RFQ_140D0426Q0324_Contractor_Questions_and_Government_Response_0001.pdf

RFQ 140D0426Q0324

Amendment 1

Contractor Questions and Government Response

1. We would love to build the AI ChatBot for the Peace Corps and wanted to participate in this project as we specialize on AI and can work with flexible financial arrangements. To do so you only need us to submit a quote with the price to these same email addresses for the period June 01, 2026, to May 31, 2027?

Response: Please follow the Request for Quote (RFQ) instructions “SECTION 4 –

QUOTATION PREPARATION & SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS”.

Per Section1- Instructions “The period of performance for this Purchase Order will consist of a one-year Base Period estimated to begin on June 1, 2026, followed by four (4) one-year Option Periods, as outlined in the table below. If all options are exercised, the total period of performance will no exceed five (5) years. Continued performance under this Purchase Order is contingent upon the availability of funds and the Contractor’s acceptable level of performance.

• Base Period: June 01, 2026, to May 31, 2027

• Option Period 1: June 01, 2027, to May 31, 2028

• Option Period 2: June 01, 2028, to May 31, 2029

• Option Period 3: June 01, 2029, to May 31, 2030

• Option Period 4: June 01, 2030, to May 31, 2031

2. Do you have a budget for this project?

Response: Yes, a budget has been allocated for this project. However, the specific budget details will not be publicly disclosed.

3. PAST PERFORMANCE – KEY PERSONNEL: Would the Government consider key personnel past performance — in addition to corporate past performance — when evaluating Factor B for an emerging small business?

Response: Yes

4. FEDRAMP AUTHORIZATION: Section 1.3 requires a commercially available SaaS conversational AI solution authorized at the FedRAMP High level. Could the Government confirm whether it is sufficient that the proposed SaaS platform itself — rather than the contractor — holds the current and active FedRAMP High authorization?

Response: The proposed solution must have or be in the process of obtaining a FedRAMP High designation. Operating on a FedRAMP designated platform does not adequately secure the solution. The designation is for the solution, not the contractor.

5. RAG DATASET ACCESS: To ensure accurate, hallucination-free conversational AI responses grounded solely in Peace Corps content, could the Government clarify whether the contractor will be provided administrative access to peacecorps.gov content systems to support knowledge dataset ingestion — or will Peace Corps provide content in an agreed-upon format during the requirements phase?

Response: Peace Corps will access content systems when and where appropriate and will provide agreed content in an agreed upon format when otherwise necessary.

6. The PWS places strong emphasis on RAG governance, continuous learning with human‑in‑the‑loop, performance optimization (response quality vs. computational cost), analytics/KPI dashboards, escalation logic, and AI accountability and traceability.

Could you please confirm whether specialized subcontractors providing these capabilities, separate from the FedRAMP‑High chatbot platform provider, are within the anticipated scope of acceptable team structures for this effort?

Response: Prospective vendors may propose a staffing approach that includes subcontractors.

Small business vendors must provide the majority (>50%) of the labor as the prime contractor. Note that FedRAMP High designation is with the solution, not the provider,

7. "The Peace Corps seeks a FedRAMP High authorized, commercially available SaaS conversational AI solution (“Chatbot”) to enhance recruitment, outreach, and public engagement across peacecorps.gov. "

Given the purpose of the solution is to provide generative AI responses around publicly available material (stated as recruitment, outreach, public engagement, and peacecorps.gov), why is there a need for a FedRAMP High environment? That environment is typically reserved for sensitive or higher classification of content, and these materials are already in the public domain.

Response: FedRAMP High Authorization is required for the solution. There is a high probability of Users entering unsolicited HIPAA protected information and other sensitive PHI/PII in the course of their interactions with the Chatbot.

8. Please share incumbent's contract # and name (if applicable) unless it is a new contract?

Response: Not Applicable. This is a new requirement.

9. If there is an incumbent contractor, could you please identify any areas where the scope of work has increased or decreased compared to the incumbent effort? If there are increases, please specify the additional tasks; if there are decreases, please identify the tasks that have been removed.

Response: Not Applicable.

10. If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the current labor mix, including the number of full-time versus part-time personnel and the labor categories (LCATs) supporting the effort?

Response: Not Applicable.

11. Beyond the provision of a FedRAMP High SaaS-based AI chatbot solution, can the Government please clarify the expected scope of professional services to be included (e.g., implementation, integration, configuration, training, content curation for RAG, ongoing support, and optimization)?

Response: Please refer to the PWS.

12. Can Government clarify the required number of personnel (e.g., team size or FTEs), in addition to any preferred labor categories (LCATs) and estimated level of effort (hours)?

Response: Prospective vendors should propose the staffing approach and level of effort needed to fulfill the requirements in the proposed technical approach.

13. Does the Government have a preference for any specific SaaS-based conversational AI platforms (e.g., Oracle Digital Assistant, Salesforce Agentforce, or Microsoft Copilot Studio for Government), particularly those with FedRAMP High authorization, that should be considered for alignment or compatibility?

