High Plains Computing, Inc. d/b/a HPC Solutions (B-422934)

High Plains Computing, Inc. d/b/a HPC Solutions (B-422934)
Photo by Chris Ried / Unsplash

You should not care.

Category: technical evaluation, price evaluation

Date: December 6, 2024

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-422934

High Plains Computing protested the VA's award of a task order to Veterans EZ Info for IT development and support services, challenging the awardee's size status and the agency's technical and price evaluations. The protest centered on a significant price difference between offerors, with the awardee's price being less than half of the protester's, and alleged technical evaluation errors.

Key issues included: (1) Size status challenge–dismissed as within SBA’s purview and outside GAO's jurisdiction; (2) price evaluation challenge–dismissed as the RFP did not provide for price realism analysis and unbalanced pricing claims were speculative; (3) technical evaluation challenge–denied as protester failed to demonstrate competitive prejudice given the significant price difference and lower technical rating.

The protest was partially dismissed and partially denied. The case reinforces established principles: size status protests belong at SBA, price realism analyses require explicit solicitation provisions, and competitive prejudice remains essential for protest success.

Digest

  1. Protest challenging the size status of the awardee is dismissed because the issue is not for GAO's consideration.
  2. Protest challenging the reasonableness of the agency's price evaluation is dismissed where, in this fixed price competition, the protester asserts the agency failed to conduct a price realism evaluation when the solicitation did not advise offerors that the agency would do so, and where the protester's allegation that the agency failed to conduct a reasonable unbalanced price evaluation is speculative and fails to state a valid basis of protest.
  3. Protest challenging the reasonableness of the agency's technical evaluation is denied where the record demonstrates that the protester cannot establish that it was prejudiced by the alleged errors.