Energy to reconsider $3.5B IT contract award to Accenture

Booz Allen Hamilton and Leidos have successfully convinced the Energy Department to rethink its choice of Accenture Federal Services for a potential $3.5 billion enterprise IT support contract.

Accenture is the incumbent on the Chief Information Officer Business Operations Support Services blanket purchase agreement, known as CBOSS. Energy uses that pact to acquire enterprise IT and business support service.

Energy awarded the CBOSS 2.0 recompete to Accenture on Jan. 17, then Booz Allen and Leidos filed their protests in late January. The U.S. Court of Federal Claims joined the protests into a single case on Feb. 4.

On Monday, Justice Department attorneys representing Energy filed a motion to let the case go back for reconsideration. That sealed filing is listed as a “consent motion,” which means both the agency and the protesters support the motion.

That does not mean Energy will change its mind on the award, but appears to have seen something in the protests that raised potential issues with the source selection decision.

With the motion, the protests are paused to give Energy a chance to take a second look. Leidos and Booz Allen can come back to the court if they disagree with whatever action Energy takes to address its concerns.

Most of the filings are sealed, but the court has released redacted versions of Booz Allen’s and Leidos’ complaints.

From what we can see, Booz Allen and Leidos argue that Energy did not follow the solicitation when it evaluated proposals and that resulted in a higher score for Accenture.

Accenture’s proposal came in at a lower price than Booz Allen and Leidos, who claim Energy did not evaluate the realism of Accenture’s pricing. They also argue that Accenture’s low price reflects a lack of understanding of the requirement.

One phase of the competition called on the companies to respond to a hypothetical task order for an IT infrastructure library, which is a collection of best practices for IT service management.

Booz Allen alleges in its complaint that Accenture proposed a “significantly reduced, underskilled staff approach to the ITIL requirement.” Accenture is essentially accused of lowering the seniority and skill levels of its labor mix, plus slashing salaries.

“These risks should have been, but were not, assessed against the Accenture technical proposal, undermining the decision to award to Accenture,” Booz Allen writes in its complaint.

Leidos raises nearly identical allegations in its complaint.

“Had the Agency evaluated Accenture’s proposal consistent with the terms of the Solicitation, it would have recognized that Accenture’s low level of effort creates significant risk,” Leidos writes in its complaint.

The companies also allege that the agency misevaluated their technical proposals.