File Not Found

B-424253.2,B-424253.3,B-424253.5 May 18, 2026 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights ID8Spark, LLC, of Catonsville, Maryland, a small business, protests the issuance of a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) task order to Chags Health Information Technology LLC, doing business as C-HIT, of Columbia, Maryland, also a small business, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. RFQ-CMS-2026-260007J, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), for commercial services to support the agency's application programming interface (API) gateway. ID8Spark argues that CMS misevaluated the quotations, improperly held discussions only with C-HIT, and made an unreasonable source 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: ID8Spark, LLC File: B-424253.2; B-424253.3; B-424253.5 Date: May 18, 2026 David B. Dixon, Esq., Meghan D. Doherty, Esq., Alexis P. Landrum, Esq., and Aleksey R. Dabbs, Esq., Pillsbury Winthop Shaw Pittman LLP, for the protester. J. Ryan Frazee, Esq., and John. R. Prairie, Esq., Mayer Brown LLP, for Chags Health Information Technology LLC, the intervenor. Brandon Dell'Aglio, Esq., and William Shim, Esq., Department of Health and Human Services, for the agency. Paul N. Wengert, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that agency misevaluated quotations and engaged in disparate treatment under competition for Federal Supply Schedule task order is denied where the record shows the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation criteria and differences in evaluation treatment was the result of differences in vendors' quotations. 2. Protest challenging agency's selection of the best-suited vendor and the subsequent conduct of exchanges only with that firm is denied where the record shows the best-suited vendor determination was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION ID8Spark, LLC, of Catonsville, Maryland, a small business, protests the issuance of a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) task order to Chags Health Information Technology LLC, doing business as C-HIT, of Columbia, Maryland, also a small business, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. RFQ-CMS-2026-260007J, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), for commercial services to support the agency's application programming interface (API) gateway. ID8Spark argues that CMS misevaluated the quotations, improperly held discussions only with C-HIT, and made an unreasonable source selection decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFQ, issued on September 26, 2025, sought quotations from small businesses to provide support services for CMS's API gateway[1] under a hybrid firm-fixed-price/time and material task order for a base year and four option years. The RFQ provided that the competition would be conducted under the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.405 and the FSS. Agency Report (AR), Tab 2.4, RFQ app. C, Additional Information at 2. The task order would be issued to the vendor whose quotation provided the best value based on an evaluation of quotations under four factors: corporate experience (mission focused); performance work statement (PWS) and quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP); oral presentations; and cost.[2] AR, Tab 2.14, RFQ amend. 2, attach. 5, Evaluation Criteria at 2‑12.[3] The first three factors were of equal importance; all non-cost or price factors, when combined, were more important than cost or price. AR, Tab 2.4, RFQ app. C, Additional Information at 3. The RFQ divided the competition into two phases. In phase 1, vendors provided quotations addressing only the corporate experience factor, which CMS would evaluate and inform the vendor of the agency's determination of whether the vendor should participate in the next phase.[4] In phase 2, vendors submitted quotations addressing the remaining factors, except for the oral presentations factor which was presented live. The corporate experience (mission focused) factor evaluation would assess how well a vendor's previous experience demonstrates performance of work “similar to that envisioned by the Government in pursuit of the intent described in this solicitation.” AR, Tab 2.14, RFQ amend. 2, attach. 5, Additional Information at 4. The RFQ provided a statement of objectives (SOO) identifying the general scope of the task order, nine objectives that included program management, operations and management, and application rationalization for a platform alternative.