SPATHE Systems, LLC (FA8307-20-G-0050)

B-420463.2 Jun 13, 2022 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights SPATHE Systems LLC, of Tampa, Florida, protests the issuance of task orders to Omni Federal, of Gainesville, Virginia, F9 Teams, Inc., of Seattle, Washington, and Raft, LLC, of Reston, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. FA8307-20-G-0050, issued by the Department of the Air Force to support the Air Force Lifecycle Management Center, Detachment 12 (Kessel Run) mission. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably evaluated SPATHE's quotation. 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: SPATHE Systems LLC File: B-420463.2 Date: June 13, 2022 Diana C. Mendez, Esq., and Joseph M. Goldstein, Esq., Shutts & Bowen LLP, for the protester. Tara L. Ward, Esq., McDermott Will & Emery LLP, for Raft, LLC, the intervenor. Colonel Frank Yoon, Major James B. Leighton, Lieutenant Colonel Keric D. Clanahan, Sean M. Hannaway, Esq., Andrew J. Sibley, Esq., and Major Gabriel W. Bush, Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Kenneth Kilgour, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the protester’s technical quotation is denied where the record shows that the evaluation was consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION SPATHE Systems LLC, of Tampa, Florida, protests the issuance of task orders to Omni Federal, of Gainesville, Virginia, F9 Teams, Inc., of Seattle, Washington, and Raft, LLC, of Reston, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. FA8307-20-G-0050, issued by the Department of the Air Force to support the Air Force Lifecycle Management Center, Detachment 12 (Kessel Run) mission. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably evaluated SPATHE’s quotation. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The Air Force issued the RFQ to Platform One Basic Ordering Agreements (BOA) Software DevSecOps[1] Services small business contractors, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) section 16.703, BOAs. Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, RFQ at 1-2. The RFQ sought support services for Kessel Run, a detachment of the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center that “leverages industry best practices and products to rapidly deliver capabilities while posturing for future and potentially disruptive information technology (IT).” AR, Tab 6, RFQ amend. 1, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 4. The PWS describes Kessel Run as “require[ing] vendors that can accurately forecast technological changes and attract the cutting edge skill sets, known and unknown, to ensure the continued dominance of the Global [Air Operation Centers (AOC)][[2]] network.” AR, Tab 6, RFQ, amend. 1, PWS at 5. The RFQ advised vendors that the Air Force intended to issue three or more task orders, but reserved the right to issue fewer than three orders. AR, Tab 8, RFQ amend. 1, Evaluation Factors for Award at 2. The agency’s selection would be a best-value tradeoff between two factors--technical and price. Id. at 3. The technical factor contained the following three subfactors: take-home challenge and solution presentation; leadership oral presentation; and technical approach/written assessment. Id. The first two subfactors--take-home challenge and solution presentation, and leadership oral presentation--were of equal importance and were more important than the third factor--technical approach/written assessment. Id. The technical factor was significantly more important than the price factor, but price would contribute significantly to the selection decision. Id. Quotations were to be evaluated for their “completeness, feasibility, and credibility,” and the agency would gauge the vendors’ “approach and understanding of the [PWS], supporting documentation, and any other additional criteria listed below.” Id. Take-Home Challenge and Solution Presentation Subfactor At issue in this protest is the Air Force’s evaluation of SPATHE’s quotation under the first technical subfactor--take-home challenge and solution presentation.[3] The Air Force explains that the take-home challenge was designed to require vendors to demonstrate their capability and functionality by completing a sample problem. Vendors were to develop an aircraft tracking application, submit the source code, and record a programming video of the team conducting a portion of the application development. The second portion of the take-home challenge was an oral presentation of the vendor’s aircraft tracking application. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 5, citing AR Tab 7, RFQ amend.