Hive Group, LLC (1331L524Q13OS0009)

B-423677 Sep 16, 2025 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Hive Group, LLC, a small business of Ashburn, Virginia, protests the elimination of its quotation from the competition for the establishment of multiple blanket purchase agreements (BPA) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 1331L524Q13OS0009, issued by the Department of Commerce (DOC) for advisory and integrated management solutions (AIMS) support services. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably evaluated its quotation as noncompliant with the phase I page limitations and cover page requirements. 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: Hive Group, LLC File: B-423677 Date: September 16, 2025 Richard Kelley, Esq., Bean, Kinney & Korman, PC, for the protester. Marlene Egierski, Esq., and Jillian Stern, Esq., Department of Commerce, for the agency. Christine Martin, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that the agency unreasonably evaluated the protester's quotation is denied where the record shows the agency's evaluation was reasonable and conducted in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Hive Group, LLC, a small business of Ashburn, Virginia, protests the elimination of its quotation from the competition for the establishment of multiple blanket purchase agreements (BPA) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 1331L524Q13OS0009, issued by the Department of Commerce (DOC) for advisory and integrated management solutions (AIMS) support services. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably evaluated its quotation as noncompliant with the phase I page limitations and cover page requirements. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The DOC's mission is to create conditions for economic growth and opportunity. Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFQ, attach. 2, Performance Work Statement (PWS) at ¶ 2. To accomplish this mission, the DOC requires that its bureaus have access to advisory and management consulting services, or “AIMS,” to assist with human resources, acquisitions, financial management, facilities/security management, and bureau-specific projects. Id. On July 1, 2024, the DOC issued a draft RFQ via the General Services Administration's (GSA) eBuy website to acquire AIMS support services. Contracting Officer's Statement (COS) at ¶ 3. On December 17, the DOC issued a second draft RFQ and draft questions and answers (Q&A). Id. at ¶¶ 4-5. On January 10, 2025, the DOC issued a final RFQ and included the second draft RFQ and the draft Q&A as attachments. Id. at ¶ 6; Agency's Resp. to GAO Note at 1. On January 15, the agency issued the final Q&A. COS at ¶ 8. Neither the second draft RFQ nor the draft Q&A were incorporated into the final RFQ or final Q&A. Agency's Resp. to GAO Note at 1. The final RFQ was issued as a small business set-aside pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4 to vendors holding GSA multiple award schedule (MAS) contracts for special item number (SIN) 541611 – Management and Financial Consulting, Acquisition and Grants Management Support, and Business Program and Project Management Services. RFQ at ¶ 1.2; COS at ¶ 6. The RFQ was issued to obtain AIMS support services for a broad range of projects, including strategic planning, organizational design, development and restructuring, program design and development, process improvement/reengineering, in-depth program analysis, evaluations, and data analytics. RFQ at ¶ 1.2; RFQ, attach. 2, PWS at ¶ 1. The RFQ provided for a 5-year base period of performance and one potential 6-month extension. RFQ, attach. 1, BPA Terms and Conditions at ¶ 3. The RFQ contemplated the establishment of multiple BPAs with vendors who represented the best value to the government, considering price and three non-price factors: experience, technical, and management. RFQ at ¶ 4. The non-price factors were to be assigned ratings of high confidence, some confidence, or low confidence. Id. Price was to be evaluated for completeness, fairness, and reasonableness. Id. The RFQ instructed offerors to submit their quotations in two phases. The phase I submission, or the “experience volume,” required vendors to include a cover page with the vendor's information and one section describing the vendor's experience with the PWS requirements regarding planning, design, execution, and management of similar work. RFQ at ¶ 3.1.2. The cover page could not exceed two pages in length (“cover page (2 pages max),”) and had to include the vendor's GSA MAS contract-holder information. Id. at ¶ 3.1.1. The phase I submission would be evaluated under the experience factor.