Response: No.

14. Are there existing tools or platforms currently used by Peace Corps staff for handling live interactions, or should offerors propose a complete solution for agent routing, queue management, and escalation?

Response: Offerors should propose a complete solution for agent routing, queue management and escalation.

15. To what extent is the contractor expected to manage ongoing model training, tuning, and updates versus enabling Peace Corps staff to independently manage these functions?

Response: During the implementation portion of the project, with Tier 3 support when necessary.

16. To confirm our understanding, the chatbot solution is expected to integrate with both (1) the Peace Corps public website (peacecorps.gov) and (2) the agency’s existing CRM/marketing system. Can the Government confirm if this understanding is correct and provide details on the current CRM/marketing technology stack to support integration planning?

Response: Initial implementation of the Chatbot does not require direct integration to the Agency’s CRM, that is dependent upon the respondents’ proposed solution, given requirements.

17. The RFQ indicates a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) structure; however, SaaS-based conversational

AI solutions are often priced using usage-based models (e.g., per interaction, session, or user). Can the Government please clarify how offerors should structure pricing under an FFP model given the variability in projected user engagement and anticipated growth?

Response: The government is aware that conversational AI models are typically usage-based pricing. When calculating cost, respondents will need to account for this and all other variable factors and build it into their pricing model.

18. For pricing purposes, can the Government confirm whether it is acceptable for offerors to propose SaaS-based AI chatbot licensing costs as direct pass-through costs (without markup), while pricing associated labor and professional services (e.g., implementation, integration, and support) under a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) structure?

Response: Respondents are expected to provide a firm fixed price (FFP) for the period of performance. They may structure their pricing according to whatever costs are incurred.

19. The solicitation references a requirement for a "FedRAMP High authorized, commercially available SaaS" solution. Does this requirement apply specifically to the chatbot application itself holding an independent FedRAMP High Authority to Operate (ATO), or would a solution deployed and operated on FedRAMP High authorized infrastructure (e.g., AWS GovCloud) satisfy this requirement?

Response: The requirement applies to the solution including the chatbot application and platform infrastructure.

20. Would the Government consider a solution that is currently in the FedRAMP authorization process and can demonstrate compliance with FedRAMP High security controls through documentation and third-party assessment, with full ATO anticipated during the base performance period?

Response: A solution that is in-process for a FedRAMP high impact designation would be acceptable.

21. The PWS references integration with the Peace Corps website (peacecorps.gov). Can the Government provide information about the current content management system (CMS) platform and any existing APIs or integration points that the chatbot solution would need to interface with?

Response: For information regarding Peace Corps current CMS please refer to the PWS. The respondent’s solution needs to be available on Peace Corps’ website, so that someone surfing on peacecorps.gov can interact with it easily and seamlessly, all other integrations are dependent upon the requirements of the respondent’s solution.

22. Is FedRAMP High required; is FedRAMP 20x acceptable?

• Would a letter of engagement from Vanta be acceptable?

• If a letter of engagement is acceptable, how close do we need to be in the FedRAMP framework? For example, could we be FedRAMP High 3 months from the end of the Base Period of May 31st, 2027?

Response: The solution must be in-process for the FedRAMP High impact designation. The current FedRAMP (rev 5) process requires the identification of a Federal Agency sponsor. FedRAMP 20x is not scheduled to be piloted for high impact authorizations until FY27.

23. Would a quote with a pricing structure of $150k/yr + $10/hr with conversations billed by the minute make sense?

Response: The respondent should create their price quote based on whatever costs they incur.

24. We are a small veteran owned business, however that status is in processing, is that acceptable?

Response: Only small businesses will be considered for competition under this requirement.

Firms that are not certified at the time of quote submission will not be eligible for consideration.

25. The PWS references FedRAMP High authorization, while later sections reference FedRAMP

Moderate baseline controls. Can the Government clarify the required FedRAMP authorization level for this effort?

Response: FedRAMP High authorization is required.

26. Does the requirement for FedRAMP authorization apply to the entire solution, or to the hosting environment in which the solution operates?

Response: The FedRAMP requirement applies to the solution including the chatbot application and platform infrastructure.

27. Can the Government clarify whether it intends to provide and manage the underlying AI/LLM services for this solution, or if the contractor is expected to include AI model usage and associated costs as part of the proposed solution?

Response: Respondent is expected to include the AI model usage and associated costs as part of the proposed solution.

28. If the Government provides the AI/LLM capability, should contractors assume that all model usage (for example, inference or query costs) will be managed and funded by the Government?

Response: Respondent is expected to include the AI model usage and associated costs as part of the proposed solution.

29. The solicitation references a commercially available SaaS solution. Can the Government clarify whether solutions must be fully vendor-hosted SaaS, or if solutions that include hybrid or Government-hosted components are acceptable?

Response: Solutions that include hybrid or government-hosted components are acceptable.

