Strativia LLC (12319823Q0003)

B-421511,B-421511.2 Jun 14, 2023 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Strativia, LLC, of Largo, Maryland, protests the award of a task order to Field Data Technology (FDT), of Falls Church, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 12319823Q0003. The Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) issued the RFQ for support of a Retailer Service Center (RSC) for retailers authorized or seeking to be authorized to accept Supplemental Nutrition Assistant Program (SNAP) benefits. The protester primarily contends that the agency unreasonably and disparately evaluated quotations. 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: Strativia LLC File: B-421511; B-421511.2 Date: June 14, 2023 Eden Brown Gaines, Esq., Brown Gaines, LLC, for the protester. Thomas K. David, Esq., and Lewis Rhodes, Esq., Reston Law Group, LLP, for Field Data Technology, LLC, the intervenor. Adam Humphries, Esq., Department of Agriculture, for the agency. Christine Milne, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that the agency unreasonably and disparately evaluated quotations is denied where the record shows that the agency reasonably and equally evaluated quotations in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Strativia, LLC, of Largo, Maryland, protests the award of a task order to Field Data Technology (FDT), of Falls Church, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 12319823Q0003. The Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) issued the RFQ for support of a Retailer Service Center (RSC) for retailers authorized or seeking to be authorized to accept Supplemental Nutrition Assistant Program (SNAP) benefits. The protester primarily contends that the agency unreasonably and disparately evaluated quotations. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND SNAP is a federal nutrition assistance program that provides eligible individuals and households a monthly benefit to purchase food at SNAP-authorized stores or retailers. Agency Report (AR), exh. 6, RFQ, attach. 1, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at ¶ 1.0. The RSC serves as the main access point for communicating with current and potential retailers. Id. The RFQ was issued on December 20, 2022, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation section 8.405-2(c) for services in support of the RSC. AR, exh. 5, RFQ at 1, 3. The required services include distribution of SNAP retailer materials, assisting retailers with preparing and submitting SNAP applications, assisting authorized retailers with reauthorization processes, data-intake and processing, scanning, call management, statistical reporting, and other special projects. PWS ¶¶ 2.0, 3.0. Strativia is the incumbent contractor, and FDT is a former prime contractor for the RSC and Strativia’s subcontractor on the current contract. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 2. Award was to be made on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering technical capability, past performance, and price factors. RFQ at 7-9. In combination, the non-price factors were more important than price. Id. at 7. Quotations would be assessed ratings of exceptional, highly acceptable, acceptable, or unacceptable under the non-price factors. AR, exh. 4, Evaluation Report at 1-2. Price was to be evaluated for reasonableness. RFQ at 9. The agency received quotations from Strativia and from FDT. A technical evaluation panel evaluated each and submitted consensus reports to the contracting officer. COS at 6. The contracting officer, acting as the source selection authority (SSA), considered these reports, prepared the award memorandum, and conducted the best-value tradeoff analysis. Id. FDT’s quotation was evaluated as highly acceptable under both non-price factors, with a price of $7,939,168. Strativia’s quotation was evaluated as unacceptable under the technical capability factor and highly acceptable under the past performance factor, with a price of $7,921,192. AR, exh. 28, Award Memorandum at 7, 12-13. Under the technical capability factor, the SSA found that FDT’s quotation had a significant strength, a strength, and a weakness. Id. at 10-11. The SSA concluded that FDT’s quotation provided a thorough description of the processes it would use to meet requirements, proposed technological enhancements that would aid in the decision-making process between FDT and FNS, and had no significant weaknesses or deficiencies. Id. at 11. The SSA found that Strativia’s quotation had a strength, a significant weakness, and a deficiency. Id. at 7-9. The SSA concluded that Strativia’s quotation lacked essential details, provided incorrect information, and demonstrated a lack of familiarity with the requirements. Id. at 10.