Deloitte Consulting, LLP (70RDAD23Q00000112)

B-422094,B-422094.2 Jan 18, 2024 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Deloitte Consulting, LLP, of Arlington, Virginia, protests the issuance of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) call order to CGI Federal, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 70RDAD23Q00000112, issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for technical systems integration support services. The protester argues that the agency conducted unfair discussions and that the agency's evaluation of technical quotations was unreasonable. 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: Deloitte Consulting, LLP File: B-422094; B-422094.2 Date: January 18, 2024 David S. Cohen, Esq., John J. O’Brien, Esq., Pablo Nichols, Esq., and Jason W. Moy, Esq., Cordatis LLP, for the protester. Jeffery M. Chiow, Esq., Eleanor M. Ross, Esq., and Cassidy Kim, Esq., Greenberg Traurig LLP, for CGI Federal, Inc., the intervenor. Pavan Mehrotra, Esq., and Christine C. Fontenelle, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Kenneth Kilgour, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s technical quotation was unreasonable is sustained where the record shows that, to mitigate an organizational conflict of interest, the awardee eliminated a proposed teaming partner from its quotation, and the agency evaluation contains no evidence that the agency considered the impact on contract performance of the elimination of that firm. 2. Protest that agency conducted unfair discussions is denied where the record shows that the agency’s exchanges--conducted only with the awardee--constituted discussions, but the record does not establish a reasonable possibility that the protester was competitively prejudiced by the agency’s discussions with the awardee. 3. Protest that the agency conducted an unreasonable consistency analysis is denied where the analysis was consistent with the terms of the solicitation and the contemporaneous technical evaluation. 4. Protest that the agency disparately evaluated quotations regarding the proposed use of innovation is denied where the record shows that the different evaluations reflected quotation differences. DECISION Deloitte Consulting, LLP, of Arlington, Virginia, protests the issuance of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) call order to CGI Federal, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 70RDAD23Q00000112, issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for technical systems integration support services. The protester argues that the agency conducted unfair discussions and that the agency’s evaluation of technical quotations was unreasonable. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The fixed-price and time-and-materials call order solicitation was issued under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 8.405-3 to firms holding General Services Administration, Federal Supply Schedule, Enterprise Financial System Integrator (EFSI) BPAs. Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, RFQ at 1, 13. The agency sought technical systems integration support services that would modernize and integrate the financial management systems--collectively known as the DHS Cube--for the DHS Office of the Chief Financial Officer Joint Program Management Office. Id. at 14. The period of performance was a 10-month base period and five 12-month option periods. Id. at 94. The solicitation contained two technical evaluation factors[1]: technical approach and capabilities, and management approach.[2] Id. at 161-162. The technical approach and capabilities factor was more important than the management approach factor. Id. at 168. When combined, those two factors were significantly more important than price. Id. A single award would be made to the vendor whose quotation represented the best value to the agency in accordance with FAR part 8. Id. at 167. As part of its price quotation, each vendor was required to complete a pricing template providing its proposed labor categories, rates, and hours. AR, Tab 6a, RFQ attach. 1, Cube Pricing Template. The template provided vendors with the agency’s estimated level of effort, labor categories, and labor hours, but advised vendors they could vary from those estimates. Id. The RFQ advised vendors that a price analysis would be conducted to determine the reasonableness of the vendor’s total quoted price, which included the base period and all option and surge periods. RFQ at 169.