30. Will the Government provide an existing cloud environment for this effort, or should the contractor include all required hosting infrastructure in their solution?

Response: Prospective vendors should propose the solution including hosting infrastructure architecture requirements.

31. Can the Government provide additional details on existing systems that the chatbot must integrate with, including CRM or other communication platforms?

Response: The respondent’s solution needs to be available on Peace Corps website, so that someone surfing on peacecorps.gov can interact with it easily and seamlessly, all other integrations are dependent upon the requirements of the respondent’s solution. Peace Corps will provide a technical point of contact whenever necessary throughout the development and implementation processes.

Initial implementation of the Chatbot does not require direct integration with the Agency’s CRM, that is dependent upon the respondent’s proposed solution, given requirements.

32. The PWS references live agent escalation and queue management. Can the Government clarify expectations regarding staffing availability, service hours, and whether the contractor is responsible for providing queue management logic or if this will align with existing Government processes?

Response: Live agents will be available 15 hours a day, and are already under contract and internal to Peace Corps. The contractor is responsible for providing queue management logic and escalation to these live agents.

33. Can the Government clarify whether there are existing AI governance policies, review processes, or approval workflows that the chatbot solution must integrate with or support?

Response: The use case for the chatbot has already been reviewed and accepted by the Agency. The RFQ reflects the requirements for the solution.

34. Will the Government provide an initial curated dataset for the chatbot’s knowledge base, or is the contractor expected to develop and structure this dataset as part of the solution?

Response: The Peace Corps will provide all initial data for the RAG as GFI, the respondent’s solution must include structure and the capability for continued development and curation of the RAG.

35. Can the Government clarify expectations for ownership of chatbot interaction data, knowledge base content, and any derived data artifacts, as well as any required formats for data export at contract completion?

Response: All collected data will belong to the government. For data export, CSV format is required.

For reporting, presentable formats such as Word or PDF are preferred, but not required, and will be taken into consideration when evaluating responses and making a Best Value determination.

36. Can the Government provide expectations for peak concurrent users or interaction volumes to inform system sizing and performance planning?

Response: Please refer to section ‘2.2 Scope’ of the PWS.

37. The PWS outlines a series of design, development, and deployment activities following contract award. Can the Government clarify expectations regarding initial operating capability at the start of the period of performance? Specifically, is the contractor expected to provide a fully operational solution at contract start, or is a phased implementation and configuration period anticipated prior to full deployment?

Response: Contractor is expected to deploy a fully operational solution upon completion of the development phase of project.

38. Can the Government clarify expectations for post-deployment support, including the anticipated level of ongoing contractor involvement (e.g., full-time vs. part-time support) after the chatbot solution is implemented and Peace Corps staff are trained?

Response: Post-deployment, the contractor is expected to provide tier 3 support for their solution, with Peace Corps providing all other necessary support.

39. Could you please confirm whether the evaluation will be conducted using a Best Value Tradeoff approach or Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA)?

Response: As stated in Section 5 of the RFQ, the Government will make an award using a Best Value Tradeoff determination.

40. What CRM platform does Peace Corps currently use for recruitment and marketing automation?

Response: Peace Corps uses a highly customized version of the Click (Dimensions) managed solution installed directly into their on-premise Dynamics CRM 8.2 environment (currently upgrading to 9.1)

41. What cloud infrastructure provider(s) does Peace Corps currently use (e.g., AWS, Azure, Google Cloud)?

Response: Prospective vendors should propose the solution architecture including hosting infrastructure requirements.

42. Are there any existing integrations or platforms the chatbot solution should be compatible with beyond the Django/Wagtail CMS?

Response: The Chatbot shall be solution agnostic and work with current and future peacecorps.gov architecture.

43. Please confirm whether offerors are required to submit proposals as five separate volumes as outlined below:

• Volume I – Technical (20-page limit)

• Volume II – Past Performance (no page limit)

• Volume III – Assumptions, Conditions, or Exceptions (no page limit)

• Volume IV – Draft Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (no page limit)

• Volume V – Price (no page limit)

Response: Offerors are required to submit their quotations as five separate volumes in accordance with the RFQ submission requirements. Please ensure your submission follows the format and includes all required elements outlined in the RFQ. Quotations that do not meet these requirements may not be considered.

44. Submission Format Clarification: Are we required to submit two separate files, one for the Technical Proposal, and one for the Price Proposal, or should all volumes (Volumes I–V) be submitted separately as individual files? Please confirm.

• Reference:4.2.1 Format for Quotes

• Volume I – Technical (20-page limit)

• Volume II – Past Performance (no page limit)

• Volume III – Assumptions, Conditions, or Exceptions (no page limit)

• Volume IV – Draft Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (no page limit)

• Volume V – Price (no page limit)

Response: Please see answer to question 43.

45. Page Limit Clarification: Do the cover letter and table of contents count towards the 20-page limit for Volume I (Technical Proposal)?

Response: No, they do not.

