Science Applications International Corporation (80TECH23R0002)

B-422331,B-422331.2 May 10, 2024 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), of Reston, Virginia, protests the exclusion of its proposal from the competitive range under request for proposals (RFP) No. 80TECH23R0002, issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the maintenance of information technology (IT) systems, development of new applications, rationalization of duplicative efforts, and other functions. SAIC challenges the agency's evaluation of its mission suitability proposal, NASA's evaluation of one of the proposals in the competitive range, and the competitive range decision. We dismiss the protest in part and deny it in part. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. The entire decision has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Science Applications International Corporation File: B-422331; B-422331.2 Date: May 10, 2024 James J. McCullough, Esq., and Michael J. Anstett, Esq., Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, for the protester. Jennifer L. Howard, Esq., and Michael Anderson, Esq., National Aeronautics and Space Administration, for the agency. Michelle Litteken, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency improperly excluded protester’s proposal from the competitive range is denied where record shows that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), of Reston, Virginia, protests the exclusion of its proposal from the competitive range under request for proposals (RFP) No. 80TECH23R0002, issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the maintenance of information technology (IT) systems, development of new applications, rationalization of duplicative efforts, and other functions. SAIC challenges the agency’s evaluation of its mission suitability proposal, NASA’s evaluation of one of the proposals in the competitive range, and the competitive range decision. We dismiss the protest in part and deny it in part. BACKGROUND The mission of NASA’s Office of the Chief Information Officer is to increase the productivity of the agency’s workforce. Agency Report (AR), Exh. 4B, RFP attach. 1, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 5. As part of that effort, the agency is consolidating related requirements across NASA’s centers and centralizing IT support services. Id. The procurement at issue--referred to as NASA Consolidated Applications and Platform Services (NCAPS)--resulted from that effort, and consolidates work previously performed under 10 separate contracts. Id.; Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1-2. The protester is the incumbent for one of the 10 consolidated contracts. COS at 2. NASA issued the solicitation for the NCAPS contract pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15 on March 15, 2023. COS at 1. The solicitation contemplated the award of a requirements-based, hybrid contract under which the agency would acquire services and deliverables as firm-fixed price catalog items and cost-plus-fixed-fee catalog items, as well as by issuing indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity task orders.[1] AR, Exh. 4A, RFP at 16-17; COS at 1. The scope of work included general IT services, customer support, information management services, defined direct mission support systems, and integration of decentralized support contracts to one centralized source of support. PWS at 7. The RFP contemplated a contract with an 8-year period of performance and ceiling value in excess of $2 billion (excluding phase-in). COS at 1. The solicitation established that award would be made using a best-value tradeoff based on the following factors: mission suitability, past performance, and cost/price. RFP at 192. The mission suitability factor was more important than the past performance factor, and the non-price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than cost/price. Id. The mission suitability factor (with a total value of 1,000 points) consisted of four subfactors, with the following assigned point values: technical scenario video presentation (100 points), technical approach (400 points), management approach (400 points), and small business utilization (100 points). RFP at 196. NASA would assign adjectival ratings and numerical scores for each subfactor using the adjectival ratings, definitions, and percentile ranges provided in NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) 1815.305(a)(3)(A), set forth below. Adjectival Rating Definitions Percentile Range Excellent A comprehensive and thorough proposal of exceptional merit with one or more significant strengths.