Aderas, Inc (HT001519R0014)

B-418151 Jan 16, 2020 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Aderas, Inc., a small business of Reston, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Concept Plus LLC, a small business of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. HT001519R0014 issued by the Defense Health Agency (DHA), for commercial information technology (IT) sustainment and development services in support of the individual longitudinal exposure record (ILER) platform. The protester argues that the agency improperly evaluated Concept Plus's technical approach, failed to conduct a price realism analysis, and failed to provide meaningful and equal discussions. 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 version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of:  Aderas, Inc File:  B-418151 Date:  January 16, 2020 Richard Kelley, Esq., Bean, Kinney & Korman, PC, for the protester. Zachary Schroeder, Esq., and Jonathan Baker, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP, for the intervenor. Kevin Bolin, Esq., Defense Health Agency, for the agency. Christopher Alwood, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest asserting that the agency’s pre-award exchanges with vendors constituted improper and unequal discussions is denied where the agency conducted meaningful discussions with both the protester and the awardee, and provided an opportunity for the protester to revise or modify its quotation. DECISION Aderas, Inc., a small business of Reston, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Concept Plus LLC, a small business of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for quotations[1] (RFQ) No. HT001519R0014 issued by the Defense Health Agency (DHA), for commercial information technology (IT) sustainment and development services in support of the individual longitudinal exposure record (ILER) platform.  The protester argues that the agency improperly evaluated Concept Plus’s technical approach, failed to conduct a price realism analysis, and failed to provide meaningful and equal discussions. We deny the protest. On June 28, 2019, DHA issued the RFQ as a total small business set-aside pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4 to vendors holding contracts under the General Services Administration Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) No. 70, Information Technology, Health IT special item number 132-56.  Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 3; see also AR Tab 1, RFQ at 1, 54.  The RFQ contemplated the issuance of a task order for sustainment and development IT services in support of the ILER platform.[2]  COS at 3; RFQ at 3-31.  The RFQ provided that the task order would be performed over a base year, three option years, an 8‑month option period, and a 3-month option period.  RFQ at 3‑31. The RFQ stated award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis, based on an integrated assessment of all evaluation factors.  RFQ at 60.  The RFQ listed five evaluation factors with no specified order of importance:  technical approach, experience and personnel qualifications, management approach, past performance, and price.  Id. at 60-63.  The RFQ provided that as part of the evaluation of the technical approach, the agency would asses strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or risks to the vendors’ quotations.  Id. at 60-61.  The RFQ provided that the agency intended to issue a task order based on initial proposals, but explicitly reserved the right to hold discussions.  Id. at 60. On or before the August 16, 2019 closing date for initial quotations, the agency received complete quotations from three vendors, including Aderas and Concept Plus.  COS at 3.  After initial evaluation of the quotations, the agency entered into discussions to better understand the technical solutions quoted.  Id. at 4.  On August 30, the agency initiated discussions via email with all three vendors.  Id.  The emails each included a memorandum and evaluation notices describing each quotation’s assessed weaknesses.[3]  See, e.g. AR, Tab 7, Communications with Aderas Regarding Discussions.  The memorandum provided to Aderas stated that the agency would conduct meaningful discussions and upon the conclusion of discussions request revised quotations.  Id. at 3.  The agency email to Aderas specified that the response to the evaluation notice and any revised quotations were due September 9.  Id.