Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc. (36C10F23Q0008)

B-422118.2,B-422118.3 Jul 30, 2024 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH), Inc., of McLean, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket-purchase agreement (BPA) with and the issuance of a call order to Guidehouse, Inc., of Chicago, Illinois, under request for quotations (RFQ) 36C10F23Q0008 issued to all holders of the General Services Administration multiple-award federal supply schedule 541611, management and financial consulting, by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for market area assessments of VA's healthcare networks. The protester primarily challenges the adequacy and reasonableness of the agency's best-value tradeoff and, alleges that the awardee should have been found technically unacceptable because one of its proposed key personnel became unavailable prior to award. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. 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: Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc. File: B-422118.2; B-422118.3 Date: July 30, 2024 Kristen E. Ittig, Esq., Amanda J. Sherwood, Esq., Roee Talmor, Esq., and Nicole Williamson, Esq., Arnold & Porter LLP, for the protester. Brian G. Walsh, Esq., Tracye Winfrey Howard, Esq., Cara L. Sizemore, Esq., Sarah B. Hansen, Esq., and Morgan W. Huston, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for Guidehouse, Inc., the intervenor. Danica Hong, Esq., and Catherine Gilabert, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Michael Willems, Esq., and Evan D. Wesser, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest brought for the first time following corrective action is untimely when it challenges evaluation findings from an earlier award decision of which the protester was previously advised, and which did not change during the reevaluation. 2. Protest of agency's evaluation and best-value tradeoff decision is denied where the evaluation and award decision were adequately documented, reasonable, and consistent with the solicitation. 3. Protest that the awardee is ineligible for award because it did not notify the agency that a key person became unavailable to perform after quotation submission but before award is denied, where the protester did not demonstrate that the key person was actually unavailable. DECISION Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH), Inc., of McLean, Virginia, protests the establishment of a blanket-purchase agreement (BPA) with and the issuance of a call order to Guidehouse, Inc., of Chicago, Illinois, under request for quotations (RFQ) 36C10F23Q0008 issued to all holders of the General Services Administration multiple-award federal supply schedule 541611, management and financial consulting, by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for market area assessments of VA's healthcare networks. The protester primarily challenges the adequacy and reasonableness of the agency's best-value tradeoff and, alleges that the awardee should have been found technically unacceptable because one of its proposed key personnel became unavailable prior to award. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. BACKGROUND On February 13, 2023, the agency issued the RFQ seeking to establish a single BPA with a fixed-price first call order for healthcare market assessments. Agency Report (AR), Tab B, Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at 3. The solicitation provided that award would be made on the basis of a best-value tradeoff between four factors, which are listed in descending order of importance: (1) technical approach; (2) past performance; (3) socioeconomic considerations; and (4) price. AR, Tab A1, RFQ at 78. The technical approach factor was divided into three equally weighted subfactors: (1) feasibility of approach; (2) first call order staffing and management plan; and (3) key personnel. Id. The solicitation also provided that the non-price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price. Id. at 77. Relevant to this protest, the solicitation explained that key personnel would be evaluated to determine whether the proposed key personnel have the minimum required knowledge, skills, and experience to perform the necessary tasks. Id. at 78. The solicitation also explained that key personnel exceeding the minimum established requirements, to the government's benefit, may be rated more favorably. Id. The agency received four quotations in response to the RFQ, including quotations from BAH, Guidehouse, and Deloitte Consulting, LLP. Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 3. On September 29, 2023, the agency issued the BPA and first call order to Guidehouse. Id. The agency also sent notices to the unsuccessful vendors providing a high-level discussion of their respective evaluations. Id.