[Protest of HUD Contract Award for Loan Services]

A firm protested a Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) contract award for comprehensive loan servicing services, contending that HUD: (1) improperly evaluated proposals; (2) improperly evaluated the awardee's proposal under the past performance criteria; (3) failed to conduct meaningful discussions with it and held improper discussions with the awardee; and (4) based its selection on a flawed price and technical tradeoff analysis. GAO held that HUD: (1) failed to evaluate the proposals in accordance with the solicitation's evaluation criteria; (2) improperly evaluated the awardee's prior experience; and (3) failed to conduct meaningful discussions with the protester, since the protester was not afforded an opportunity to address HUD's concerns regarding its pricing strategy. Accordingly, the protest was sustained, and GAO recommended that HUD: (1) reopen discussions with the bidders and request final proposal revisions; (2) evaluate the proposals in accordance with its stated evaluation criteria; (3) afford the protester an opportunity to explain its pricing methodology during discussions; (4) reevaluate the awardee's proposal under the prior experience evaluation factor in accordance with the solicitation's criteria; (5) terminate the awardee's contract and make award to the protester, if otherwise appropriate; and (6) reimburse the protester for its protest costs.