United States Government Accountability Office 

Washington, DC 20548 

Comptroller General

of the United States

 

Decision 

Matter of: Vocus Inc. 

File: B-402391 

Date: March 25, 2010 

Todd Graham for the protester. 

Michael McCabe, Esq., Federal Emergency Management Agency, for the agency. 

Cherie J. Owen, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, 

GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. 

DIGEST 

1. Protest challenging evaluation of successful vendor’s proposal for information 

management system with regard to e-mail tracking and contact display capability is 

denied where the record shows that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable. 

2. Protest challenging evaluation of successful vendor’s proposal for information 

management system with regard to the ability of proposed system to integrate with a 

specific press release distribution service is denied where the record shows that, 

although the agency effectively relaxed the solicitation requirement, this action did 

not prejudice the protester. 

DECISION 

Vocus Inc., of Lanham, Maryland, protests the issuance of an order to PR Newswire 

Association, LLC, of Washington, D.C., by the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency (FEMA) under request for proposals (RFP) No. W469106Y for a contact 

management and distribution system to support the public outreach efforts of its 

Office of External Affairs. Vocus contends that PR Newswire’s proposal should have 

been rejected as unacceptable because it failed to satisfy several of the RFP’s 

requirements. 

We deny the protest. 
BACKGROUND 

FEMA issued the solicitation on November 17, 2009, to holders of applicable General 

Services Administration Federal Supply Service contracts, seeking a 

web-based information management system to more effectively reach out to key 

media and non-media stakeholders and measure and report on the effectiveness of 

its public outreach efforts. Agency Report (AR), Tab D, Contracting Officer’s (CO) 

Statement, at 1. The RFP’s statement of work (SOW) set forth the agency’s 

requirements regarding system management and project management. The system 

management portion of the work was broken down into three main areas: contact 

management; distribution; and collaboration and campaign management. The first 

area required vendors to provide a system or service with contact management 

capabilities that would integrate essential external affairs functions into one 

browser-based, database-driven software suite. The second area, distribution, 

required vendors to provide a system or service to send broadcast messages to a list 

of targeted contacts via e-mail and fax. The third area, collaboration and campaign 

management, required that vendors provide a system or service that would enable 

FEMA’s external affairs office to organize and track progress on communications 

projects and campaigns, and assist in maximizing the targeted distribution of 

communications products. Each service area listed a number of required system 

attributes. 

As relevant here, the contact management section of the SOW specified that a 

vendor’s system had to provide the capability of “viewing all information pertinent to 

a contact from within a contact’s record--on one screen (as well as from a PDA1

).” 

AR, Tab A, RFP Attach. 1, at 3. 

Under the collaboration and campaign management portion of the SOW, the RFP 

required that the proposed system be capable of generating electronic press releases 

or external affairs products, and permit distribution of such products to an unlimited 

number of recipients as well as “provide the ability to integrate distribution via 

PRWeb and other online distribution capabilities outside of the contractor’s system 

or service.”2

 Id. at 4. The SOW also required that the system provide the agency with 

the ability to track e-mail to determine which recipients opened e-mail messages, and 

what documents or links were accessed from which e-mails. Id. 

 

1

 The acronym “PDA” stands for “personal digital assistant,” an evolving term 

referring to a broad range of electronic devices with varying capabilities, including 

internet access and email. See, e.g., www.it.jhmi.edu/glossary/pqrs.html. 

2

 PRWeb is an online news and press release distribution service, owned by Vocus. 

See www.prweb.com/pr/press-release-tip/prweb-faqs.html. 

Page 2 B-402391 
The RFP listed four evaluation factors: technical approach, management approach, 

past performance, and price. The solicitation specified that technical approach was 

the most important factor. Management approach and past performance were of 

equal importance, but less important than technical approach. The three non-price 

factors, when combined, were more important than price. The order was to be 

issued to the responsible offeror whose proposal represented the “best value” to the 

government, all factors considered. AR, Tab A, RFP, Attach. 2, at 2. 

Three offerors, including PR Newswire and Vocus, submitted proposals by the 

November 30 closing date. AR, Tab D, CO Statement, at 2. An agency technical 

evaluation panel (TEP) evaluated offerors’ proposals as to the non-price factors 

using an adjectival rating scheme that was set forth in the RFP: excellent; good; 

satisfactory; marginal; unsatisfactory; and, with regard to the past performance 

factor, neutral. Id. at 1-2. 

