Computer World Services

B-417354 May 16, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Computer World Services (CWS), of Falls Church, Virginia, protests the award of a contract to 1901 Group, LLC, of Blacksburg, Virginia, pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ) No. 95332418Q0164, issued by Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), Office of Chief Information Officer (OCIO) in the Administration and Finance Department, for information technology (IT) operations and maintenance support services. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of its technical quotation. The protester also alleges that the agency engaged in disparate treatment by assessing a deficiency to CWS's quotation for lack of key personnel. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Computer World Services File: B-417354 Date: May 16, 2019 Lee Dougherty, Esq., Effectus, PLLC, for the protester. Richard J. McCarthy, Esq., Millennium Challenge Corporation, for the agency. Kasia Dourney, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging an agency's evaluation of the protester's quotation is denied where the agency's evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation, and where the agency reasonably determined after the technical review to exclude the protester from further consideration. DECISION Computer World Services (CWS), of Falls Church, Virginia, protests the award of a contract to 1901 Group, LLC, of Blacksburg, Virginia, pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ) No. 95332418Q0164, issued by Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), Office of Chief Information Officer (OCIO) in the Administration and Finance Department, for information technology (IT) operations and maintenance support services. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of its technical quotation. The protester also alleges that the agency engaged in disparate treatment by assessing a deficiency to CWS's quotation for lack of key personnel. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On August 31, 2018, MCC issued the RFQ to small business holders of General Services Administration (GSA) IT Schedule 70, special item number 132-51, contemplating the establishment of a single blanket purchase agreement (BPA), on a best-value tradeoff basis. Agency Report (AR), RFQ at 21, 67; Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 429.1 The RFQ sought quotations for services required for infrastructure and engineering support, operations and maintenance support, IT service desk end-user support, and audio/visual support for the agency's conference and meeting spaces, as well as procurement support of OCIO's IT requirements.2 RFQ at 25. The solicitation provided that call (or task) orders would be issued under the BPA on a hybrid, fixed-price and time-and-materials basis, and advised vendors that MCC intended to issue the initial 1-year call order concurrent with the establishment of the BPA.3 RFQ at 21, 67; COS at 429. The RFQ advised that quotations would be evaluated in two phases. In phase 1, the agency was to evaluate quotations based on the following evaluation factors, in descending order of priority: (1) call order technical response; (2) call order management and staffing; (3) BPA corporate capabilities; and (4) BPA past performance. RFQ at 67. Quotations found most highly rated in phase 1 would proceed to be evaluated under phase 2, based on the same four factors from phase 1, plus the following factors: (5) oral presentations, and (6) price quote (BPA rates and call order 0001 pricing table). RFQ at 68. The non-price evaluation factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price. Id. As the quotations' ratings became more similar under the non-price evaluation factors, however, the importance of price increased. Id. As relevant here, the RFQ included certain key personnel requirements. Specifically, the solicitation identified the project manager, service desk manager, and operations manager as mandatory key personnel for the requirement. RFQ at 52-53. All proposed key personnel were required to attend the oral presentations at MCC headquarters during the technical evaluation stage. RFQ at 68. The RFQ further advised that all proposed key personnel "must be available to begin work on the designated start date." RFQ at 65. Of particular significance here, section L of the RFQ advised that at any time prior to award, the government might exclude from further consideration a quotation that was not among the most highly rated or was not likely to be selected for award. RFQ at 67. In addition, section M of the RFQ provided that a quotation evaluated as unacceptable under any technical factor or sub-factor was ineligible for award. RFQ at 70. In response to the RFQ, the agency received 13 quotations,4 including those submitted by CWS and 1901 Group. COS at 430.