Catalyst Solutions, LLC (M6785424R30140002)

B-423269.2 Apr 23, 2025 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Catalyst Solutions, LLC (Catalyst), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) located in Stafford, Virginia, protests the corrective action undertaken by the United States Marine Corps (USMC), in response to Catalyst's protest challenging the agency's issuance of a competitive task order to Alexandria Insights, Inc. (Alexandria Insights), located in Stafford, Virginia, pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. M67854-24-R-3014, to provide program management support services. The protester alleges that the agency's proposed corrective action is unreasonable. 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 version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Catalyst Solutions, LLC File: B-423269.2 Date: April 23, 2025 Milton C. Johns, Esq., Executive Law Partners, PLLC, for the protester. Jared M. Miller, Esq., and Lisa L. Baker, Esq., United States Marine Corps, for the agency. Paula A. Williams, Esq., and Evan D. Wesser, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the scope of the agency’s corrective action that includes amending the solicitation to include a provision for a price realism evaluation is denied where the agency acted within its discretion to reasonably determine what corrective action is appropriate to remedy a flaw in the procurement process. DECISION Catalyst Solutions, LLC (Catalyst), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) located in Stafford, Virginia, protests the corrective action undertaken by the United States Marine Corps (USMC), in response to Catalyst’s protest challenging the agency’s issuance of a competitive task order to Alexandria Insights, Inc. (Alexandria Insights), located in Stafford, Virginia, pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. M67854-24-R-3014, to provide program management support services. The protester alleges that the agency’s proposed corrective action is unreasonable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on September 16, 2024, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation section 16.505 to SDVOSB firms in the National Capital Zone 2 under the Department of the Navy’s SeaPort indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract, sought proposals for a contractor to provide support services for the USMC’s Program Manager Expeditionary Radars portfolio to include both the ground/air task oriented radar program management and product manager future radar systems. The solicited support services include program management; acquisition and scheduling; business and finance; logistics, fielding and training; and engineering, manufacturing and testing-related activities to include acquisition policy and program documentation development. B-423269, Protest exh. 1, RFP at 8.[1] The RFP anticipated issuance of a single, fixed-price task order on a best-value tradeoff basis for a 5-year period of performance. Id. at 80. The best-value decision was to be based on the following evaluation factors: technical; past performance; and price. Id. Under the solicitation’s evaluation criteria, the technical factor was more important than past performance, and both non-price factors, when combined, were more important than price. Id. The solicitation also established that the agency might issue the task order to other than the lowest-priced or highest-rated offeror. Id. The technical factor was comprised of three task elements: technical approach and understanding; management approach; and transition plan. Id. at 80-81. Under these task elements, proposals would be assigned ratings of significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, or deficiencies as defined in the solicitation and proposals would be assigned overall ratings of either outstanding, good, acceptable, marginal, or unacceptable under the technical factor. Id. at 81-82. Two offerors submitted timely proposals in response to the solicitation--Catalyst and Alexandria Insights. Following the evaluation of proposals, the agency assigned Catalyst’s technical proposal an overall rating of acceptable with an evaluated total price of $35,431,630. See B-423269, Protest exh. 3a, Technical and Past Performance Eval. at 1; exh. 3b, Price Eval. Report at 2. The agency assigned Alexandria Insights’ technical proposal an overall rating of outstanding with an evaluated total price of $53,917,708. Id., exh. 3b, Price Eval. Report at 2; Protest exh. 3, Post-Award Debrief at 2.