Each member of the TEP individually evaluated the proposals and prepared a 

technical evaluation worksheet. Id. at 2; AR, Tabs J-O, TEP Member Evaluation 

Sheets. The TEP then met to prepare a consensus TEP report and decided to 

conduct clarifications with each of the offerors. After clarifications, the TEP 

updated the consensus report and assigned the following ratings: 

Offeror 

Technical 

Approach 

Management 

Approach 

Past 

Performance 

Overall 

Rating 

PR Newswire Good Good Good Good 

Vocus, Inc. Satisfactory Good Good Good 

Offeror 3 Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Neutral Unsatisfactory 

AR, Tab G, TEP Report, at 2. 

On December 17, the source selection authority (SSA) determined that PR 

Newswire’s proposal was both technically superior to, and lower-priced than, the 

proposal submitted by Vocus. Specifically, the SSA noted that PR Newswire’s 

proposal had received a rating of good on the technical approach factor, while 

Vocus’ received a rating of satisfactory. The SSA also noted that PR Newswire’s 

proposal offered a cost savings of 21% over the life of the contract, when compared 

to the price submitted by Vocus. The SSA therefore determined that PR Newswire’s 

proposal represented the best value to the government. AR, Tab P, Source Selection 

Decision, at 2. The order was issued to PR Newswire on December 18, and on 

December 19, the protester received its debriefing. This protest followed. 

Page 3 B-402391 
DISCUSSION 

The protest raises several challenges to FEMA’s evaluation of the proposal submitted 

by PR Newswire.3 Vocus alleges that PR Newswire’s proposal did not offer the 

following features, as required by the RFP: the ability to view contact information 

on a PDA; the ability to provide tracking of e-mail messages; and the ability to 

integrate distribution of press releases via PRWeb.4

 In its comments on the agency 

report, the protester also challenged the agency’s evaluation of its own proposal. 

Specifically, the firm challenged several statements in the individual evaluators’ 

scoring sheets, and the fact that the sheets were dated prior to the agency’s 

clarifications with the offerors. The protester contends that its proposal was 

improperly evaluated as having weaknesses that in fact were addressed during 

clarifications. 

The evaluation of technical proposals is a matter within the discretion of the 

contracting agency. Marine Animal Prods. Int’l, Inc., B-247150.2, July 13, 1992, 92-2 

CPD ¶ 16 at 5. In reviewing an agency’s evaluation, we will not reevaluate technical 

proposals; instead, we will examine the agency’s evaluation to ensure that it was 

reasonable and consistent with the solicitation’s stated evaluation criteria. 

Clark/Caddell Joint Venture, B-402055, Jan. 7, 2010, 2010 CPD ¶ 21 at 5. An offeror’s 

mere disagreement with the agency’s evaluation does not render the evaluation 

unreasonable. McDonnell Douglas Corp., B-259694.2, B-259694.3, June 16, 1995, 95-2 

CPD ¶ 51 at 18. 

With regard to the protester’s challenge to the evaluation of its own proposal based 

on its review of the evaluators’ scoring sheets, the record reflects that the evaluators 

reviewed the initial proposals, completed individual scoring sheets, and prepared the 

TEP Report prior to clarifications with the offerors. FEMA Response to GAO 

Questions, Mar. 12, 2010, at 2. After clarifications, they updated the TEP Report to 

reflect the information provided by the offerors; the individual scoring sheets were 

not updated. Id.; AR, Tab D, CO Statement, at 2-3. The record also shows that the 

 

3

 To the extent that Vocus asserts that, despite what PR Newswire stated in its 

proposal, it is not capable of meeting the solicitation’s requirements, these assertions 

concern the agency’s affirmative determination of responsibility. Affirmative 

determinations of responsibility are largely committed to the contracting officer’s 

discretion, and our Office will not consider a protest challenging such 

determinations, except in limited circumstances not alleged or demonstrated here. 

See Bid Protest Regulations, 4 C.F.R. § 21.5(c) (2009). 

4

 Vocus raised several other challenges to evaluation of PR Newswire’s proposal in 

its initial protest, but failed to address these grounds in its comments on the agency 

report. Therefore, we regard these protest grounds as abandoned. See Remington 

Arms Co., Inc., B-297374, B-297374.2, Jan. 12, 2006, 2006 CPD ¶ 32 at 4 n.4. 

