Deloitte Consulting, LLP (FDA-RFQ-18-119234)

B-416882.4 Jan 06, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Deloitte Consulting, LLP, of Arlington, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) and issuance of a task order to Guidehouse LLP, of McLean, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. FDA-RFQ-18-119234, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for information technology services in support of the agency's integrated budget, acquisition, and planning system. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably concluded that its quotation was unacceptable and disqualified it from the competition. 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:  Deloitte Consulting, LLP File:  B-416882.4 Date:  January 6, 2020 Paul A. Debolt, Esq., Chelsea B. Knudson, Esq., Spencer P. Williams, Esq., and Taylor A. Hillman, Esq., Venable, LLP, for the protester. Brian G. Walsh, Esq., Philip J. Davis, Esq., Tara L. Ward, Esq., Moshe B. Broder, Esq., and Lindy C. Bathurst, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for Guidehouse LLP, the intervenor. Seeta Rebbapragada, Esq., and Douglas Kornreich, Esq., Department of Health and Human Services, for the agency. Raymond Richards, Charmaine A. Stevenson, Esq., and Laura Eyester, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the protester’s quotation as unacceptable is denied where the agency reasonably found, consistent with the stated evaluation criteria, that one of the protester’s proposed key personnel failed to satisfy the solicitation’s minimum requirements. DECISION Deloitte Consulting, LLP, of Arlington, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) and issuance of a task order to Guidehouse LLP, of McLean, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. FDA-RFQ-18-119234, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for information technology services in support of the agency’s integrated budget, acquisition, and planning system.  The protester contends that the agency unreasonably concluded that its quotation was unacceptable and disqualified it from the competition. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND FDA issued the solicitation on March 26, 2018, using Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4 procedures.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, RFQ Instructions and Evaluation, amend. 2, at 1, 3.  The RFQ was issued to vendors holding Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts under General Services Administration (GSA) Information Technology Schedule 70.  AR, Tab 2, GSA e-Buy RFQ Summary, at 1.  The RFQ contemplated a single-award BPA with an estimated value of $112 million and a period of performance consisting of a 12-month base period and four 1-year option periods.  AR, Tab 2, GSA e-Buy RFQ Summary, at 1; Tab 2B, BPA Statement of Work (SOW) and Terms and Conditions, at 41. The RFQ included the following evaluation factors, in descending order of importance:  technical approach, relevant experience, and price.[1]  AR, Tab 4, RFQ Instructions and Evaluation, amend. 2, at 13.  The technical approach factor included the following three subfactors:  (1) technical approach to the operations and maintenance support SOW; (2) technical approach to Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) child application development, modernization, and enhancement (DME) SOW; and (3) general approach to BPA task area No. 5 - business transformation activities.  Id.  The RFQ stated that award was to be made to the responsible vendor whose quotation represented the best value to the government, using a tradeoff where the non-price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price.  Id.  As relevant to the protest, the technical approach to the CDER DME SOW subfactor required the submission of resumes for qualified key personnel, one of which was an enterprise solutions architect.  AR, Tab 4, RFQ Instructions and Evaluation, amend. 2, at 10; Tab 3C, Amended RFQ CDER SOW at 17.  The agency was to evaluate the relevance of each listed key person’s experience, knowledge, certification, and identified skill sets for the ability to successfully complete the activities listed in the CDER DME SOW.  AR, Tab 4, RFQ Instructions and Evaluation, amend.