[Protest of DFAS Contract Award for Contract Reconciliation Services]

A firm protested two Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) contract awards for contract reconciliation services, contending that DFAS' source selection decision was inconsistent with the stated evaluation criteria. GAO held that DFAS failed to: (1) properly document its decision to rank the awardee's technical proposal higher than the protester's proposal; and (2) conduct a proper cost/technical tradeoff in selecting the awardee's low priced proposal. Accordingly, the protest against one awardee was sustained, and GAO recommended that DFAS: (1) document a reasoned source selection determination that, in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria, considers the comparative merits of the technical and past performance proposals, as well as the bidders' proposed prices, to determine which offer is the most advantageous to the government; and (2) reimburse the protester for its protest costs.