46. For the requirement that the solution be FedRAMP High authorized, can the Government clarify whether this requirement must be met by the prime contractor’s offering specifically, or if it may be satisfied at the overall solution level, including through a subcontractor-provided FedRAMP High authorized platform as part of a team-based approach?

Response: The FedRAMP requirement applies to the solution including the chatbot application and platform infrastructure. Some controls can be inherited from the platform as part of the solution FedRAMP designation. The solution may be provided by the vendor team, but should be included in the prime contractor’s quote.

47. Can the Government clarify the expected level of integration with existing systems (e.g., CRM, CMS, or other recruitment platforms), and whether APIs or existing middleware are preferred?

Response: Respondents should provide whatever solution will best meet the government’s requirements provided in the PWS, given a Best Value Tradeoff determination.

48. Can the Government clarify expectations around knowledge base ownership and management, including whether Peace Corps staff are expected to directly manage and update the dataset used for AI responses?

Response: After deployment and training, Peace Corps staff are expected to directly manage and update the RAG dataset.

49. Are there specific systems currently used for live agent engagement or case management that the solution should integrate with for escalation workflows?

Response: Peace Corps does not currently have a system for live agent engagement or case management. There is currently an internal team of 10 contractors processing general inquiries from leads and other members of the public for the Office of Recruitment. This team will act as the first tier of support for live escalations from the Chatbot, although in certain cases the Chatbot will need to escalate to other offices or groups of people.

50. Can the Government clarify the primary success metrics for this solution (e.g., lead generation, applicant conversion, reduction in staff workload, or response accuracy)?

Response: This project is Peace Corps first implementation of a conversational AI agent, and although Peace Corps expects increased lead and application conversion, and a reduction in staff workload, initially, success metrics will be based on the solution’s accuracy, and ability to answer questions, offer guidance and appropriately route Users to the correct person or office.

51. Can the Government provide any additional guidance on expected chatbot usage volumes or peak traffic scenarios beyond what is included in the solicitation?

Response: The data provided in the PWS is the best indicators Peace Corps has of expected use.

52. Is there a target timeline for initial deployment and full rollout beyond the period of performance start date?

Response: That is up to the respondent to establish, but the government will take that into consideration when evaluating responses and making a Best Value Tradeoff determination.

53. Please confirm whether the cover page and table of contents count toward the 20-page limit for Volume I.

Response: They do not count towards the 20-page limit.

54. Please confirm the acceptable file format(s) for quote submission (e.g., PDF, Word).

Response: PDF and Word formats are acceptable for quote submission, provided that all instructions and formatting requirements outlined in the RFQ are followed.

55. Has the Peace Corps established a budget ceiling or independent government cost estimate

(IGCE) for this effort, either for the base year or the full five-year period of performance?

Response: Yes, for both the base year and the full period of performance.

56. Does the Peace Corps have a preferred pricing model (e.g., annual SaaS subscription, per-user licensing, per-interaction), or are vendors free to propose the structure they believe best fits the solution?

Response: Vendors are free to propose the FFP structure they believe best fits the solution.

57. What are the primary pain points or challenges Peace Corps staff currently experience in managing public inquiries and recruiter interactions that this Chatbot is expected to address?

Response: Members of the public ask many of the same questions repeatedly, despite information being provided on the website and elsewhere. The Chatbot’s first duty will be to satisfactorily answer all queries that do not require human intervention. After that, the Chatbot must successfully route inquiries to the correct office and person, whether it’s a general question that needs a human response or a very specific, possibly urgent, need that requires immediate, specific attention.

58. Does the Peace Corps have a target go-live date in mind, or is the implementation timeline expected to be finalized collaboratively after award?

Response: The sooner the better, but not at the cost of quality or capability. This timeline should be included in the response and will be evaluated by the government as part of a Best Value Tradeoff determination.

59. Does the Peace Corps have a target or estimated number of monthly chatbot interactions it expects the solution to handle? The PWS references current website traffic but notes engagement will "dramatically increase" — any directional guidance on expected volume would help vendors propose an appropriately scaled solution.

Response: Peace Corps has provided whatever information it can, given the data on hand and no prior experience with public facing conversational AIs. The respondents must take this into account when estimating use rates and other forms of traffic.

60. Section 3.1.4 states the RAG dataset is estimated between 1,000 and 10,000 pages. Will the Peace Corps provide the source documents and internal content to populate the RAG, or is the Contractor expected to gather and structure this content independently?

Response: Peace Corps will provide all sources of information, both internal and external, for populating the RAG. The contractor is expected to provide structure for the content in the RAG, whatever form that takes.

61. Please confirm whether vendors may structure their price submission however they see fit, as long as a total price for the full period of performance is provided.

Response: Respondents are expected to provide a firm fixed price (FFP) price quote for the base period of performance and each option period. They may structure their pricing according to whatever costs are incurred.

62. Is Attachment 2 only included for reference purposes, or does anything in that attachment need to be completed for the submission?

