Information International Associates, Inc.

B-416826.2,B-416826.3,B-416826.4 May 28, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Information International Associates, Inc. (IIa), of Alexandria, Virginia, protests the award of the Homeland Defense and Security Information Analysis Center (HDIAC) Basic Center Operations (BCO) contract to Quanterion Solutions Inc., of Utica, New York, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8075-18-R-0001, issued by the Department of the Air Force for the collection, analysis, synthesizing/processing, and dissemination of scientific and technical information. Agency Report (AR), Tab 3, Conformed RFP at 15. The protester challenges the agency's technical, past performance, and cost evaluations and the reasonableness of the agency's source selection. We sustain 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:  Information International Associates, Inc. File:  B-416826.2; B-416826.3; B-416826.4 Date:  May 28, 2019 John J. O’Brien, Esq., David S. Cohen, Esq., and Daniel J. Strouse, Esq., Cordatis LLP, for the protester. Evan A. Rossi, Esq., Rossi & Rossi Attorneys at Law, PLLC, for Quanterion Solutions Inc., the intervenor. Lieutenant Colonel Damund Williams and Matthew Ruane, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Kenneth Kilgour, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Agency unreasonably evaluated awardee’s proposal as containing a strength where the added benefit identified by the agency was either not consistent with the terms of the solicitation or not adequately supported by the record, and the agency unreasonably evaluated the protester’s proposal as containing a weakness where the awardee’s proposal was not materially different from the protester’s and only the protester’s proposal was assessed a weakness. 2.  Challenge to the agency’s consideration of past performance in the source selection is denied where minor differences in the offerors’ past performance was insufficient to call into question the reasonableness of the source selection authority’s conclusion that the two offerors were essentially equal with respect to past performance.  3.  Protester’s challenge to the agency’s evaluation of awardee’s cost proposal is denied where the protester failed to demonstrate prejudice from alleged errors in the evaluation. DECISION Information International Associates, Inc. (IIa), of Alexandria, Virginia, protests the award of the Homeland Defense and Security Information Analysis Center (HDIAC) Basic Center Operations (BCO) contract to Quanterion Solutions Inc., of Utica, New York, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8075-18-R-0001, issued by the Department of the Air Force for the collection, analysis, synthesizing/processing, and dissemination of scientific and technical information.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 3, Conformed RFP at 15.  The protester challenges the agency’s technical, past performance, and cost evaluations and the reasonableness of the agency’s source selection.[1]  We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation sought proposals for the award of a single cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to the offeror whose proposal offered the best value to the government, considering past performance, technical, and cost.  RFP at 124-25.  The technical factor had three subfactors of equal importance:  operations approach, management, and information support system (ISS).  Id. at 129‑30.  The past performance and technical factors were of equal importance and, when combined, were significantly more important than cost.  Id. at 125.  With respect to past performance, offerors were required to submit three or more references for the prime contractor and one for the subcontractor or teaming member that was to perform the largest portion of the BCO requirement, up to a maximum of five references.  Id. at 105.  The RFP advised offerors that the agency would evaluate past performance through an analysis of the quality of performance on the offeror’s recent and relevant contract references.  Id. at 125.  The agency would assign each offeror a single confidence assessment rating--ranging from substantial confidence to no confidence--reflecting the probability that the offeror would successfully perform the requirements of this solicitation.  Id.