Strategic Alliance Business Group, LLC (80TECH24R0001)

B-423306.19 Jul 02, 2026 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Strategic Alliance Business Group, LLC, a small business of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the elimination of its proposal from the competition under request for proposals (RFP) No. 80TECH24R0001, issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), for information technology (IT) products, cloud solutions, cybersecurity, and related services. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably eliminated its proposal from the competition. 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: Strategic Alliance Business Group, LLC File: B-423306.19 Date: July 2, 2026 Christopher R. Shiplett, Esq., Randolph Law, PLLC, for the protester. Jennifer L. Howard, Esq., and Stephen T. O'Neal, Esq., National Aeronautics and Space Administration, for the agency. Jacob M. Talcott, Esq., and Heather Weiner, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest is denied where agency reasonably eliminated protester's proposal from award consideration because the proposal failed to include information required by solicitation. DECISION Strategic Alliance Business Group, LLC, a small business of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the elimination of its proposal from the competition under request for proposals (RFP) No. 80TECH24R0001, issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), for information technology (IT) products, cloud solutions, cybersecurity, and related services. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably eliminated its proposal from the competition. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND NASA issued the solicitation on May 23, 2024, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15, seeking to award the sixth generation of the solutions for enterprise-wide procurement (SEWP VI) government-wide acquisition contract vehicle for IT products and services.[1] The solicitation will result in multiple government-wide indefinite‑delivery, indefinite‑quantity contracts under which fixed-price, time-and-materials, labor‑hour, fixed-price award fee, fixed-price incentive fee, and fixed-price economic price adjustment task orders can be issued. RFP at 40. The solicitation contemplates awarding contracts without discussions to all qualifying offerors for an ordering period of 10 years. Id. at 40, 117. The maximum ordering value is $20 billion. Id. at 44. The solicitation advised that contracts will be awarded for three categories;[2] each category is self-contained with its own separate fulfillment requirements, proposal submission requirements, and evaluation criteria. Id. at 25-39. This protest concerns category B, enterprise-wide ITC/AV service solutions, and category C, ITC/AV mission‑based services. Protest at 8.  The due date for receipt of category B and C proposals was February 24, 2025. COS at 2. NASA is conducting this procurement in three phases. RFP at 117. Upon the completion of each phase of the evaluation, the agency will notify the offeror whether its proposal was selected to proceed to the next phase or eliminated from the competition. Id. at 118. Offerors were required to submit their proposals in the following three volumes: offer volume, past performance volume, and mission suitability volume. Id. at 96. As relevant here, the mission suitability volume, which was evaluated during phase three, consisted of the technical approach subfactor and the management approach subfactor.[3] Id. at 114-115. Pertinent to this protest, for the management approach subfactor, offerors were to provide a narrative describing their corporate processes and resources regarding the corporate risks associated with cybersecurity supply chain risk management (C-SCRM) and IT security of contractor acquired property. Id. at 115. In the narrative, offerors also were to provide information related to how the offeror is participating in SCRM and/or IT security activities, or at a minimum provide details regarding how the offeror is kept abreast of and is addressing key SCRM and/or IT security practices. Id. Additionally, the solicitation specified that offerors “shall either fill out . . . [a] C‑SCRM [a]ttestation [f]orm,” attached as exhibit 5 to the RFP, or “provide a copy of a valid active [o]pen [t]rusted [t]echnology [p]roviderTM [s]tandard (O-TTPS) [c]ertification to attest to meeting the ISO 20243 standard.” Id. As relevant here, the solicitation provided that the agency would evaluate the management approach subfactor of the mission suitability factor to assess the offeror's understanding and demonstration of its ability to successfully perform the management requirements as specified in the RFP. Id. at 123.