Ironclad Technology Services, LLC (70CTD021Q0000091)

B-419976.2 May 02, 2022 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Ironclad Technology Services, LLC, a small business of Virginia Beach, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Information Technology Coalition, Inc. (ITC), a small business of Alexandria, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 70CTD021Q0000091, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for software implementation, configuration, and maintenance of ICE's virtual information technology application infrastructure. The protester contends the agency's best-value tradeoff decision was unreasonable and insufficiently documented. 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: Ironclad Technology Services, LLC File: B-419976.2 Date: May 2, 2022 J. Bradley Reaves, Esq., and Beth V. McMahon, Esq., Reaves Coley PLLC, for the protester. Daniel R. Forman, Esq., and William B O’Reilly, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP, for Information Technology Coalition, Inc., the intervenor. Cassandra A. Maximous, Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Michael P. Grogan, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency’s best-value tradeoff decision is denied where the record reflects that the decision was reasonable, consistent with the terms of the solicitation, and adequately documented. DECISION Ironclad Technology Services, LLC, a small business of Virginia Beach, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Information Technology Coalition, Inc. (ITC), a small business of Alexandria, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 70CTD021Q0000091, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for software implementation, configuration, and maintenance of ICE’s virtual information technology application infrastructure. The protester contends the agency’s best-value tradeoff decision was unreasonable and insufficiently documented. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the solicitation on April 19, 2021, pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.5, to firms holding contracts under the General Services Administration’s Veterans Technology Services 2 indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) governmentwide acquisition contract (GWAC).Agency Report (AR), Tab 9, Amendment 1 to RFQ Letter at 1. The solicitation contemplated the issuance of a single task order, with fixed-price and labor hour contract line items, with a 1-year base period of performance and four 1-year option periods. Id. The solicitation sought contractor support for ICE’s GovCloud and information technology (IT) infrastructure, which would include providing resources and telecommunications support to ICE, designing and engineering infrastructure and network systems, and managing IT systems. See generally AR, Tab 13, Statement of Work (SOW). The solicitation provided for award on a best-value tradeoff basis considering three factors, listed in descending order of importance: (1) technical approach; (2) past performance; and (3) price.[1] AR, Tab 9, Amendment 1 to RFQ Letter at 9. Under the technical approach factor, the agency would evaluate whether a vendor’s “approach is sound, practical, and feasible for accomplishing all relevant tasks.” Id. at 10. ICE would evaluate a vendor’s past performance to determine if the firm “has successfully performed on previous contracts of similar size, scope, and complexity.” Id. at 11. Price would be evaluated with respect to accuracy, reasonableness, and completeness. Id. The solicitation advised that the non-price factors, when combined, were more important than price. Id. at 10. The RFQ also provided that “[i]n the event that two or more quotes are determined not to have any substantial technical differences (i.e., are technically equivalent), price becomes the determining factor and award may be made to the lower priced quotation.” Id. In making award, the solicitation explained that “[t]rade-off analyses in both technical considerations and prices will be used to determine the best overall value to the Government and shall consist of a comparative analysis of evaluated benefits and risks, which will be traded off against the price factor.” Id. at 8. The agency received multiple quotations by the final submission deadline of May 10, to include submissions from Ironclad and ITC. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 7. The agency concluded that Ironclad’s quotation represented the best value for the agency and issued the task order on July 12. Id. at 7. ITC filed a protest with our Office, challenging ICE’s evaluation of quotations.