RemedyBiz, Inc. (91990022Q0066)

B-421196 Jan 17, 2023 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights RemedyBiz Inc., a small business of Reston, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) with, and issuance of a task order to, Centennial Technologies Inc., a small business of Leesburg, Virginia, under Department of Education request for quotations (RFQ) No. 91990022Q0066, for the implementation of a new acquisition management system. RemedyBiz alleges that the agency's evaluation of quotations and award decision were improper. We sustain 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: RemedyBiz, Inc. File: B-421196 Date: January 17, 2023 Jeffrey M. Chiow, Esq., Eleanor M. Ross, Esq., Christopher M. O’Brien, Esq., and Jordan N. Malone, Esq., Greenberg Traurig LLP, for the protester. Matthew R. Keller, Esq., and Kristen L. Loesch, Esq., Praemia Law, PLLC, for Centennial Technologies Inc., the intervenor. Jill Siegelbaum, Esq., Department of Education, for the agency. Samantha S. Lee, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protests challenging agency’s oral presentation, key personnel, and technical evaluations are denied where protester has not demonstrated that the agency’s evaluation was unreasonable or inconsistent with the terms of the solicitation. 2. Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of prior experience is sustained where the agency failed to adequately document the evaluation, and the error was prejudicial to the protester. DECISION RemedyBiz Inc., a small business of Reston, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) with, and issuance of a task order to, Centennial Technologies Inc., a small business of Leesburg, Virginia, under Department of Education request for quotations (RFQ) No. 91990022Q0066, for the implementation of a new acquisition management system. RemedyBiz alleges that the agency’s evaluation of quotations and award decision were improper. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation, set aside for small-businesses, was issued on July 18, 2022, under the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4 utilizing the General Services Administration’s Federal Supply Schedule (FSS). Agency Report (AR), Tab C, RFQ at 1, 3.[1] The RFQ sought quotations to implement “a modern Acquisition Management System (AMS) that creates a secure business environment and facilitates and supports cost-effective acquisition of goods and services” in support of the agency’s mission. Id. at 20. The solicitation contemplated the establishment of a BPA under which the agency will place fixed-price, time-and-materials, or hybrid, “calls” for task orders--for a 12‑month base period and four 12‑month options--in conjunction with the issuance of the first task order. Id. at 4-5. The RFQ included a statement of objectives for the first task order that “focuses primarily on the implementation of the AMS solution and relevant support activities,” specifically the planning phase work. Id. at 41‑42. The solicitation set forth a three-phase, best-value tradeoff source selection process, considering the following evaluation factors, listed in descending order of importance: (1) demonstrated prior experience (prior experience); (2) oral presentation and slide deck (oral presentation); (3) capability of proposed key personnel (key personnel); (4) technical submission (technical); and (5) business submission and price workbook (price). Id. at 78-81. When combined, the non-price factors were significantly more important than price. Id. at 78. In phase 1, the agency would evaluate only prior experience. Id. at 67-68. After the phase 1 evaluation, the agency would issue an advisory notification to each vendor, identifying the vendors that were “rated most highly and advised to proceed” to the next phase (phase 2), oral presentations and submission of key personnel resumes.[2] Id. at 68-72. After the phase 2 evaluation, the agency would issue another notification, advising vendors whether they should proceed to phase 3, the submission of quotations for evaluation under the technical and price factors. Id. at 72-75. The RFQ advised that, for each non-price factor, the agency would evaluate “holistically” to assign a rating of “high confidence,” “some confidence,” or “low confidence.” Id. at 79. For price, vendors were instructed to submit labor categories and labor rates as well as a fixed price for the first task order. Id. at 74. For the BPA, the agency would evaluate price quotations to determine whether labor rates, labor categories, and labor mix were fair and reasonable. Id. at 81.