DigitalSpec, LLC

B-412344 Jan 20, 2016 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGITALSPEC, LLC (DSPEC), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) and issuance of an initial BPA call to GENCO Systems, Inc. (GENCO), of Herndon, Virginia, by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. OPM1515T0006, for independent verification and validation (IV&V) services. DSPEC challenges the agency's technical and past performance evaluations and the award decision. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of:  DigitalSpec, LLC File:  B-412344 Date:  January 20, 2016 Pamela J. Mazza, Esq., Piliero Mazza PLLC, for the protester. Kenneth D. Brody, Esq., David, Brody & Dondershine, LLP, for the intervenor. Austin Fulk, Esq., Office of Personnel Management, for the agency. Lois Hanshaw, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the protester’s quotation as technically unacceptable is denied where the quotation failed to meet a material solicitation requirement and was reasonably rejected as unacceptable. DECISION DIGITALSPEC, LLC (DSPEC), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) and issuance of an initial BPA call to GENCO Systems, Inc. (GENCO), of Herndon, Virginia, by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. OPM1515T0006, for independent verification and validation (IV&V) services.  DSPEC challenges the agency’s technical and past performance evaluations and the award decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On September 14, 2015, OPM issued the RFQ as a total small business set-aside pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4 to vendors holding contracts under the General Services Administration’s (GSA) multiple award schedules program, for federal supply schedule (FSS) 70, Information Technology Professional Services.  RFQ at 3.  The solicitation contemplated the establishment of a labor-hour BPA, for a base year and four one-year options.  Id. at 61.  The RFQ anticipated award on a best-value basis, considering the following evaluation factors, listed in descending order of importance:  (1) key personnel and staffing plan (key personnel), (2) past performance, and (3) price.  Id. at 59, 61.  The statement of work (SOW) sought IV&V services for OPM to support the successful and efficient development of the EPIC[1] application systems that support OPM’s personnel background investigation program, as OPM transitions from a legacy environment to more modern technology.  Id. at 30.  The SOW stated that IV&V is based on the use of an independent contractor to review the work performed by OPM project teams to provide an independent, objective, and iterative assessment of products and processes throughout the project lifecycle.  Id. at 31, 35.  The SOW also explained that IV&V helps to assure overall project success by early recognition, detection, and correction of errors; heightening management insight into risks; recommending solutions and helping to ensure remedial activities are in place; and confirming compliance with project requirements and quality performance standards.  Id. at 31.  As relevant to the key personnel factor, the RFQ required offerors to include a staffing plan that demonstrated that the team being proposed possessed the requisite skills to accomplish the work described in the SOW.[2]  Id. at 56.  Offerors were also required to provide resumes for three key personnel--the project manager; IV&V lead analyst; and IV&V test lead--that demonstrated experience performing the tasks outlined by the staffing plan for this project.  Id. at 47-50.  The RFQ advised vendors that experience would be cross-checked against the resume to ensure the minimum requirements were met.  Id. at 59.  As relevant here, to receive a favorable rating offerors were required to provide resumes for key personnel that met and/or exceeded the minimum requirements for each position.  Id. With regard to the minimum experience requirements, the SOW required the project manager to demonstrate “[10] years of management experience in IV&V of software development environment focused on assessing [p]roject [m]anagement tasks, deliverables and processes,” among other things.  Id. at 48.  For the IV&V lead analyst, the minimum requirements included experience in code analysis and code review.  Id. at 49.  The IV&V test lead was required to demonstrate, as relevant here, IV&V experience in both the private and public sector in large-scale, complex environments.  Id.