Response: As stated in the solicitation, “The contractor shall also submit a report (Attachment 2) to the Contracting Officer 60 days prior to the end of the base period and all option periods”. \

63. Does the Standard Form 1449 attachment need to be included with the submission, or is this only for reference?

Response: The Standard Form 1449 attachment is for internal documentation and reference purposes only and does not need to be included with your quote submission.

64. FedRAMP Authorization Level — High vs. Moderate: The Performance Work Statement (PWS), Section 3.1.1 requires a "FedRAMP High Authorization" approved SaaS solution.

However, PWS Section 6.1 states that the Contractor shall implement controls for "FedRAMP Cloud Computing Security Requirements Baseline and FedRAMP Continuous Monitoring Requirements for Moderate impact systems (as defined in FIPS PUB 199)."

These two requirements are in direct conflict. Please clarify: Is the required FedRAMP authorization level High or Moderate? If FedRAMP High is required, please confirm that FedRAMP Moderate authorized solutions will not be considered. Background: FedRAMP High and Moderate represent materially different security baselines and significantly different pools of commercially available SaaS chatbot solutions. Clarification is essential to determine compliance eligibility and to structure a compliant technical approach.

Response: The solution must be for the FedRAMP High impact designation. FedRAMP Moderate designated solutions will not be considered.

65. FedRAMP Authorization: Section 1.3 and PWS 3.1.1 both reference a "FedRAMP High authorized, commercially available SaaS conversational AI solution." We want to confirm our understanding of this requirement. Would the Government accept a solution where the underlying cloud service provider holds a FedRAMP High authorization (e.g., Google Cloud, Azure Government) and the agency issues an ATO for the specific application layer ― or must the chatbot product itself carry an independent FedRAMP High Marketplace listing prior to award? Background: The RFQ requires a "FedRAMP High authorized, commercially available SaaS conversational AI solution." The question we're submitting is whether that means the chatbot product itself needs a standalone FedRAMP High Marketplace listing, or whether building on a FedRAMP High-authorized cloud with an agency-issued ATO satisfies the requirement.

platform infrastructure.

66. Pricing Structure — SaaS Subscription vs. Labor Hours: Section 4.3 of the Solicitation instructs Quoters to "provide the labor categories and labor hours appropriate for their proposed solution." This contract is for a commercially available SaaS product, which is typically priced as a subscription or license fee rather than by labor hour. Please clarify whether the Government expects: (a) a SaaS subscription/license pricing model, (b) a labor-hour-based pricing model, or (c) a combination of both, with the SaaS license as a separate line item from implementation and support labor: Background: The appropriate pricing model is fundamental to structuring a complete and competitive price submission. An FFP SaaS license structure is materially different from a labor-hour model and affects both price reasonableness analysis and deliverable-based payment milestones.

Response: The government expects that implementation of the Chatbot, such as creating the RAG data structure, training the model, and training Peace Corps administrators and users will require labor hours, while use rates of the SaaS the Chatbot is built upon will require subscription/licensing fees. The Government expects pricing on FFP basis to include the SaaS licensing and labor costs for implementation and integration.

67. FAR 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting — Compliance Period: FAR 52.219-14

(Deviation Oct 2022), as included in Section 3.1 of the Solicitation (pages 8–9), contains two checkbox options for the compliance measurement period: (1) "By the end of the base term of the contract and then by the end of each subsequent option period," or (2) "By the end of the performance period for each order issued under the contract." Neither checkbox appears to have been selected in the solicitation document. Please confirm which compliance period applies to this acquisition. Background: The selected compliance period directly affects how the prime contractor must structure its subcontracting arrangements and track performance throughout the contract. This is also material to completing Attachment 2, the Limitations on Subcontracting Report.

Response: By the end of the base term of the contract and then by the end of each subsequent option period.

68. Draft QASP Submission Requirements: Section 4.3 requires Quoters to submit a Draft

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) as Volume IV of their quote. PWS Section

3.2.1 separately requires the Contractor to submit a draft QASP within 15 days of award and a final QASP within 30 days of award. Please clarify: (a) What level of detail is expected in the pre-award draft QASP submitted with the quote, and (b) should the draft QASP submitted with the quote serve as the starting point for the post-award QASP, or are these treated as independent documents? Background: Clarification will ensure that Volume IV is appropriately scoped and will avoid misalignment between the pre-award and post-award QASP processes.

Response: Contractors shall follow the FAR Overhaul 46.4. The draft QASP should be submitted with the quote and will be the starting point for the post-award QASP.

69. CCPA Compliance Applicability: PWS Section 3.1.13 requires the Chatbot to comply with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). The Peace Corps is a United States federal agency and would not typically be subject to CCPA, which applies to for-profit businesses meeting specific California thresholds. Please confirm whether CCPA compliance is a firm requirement, and if so, please provide the rationale or cite the specific Peace Corps policy that mandates this requirement. Background: CCPA compliance is a material technical and legal requirement that would affect the design of data collection, consent management, and user rights features of the chatbot solution

Response: This has been removed from the PWS.

