Systems Made Simple, Inc.

B-412948.2 Jul 20, 2016 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Systems Made Simple, Inc. (SMS), of Vienna, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to ASM Research, LLC (ASMR), of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for task execution plan (RTEP) No. T4-0800, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for National Service Desk (NSD) help desk services. SMS argues that the agency failed to reasonably analyze the awardee's organizational conflict of interest, challenges the agency's technical evaluation, and contends that the resulting award decision was improper. 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:  Systems Made Simple, Inc. File:  B-412948.2 Date:  July 20, 2016 Robert M. Moore, Esq., Richard O. Wolf, Esq., and Casey J. McKinnon, Esq., Moore & Lee, LLP; and Maryann P. Surrick, Esq., Lockheed Martin Corporation, for the protester. Amy Laderberg O’Sullivan, Esq., Peter J. Eyre, Esq., James G. Peyster, Esq., Olivia L. Lynch, Esq., and Hart W. Wood, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP; and Nicole O. Saunders, Esq., Accenture Federal Services, LLC, for ASM Research, LLC, an intervenor. John W. Tangalos, Esq., and Frank V. DiNicola, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Louis A. Chiarella, Esq., and Noah B. Bleicher, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest that agency failed to give adequate consideration to awardee’s potential organizational conflicts of interest is denied where the agency reasonably evaluated whether the awardee had the ability to shape the ground rules for the procurement or unequal access to information, and where the protester’s assertions fail to present hard facts indicating the existence of a conflict. 2.  Protest challenging the rating assigned to protester’s technical proposal is denied where the protester fails to demonstrate that it was prejudiced by the alleged error; even if the protester had received a higher technical rating, the awardee would have remained both higher-rated and lower-priced than the protester. DECISION Systems Made Simple, Inc. (SMS), of Vienna, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to ASM Research, LLC (ASMR), of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for task execution plan (RTEP) No. T4-0800, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for National Service Desk (NSD) help desk services.  SMS argues that the agency failed to reasonably analyze the awardee’s organizational conflict of interest, challenges the agency’s technical evaluation, and contends that the resulting award decision was improper. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RTEP was issued on January 25, 2016, to holders of the Transformation Twenty-One Total Technology (T4) multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts, pursuant to the procedures set forth in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.5.[1]  The solicitation contemplated the issuance of a fixed-price task order for a 9-month base period with three 1-year options and one 3-month “transition out” option, for support services for the full range of functions performed by the VA NSD.  In general terms, the performance work statement (PWS) required the contractor to deliver quality information technology service and support; realize continual service improvement; execute sound project management principles; and provide program support to effectively manage the variety of service desk-related activities performed by the NSD.  Contracting Officer’s Statement, June 10, 2016, at 1. The solicitation established that task order award would be made on a best-value basis, based on three evaluation factors in descending order of importance:  technical, past performance, and price.  RTEP at 2.  The technical factor was significantly more important than past performance, which in turn was slightly more important than price.  Id. Seven vendors, including ASMR and SMS, submitted quotations by the February 3 closing date.  An agency technical evaluation team (TET) evaluated technical quotations using an adjectival rating scheme (outstanding, good, acceptable, susceptible to being made acceptable, and unacceptable), and past performance using a separate, point-scoring methodology (0-10).  The final evaluation ratings and prices of those quotations found to be technically acceptable were as follows:   Technical Past Performance Price ASMR Good 8.21 $286,786,196 SMS Acceptable 5.95 $296,138,382 Vendor B Good 8.17 $298,104,205 Agency Report (AR), Tab 5, Source Selection Briefing, Mar. 16, 2016, at 61; Tab 18, Source Selection Decision, Mar.