Innovative Management & Technology Approaches, Inc. (MPO-TEM-SCOR-4)

B-423190,B-423190.2 Mar 03, 2025 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Innovative Management and Technology Approaches, Inc. (IMTAS), a small business of Reston, Virginia, protests the issuance of a call order to i3, LLC, a small business of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. MPO-TEM-SCOR-4, issued by the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for management of the agency's information technology enterprise, mobile device products and data plans. The protester argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated vendors' quotations and that the resultant best-value determination and source selection decision were flawed. 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: Innovative Management & Technology Approaches, Inc. File: B-423190; B-423190.2 Date: March 3, 2025 Travis L. Mullaney, Esq.,and Richard J. Webber, Esq., Arent Fox Schiff, LLP, for the protester. Stephanie D. Wilson, Esq., Rachael C. Haley, Esq., and Charles L. Bonani, Esq., Berenzweig Leonard, LLP, for i3, LLC, the intervenor. Carlos S. Pedraza, Esq., and Ethan S. Chae, Esq., Department of Justice, for the agency. Michael P. Price, Esq., and John Sorrenti, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging the agency’s price evaluation of the protester’s quotation is denied where even though the agency unreasonably determined the protester’s pricing was incomplete the protester has not demonstrated it was competitively prejudiced by the agency’s actions. 2. Protest challenging the agency’s technical evaluation of the protester’s quotation is denied where the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 3. Protest challenging the agency’s past performance evaluation of quotations is denied where the agency reasonably evaluated quotations against the stated evaluation criteria and in an even-handed manner. DECISION Innovative Management and Technology Approaches, Inc. (IMTAS), a small business of Reston, Virginia, protests the issuance of a call order to i3, LLC, a small business of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. MPO-TEM-SCOR-4, issued by the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for management of the agency’s information technology enterprise, mobile device products and data plans. The protester argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated vendors’ quotations and that the resultant best‑value determination and source selection decision were flawed. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On September 20, 2024, the FBI issued the RFQ to holders of the information technology supplies and support services (ITSSS-2) blanket purchase agreement (BPA) pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1.[1] The solicitation contemplated the issuance of a call order to provide professional services “to support the [agency] in the management of FBI IT [information technology] mobile device products funded and supported for the enterprise[,]” with an expectation that the contractor would manage “at least 40,000‑50,000 mobile devices along with their inventory and carrier voice/data plans.” Id. The RFQ anticipated a 1-year base period of performance along with four 1-year options, and an additional 6-month option to extend services. Agency Report (AR), Tab 3.1, RFQ at 7. The RFQ advised that the FBI intended to issue the call order to the vendor whose quotation represented the best value to the government, and that determination of the best-value quotation would be made using a tradeoff process. Id. at 31. The RFQ provided that in determining the best-value quotation, the agency would consider the following factors, listed in descending order of importance: (1) technical approach; (2) past performance; and (3) price. Id. The solicitation stated that the agency “is more concerned with obtaining superior technical skills than with making an award at the lowest overall price to the Government.” Id. at 32. The RFQ stated that for each non-price factor, the FBI would assess one of the following confidence ratings: low confidence, some confidence, or high confidence. Id. at 34. The rating was based on the vendor’s demonstrated ability to understand the requirement, whether the vendor proposed a sound approach or demonstrated similar past performance to the current requirement, and the degree to which the government determined the vendor could be successful in performing the requirement without government intervention.