70. HIPAA Compliance Scope: PWS Section 3.1.23 requires the Chatbot to "understand and comply with HIPAA requirements, redirecting audience members with HIPAA protected questions to qualified Peace Corps staff." Please clarify the anticipated HIPAA-related use case. Is this requirement related to interactions involving the Global Health Services Partnership (GHSP) program, medical clearance questions from applicants, or another context? Understanding the scope will allow Quoters to appropriately design the chatbot's triage and escalation workflows. Background: HIPAA-related functionality requires specific handling logic, training data, and escalation pathways that differ from standard inquiry handling. Proper scoping is necessary to design a compliant and effective solution.

Response: The majority of HIPAA protected content will come from applicants undergoing the medical clearance portion of the Peace Corps application process. Less common would be members of the public divulging medical information regarding currently serving Volunteers or current applicants.

71. Expected Timeline for Peace Corps ATO and Target Go-Live Date: The period of performance begins June 1, 2026. PWS Section 6.1.2 describes the process by which Peace Corps will issue an Agency ATO leveraging the Contractor's FedRAMP package. Given the documentation deliverable sequence (Project Plan at 15 days, Requirements Specification at 30 days post-kickoff, Design Documentation at 45 days post-Requirements approval, UAT at 30 days post-design approval, and final deployment within 60 days of testing completion), the total go-live timeline could extend well into the base year or beyond. Please confirm: (a) whether the Government has a target go-live date, (b) whether an existing Peace Corps ATO or Provisional ATO for any chatbot solution exists that could accelerate the process, and (c) whether the Government's change management and ATO timeline is already incorporated into the above delivery schedule. Background: The ATO timeline is a critical path dependency that significantly affects the overall implementation schedule and deliverable planning within the base period.

Response: The target go live date will be determined after contract award based upon the final project plan. ATO considerations will be reflected in the schedule.

72. CRM Integration Scope: PWS Section 2.1 describes the Peace Corps' existing CRM system as integral to recruitment operations, noting that all current lead interactions are recorded in the CRM and that the Agency uses the CRM for email, events, web forms, and outreach.

However, the PWS technical requirements (Section 3.1) focus on integration with peacecorps.gov and do not explicitly require CRM integration. Please confirm: (a) whether direct integration between the Chatbot and the Peace Corps CRM is in scope for this contract,

(b) if so, what level of integration is required (e.g., lead capture, data synchronization, conversation logging), and (c) whether any Government-furnished APIs or integration documentation will be provided. Background: CRM integration represents a significant technical scope item that would affect proposed architecture, implementation effort, pricing, and the Chatbot's ability to achieve the lead generation and applicant conversion objectives described in the PWS.

Response: This depends upon the respondent’s proposed solution. Direct integration with Peace Corps CRM environment is not a requirement at this stage of the project, but it may be necessary for certain proposed solutions and will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis as part of a Best Value Tradeoff determination. If a respondent’s solution requires integration, Peace Corps will provide the necessary APIs and integration documentation.

73. RAG Dataset Curation Responsibility and Government Furnished Information: PWS Section 3.1.4 states that the RAG dataset will consist of selected sections of peacecorps.gov, publicly facing documents, internal documents, and customized workflows, with an estimated 1,000 to 10,000 pages at initial deployment. Please clarify: (a) whether the curation and preparation of the initial RAG dataset is the responsibility of the Contractor, the Government, or a shared effort; (b) whether Peace Corps internal documents and workflows will be provided as Government Furnished Information (GFI) prior to the RAG build phase;

and (c) whether the Contractor should price the initial dataset curation effort as part of their quote. Background: The scope and ownership of the initial dataset curation has a direct bearing on implementation timelines, level of effort pricing, and the feasibility of the deployment schedule.

Response: The Peace Corps will provide all initial data for the RAG as GFI, the respondent’s solution must include structure and the capability for continued development and curation of the RAG. The respondent should price their quote accordingly.

74. Multilingual Support — Required Languages at Deployment: PWS Section 3.1.9 requires the Chatbot to support interaction in multiple languages using a single English-language RAG dataset. Please specify: (a) which languages must be supported at initial deployment, (b) whether there is a minimum number of supported languages required, and

(c) whether additional language support may be phased in during the option periods.

Background: The number and complexity of languages required at deployment directly affects the choice of underlying AI model, translation infrastructure, and QA testing scope, all of which have material cost and timeline implications.

Response: English and Spanish must be supported at initial deployment; all other languages are optional at this phase of the project but will be evaluated as part of a Best Value Tradeoff

75. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) Constraint; Reference: PWS 3.1.4

Can you clarify whether “rely solely on a RAG” means that responses must be grounded in retrieved Peace Corps-approved content, or whether the model is prohibited from leveraging pretrained knowledge? Are responses expected to include source citations for retrieved content? “Pretrained knowledge” refers to the knowledge and reasoning capabilities developed during the foundation model’s training process, in which the model learns statistical relationships, language patterns, domain concepts, and general world knowledge from large, diverse datasets. This underlying training enables the model to interpret prompts, reason, summarize, and generate responses. Can Peace Corps confirm this interpretation:

responses should be grounded in retrieved Peace Corps-approved content, but this requirement does not prohibit using the model’s pretrained capabilities in conjunction with retrieval?

