Salient CRGT, Inc.

B-423283.3 Dec 05, 2025 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Salient CRGT, Inc. (CRGT), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) of Reston, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 05GA0A24R0002, issued by the Government Accountability Office for technology information services (TIS). The protester challenges multiple aspects of the agency's evaluation of proposals and the selection decision. 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: Salient CRGT, Inc. File: B-423283.3 Date: December 5, 2025 J. Andrew Jackson, Esq., Ryan P. McGovern, Esq., Robyn B. Celestino, Esq., and Jonathan E. DeWitt, Esq., Jones Day, for the protester. Daniel R. Forman, Esq., William B. O'Reilly, Esq., and Jasmine L. Masri, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP, for Science Applications International Corporation, the intervenor. Lauren Jenrich, Esq. and Nuha Hamid, Esq., Government Accountability Office, for the agency. Charmaine A. Stevenson, 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 evaluation of the awardee's labor category mix and level of effort under the technical approach factor is denied where the solicitation did not require that the agency perform a price realism analysis or state that a proposal could be rejected for submitting prices that were too low, and the record shows that the agency's evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 2. Protest challenging the evaluation of key personnel is denied where the agency effectively waived some special qualification and certification requirements for both offerors and otherwise treated the offerors equally. 3. Protest challenging the evaluation of past performance is denied where the agency reasonably assigned ratings consistent with the solicitation's evaluation scheme. 4. Protest challenging the agency's selection decision is denied where the selection is reasonable, consistent with the solicitation, and properly documented. DECISION Salient CRGT, Inc. (CRGT), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) of Reston, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 05GA0A24R0002, issued by the Government Accountability Office for technology information services (TIS). The protester challenges multiple aspects of the agency's evaluation of proposals and the selection decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the final amended RFP on October 17, 2024, using the ordering procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.5, to holders of National Institutes of Health, Information Technology Acquisition and Assessment Center (NITAAC) indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts. Contracting Officer's Statement and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 2; Protest, exh. A, RFP at 2.[1] The RFP contemplated the issuance of a hybrid fixed-price and time-and-materials task order with a period of performance consisting of a 1-year base period (to include a 90-day transition period) and four 1-year option periods. Protest, exh. B, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 68. The RFP stated that proposals would be evaluated under the following three factors: technical approach, past performance, and cost/price. RFP at 49. The technical approach factor included three subfactors: technical solution, technical oral presentations (which included two equally weighted subfactors, dashboard and scenarios), and management approach. Id. The RFP stated that the technical approach factor was more important than past performance, and when combined, these factors were significantly more important than the cost/price factor. Id. at 48. The RFP stated that award would be made to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with FAR subpart 9.1, whose proposal conforms to the RFP requirements, and “is judged, based on the evaluation factors and subfactors, to represent the best value to the Government.” Id. The agency received three proposals, including from CRGT and SAIC. COS/MOL at 3. On January 7, 2025, the agency notified CRGT that SAIC had been selected for award of the task order and CRGT filed a protest with our Office.[2] On April 15, the GAO attorney assigned to handle the protest conducted outcome prediction alternative dispute resolution and advised the parties that some of the protest allegations would likely be sustained.