Anika Systems, Inc. (50310224C0004)

B-422187,B-422187.2,B-422187.3 Feb 01, 2024 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Anika Systems, Inc., of Leesburg, Virginia, protests the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) decision to award a contract to Peregrine Advisors Benefit, Inc., of Potomac, Maryland, on a sole-source basis through the Small Business Administration's (SBA) 8(a) Business Development (BD) Program. Anika argues that the SEC unreasonably awarded the contract without competition, and that the SBA improperly accepted the contract. 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: Anika Systems, Inc. File: B-422187; B-422187.2; B-422187.3 Date: February 1, 2024 Dominique L. Casimir, Esq., and Shane M. Hannon, Esq., Blank Rome LLP, for the protester. Peter B. Ford, Esq., Katherine B. Burrows, Esq., Eric A. Valle, Esq., and Dozier L. Gardner, Jr., Esq., Piliero Mazza, PLLC, for Peregrine Advisors Benefit, Inc., the intervenor. Jeffrey C. Walker, Esq., and Michael K. Greene, Esq., Securities and Exchange Commission, and Mark R. Hagedorn, Esq., Small Business Administration, for the agencies. Todd C. Culliton, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that the agency unreasonably divided its requirement to make a sole-source award for an interim or “bridge” contract in violation of 13 C.F.R. § 124.506(a)(5) is denied because the regulation does not apply to the award of bridge contracts. 2. Protest that the Small Business Administration unreasonably accepted a requirement into the 8(a) program without conducting an equitable distribution analysis under 13 C.F.R. § 124.503(g)(1)(iii) is denied where the record shows that the agency followed its regulations. DECISION Anika Systems, Inc., of Leesburg, Virginia, protests the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) decision to award a contract to Peregrine Advisors Benefit, Inc., of Potomac, Maryland, on a sole-source basis through the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) 8(a) Business Development (BD) Program. Anika argues that the SEC unreasonably awarded the contract without competition, and that the SBA improperly accepted the contract. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On May 19, 2022, the SEC developed an acquisition plan to procure enterprise data management services for its Office of the Chief Development Officer (OCDO). Agency Report (AR), Tab 8, Acquisition Plan for 2022 Peregrine Contract at 5. [1] The agency intended to consolidate enterprise data management services received under a single contract vehicle. Id. To do so, the agency developed a two-phase acquisition plan. Id. In phase one, the agency would make a direct 8(a) award to consolidate elements of enterprise data management, architecture, governance, and strategy. Id. In phase two, the agency would conduct a competitive 8(a) award to obtain these services and other enterprise data management services under a single contract vehicle. Id. On July 5, 2022, the SEC started phase one of its acquisition plan by notifying the SBA that it intended to award a fixed-price contract valued at $4.5 million and nominated Peregrine for direct award. AR, Tab 2, SEC Letter to the SBA, July 5, 2022, at 1-2. Specifically, the SEC advised that Peregrine would assist its OCDO in enterprise data strategy, services, architecture, and program management. See AR, Tab 4, 2022 Peregrine Contract at 5-8. The contract was to be performed over a 12‑month base period, and one 3-month option period. Id. at 8. On July 6, the SBA accepted the contract on behalf of Peregrine. AR, Tab 3, SBA Letter to the SEC, July 6, 2022, at 1. On July 25, 2023, the SEC commenced phase two of its acquisition plan. COS at 2. The SEC issued request for quotations (RFQ) No. 50310223Q0101 to establish multiple blanket purchase agreements with 8(a) eligible firms for enterprise data management services. COS at 2. The estimated aggregate value of all call orders to be issued under the blanket purchase agreements (BPA) is $43 million. Protest, exh. B., Anika BPA at 3. The ordering period for the BPAs consists of a 1-year base period and four 1‑year option periods. Id. at 3-4. Following the competition, the agency issued BPAs to four firms, including both Anika and Peregrine. COS at 2. On September 29, two unsuccessful vendors challenged the issuance of those BPAs and, after reviewing the allegations, the agency elected to reevaluate quotations, revise its technical and price analyses, investigate alleged organization conflict of interests, and make a new selection decision; as a result, our Office dismissed the protests as academic. Analytica, LLC, B‑422028, B-422028.3, Oct. 24, 2023 (unpublished decision); Enterprise e-Support, Inc., B‑422028.2, Oct.