Ventera Corporation (75FCMC20Q0018)

B-418871,B-418871.2 Oct 05, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Ventera Corporation, of Reston Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to SemanticBits, LLC, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 75FCMC20Q0018, issued under the Agile Delivery to Execute Legislative Endeavors for Quality Related Initiatives (ADELE) blanket purchase agreement (BPA) pursuant to the General Services Administration's Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) 70, by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, for information technology services. The protester alleges that the agency erred in its evaluation of quotations and conducted a flawed best-value tradeoff. 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:  Ventera Corporation File:  B-418871; B-418871.2 Date:  October 5, 2020 Samuel B. Knowles, Esq., Daniel J. Cook, Esq., Ryan Carpenter, Esq., DLA Piper LLP- US, for the protester. Christopher R. Shiplett, Esq., Randolph Law, PLLC, for the intervenor. Pamela Waldron, Esq., and Linda Santiago, Esq., Department of Health and Human Services, for the agency. Michael Willems, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest that the agency unreasonably evaluated quotations is denied where the record reflects that the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation and applicable statutes and regulation. 2.  Protest challenging agency best-value tradeoff is denied when the best-value tradeoff was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION   Ventera Corporation, of Reston Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to SemanticBits, LLC, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 75FCMC20Q0018, issued under the Agile Delivery to Execute Legislative Endeavors for Quality Related Initiatives (ADELE) blanket purchase agreement (BPA) pursuant to the General Services Administration’s Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) 70, by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, for information technology services.  The protester alleges that the agency erred in its evaluation of quotations and conducted a flawed best-value tradeoff. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On April 17, 2020, the agency issued the RFQ to the six vendors holding the ADELE BPA, seeking agile software development services for the development, modernization, enhancement, operation, and maintenance of certain aspects of the agency’s Internet Quality Improvement and Evaluation System (IQIES).  Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 1‑2, 6.  Of note, this procurement is a follow-on from an existing task order currently being performed by the protester, but this procurement represents a change in scope from the incumbent effort.  MOL at 2-3. The RFQ contemplated the award of a single primarily fixed-price task order for one base year and four option years.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 1B.1, Conformed RFQ Instructions to Vendors, at 10, 15.  The solicitation also provided for the evaluation of quotations using a three-phase approach.  Id. at 5-6, 15.  In phase 1, the agency would provide each vendor with a “solutioning exercise” which the vendor would then address in an oral presentation.  Id. at 5-6.  In phase 2, the agency would then evaluate the presentations, and issue advisory notices to vendors to inform them of their likelihood of award.  Id.  The RFQ indicated that the purpose of this notice was to minimize quotation development costs for vendors, but the RFQ was clear that these notices were advisory only.  Id.  That is to say, vendors were not excluded from the competition by virtue of receiving a negative advisory notice.  Id. In phase 3, the RFQ contemplated that vendors would submit written quotations.  AR, Tab 1B.1, Conformed RFQ Instructions to Vendors, at 6-7.  The RFQ provided that the agency would evaluate vendors’ quotations using the following non-price criteria listed in descending order of importance:  (1) solutioning exercise/oral presentation; (2) technical approach/understanding; and (3) product accessibility template.  Id.