Attachment_6_FA_5_SAMPLE_TO_SOW_3.docx

Attachment 6: FA 5 Sample TO SOW Solicitation 140D0422R0016

Functional Area (FA) 5: Management Platform Task Order (TO) SAMPLE Statement of Work (SOW) Bureau of Consular Affairs Evaluation of the Office of Visa Service’s LegalNet Service

I. Scope The Department of State (DOS), Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA), Office of Visa Services (VO), is seeking an evaluation of the Visa Office’s LegalNet service (LegalNet) with a goal of measuring its efficacy in managing the volume and complexity of legal inquiries received pertaining to the application of immigration law to individual visa applications. LegalNet’s primary objectives are to provide review of legal issues raised by immigration attorneys in specific visa applications and to provide meaningful feedback to posts that improves the quality of visa adjudications. The evaluation findings will inform VO on how to improve workflow management of LegalNet, maximizing the effectiveness and efficiency of the program.

II. Evaluation Purpose/Objective Evaluation is designed to answer questions that address program and process efficiency, effectiveness, impact, sustainability, and relevance. The purpose of this evaluation is twofold:

1. Evaluate the extent to which the LegalNet operational plan and its implementation allows VO to meet the program’s primary objectives.

2. Identify obstacles, risks, and opportunities for LegalNet to provide an effective, relevant, and sustainable service to visa applicants, their attorneys, and consular sections overseas.

Recommendations from the evaluation will inform CA and DOSt leadership of ways to maximize LegalNet’s effectiveness and efficiency so the program best meets it objectives.

III. Program Description and Current Status of the Effort The Bureau of Consular Affairs’ Office of Visa Services has a dedicated email channel, LegalNet@state.gov, available to visa applicants or their representatives to raise case-specific questions on the interpretation or application of immigration law. The two critical roles of LegalNet for DOS are to provide an opportunity for meaningful review of the application of law in refused applications and to help ensure consular officer visa adjudications are consistent with U.S. immigration law. For a visa applicant, LegalNet is intended to provide a readily accessible and streamlined legal review of inquiries involving case-specific legal issues, so inquirers receive a timely, but duly considered, answer. The Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) advises posts to refer applicants and their representative’s cases to LegalNet when an inquirer raises questions of law rather than questions of fact.

LegalNet’s primary objectives are to provide review of legal issues raised by immigration attorneys in specific visa applications and to provide meaningful feedback to posts that improves the quality of visa adjudications. Operationally, LegalNet meets these objectives by:

1. Responding to case specific legal inquiries within appropriate timeframes,

2. Ensuring that LegalNet inquiries referred to post are promptly resolved by effectively managing any necessary follow up inquiries to obtain an appropriate response,

3. Manually collecting and reporting quantifiable data to CA leadership.

LegalNet was established in the early 2000s and is operated by a small team in VO’s Advisory Opinion Division (CA/VO/L/A). In an average business day, LegalNet receives between 30 and 40 inquiries. In FY 2019, LegalNet received approximately 10,000 inquiries. When an email inquiry is received in LegalNet’s inbox, it is initially reviewed to determine whether the inquiry falls within LegalNet’s scope, as described in 9 FAM 103.4; approximately 40 percent of received inquiries are out of LegalNet’s scope. If the inquiry is determined to be out-of-scope, the LegalNet auto-reply will be the only response the inquirer receives. The auto-response describes LegalNet’s scope of review and provides contact information for other Visa Office resources that may be helpful, depending on the nature of the inquiry. At the time of the initial review, LegalNet staff determine whether the case is high profile or time sensitive and requires immediate action. The remaining in-scope inquiries are assigned to a specific individual working in LegalNet. Inquiries that raise a complex legal issue that the LegalNet team cannot address are referred to the appropriate CA/VO/L/A staff member to resolve, before returning the case to LegalNet to respond to the requester. In 2019, LegalNet responded to 548 complex legal inquiries.

LegalNet provides two general types of responses to inquiries that raise legal issues tied to a specific visa adjudication. The first, and most common, type of response informs the inquirer that LegalNet reviewed the case and found no legal error in post’s adjudication. The response includes a brief explanation. The form and substance makes clear that someone in VO’s legal office considered the arguments presented and reviewed the case, before concluding that the consular officer made no error in interpretation or application of law in the visa adjudication. The second type of response informs the inquirer that post will follow up with the applicant. LegalNet sends this type of response, following consultation with post, when LegalNet and post conclude that additional review of the case is required.

The intent of consultations with post is to ensure that the officers have the necessary facts and reached the legally correct outcome. CA/VO/L/A defers completely to post on findings of fact and will never try to substitute its judgment for the consular officers’ on factual matters. However, DOS regulations establish that interpretations of law provided by CA/VO/L/A are binding on consular officers. If the LegalNet team or another CA/VO/L/A staff member has concluded that post assistance is required to resolve a case, then the case will remain open until post provides the requested assistance. CA/VO/L/A also encourages consular section managers to use responses from LegalNet to promote consistency among adjudicating officers, to clarify legal standards within a section, and as a source of feedback on writing good case notes.

