File: B-422942, B-422942.2
Digest
-
Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of task order proposals is denied where the record shows the evaluation largely was reasonable, and any errors that occurred did not competitively prejudice the protester.
-
Protest arguing the agency applied an incorrect evaluation factor weighting scheme when making the best-value decision is denied where the record reflects that correcting this error would not change the award outcome based on the solicitation’s highest technically rated, reasonably priced offer source selection methodology.
Discussion
The protester challenges the agency’s evaluation of Cydecor’s task order technical approach, SAIC’s key personnel, and SAIC’s corporate experience. Further, the protester argues the agency applied an evaluation factor weighting scheme inconsistent with the solicitation and failed to look behind the adjectival ratings in making the best‑value source selection decision. Cydecor makes additional arguments to those discussed below. While we do not address every issue raised, we have considered all Cydecor’s arguments and conclude none furnishes a basis on which to sustain the protest.
Decision
Cydecor Inc., of Arlington, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), of Reston, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 47QFHA24R0004, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) on behalf of the Department of Defense (DOD) for personnel and readiness infrastructure support management (PRISM) services. The protester challenges GSA’s evaluation of proposals and resulting best-value source selection decision.
We deny the protest.
Not Yet a Premium Partner/Sponsor? Learn more about the OS AI Premium Corporate and Individual Plans here. Plans start at $250 annually.