Dell Services Federal Government, Inc.

B-414461.6 Oct 12, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Dell Services Federal Government, Inc. (DSFG), of Herndon, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to SRA International, of Chantilly, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. ED-CIO-17-Q-0002, issued by the Department of Education for information technology (IT) products and services. DSFG argues that: SRA has an impermissible organizational conflict of interest (OCI) that should have precluded award to the firm, and that the agency failed to properly execute a waiver of that OCI; the agency engaged in unequal and inadequate discussions; and the agency misevaluated quotations and made an unreasonable source selection decision. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of:  Dell Services Federal Government, Inc. File:  B-414461.6 Date:  October 12, 2018 Kevin J. Maynard, Esq., Tracye Winfrey Howard, Esq., Gary S. Ward, Esq., Cara L. Lasley, Esq., and Sarah B. Hansen, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for the protester. Mark D. Colley, Esq., Stuart W. Turner, Esq., Sonia Tabriz, Esq., and Alexandra L. Barbee-Garrett, Esq., Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, for SRA International, Inc., an intervenor. Sara Falk, Esq., and Tracey L. Sasser, Esq., Department of Education, for the agency. Scott H. Riback, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest that agency failed to properly execute a waiver of an organizational conflict of interest is denied where record shows that waiver was in writing, set forth the extent of the conflict, and was signed by an agency official authorized to do so. 2.  Protest challenging agency's evaluation of quotations and conduct of discussions is denied, in part, and dismissed, in part, where record shows either that agency's evaluation was reasonable, or that any alleged errors were not prejudicial to the protester. DECISION Dell Services Federal Government, Inc. (DSFG), of Herndon, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to SRA International, of Chantilly, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. ED-CIO-17-Q-0002, issued by the Department of Education for information technology (IT) products and services.  DSFG argues that:  SRA has an impermissible organizational conflict of interest (OCI) that should have precluded award to the firm, and that the agency failed to properly execute a waiver of that OCI; the agency engaged in unequal and inadequate discussions; and the agency misevaluated quotations and made an unreasonable source selection decision. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. BACKGROUND This is DSFG's third protest challenging the agency's actions in connection with this acquisition.  DSFG's first protest was filed before the agency made a selection decision and was confined to allegations concerning whether SRA had an OCI, as well as whether there had been a possible violation of the Procurement Integrity Act (PIA).  We sustained that protest, finding that the agency's determination that there had been no adverse impact on the acquisition in light of an apparent PIA violation failed to take several considerations into account.  We also found that SRA appeared to have OCIs that had not been adequately considered and addressed by the agency.  We recommended that the agency evaluate these questions before proceeding.  Dell Services Federal Government, Inc., B-414461, B-414461.2, June 21, 2017, 2017 CPD ¶ 192. The agency took corrective action in response to our first decision, and based on its investigation performed in light of the considerations outlined in that decision, concluded that it was unobjectionable for SRA to participate in the acquisition.  In addition, the agency completed its source selection and determined that award to SRA was in the best interests of the government.  DSFG then filed its second protest challenging both the agency's conclusion that it was unobjectionable for SRA to participate in the acquisition because of continuing concerns over whether SRA had an OCI, and also challenging the adequacy of discussions and the reasonableness of the agency's evaluation and selection decision.  We sustained DSFG's second protest on the OCI allegation after finding that the record showed an individual participating in the preparation of SRA's quotation had access to a wide array of non-public, competitively useful information that was identified by the contracting officer but not considered in connection with the agency's review or investigation of a possible OCI on the part of SRA.  We recommended that the agency reconsider whether SRA had an OCI that could be avoided, neutraliz...