OnPoint Consulting, Inc.

B-417397.3,B-417397.5,B-417397.6 Oct 03, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights OnPoint Consulting, Inc. (OnPoint), of Arlington, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Data Systems Analyst, Inc. (DSA) of Trevose, Pennsylvania, by the Defense Information Systems Agency under request for proposals (RFP) No. 831710869, for information and knowledge management solutions and services. OnPoint protests that the agency's technical evaluation was unequal and applied an unstated evaluation criterion; the agency failed to reasonably evaluate DSA's most probable cost and did not meaningfully evaluate price reasonableness; and the agency conducted a flawed best-value determination. 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:  OnPoint Consulting, Inc. File:  B-417397.3; B-417397.5; B-417397.6 Date:  October 3, 2019 Kevin J. Maynard, Esq., Cara L. Lasley, Esq., and Sarah B. Hansen, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for the protester. David S. Cohen, Esq., Norah D. Molnar, Esq., John J. O’Brien, Esq., and Daniel J. Strouse, Esq., Cordatis LLP, for Data Systems Analyst, Inc., the intervenor. Vera A. Strebel, Esq., Anthony J. Balestreri, Esq., and Nati Silva, Esq., Defense Information Systems Agency, for the agency. John Sorrenti, Esq., Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest that the agency’s technical evaluation was unequal is denied where the record shows that the agency assessed strengths to the awardee and not to the protester as a result of differences in the offerors’ proposals. 2.  Protest that agency applied an unstated evaluation criterion in assessing a strength to the awardee’s proposal is denied where the agency assessed the strength based on an aspect of the awardee’s proposal that was reasonably encompassed by the solicitation’s evaluation criteria. 3.  Protest that agency failed to reasonably evaluate price realism and reasonableness is denied where the record shows the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation. 4.  Protest that the agency’s best-value determination was flawed is denied where record shows that the agency meaningfully considered the differences in offerors’ proposals and adequately documented its tradeoff decision. DECISION OnPoint Consulting, Inc. (OnPoint), of Arlington, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Data Systems Analyst, Inc. (DSA) of Trevose, Pennsylvania, by the Defense Information Systems Agency under request for proposals (RFP) No. 831710869, for information and knowledge management solutions and services.  OnPoint protests that the agency’s technical evaluation was unequal and applied an unstated evaluation criterion; the agency failed to reasonably evaluate DSA’s most probable cost and did not meaningfully evaluate price reasonableness; and the agency conducted a flawed best-value determination.[1] We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the RFP on July 23, 2018, under the National Institutes of Health (NIH) information technology acquisition and assessment center Chief Information Officer-Solutions and Partners 3 (CIO-SP3) governmentwide multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract.  Agency Report (AR) Tab 1, RFP at 1.  The RFP sought services to support the Product Lead Military Technical (MilTech) Solutions with expertise in developing, acquiring, fielding, sustaining, and enhancing MilTech’s suite of applications and systems.[2]  AR, Tab 1A, PWS, at 3.  This includes support such as systems engineering, project management, and systems administration, and technical support to provide a variety of services for the MilTech’s technology portfolio.  Id. The RFP contemplated the issuance of a cost-plus-fixed-fee/fixed-price task order with a 1-year base period and four 1-year option periods.  RFP at 1.  The solicitation provided for a best-value tradeoff based on a technical/management approach factor and a cost/price factor.  Id.