Utech, Inc- dba EndoSoft (36C10G20Q0050)

B-420755 Jul 29, 2022 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Utech, Inc., dba EndoSoft, of Schenectady, New York, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C10G20Q0050, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for an endoscopy information system. EndoSoft argues that the solicitation does not meet the agency's needs. We dismiss the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Utech, Inc- dba EndoSoft File: B-420755 Date: July 29, 2022 Alan Grayson, Esq., for the protester. Shawn Larson, Esq, and Aleia Barlow, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Mary G. Curcio, Esq., and Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that the solicitation did not clearly indicate whether the awarded contract would apply to all Department of Veterans Affairs locations is dismissed as untimely where the solicitation made it clear that the resulting contract could be utilized by all Department of Veterans Affairs locations in the United States and its territories. 2. Protest that agency amended solicitation is dismissed where agency asserts, and review of solicitation confirms, that no amendment was issued. 3. Protest that, because the competitive landscape has changed, it is no longer reasonable for the Department of Veterans Affairs to conduct procurement using a small business tiered evaluation approach is dismissed where solicitation as issued contemplated that the agency might not receive proposals from any category of small business concerns, and specifically allowed large business concerns to submit proposals. DECISION Utech, Inc., dba EndoSoft, of Schenectady, New York, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C10G20Q0050, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for an endoscopy information system. EndoSoft argues that the solicitation does not meet the agency’s needs. We dismiss the protest. The solicitation was issued on January 26, 2021, for an endoscopy information system on a brand name or equal basis.[1] As relevant to this protest, the solicitation provided for a set-aside based on an order of priority as established by 38 U.S.C. 8127, with the following tiers, in descending order of preference: (1) service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns (SDVOSB); (2) veteran-owned small business concerns; (3) small business concerns, with historically underutilized business zone small business concerns and 8(a) participants having priority; and (4) large business concerns. Solicitation at 94. The solicitation provided for award on a best-value tradeoff basis considering technical, past performance, socio-economic, and price factors. Id. The closing date for the receipt of proposals was February 16, 2021. Id. at 1. EndoSoft did not submit a proposal, and instead states that it “arranged to provide this product through an offeror named Namtek, which is an SDVOSB concern.” Protest at 4. On April 1, 2022, the protester filed an agency-level protest with the VA. EndoSoft stated that on March 22 it learned that a VA location for which EndoSoft held an endoscopy information system contract suspended its decision to upgrade the system due to an impending decision on the “national contract.” Agency Level Protest. According to EndoSoft, the term national contract referred to the solicitation at issue here, which the protester argues does not contemplate or instruct offerors to take over existing contracts. Id. at 2. EndoSoft also asserted that it learned at the same time that there was a change in the evaluation scheme which made performance of an existing project part of the evaluation process.[2] Id. Finally, EndoSoft asserted that the field of likely offerors changed since the solicitation was issued because the protester’s relationship with Namtek, the firm that would provide the protester’s endoscopic information system, had “collapsed.” Id. at 3. For this reason, the protester argued that a tiered evaluation was no longer a reasonable approach. Id. at 3. On May 6, the agency denied Endosoft’s protest on the basis that EndoSoft was not an interested party because it did not submit a proposal in response to the solicitation. Response to Agency Level Protest. On May 16, EndoSoft submitted its protest to our Office, in which EndoSoft raised the same issues that it raised in its agency-level protest. As discussed below, we dismiss the protest. First, EndoSoft protests that the solicitation was unclear as to whether the contract that will be awarded will apply to all VA locations. EndoSoft explains that many, but not all, VA locations obtain endoscopy information systems through separate, location-specific contracts. Protest at 2. EndoSoft asserts that the agency intends through the current solicitation to establish a framework for parts of the VA that do not obtain endoscopy information systems under stand-alone contracts.