IV. Evaluation Questions

1. To what extent does LegalNet’s current operational plan and implementation of it allow LegalNet to fulfill its objectives? (found in section III)

2. What best practices can LegalNet consider to measure the customer’s experience and satisfaction?

3. How can the LegalNet team improve workload management and other operational processes to maximize efficiencies?

0. How can the team maximize operational efforts to resolve more inquiries and thus minimize the number of inquiries requiring referral to other VO/L/A staff members?

0. How can the team improve analysis of its workload trends to best determine appropriate and realistic response times to in-scope legal inquiries?

0. What best practices can the team consider for developing a more effective method to follow-up with VO/L/A staff members and/or posts on pending inquiries?

0. How can VO address IT limitations and capitalize on IT opportunities to improve efficiencies, including collection of metrics and other potentially valuable data?

V. Evaluation Design and Data Collection Methods The evaluation will require analysis of LegalNet’s current methods for sorting and managing responses to inquiries. The methodology may include:

· Review of documentation establishing the purpose of LegalNet, standard operating procedures governing LegalNet email box processes, process maps documenting workflow, current filing and searching systems used by the team in Outlook, data fields and functionality in the Consolidated Consular Database (CCD), and internal policy guidance.

· Interviews with the LegalNet team, managers, and attorney advisors who receive referred cases.

· Review of best practices from other government agencies for relevant IT and customer service solutions.

· Based on findings, make recommendations that address each evaluation question.

VI. Personnel and Qualifications In order to accomplish the evaluation objectives, CA envisions the following team composition:

· Technical Advisor (or Equivalent) - experience conducting process evaluations and preferably demonstrated experience with process improvement, customer service expertise, IT solutions, and workflow process improvement. We expect this position to be the SME.

· Research Assistant/Enumerator (or Equivalent) - Experience using IT solutions to improve efficiencies, designing systems to collect metrics, and developing customer service solutions is preferred.

· Task Order Program Manager (or Equivalent) – Experience with project management and quality control protocols is desired.

VII. Security Requirements

a) A facility security clearance at the SECRET level is required for TO performance in accordance with the DD Form 254, Department of Defense Contract Security Classification Specification, attached to this TO.

b) Since it will be necessary for some Contractor personnel to have access to visa records and other Personally Identifiable Information (PII) material and/or to enter into areas requiring a security clearance, each Contractor employee requiring such access must have an individual security clearance commensurate with the required level of access prior to TO performance. Individual clearances shall be maintained for the duration of employment under this TO, or until access requirements change.

c) The Contractor shall obtain a DOS building pass for all employees performing under this TO who require frequent and continuing access to DOS facilities in accordance with Bureau of Diplomatic Security Instructions.

d) Performance of this TO shall be in accordance with the attached DD Form 254, Department of Defense Contract Security Classification Specification and FAR 52.204-2 "SECURITY REQUIREMENTS."

e) Classified material received or generated in the performance of this TO shall be safeguarded and disposed of in accordance with the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (DOD 5220.22-M).

f) SECURITY of VISA RECORDS Visa records are considered “confidential” as defined by Section 222(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended. In this circumstance, the designation “confidential” does not relate to the security classification of a document but rather to its releasability.” Evaluators will comply with requirements to protect visa records in accordance with 9 FAM 603.1

VIII. Travel Local travel is anticipated to support this task order. All local travel costs will be reimbursed in accordance with the Federal Travel Regulations at the rates in effect at the time of travel. Local travel is defined as travel within 50 miles of an employee’s main office location. Reimbursable local travel costs may include mileage for a privately-owned vehicle (POV), Metro, and any associated tolls or parking.

Travel outside the local area is not anticipated for this TO.

1. Estimated Timeline and Cost Period of Performance: The evaluation team will have 17 weeks to conduct the full evaluation and provide deliverables.

1. Deliverables Deliverables will be provided in accordance with guidelines specified by the GTM or COR.

Since the Work Plan is a viable document, changes in the Work Plan may result in associated changes in due dates. Such changes are discussed between DOS and the contractor prior to the actual changes being made. The Work Plan becomes a formal deliverable upon completion of a TO.

All deliverables shall meet requirements as described under the tasks in clear, concise, well-written language, and in accordance with the applicable SOW. Accordingly, the quality measures (acceptance criteria) as set forth below shall be applied to each work product or deliverable received from the contractor under this SOW.

Acceptance Criteria: The contractor shall deliver all products to the TO COR. Hardcopy (in quantities specified by DOS) shall be provided upon request. All products will be scanned for viruses prior to submission. Generally, all work performed under this TO shall comply with DOS Directives, Instructions, and Standards. Exceptions may be made on a case-by-case basis.

· Completeness – Initial requirements (as identified) are satisfied in all sections.

· Accuracy – Documents shall be accurate in presentation, technical content, and adherence to accepted elements of style.

· Clarity—Documents shall be clear and concise; project management and terms shall be used, as appropriate. All diagrams shall be easy to understand and be relevant to the supporting narrative.

· Specification Validity—all deliverables must satisfy the requirements of the U.S. Government as specified herein.

Drafted: CA/C/SPPD: CCorman, KHDoherty, MRam Clearance CA/C