About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-413116.52,B-413116.59 1 (2017-05-09)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadtji0001 and id is 1 raw text is: GAO U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 441 G St. N.W. Comptroller General Washington, DC 20548 of the United States ....................................................................................................................... DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to Decision a GAO Protective Order. This version has been approved for public release.----------------------------- Matter of: Sevatec, Inc. File: B-413116.52; B-413116.59 Date: May 9, 2017 Alexander J. Brittin, Esq., Brittin Law Group, PLLC, for the protester. Jonathan A. Baker, Esq., and Douglas Kornreich, Esq., Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, for the agency. Eric M. Ransom, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest of agency's best-value tradeoff decision is denied where the award decision was adequately documented, reasonable, and consistent with the solicitation's best-value award criteria. DECISION Sevatec, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the decision of the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), not to award it a contract under request for proposals (RFP) No. CMS-2016-SPARC, for multiple indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts in support of the agency's Strategic Partners Acquisition Readiness Contract (SPARC) program. Sevatec alleges that the agency's best-value tradeoff determinations in favor of higher-priced proposals were irrational and inconsistent with the RFP's award criteria. We deny the protest. CMS issued the RFP on August 3, 2015, for the purpose of establishing multiple indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts to provide support services to develop and maintain CMS information technology (IT) systems. The RFP advised that the competition, and the resulting contracts, would be divided into two pools--a small business pool and an unrestricted pool. The contract awards in each pool were to be made on a best-value basis considering four non-price technical evaluation factors and price. The technical evaluation factors, in descending order of importance, were: (1) corporate experience; (2) past performance; (3) process maturity; and (4) small business participation. As relevant, the corporate experience evaluation criteria

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most