Computer World Services

Case: B-417356 Agency: Department of Defense : Defense Information Systems Agency Protester: Computer World Services Date: 2019-05-16 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-417356 May 16, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Computer World Services (CWS), of Falls Church, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Ryan Consulting Group, Inc., of Indianapolis, Indiana, under request for proposals (RFP) No. S5102A93442, issued by the Defense Information Systems Agency for information technology (IT) services. CWS argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated its proposal and improperly made its source selection decision. 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:  Computer World Services File:  B-417356 Date:  May 16, 2019 Lee Dougherty, Effectus, PLLC, for the protester. Sean T. White, Esq., Clapp Ferrucci, for Ryan Consulting Group, Inc., the intervenor. LaTonya McFadden, Esq., Department of Defense, Defense Information Systems Agency, 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 Protest is denied where the evaluation record and source selection decision were adequately documented and made in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Computer World Services (CWS), of Falls Church, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Ryan Consulting Group, Inc., of Indianapolis, Indiana, under request for proposals (RFP) No. S5102A93442, issued by the Defense Information Systems Agency for information technology (IT) services.  CWS argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated its proposal and improperly made its source selection decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP was issued on January 8, 2019, under the National Institutes of Health Information Technology Acquisition and Assessment Center Chief Information Officer‑‑Solutions and Partners 3 governmentwide acquisition contract in accordance with the procedures under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 16.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFP at 1; AR, Tab 2, RFP, amend. 1 at 1; Combined Contracting Officer’s Statement and Memorandum of Law at 2.  The RFP contemplated the issuance of a fixed-price task order to be performed over a 1-year base period and two 1-year option periods.  AR, Tab 1, RFP at 1.  The selected contractor would be expected to provide IT operations infrastructure sustainment support services in multiple areas, including database management and maintenance, standard workstation image, software license compliance management, and datacenter migration.  AR, Tab 1, RFP, attach. 1, Performance Work Statement at 1. The RFP provided for award on a best-value tradeoff basis considering technical, past performance, and price factors.  AR, Tab 1, RFP at 5-10.  The technical factor was divided into four subfactors:  general management, administrative, and staffing (GMAS); IT operations and sustainment support (ITOSS); infrastructure planning and design (IPD); and, cybersecurity implementation (CI).  Id. at 5-7.  The non-price factors, when combined, were more important than price.  Id. at 5. Five offerors, including CWS and Ryan, submitted proposals prior to the January 24, 2019, closing date.  AR, Tab 23, Price Negotiation Memorandum (PNM) at 2.  The agency’s evaluation produced the following relevant results:   CWS Ryan Technical Subfactor (1) --GMAS Green/Acceptable Green/Acceptable Technical Subfactor (2) --ITOSS Green/Acceptable Green/Acceptable Technical Subfactor (3) --IPD Green/Acceptable Green/Acceptable Technical Subfactor (4) --CI Green/Acceptable Purple/Good Past Performance Substantial Confidence Satisfactory Confidence Price $29,155,958 $30,093,027 Id. at 6-7.[1]  After comparing proposals, the source selection authority (SSA) determined that Ryan’s proposal represented the best value.  Id. at 8.  The SSA concluded that Ryan’s evaluated price was worth the additional premium based on advantages offered under the IPD and CI technical subfactors.  The SSA found that these advantages would improve agency efficiency, reduce agency expenses, and provide enhanced cybersecurity functionality.  Id.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...