Page 4 B-402391 
updated TEP Report was the document relied upon by the contracting officer in 

making the selection decision, not the individual scoring sheets. AR, Tab D, CO 

Statement, at 3. Therefore, the protester’s challenges to the statements contained in 

the individual scoring sheets, but not reflected in the TEP Report, provide no basis 

upon which to sustain the protest. 

Vocus argues that PR Newswire’s proposal was unacceptable because the firm did 

not offer to provide a system that would allow contact information to be viewed on a 

PDA. Protest at 1. The agency responds that, while neither PR Newswire nor Vocus 

specifically addressed the use of a PDA to display contact information from their 

systems, the agency concluded that the proposals of both companies met this 

requirement. FEMA Supp. Response, at 4. With regard to PR Newswire, FEMA 

explains that because the firm offered the ability to share content in several 

electronic media, the agency properly inferred that the content would be available 

via PDA. Id. at 4-5. For example, PR Newswire offered the ability to view content 

directly through Facebook, and Facebook is accessible on mobile devices, such as 

PDAs and cellular telephones. Id. at 5. 

The RFP did not define the term “PDA,” which, as noted above, is an imprecise term, 

commonly used to refer to numerous types of hand-held electronic devices. Given 

that most PDAs in use today offer the ability to access the internet and e-mail 

accounts, we think that the agency’s conclusion--that all systems that offered the 

ability to view information electronically satisfied this requirement--was reasonable. 

The protester also contends that PR Newswire’s proposal did not offer the ability to 

provide e-mail tracking. However, our review of the record shows that PR Newswire 

specifically offered to provide this service. In this regard, the firm’s proposal stated, 

“with fax and e-mail distributions FEMA will be able to see who has received your 

releases and if they have opened them, etc.” AR, Tab B, PR Newswire Proposal at 7. 

Therefore, we find no merit to this protest ground. 

Finally, the protester contends that PR Newswire’s system does not offer the ability 

to integrate distribution of press releases and other products via PRWeb, as required 

by the RFP. Protest at 1. The agency acknowledges that PR Newswire’s proposal 

did not offer the ability to integrate with PRWeb, but contends that the firm’s system 

offers an equivalent capability--the ability to integrate with WebMaxPLUS, another 

online press release distribution service. FEMA Response to GAO Questions, Mar. 

12, 2010, at 2. The agency contends that, although PR Newswire’s system integrates 

with WebMaxPLUS rather than PRWeb, the system achieves the same results, and 

therefore satisfies the requirements of the solicitation. Id.; FEMA Supp. Response, 

at 5. 

Generally, where a solicitation sets forth requirements in very specific terms, 

offerors must meet them precisely. See Ross Cook, Inc., B-231686, Sept. 7, 1988, 88-2 

CPD ¶ 216 at 2. However, if there is a discrepancy between the offered product and 

the stated requirement, and the offered product will meet the agency’s needs, the 

Page 5 B-402391 
Page 6 B-402391 

deviation may be waived if there is no prejudice to the other offerors. See Safety 

Storage, Inc., B-275076, Jan. 21, 1997, 97-1 CPD ¶ 32 at 4; CryoMed, B-241605, Feb. 

22, 1991, 91-1 CPD ¶ 202 at 4. Unfair competitive prejudice from a waiver or 

relaxation of the terms and conditions of the RFP for one offeror exists where the 

protester would have altered its proposal to its competitive advantage had it been 

given the opportunity to respond to the altered requirements. CryoMed, supra. 

Here, while PR Newswire did not offer the ability to integrate with the specific 

distribution service named in the RFP, it offered the ability to integrate with an 

equivalent service. The protester does not argue that the system with which PR 

Newswire’s technology integrates, WebMaxPLUS, is inferior to PRWeb; rather, the 

protester contends that PR Newswire did not comply with the specific terms of the 

RFP requiring integration with PRWeb. We agree with the protester that the agency 

effectively waived the RFP requirement that the proposed system integrate with 

PRWeb, and instead considered the requirement to be satisfied if the system was 

capable of integrating with any online press release distribution service that offered 

the same features as PRWeb. Nevertheless, we see no basis to conclude that, had 

Vocus known of the relaxed requirements regarding integration with PRWeb, it 

would have revised its proposal in any material way. Because the protester has 

suffered no prejudice as a result of the agency’s waiver of strict compliance with the 

RFP requirement, we deny this ground of protest. 

The protest is denied. 

Lynn H. Gibson 

Acting General Counsel