Soft Tech Consulting, Inc.

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: Soft Tech Consulting, Inc. File: B-423590.6 Date: May 22, 2026 Aron C. Beezley, Esq. and Patrick R. Quigley, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester. Lawrence Block, Esq., Lawrence Sher, Esq., Elizabeth Leavy, Esq., Michael Hill, Esq., and Warren Geary, Esq., Winston & Strawn LLP, for Link Solutions, Inc., the intervenor. Wade L. Brown, Esq., and Bradford C. Ramos, Esq., Department of the Army, 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 alleging that agency was required to amend the solicitation and seek revised proposals in response to budget cuts that led the agency to modify the incumbent task order due to funding unavailability is dismissed as untimely where the allegation was not raised within 10 days of when the protester knew or should have known its basis of protest. 2. Protest challenging the agency's evaluation of the protester's proposal under the technical factor is denied where the record shows that the agency's evaluation was consistent with the terms of the solicitation and otherwise reasonable. DECISION Soft Tech Consulting, Inc., a small business of Chantilly, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Link Solutions, Inc., a small business of McLean, Virginia, under task order request for proposals (TOR) No. W911QX24R0005, issued by the Department of the Army, Army Materiel Command for information technology (IT) services for the Army Research Lab (ARL). The protester contends that the agency's evaluation is unreasonable because the agency's needs have changed such that the agency should have amended the TOR and solicited revised proposals. The protester also challenges the evaluation of its proposal under the technical factor and the agency's cost realism evaluation. We dismiss the protest in part and deny it in part. BACKGROUND On April 24, 2024, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.5, the agency issued the TOR as a set-aside for small business holders of the Army's Computer Hardware Enterprise Software and Solution (CHESS) information technology enterprise solution services (ITES-3S) indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts. Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, TOR at 1-2. [1] The TOR contemplated issuance of a single cost-plus-fixed-fee task order with a period of performance consisting of a 1-year base period, three 1-year option periods, and a 6-month option to extend pursuant to FAR clause 52.217-8. Id. at 3. ARL's objective is to acquire the full range of IT services to support ARL's research mission which includes a highly mobile workforce and geographically disbursed staff, support contractors, and other partners. The work requires a contractor that understands the current state IT infrastructure to provide the stated IT services and support the future implementation of modernization initiatives and goals. AR, Tab 5, Statement of Objectives (SOO) at 2-20. The TOR stated that proposals would be evaluated under the following factors, listed in descending order of importance: technical, management, past performance, and cost/price.  TOR at 18. The TOR stated that appropriate consideration would be given to the evaluation factors but that all non-cost factors, when combined, were significantly more important than cost/price. Id. The technical and management factors were to be evaluated and assigned the following adjectival ratings: outstanding, good, acceptable, marginal, and unacceptable. Id. at 22-23. Under the technical approach factor, the TOR stated that the offeror should identify the expertise, knowledge, and capabilities to enable successful performance of the requirements, with specific emphasis on the SOO and the contractor generated performance work statement (PWS). Id. at 7. The TOR also instructed offerors to complete tables with their proposed labor category and skill mix for the prime and subcontractors, indicate the number of hours per labor category, and stated:  “The Offeror shall demonstrate the realism of the proposed labor resources (labor category, labor category descriptions, hours per labor category, and qualifications/certifications) required to execute the technical approach.  Information given here shall correlate to the Offeror's cost/price proposal.” Id. at 8. Under the cost/price factor, the TOR stated that the proposed cost and fee would be evaluated for reasonableness and realism to accomplish the technical and management approaches. Id. at 21.