RK Consultancy Services, Inc. (210501 )

B-420030,B-420030.2 Nov 03, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights RK Consultancy Services, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, protests the issuance of a task order to Nimbus Consulting LLC of Columbia, Maryland, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 210501, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), for consulting support services. The protester challenges the agency’s evaluation of its quotation. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  RK Consultancy Services, Inc. File:  B-420030; B-420030.2 Date:  November 3, 2021 Venkat Ramaswamy, RK Consultancy Services, Inc., for the protester. Terry L. Elling, Esq., and Amy L. Fuentes, Esq., Holland & Knight LLP, for Nimbus Consulting LLC, the intervenor. Karyne Constance Akhtar, Esq., Department of Health and Human Services, for the agency. Raymond Richards, Esq., and John Sorrenti, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging an agency’s technical evaluation of the protester’s quotation is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and performed in accordance with the terms of the solicitation, and where the protester is unable to demonstrate competitive prejudice.  DECISION RK Consultancy Services, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, protests the issuance of a task order to Nimbus Consulting LLC of Columbia, Maryland, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 210501, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), for consulting support services.  The protester challenges the agency’s evaluation of its quotation.  We deny the protest. Background On April 19, 2021, CMS issued the RFQ under the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4, Federal Supply Schedules (FSS).  Agency Report (AR), Tab 2a, RFQ at 1.  The RFQ sought quotations for information technology consulting services to support CMS “in implementing national health care transformation.”  AR, Tab 2c, Statement of Work (SOW) at 3.  The SOW explained that services sought under the RFQ will “provide CMS with strategic, analytic and professional consulting support for organizational change, concept to design planning, acquisition strategy, process improvement, and other transformational activities.”  Id. The RFQ contemplated the issuance of a fixed‑price order with one 12‑month base period and four 12‑month option periods.  RFQ at 2‑3.  The task order would be issued on a best‑value tradeoff basis considering price and the following non‑price factors listed here in order of importance:  corporate experience; staffing; and section 508 compliance.[1]  Id. at 13‑14.  The non‑price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price.  CMS planned to issue an order based on initial quotations without engaging in discussions with vendors.  Id. at 1, 13.  Quotations were due by April 26.  Id. at 4. CMS received two quotations in response to the RFQ.  Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at ¶ 11.  The quotations were evaluated as follows:   Corporate Exp. Staffing Section 508 Price RK Low Confidence No Confidence Unacceptable $54,387,134 Nimbus High Confidence High Confidence Acceptable $68,474,878   AR, Tab 6f, Award Decision Memo at 9‑12.  The contracting officer determined that Nimbus’s quotation represented the best value to the government and selected Nimbus for award.  COS at ¶ 16. RK Consultancy requested a brief explanation of the agency’s award decision, which was provided on July 26.  Protest, exh. 7, Req. for Explanation at 1; AR, Tab 5a, Brief Explanation at 1.  The brief explanation detailed negative findings assessed to RK Consultancy’s quotation under each technical evaluation factor and stated that “negative findings assessed for Factors 1 through 3 increased the level of performance risk to an unacceptable level and made [RK Consultancy’s] quote technically unacceptable.”  AR, Tab 5a, Brief Explanation at 3.  On July 30, RK Consultancy filed this protest with our Office. Discussion RK Consultancy raises a multitude of challenges against this procurement.  The primary issue here is whether RK Consultancy’s quotation was reasonably found to be unacceptable under the section 508 compliance factor and in turn, ineligible for award.  Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable.[2] Where, as here, an agency issues a solicitation to FSS vendors under FAR subpart 8.4 and conducts a competition, we will review the record to ensure that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation.  Accenture Fed. Servs., LLC, B‑417857, Nov.