Data Computer Corporation of America (75FCMC20F0057)

B-419033.4,B-419033.5,B-419033.6,B-419033.7 Aug 03, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Data Computer Corporation of America (DCCA), of Ellicott City, Maryland, protests the issuance of a task order to Sparksoft Corporation, of Columbia, Maryland, under a teaming agreement with Skyward IT Solutions, LLC, (Sparksoft/Skyward) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. GS-35F-161CA/75FCMC20F0057 issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), against the General Services Administration's Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) 70 for information technology services related to software testing of various Medicare information systems. The protester contends the agency erred in its evaluation in numerous respects, engaged in impermissible disparate treatment of quotations, and did not adequately justify its best-value tradeoff decision. 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:  Data Computer Corporation of America File:  B-419033.4; B-419033.5; B-419033.6; B-419033.7 Date:  August 3, 2021 Rebecca E. Pearson, Esq., Taylor Hillman, Esq., Caleb E. McCallum, Esq., and Lindsay M. Reed, Esq., Venable LLP, for the protester. David B. Dixon, Esq., Toghrul M. Shukurlu, Esq., and Robert C. Starling, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, for Sparksoft Corporation, the intervenor. Krystal A. Jordan, Esq., Robyn A. Littman, Esq., and Douglas Kornreich, 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 agency unreasonably evaluated quotations is denied where the record reflects the evaluation was generally reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation and applicable statutes and regulation. 2.  Protest that agency treated vendors disparately by downgrading the protester’s quotation for reasons equally applicable to the awardee’s quotation is denied where the protester cannot show a reasonable possibility of competitive prejudice.  DECISION Data Computer Corporation of America (DCCA), of Ellicott City, Maryland, protests the issuance of a task order to Sparksoft Corporation, of Columbia, Maryland, under a teaming agreement with Skyward IT Solutions, LLC, (Sparksoft/Skyward) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. GS-35F-161CA/75FCMC20F0057 issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), against the General Services Administration’s Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) 70 for information technology services related to software testing of various Medicare information systems.  The protester contends the agency erred in its evaluation in numerous respects, engaged in impermissible disparate treatment of quotations, and did not adequately justify its best-value tradeoff decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On March 30, 2020, the agency issued the Medicare Integrated Systems Testing (MIST) RFQ to eight FSS 70 contract holders, including DCCA, Sparksoft, and Skyward.  Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 4.  The RFQ provides for the issuance of a single task order to replace two existing contracts:  (1) the Single Test Contractor contract performed by DCCA, which primarily involves testing Medicare information systems running legacy COBOL software hosted on mainframes; and (2) the Medicare Payment System Modernization Services contract performed by Skyward, which involved migrating portions or aspects of the testing process to a modern cloud environment.  Id. at 2-3.  However, in addition to replacing those prior efforts, the MIST RFQ also contemplates significant new work that will result in a more complete modernization of the testing environment, gradually reducing the share of legacy testing to be performed over the task order’s period of performance.  Id. at 3. The contemplated task order is primarily fixed-price, with certain direct costs to be paid on a time-and-materials basis.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 5, RFQ at 1.  The RFQ also contemplated a 4-month base period of performance, and three 1-year option periods.  Id. at 3.  Award was to be made on the basis of a best-value tradeoff between the following factors:  (1) corporate experience; (2) performance work statement and quality assurance surveillance plan (PWS/QASP); (3) demonstration exercises; (4) section 508[1] compliance; and (5) price.  Id. at 63.  The RFQ explained the combination of non-price factors was significantly more important than price.  Id.