SOS International, LLC (W900KK-25-R-A005)

B-423516,B-423516.2 Jul 29, 2025 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights SOS International, LLC (SOSi), of Reston, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Peraton, Inc., of Herndon, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W900KK-25-R-A005, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Material Command for information technology (IT) services. SOSi argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated proposals and improperly conducted the tradeoff analysis. 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: SOS International, LLC File: B-423516; B-423516.2 Date: July 29, 2025 Dawn E. Stern, Esq., Richard P. Rector, Esq., David R. Lacker, Esq., and Andrew W. Current, Esq. , DLA Piper LLP, for the protester. Kevin P. Connelly, Esq., Kelly E. Buroker, Esq., Jeffrey M. Lowry, Esq., and Michael P. Ols, Esq., Vedder Price PC, for Peraton, Inc., the intervenor. Wade L. Brown, Esq., and Paula S. Klotzbach, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Todd C. Culliton, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that the agency unreasonably evaluated proposals is denied where the record shows that the evaluation was consistent with the proposals' contents and terms of the solicitation. 2. Protest that the agency unreasonably conducted the best-value tradeoff analysis is denied where the record shows that the agency compared proposals and considered their relative merit in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION SOS International, LLC (SOSi), of Reston, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Peraton, Inc., of Herndon, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. W900KK‑25‑R‑A005, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Material Command for information technology (IT) services. SOSi argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated proposals and improperly conducted the tradeoff analysis. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On December 17, 2024, the Army issued the RFP against the General Services Administration's Alliant 2 governmentwide acquisition contract to procure IT and computing support services for the Army Intelligence Center of Excellence (i.e., Military Intelligence Information Technology Support (MIITS)). Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, RFP at 1-2; AR, Tab 5, RFP, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 5-6; Combined Contracting Officer's Statement and Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 2.[1] The RFP was conducted using the procedures set forth under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) section 16.505. COS/MOL at 2. The selected contractor would be required to provide numerous IT services, such as systems and database administration; field support engineering; cyber security, information assurance, and data governance; and modeling, simulation, and exercise support. PWS at 6. Amongst others, annual support requirements include supporting 10,500 workstations, 4,500 simultaneous users, 7,000 virtual desktops, 2,000 supporting servers, 9,000 thin clients, 4,500 training laptops, 5 closed networks, and 4 data centers. Id. at 6-7. The RFP contemplated the award of a hybrid contract containing fixed-price and cost‑reimbursable contract line items. RFP at 3-14. The contract is to be performed over a 10.5-month base period and four 12-month option periods. Id. Award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis considering technical and price factors. AR, Tab 23, RFP, Evaluation Criteria at 1. Technical factors, listed in descending order of importance, were program management, technical approach, and corporate experience. Id. Each technical factor was more important than the price factor and, when combined, the technical factors were significantly more important than the price factor. Id. Prior to the January 17, 2025, close of the solicitation period, four offerors, including SOSi and Peraton, submitted proposals. AR, Tab 61, Source Selection Decision (SSD) at 2. The Army's evaluation produced the following relevant results:   SOSi Peraton Program Management Purple/Good Blue/Outstanding Technical Approach Blue/Outstanding Blue/Outstanding Corporate Experience Purple/Good Purple/Good Total Evaluated Price $186,269,331 $206,523,543 Id. at 4.[2] When comparing proposals, the source selection authority (SSA) concluded that Peraton's proposal was the most advantageous. Id. at 54. The SSA determined that Peraton offered significant advantages under the program management factor. Id. at 49-50. While SOSi was lower priced, the SSA determined the advantages and innovations included in Peraton's proposal were worth the $3.6 million per year ($20.25 million total) price premium. Id.