CACI, Inc.-Federal (N00164-19-R-3503)

B-419371.3 Feb 26, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights CACI, Inc.-Federal (CACI), of Chantilly, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Booz Allen Hamilton (Booz Allen), of McLean, Virginia, issued by the Department of the Navy under Request for Proposals (RFP) No. N00164-19-R-3503 for acquisition and integrated logistics support services for the Navy's Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems. CACI challenges discrete portions of the agency's technical and cost evaluation. 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:  CACI, Inc.-Federal File:  B-419371.3 Date:  February 26, 2021 Sharon L. Larkin, Esq., and James M. Larkin, Esq., The Larkin Law Group LLP, for the protester. Kristen E. Ittig, Esq., Mark D. Colley, Esq., Amanda J. Sherwood, Esq., and Eric Valle, Esq., Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, LLP, for Booz Allen Hamilton, the intervenor. Per D. Midboe, Esq., and David L. Bodner, Department of the Navy, for the agency. Lois Hanshaw, Esq., and Evan C. Williams, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of protester’s proposal is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION CACI, Inc.-Federal (CACI), of Chantilly, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Booz Allen Hamilton (Booz Allen), of McLean, Virginia, issued by the Department of the Navy under Request for Proposals (RFP) No. N00164-19-R-3503 for acquisition and integrated logistics support services for the Navy’s Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems.  CACI challenges discrete portions of the agency’s technical and cost evaluation. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On April 26, 2019, the Navy issued the solicitation to holders of the Navy’s SeaPort-NxG multiple award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract.  Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1.  The RFP contemplated the award of a cost-plus-fixed-fee task order for a base year and four 1-year option periods.  Agency Report (AR) Tab 2, RFP at 89.[1]  The solicitation sought a contractor to assist with the development and management of cross-program and cross-organization policies and practices for the full range of acquisition and integrated logistics support services.  Id. at 7. Award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis considering three evaluation factors, listed in descending order of importance:  technical capability/management approach personnel and small business approach (referred to collectively as “technical approach”); past performance; and cost/price.  Id. at 90-91.  In this regard, the technical approach factor was more important than past performance, with the non-cost factors being significantly more important than the cost/price factor.  Id. at 91.  The RFP also advised that as competing proposals approached equality in the non-cost factors, the total evaluated cost would increase in importance.  Id.  As relevant to this protest, the technical approach factor was comprised of three equally rated subfactors, including the management approach/plan subfactor.  Id.  Under the management approach/plan subfactor, offerors were required to demonstrate the ability to effectively manage all efforts under the task order and address four plans, including, as relevant here, a transition plan.  Id. at 84.  For the transition plan, offerors were to provide a detailed description of the transition process for assuming responsibility from the incumbent, if applicable, within 60 days of award.  The plan was to address areas such as facility clearances, hiring personnel after award, and how personnel will be properly trained and skilled with adequate security clearances.  Id. at 84.  The RFP required that staffing actions be completed by no later than 60 days after award and that the transition plan be consistent with the technical approach and cost proposal.  Id.  Additionally, offerors were required to address the following seven elements:  transition team responsibilities; work turnover; incumbent capture; security requirements; quality assurance; training; and archived material.  Id. at 84-85.  In evaluating the management approach/plan subfactor, the agency would evaluate the degree to which the plan provided an integrated team with a coordinated approach to work performance, demonstrated a clear understanding of task order reporting requirements, and assured quality long term support.  Id.