past performance references--three that stemmed from its own performance and two from its proposed subcontractor. In these emails, the references continue to state that they were not contacted by the agency. GMCS also disputes the agencys initial report of a negative reference from one of the eight references identified in its proposal.
While the protester asserts that the agency has misrepresented that it contacted this individual, and points to the email from its initial protest in which this person stated that no one from the agency had contacted him, we find that the agency has sufficiently demonstrated that it did, in fact, contact this individual, and find nothing improper about the agencys reliance on the negative past performance information it received.
With regard to the second individual who the protester asserts was never contacted, the agency official explains that she attempted to email this individual, and never received a response.
Declaration of Quality and Safety Manager, OAS, Dec.
4, 2017; AR, Tab 12, Agency Past Performance Notes.