SMS Data Products Group, Inc. (B-423341; B-423341.2; B-423341.3)

You should not care.

Category: Price evaluation, professional compensation plan, discussions

Date: 29 May 2025

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423341%2Cb-423341.2%2Cb-423341.3

SMS Data Products Group, Inc., the incumbent, protested the Air Force’s award of a fixed-price intranet control support services task order to Abacus Technology Corporation under a fair opportunity proposal request (FOPR) issued to small business awardees on a strategic sourcing IDIQ. SMS challenged multiple aspects of the evaluation—specifically the agency’s analysis of Abacus’s price and professional employee compensation plan under FAR 52.222-46, the conduct of exchanges/discussions regarding labor rates, and the best value determination. SMS further alleged that its protest was timely since the agency-provided debriefing extended via DFARS enhanced debriefing was not concluded prior to protest filing. The topics at hand:

• Timeliness of protest: GAO found the protest timely, as the debriefing was deemed concluded when SMS did not submit written questions within DFARS’s two-business day window, making the protest deadline calculated from the date of the original debriefing.
• Compensation and price realism: The agency appropriately compared Abacus’s proposed salaries to incumbent rates and market comparators; Abacus’s lower prices were consistently above at least one comparator (market, average offeror, or incumbent rates). GAO found the agency’s dual analysis—both market-based and incumbent comparison—reasonable and consistent with FAR 52.222-46 and the solicitation.
• Misleading discussions: GAO found that the agency’s communications allowed SMS to justify or revise rates; SMS voluntarily increased its price instead of providing justification, so no improper steering or misleading discussion occurred.
• Best value tradeoff: With both offerors equal on nonprice factors, the solicitation dictated award to the lowest-priced, realistic offeror. GAO found the Air Force’s decision documented, consistent with solicitation language, and reasonable.

The protest was denied. The case is a straightforward affirmation of an agency’s adherence to established price/compensation evaluation procedures and solicitation rules.

Digest

1. Protest is not premature where the protester did not timely submit questions to the agency and therefore the debriefing was considered to be concluded on the date it was delivered, and the protest was filed within 10 days of that date.
2. Protest of the agency's evaluation of the awardee's price and professional employee compensation plan is denied where the agency's evaluation was reasonable and consistent with Federal Acquisition Regulation provision 52.222-46 and the terms of the solicitation.
3. Protest that the agency engaged in misleading discussions is denied where the record shows the protester exercised its business judgment and increased its price rather than provide additional information to justify labor rates identified by the agency as unrealistic during exchanges with offerors.
4. Protest challenging the agency's best-value decision is denied where the agency's decision is reasonable, consistent with the terms of the solicitation, and adequately documented.