GCC Technologies, LLC

B-416459.2 Nov 19, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights GCC Technologies, LLC (GCC), of Oakland, Maryland, protests the issuance of a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) task order to The Red Gate Group, Ltd. (RGG), of Chantilly, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 36C10X18Q0126, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs for human resources support services. The protester alleges that the agency unreasonably evaluated quotations and improperly made its source selection 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:  GCC Technologies, LLC File:  B-416459.2 Date:  November 19, 2018 Lee Dougherty, Esq., and Katherine S. Saphier, Esq., Effectus, PLLC, for the protester. Antonio R. Franco, Esq., Kathryn V. Flood, Esq., Julia Di Vito, Esq., and Timothy F. Valley, Esq., PilieroMazza PLLC, for The Red Gate Group, Ltd., the intervenor. Aleia Barlow, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Todd C. Culliton, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest is denied where the agency did not apply unstated evaluation criteria when comparing protester's proposed employee's substitute qualifications to the approved qualifications contained in the solicitation. 2.  Protest is denied where the agency reasonably evaluated the awardee's performance risk as low in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. 3.  Protest is denied where the protester failed to show that the awardee knowingly or negligently misrepresented its proposed key personnel. DECISION GCC Technologies, LLC (GCC), of Oakland, Maryland, protests the issuance of a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) task order to The Red Gate Group, Ltd. (RGG), of Chantilly, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 36C10X18Q0126, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs for human resources support services.  The protester alleges that the agency unreasonably evaluated quotations and improperly made its source selection decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation, issued on May 15, 2018, contemplated the award of a fixed-price task order under Schedule 00CORP (the professional services schedule) to be completed over a 9-month base period and four 1-year option periods.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 5g, RFQ, amend. 6 at 4.  The selected contractor would be expected to provide human resources support services, including integrated enterprise planning and architecture, capital planning and investment management, resource management, and transition and change management.  Id.  The solicitation provided for award on a best-value tradeoff basis considering technical capability, performance risk, and price. Tab 5a, RFQ at 49-50. Nine vendors, including GCC and RGG, submitted quotations prior to the June 25 closing date.  Relevant to the instant protest, the agency assigned GCC an unsatisfactory rating under the technical capability factor, and assigned RGG a good rating under the technical capability factor and a low risk rating under the performance risk factor.  AR, Tab 4a, Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD), at 10.  After comparing quotations, the agency determined that RGG offered the best value and issued the task order to RGG at a price of $17,628,830.  Id. at 54.  The instant protest followed. DISCUSSION GCC asserts that the agency unreasonably evaluated its quotation as unsatisfactory under the technical capability factor.  Protest at 5-7.  GCC also asserts that the agency unreasonably evaluated RGG's quotation as low risk under the performance risk factor.  Id. at 8-10.  GCC further asserts that RGG should have been disqualified for materially misrepresenting its proposed key personnel.  Id. at 10-11.  Finally, GCC asserts that the agency improperly made its source selection decision.  We have considered all of the allegations and find no basis to sustain the protest.  We note, at the outset that, in reviewing protests challenging an agency's evaluation of quotations, our Office does not reevaluate quotations or substitute our judgment for that of the agency; rather, we review the record to determine whether the agency's judgment was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria, as well as applicable statutes and regulations.  TSC Enterprise, LLC, B-415731, Feb.