Perspecta Engineering, Inc. (W52P1J-20-R-0092)

B-420501.2,B-420501.3 Dec 13, 2022 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Perspecta Enterprise Solutions LLC, of Chantilly, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Business Mission Edge, LLC, of Rockville, Maryland, under task order request for proposals (TORFP) No. W52P1J-20-R-00925, issued by the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Material Command for information technology (IT) infrastructure support services. The protester challenges various aspects of the Army's evaluation of proposals under the management/technical and past performance factors, and maintains that the best-value decision was unreasonable. 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: Perspecta Engineering, Inc. File: B-420501.2; B-420501.3 Date: December 13, 2022 J. Scott Hommer, III, Esq., Rebecca E. Pearson, Esq., Christopher G. Griesedieck, Esq., Taylor A. Hillman, Esq., Caleb E. McCallum, Esq., and Andrew W. Current, Esq., Venable LLP, for the protester. Stuart W. Turner, Esq., Amanda J. Sherwood., Esq., Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Noah B. Bleicher, Esq., Carla J. Weiss, Esq., and Scott E. Whitman, Esq., Jenner & Block LLP, for Business Mission Edge, LLC, the intervenor. Alex M. Cahill, Esq. and Debra J. Talley, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Christopher Alwood, Esq., and Alexander O. Levine, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of proposals under the solicitation’s management/technical and past performance factors is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation criteria. 2. Protest challenging the agency’s comparative analysis and source selection decision is denied where the agency’s best-value tradeoff and source selection decision were reasonable, adequately documented, and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Perspecta Enterprise Solutions LLC, of Chantilly, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Business Mission Edge, LLC, of Rockville, Maryland, under task order request for proposals (TORFP) No. W52P1J-20-R-00925, issued by the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Material Command for information technology (IT) infrastructure support services. The protester challenges various aspects of the Army’s evaluation of proposals under the management/technical and past performance factors, and maintains that the best-value decision was unreasonable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On October 15, 2020, the Army issued the solicitation to all small businesses holding contracts under the Army’s Computer Hardware, Enterprise Software Solutions IT Enterprise Solutions-3 Services (ITES-3S) multiple‑award indefinite‑delivery, indefinite‑quantity (IDIQ) contract, pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.5. Contracting Officer’s Statement and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 2; Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, TORFP at 2.[1] The solicitation sought proposals to provide operational sustainment of data centers, data center hosting, and other IT capabilities that directly enable the Army Human Resources Command recruiting, accessioning, and human resources missions. COS/MOL at 1-2. The solicitation contemplated the issuance of a single fixed‑price task order for a 12 month based period and three 1-year option periods. TORFP at 2. The solicitation provided for award on a best‑value tradeoff basis considering three evaluation factors: management/technical, past performance, and price. Id. at 43. For the purpose of performing the best-value tradeoff, the management/technical factor was more important than past performance, the past performance factor was more important than price, and the two non‑price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price. Id. The agency was to evaluate proposals under the management/technical factor considering the offeror’s “proposed approach to performing all the Management/Technical requirements of the solicitation.” TORFP at 44. The solicitation established that the agency would evaluate whether the proposed management approaches and staffing approaches “demonstrate a thorough understanding of the actions, procedures, and timelines required.” Id. The solicitation also provided that the agency would evaluate the proposed key personnel to “ensure compliance with the experience requirements” set forth in the solicitation’s performance work statement (PWS).