Strategic Resources, Inc. (Unknown)

B-418928 Oct 21, 2020 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Strategic Resources, Inc. (SRI), of McLean, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Abacus Technology Corporation (Abacus), of Chevy Chase, Maryland, under a task order request for proposals (TOPR), issued by the Department of the Army, Army Materiel Command, for command, control, communication, and computer information technology (C4/IT) enterprise management services. SRI protests that the agency's evaluation was unreasonable and failed to assess a number of strengths to SRI's technical proposal, and that the agency conducted an unreasonable 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:  Strategic Resources, Inc. File:  B-418928 Date:  October 21, 2020 Douglas C. Proxmire, Esq., Chelsea B. Knudson, Esq., and Taylor A. Hillman, Esq., Venable, LLP, for the protester. Alexander B. Ginsberg, Esq., and Meghan D. Doherty, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, for Abacus Technology Corporation, the intervenor. Debra J. Talley, Esq., and Gwendolyn T.D. Franks, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. John Sorrenti, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency’s evaluation of protester’s proposal and best-value determination were unreasonable is denied where record shows that the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation. DECISION Strategic Resources, Inc. (SRI), of McLean, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Abacus Technology Corporation (Abacus), of Chevy Chase, Maryland, under a task order request for proposals (TOPR), issued by the Department of the Army, Army Materiel Command, for command, control, communication, and computer information technology (C4/IT) enterprise management services.  SRI protests that the agency’s evaluation was unreasonable and failed to assess a number of strengths to SRI’s technical proposal, and that the agency conducted an unreasonable best-value determination. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the TOPR pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 16.5, to holders of the Army’s information management communications services III multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 25, TOPR at 1; Contracting Officer’s Statement and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 2.  The TOPR sought a variety of C4/IT services, including network and switch operations/administration; system administration; systems integration and testing; configuration management (hardware and software); end-user support and training; and information assurance and network security services.  AR, Tab 21, Performance Work Statement (PWS) §§ 1.1, 2.2. The TOPR contemplated issuance of a single fixed-price task order for a base period and four option periods, as well as a phase-in period if necessary.  TOPR at 4, 8.  Award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis considering three evaluation factors: critical services, technical, and price.  Id. at 7.  The critical services factor was significantly more important than the technical factor, and when combined, the critical services and technical factors were more important than price.  Id.  The critical services and technical factors were assigned adjectival ratings of outstanding, good, acceptable, or unacceptable.  Id. Under the critical services factor, the agency would evaluate an offeror’s understanding and approach to four critical areas:  network services, site-unique requirements, administrative telephone services, and vehicle requirements.  Id. at 3-4, 7-8.  The TOPR identified sections of the PWS that corresponded with each of these four critical areas.  Id. at 3-4.  Under the technical factor, the agency would evaluate an offeror’s understanding and approach to staffing, technical approach, management, and training.  Id. at 4-5; 7-8.  Under both the critical services and technical factors, the agency would evaluate proposals to “determine whether all of the requirements of the PWS have been completely satisfied.”  Id. at 8. The agency received proposals from 9 offerors, including SRI and Abacus.  After evaluating the proposals, the agency assigned the following ratings to the proposals from SRI and Abacus: Critical Services Technical Price SRI Acceptable Acceptable $41,947,442.52 Abacus Outstanding Acceptable $45,185,575.00 AR, Tab 33, Task Order Decision Document (TODD) at 3.  The agency assessed to SRI’s proposal one strength and no weaknesses under the critical services factor, and no strengths or weaknesses under the technical factor.  Id.