Response: Peace Corps can confirm that responders should provide the best solution given project requirements, and all responses will be assessed using the same Best Value Tradeoff criteria.

76. FedRAMP High Authorization Approach: Reference: PWS 3.1.1; 6.1

Can the Government confirm whether we may leverage an existing FedRAMP High authorized SaaS platform and inherit controls from that authorization boundary, with the Peace Corps issuing an Agency Authorization to Operate (ATO) for its implementation?

Additionally, is a FedRAMP Agency ATO sufficient, or is a JAB Provisional Authorization (P-ATO) required?

platform infrastructure. Some controls can be inherited from the platform as part of the solution FedRAMP designation. The Peace Corps will issue its ATO/ATU based on information in the FedRAMP program and in other agencies’ ATOs.

77. FedRAMP Boundary Scope: Reference: PWS 3.1.1; 6.1 Should all components of the solution reside fully within a FedRAMP High boundary controlled by the offeror, or is a hybrid architecture with segmented components acceptable?

platform infrastructure. A hybrid/segmented architecture is acceptable but all components must meet the FedRAMP High designation.

78. Live Agent and CRM Integration: Reference: PWS 3.1.11

Can you provide details on any existing Live Agent and/or CRM systems that the chatbot must integrate with, and whether APIs or middleware are currently available to support this integration?

leads and other members of the public for the Office of Recruitment. This team will act as the first tier of support for live escalations from the Chatbot, although in certain cases the Chatbot will need to escalate to other offices or groups of people.

Initial implementation of the chatbot does not require direct integration to the Agency’s

79. Expected User Load and Concurrency: Reference: PWS 2.2.1

Can you provide expected adoption rates, peak concurrent users, or target usage assumptions to inform solution sizing and scalability planning?

Response: Please refer to section 2.2 Scope of the PWS.

80. Response Time Expectations: Reference: PWS 3.1.6

Can you provide specific response time expectations for chatbot interactions?

Response: Fast enough to ensure a smooth and natural conversation flow.

81. Multilingual Capability Expectations: Reference: PWS 3.1.9

Can you clarify which languages are expected to be supported and whether machine translation approaches using a single English dataset (assuming the Peace Corps corpus is English-only) are acceptable?

Response: English and Spanish are expected to be supported at a minimum, more languages than that will be evaluated as part of a Best Value Tradeoff determination. For the RAG, Peace Corps will be providing materials only in English.

82. Data Retention and Usage: Reference: PWS 3.1.22; 6.1

Can you clarify requirements for data retention duration, and whether chatbot interaction data may be used for system improvement (e.g., tuning, optimization), provided it remains within the authorized environment?

Response: If data is stored in external systems, it must be kept until transferred to the Peace Corps.

Peace Corps expects Chatbot interaction data to be used for system improvement.

83. Explainability Requirements: Reference: PWS 3.1.21

Can you clarify expectations for “explainable outputs”? Is citation of source material sufficient, or are additional explanation mechanisms required?

Response: When the Chatbot provides a factually incorrect, misleading or wrong response to a question, Peace Corps wants to understand why this happened as part of the correction process.

Material citation, where applicable, on the front end, for Users, is a related but separate process.

Both are necessary.

84. AI Risk Management Framework: Reference: PWS 3.1.20

Are there specific frameworks or standards (e.g., NIST AI Risk Management Framework) that you expect offerors to follow for AI risk management?

Response: The Peace Corps does not expect a specific risk management framework, but respondents should describe their process for managing risk with AI technologies.

85. Continuous Learning and Government Control:Reference: PWS 3.1.5

Can you clarify expectations regarding the level of technical expertise required for Peace Corps staff to manage continuous learning and updates?

Response: At a minimum, Peace Corps OCIO Product Managers and IT Specialists should be able to manage the solution’s continued administration and upkeep.

86. Accessibility Compliance Validation: Reference: PWS 6.2 Can you clarify expectations for demonstrating Section 508 compliance? Is it sufficient to provide a VPAT and/or other particular standards (like WCAG 2.1)? What further testing methodologies or other standards are required as part of this submission?

Response: A VPAT is acceptable for demonstrating Section 508 compliance.

87. FedRAMP impact level clarification. In support of RFQ Section 1.3 (p. 3 of 23), PWS Section 3.1.1 (Attachment 1, p. 7 of 27), and PWS Section 6.1 (Attachment 1, p. 17 of 27): The RFQ/PWS references a “FedRAMP High Authorization” chatbot, while PWS Section 6.1 references FedRAMP / Continuous Monitoring requirements for “Moderate impact systems.” Please confirm the required impact level for the proposed cloud / SaaS solution and whether Peace Corps will accept a FedRAMP-authorized solution consistent with the final FIPS 199 / agency authorization categorization.

