Deloitte Consulting, LLP (FDA-RFQ-20-00002)

B-418485.2 Oct 26, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Deloitte Consulting, LLP, of Arlington, Virginia, protests the decision of the Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to eliminate Deloitte's quotation from the competition, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. FDA-RFQ-20-00002, to provide technical and management services for the FDA's Office of Regulatory Affairs (ORA). The protester contends that the agency unreasonably found the protester's quotation unacceptable. 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-418485.2 Date:  October 26, 2020 Daniel J. Strouse, Esq.,David S. Cohen, Esq., and John J. O’Brien, Esq., Cordatis LLP, for the protester. Karyne Akhtar, Esq., and Douglas Kornreich, Esq., Department of Health and Human Services, for the agency. Jacob M. Talcott, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s elimination of the protester’s quotation from the competition is denied where the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Deloitte Consulting, LLP, of Arlington, Virginia, protests the decision of the Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to eliminate Deloitte’s quotation from the competition, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. FDA-RFQ-20-00002, to provide technical and management services for the FDA’s Office of Regulatory Affairs (ORA).  The protester contends that the agency unreasonably found the protester’s quotation unacceptable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On December 30, 2019, the FDA issued the RFQ to vendors holding General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts under Schedule 70.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 2.  The solicitation sought development, modernization, and enhancement (DME) support, and software applications operation and maintenance (O&M), for the FDA’s ORA.  AR, Tab 4b, RFQ at 2.  The FDA intended to establish a single blanket purchase agreement (BPA) under the GSA FSS with the responsible vendor whose quotation represented the best value to the government, considering four factors:  relevant experience to the BPA, technical approach to technical scenario one, technical approach to technical scenario two, and price.  Id. at 2-3.The due date for quotations was February 3, 2020.  Id. at 4.  For the evaluation, the RFQ required vendors to submit their quotations in three separate volumes:  volume one, relevant experience; volume two, technical; and volume three, business/price quote.  Id. at 5.  As relevant here, volume one, relevant experience[1] required vendors to provide a copy of a single indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract, BPA, or basic ordering agreement (BOA) under which the vendor performed at least “three (3) concurrent orders/modifications/ tasks on the same Award IDIQ/BPA/BOA within the last five (5) years” from the RFQ release date.[2]  Id. at 7.  The RFQ provided that the agency would assign a vendor’s relevant experience a rating of acceptable or unacceptable, and that if a quotation received a rating of unacceptable under relevant experience, the agency would eliminate that quotation from the competition.  RFQ at 3.  The RFQ further required that the work submitted under relevant experience encompass a “similar scope” to the work required under the RFQ.  Id. To demonstrate relevant experience, the RFQ required vendors to complete and submit a task matrix with their quotations.  Id.  The RFQ required vendors to use the task matrix to identify areas in the statement of work (SOW) of their submitted orders that were similar in scope to task areas under ¶ 2.2 (Systems Integration and Engineering Services), ¶ 2.6 (DME), and ¶ 2.7 (O&M and support services) of the RFQ’s SOW.  RFQ at 7.The relevant task matrix identified five task areas under ¶ 2.2; five task areas under ¶ 2.6; and six task areas under ¶ 2.7; it also identified four task areas under ¶ 2.3.  AR, Tab 4f, Relevant Experience Task Matrix.  Of relevance to this protest, one of the task areas under ¶ 2.6 was “[d]evelop and test the required system components.”  Id. Deloitte timely submitted its quotation.  Protest at 2.  Following Deloitte’s submission, the technical evaluation team (TET) determined that Deloitte failed to demonstrate relevant experience.  AR, Tab 6a, TET Report at 16-17.  Specifically, the TET determined that although Deloitte provided three task orders (Order 0016, Order TEPB16-34674, and Order 0014) to demonstrate its experience with developing and testing...