Encentric, Inc.

B-412368.3 Apr 19, 2016 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Encentric, Inc., a small business headquartered in Fairfax, Virginia, and the incumbent contractor, protests the issuance of a task order to Buchanan and Edwards, Inc., (B&E), located in Arlington, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SAQMMA15Q0209, issued by the Department of State, for maintenance, operation, and management of PeopleSoft v9.x or later in a production environment, including any follow-on functional requirements and application support. This competition was conducted among firms holding one of the General Services Administration's (GSA) 8(a) Streamlined Technology Acquisition Resources for Services II (STARS II) government-wide acquisition contracts. 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:  Encentric, Inc. File:  B-412368.3 Date:  April 19, 2016 Jennifer S. Zucker, Esq., Brian G. Walsh, Esq., and George E. Petel, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for the protester. Daniel R. Forman, Esq., John E. McCarthy Jr., Esq., and Hart W. Wood, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP, for Buchanan & Edwards, Inc., the intervenor. Tudo N. Pham, Esq., Department of State, for the agency. K. Nicole Willems, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST In a best-value procurement, agency reasonably selected higher-rated and lower‑priced quotation for issuance of a task order, where evaluation was consistent with the solicitation’s stated evaluation criteria and the agency’s conclusions were reasonably based. DECISION Encentric, Inc., a small business headquartered in Fairfax, Virginia, and the incumbent contractor, protests the issuance of a task order to Buchanan and Edwards, Inc., (B&E), located in Arlington, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SAQMMA15Q0209, issued by the Department of State, for maintenance, operation, and management of PeopleSoft v9.x or later in a production environment, including any follow-on functional requirements and application support.  This competition was conducted among firms holding one of the General Services Administration’s (GSA) 8(a) Streamlined Technology Acquisition Resources for Services II (STARS II) government-wide acquisition contracts.[1] We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFQ, which was issued on August 13, 2015, contemplated the issuance of a performance-based labor-hour task order with a one-year base period and four one‑year options.  RFQ at 3; AR, Tab 9, Award Recommendation, at 1.  The task order was to be issued on a best-value basis, considering the following five technical factors:  (1) technical approach; (2) management approach; (3) personnel; (4) understanding of the requirements, organization and scope of work; and (5) past performance, in addition to cost/price.[2]  RFQ at 44.  The RFQ established that technical merit was significantly more important than cost/price.  Id. As relevant here, under the management approach factor, the RFQ instructed vendors to include, among other things, a description of the organizational structure they intended to use to satisfy the contract requirements.  RFQ at 45.  Vendors were also directed to address corporate experience under this factor by including a discussion of corporate ability and experience with Department of State and human resources specific software applications.  Id.  The RFQ provided that the management approach factor would be evaluated to determine how clearly the contractor demonstrated its organizational structure; the extent to which the vendor’s corporate experience demonstrates its capability to explore, apply, and employ technologies and techniques required for the RFQ; and how well the vendor described its performance measurements.  Id. Regarding the personnel factor, the RFQ required vendors to propose personnel for three key personnel positions, including a project manager and a senior functional lead.  RFQ at 12.  The solicitation listed minimum acceptable criteria for each key personnel position, as well as detailed descriptions of each position.[3]  RFQ at 12‑19.  Of relevance to the protest here, among the minimum requirements for the position of project manager were “5+ years Project Management experience” and “3+ years Project Management experience on a People[S]oft project.”  RFQ at 17.  Also of relevance, among the minimum requirements for the position of senior functional lead were “2+ years as People[S]oft Lead Analyst.”  RFQ at 19.  Vendors were required to provide a resume for each person proposed to fill a key position, and the solicitation provided that the agency would evaluate the qualifications and experience of the vendor’s proposed key personnel.  RFQ at 11, 47....