Computer World Services Corporation (89303022REI000082)

B-421130 Dec 22, 2022 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Computer World Services Corporation (CWS), a small business of Falls Church, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to VariQ-CV JV, a small business of Luray, Virginia, by the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 89303022REI000082, issued under the National Institutes of Health's Chief Information Officer--Solutions and Partners 3, Small Business multiple award indefinite- delivery, indefinite-quantity contract for system administration support. The protester contends the agency's evaluation of its proposal and DOE's best-value tradeoff determination were unreasonable and inconsistent with the terms of the solicitation. 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: Computer World Services Corporation File: B-421130 Date: December 22, 2022 Matthew T. Schoonover, Esq., Matthew P. Moriarty, Esq., John M. Mattox II, Esq., Ian P. Patterson, Esq., and Timothy J. Laughlin, Esq., Schoonover & Moriarty LLC, for the protester. Kelly E. Buroker, Esq., and Tamara Droubi, Esq., Vedder Price PC, for VariQ-CV JV, LLC, the intervenor. James Jurich, Esq., Marianna Lvovsky, Esq., and Greta Iliev, Esq., Department of Energy, for the agency. Michael A. Willems, Esq., and Evan D. Wesser, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging agency’s evaluation of the protester’s proposal is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 2. Protest challenging the agency’s best-value tradeoff is denied where the agency’s decision was reasonable. DECISION Computer World Services Corporation (CWS), a small business of Falls Church, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to VariQ-CV JV, a small business of Luray, Virginia, by the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 89303022REI000082, issued under the National Institutes of Health’s Chief Information Officer--Solutions and Partners 3, Small Business multiple award indefinite- delivery, indefinite-quantity contract for system administration support. The protester contends the agency’s evaluation of its proposal and DOE’s best-value tradeoff determination were unreasonable and inconsistent with the terms of the solicitation. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the RFP on July 6, 2022, seeking to establish a single, fixed-price task order with a 1-year base period and four 1-year option periods. Agency Report (AR), Tab A.1, RFP at 1, 13. The RFP proposed to make award on the basis of a best-value tradeoff among three evaluation criteria listed in descending order of importance: (1) technical approach; (2) business management and key personnel; and (3) price. Id. at 19-20. The solicitation further provided that the non-price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price. Id. The agency received three offers in response to the RFP, including from the protester and VariQ. Contracting Officer’s Statement of Facts and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 6. The agency’s technical evaluation panel (TEP) evaluated each proposal and identified features of each proposal that raised or lowered their expectation that the offeror would be able to successfully perform the requirement.[1] Id. at 6-7. Of note, the TEP did not assign adjectival ratings to proposals, but instead performed a comparative assessment of the proposals. Id. Following the TEP’s evaluation, the contracting officer reviewed and concurred with the TEP’s consensus comparative evaluation report. See AR, Tab B.2, Award Determination Document at 2. The contracting officer concluded that VariQ’s proposal was superior to the protester’s proposal with respect to both non-price factors, but also noted that VariQ proposed a higher price than the protester.[2] Id. at 9. The contracting officer ultimately concluded that VariQ represented the best value to the government, because the non-price factors were the most important factors and VariQ’s technical superiority was worth paying the price premium. Id. The agency issued a task order to VariQ on September 26, 2022. COS/MOL at 8. This protest followed. DISCUSSION The protester argues that the agency erred in its evaluation of the protester’s proposal and in its best-value tradeoff in numerous respects. Specifically, the protester contends that the agency improperly assigned several weaknesses to its technical and business management approaches. Additionally, the protester claims that the agency failed to reasonably consider the protester’s lower price in conducting its best-value tradeoff.