Amyx, Inc.

Case: B-416734 Agency: Department of Homeland Security : United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Protester: Amyx, Inc. Date: 2019-04-09 Sustained In Part, Denied In Part
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-416734 Nov 27, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights ManTech Advanced Systems International, Inc., of Herndon, Virginia, protests the issuance of a blanket purchase agreement against the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) to SRA International, Inc., of Chantilly, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 70CMSD18Q00000016, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, for operations support services. ManTech alleges that the agency unreasonably and unequally evaluated quotations and improperly made its source selection decision. We sustain the protest in part and deny it in part. We sustain the protest in part and deny it in part. 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:  ManTech Advanced Systems International, Inc. File:  B-416734 Date:  November 27, 2018 Stuart B. Nibley, Esq., Amy Conant Hoang, Esq., and Erica L. Bakies, Esq., K&L Gates LLP, for the protester. Douglas J. Becker, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, 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 reasonably evaluated quotations as consistent with the solicitation criteria. 2.  Protest is sustained where the agency unequally evaluated quotations when both the protester and awardee did not propose retention techniques focused on cleared personnel but only the protester’s quotation was evaluated as having a weakness on that basis. 3.  Protest is denied where the agency reasonably made its source selection decision in accordance with the source selection decision methodology as provided for in the solicitation. DECISION ManTech Advanced Systems International, Inc., of Herndon, Virginia, protests the issuance of a blanket purchase agreement against the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) to SRA International, Inc., of Chantilly, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 70CMSD18Q00000016, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, for operations support services.  ManTech alleges that the agency unreasonably and unequally evaluated quotations and improperly made its source selection decision. We sustain the protest in part and deny it in part. BACKGROUND On June 4, 2018, the agency issued the RFQ to a subset of General Service Administration, Professional Services Schedule, Special Item Number 874-1, schedule contract holders.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, Contracting Officer’s Statement of Facts at 1.  The RFQ contemplated the issuance of a fixed-price blanket purchase agreement to be performed over a 1-year base period, four 1-year option periods, and one 6-month extension period.  AR Tab 1, RFQ at 2, 81.  The selected contractor would be expected to provide operations support services to the Visa Security Program (VSP) and the Counterterrorism and Criminal Exploitation Unit (CTECU) within the agency’s Visa Lifecycle Vetting Initiative.  Id. at 134.  The RFQ provided for award on a best-value tradeoff basis considering corporate experience, key personnel, staffing approach, and price.  Id. at 7‑8.  Eight vendors, including ManTech and SRA, submitted quotations prior to the July 11 closing date.  The agency assigned both vendors’ quotations acceptable ratings under each of the non-price factors.  AR, Tab 7, Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD) at 2.  ManTech’s quotation was priced at $111,805,455, and SRA’s quotation was priced at $113,051,362.  Id.  After evaluating quotations, the agency determined that SRA’s quotation offered the best value.  Id. at 10.  When comparing ManTech’s and SRA’s quotations, the agency determined that SRA’s quotation was more advantageous because, despite the lower price, ManTech’s staffing approach had two weaknesses while SRA’s quotation did not have any weaknesses.  Id.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...