Response: The solution must have a FedRAMP high designation and meet the continuous monitoring requirements for FedRAMP High-designated solutions. The PWS will be corrected to reflect this consistently throughout the document.

88. Commercial AI Service Within a Segmented SaaS Solution. In support of PWS Section

3.1.1 (Attachment 1, p. 7 of 27), PWS Section 3.1.3 (Attachment 1, p. 8 of 27), PWS Section 6.1.2 (Attachment 1, p. 19 of 27), and RFQ Section 5 / Factor A (pp. 20-21 of 23):

Please confirm whether a commercially available SaaS chatbot solution may use a segmented architecture in which conversational AI / foundation-model capabilities, retrieval, orchestration, website integration, and administrative functions are provided through integrated cloud services within the proposed solution, provided the Contractor documents the authorization boundary, inherited controls, customer controls, data flows, and security responsibilities necessary for Peace Corps to issue its agency ATO.

Response: Yes, as long as the data remains segmented and the entire solution aligns with Peace Corps’ ATO process.

89. Continuous Learning and Use of Interaction Data. In support of PWS Section 3.1.5

(Attachment 1, p. 8 of 27) and PWS Section 3.1.22 (Attachment 1, p. 11 of 27): Please confirm whether “continuous learning” may be satisfied through secure capture of user interactions for later analysis; human-approved updates to the knowledge base, retrieval rankings, prompts, workflows, guardrails, feedback queues, evaluation sets, and configuration; and Peace Corps staff training to oversee these processes - rather than requiring autonomous model retraining or training/fine-tuning of generalized foundation models on Peace Corps or public-ushigher interaction data.

Response: Peace Corps expect respondents to determine the method of continuous learning based on technological requirements of the solution.

90. The PWS (Section 3.1.1) requires a FedRAMP High authorized solution, but Section 6.1 references FedRAMP Moderate baseline controls. Is the requirement for FedRAMP High or Moderate?

Response: FedRAMP High. The PWS will be corrected to reflect this consistently throughout the document.

91. The PWS (Section 3.1.1) states contractors shall provide a FedRAMP High authorized solution. If High is required, will the Government accept a solution operating under FedRAMP Moderate authorization with a documented Path to High, or is FedRAMP High authorization (JAB Provisional or Agency ATO) required at the time of contract award and at the start of performance?

Response: The proposed solution must have or be in the process of obtaining a FedRAMP High designation. Operating on a FedRAMP designated platform does not adequately secure the solution.

92. If FedRAMP High is required, does it apply to (a) the entire SaaS/PaaS platform hosting the chatbot, (b) only the government data boundary managed by the prime contractor, or (c) the underlying cloud infrastructure only? Please clarify which components within the solution architecture must individually hold FedRAMP High authorization.

Response: The entire proposed solution must have or be in the process of obtaining a FedRAMP High designation. Operating on a FedRAMP designated platform does not adequately secure the solution.

93. Must the FedRAMP High authorization be active and in place at the time of quote submission, contract award, or the start of performance? Alternatively, will the Government accept a plan to obtain a Peace Corps Agency ATO within a defined period after award (e.g., 60–90 days)?

Response: The proposed solution must have or be in the process of obtaining a FedRAMP High designation at time of quote submission to be able to verify the requirement during the proposal evaluation.

94. Does the Peace Corps currently have an active Agency Authority to Operate (ATO) for any

Google Cloud Platform services? If so, which services are currently under that ATO, and what is the impact level?

Response: No.

95. What level of access will the contractor have to the peacecorps.gov CMS (currently Django 5/Wagtail 8) for integration purposes? Will a Peace Corps technical point of contact be available during the integration phase? Are there known firewall rules, API gateway restrictions, or network policies that would affect embedding a JavaScript-based chatbot widget on peacecorps.gov?

Response: Peace Corps will provide a technical point of contact whenever necessary throughout the development and implementation processes to provide access for integration. There are no restrictions that would affect respondent’s approach, other than a content security policy (CSP), which would require Peace Corps to whitelist the script-src for the widget.

96. The PWS describes the Peace Corps' existing CRM system as the central hub for lead interactions. Is CRM integration (e.g., lead capture, conversation logging into the CRM) within scope for the base period, or is it anticipated as a future option period enhancement? If in scope for the base period, which CRM platform is in use?

Response: Initial implementation of the Chatbot does not require direct integration to the Agency’s

97. Will the Peace Corps provide curated source documents for the initial RAG knowledge base at contract award, or is the contractor expected to independently harvest content from peacecorps.gov and publicly available documents? What is the estimated timeline for Peace Corps to complete initial content curation and review?

Response: Peace Corps will provide all sources of information, both internal and external, for populating the RAG. Peace Corps will prioritize content collection and review upon kickoff of the project, but not before, as the Agency expects input and guidance from the vendor.

98. Does Peace Corps currently use a specific customer service or help desk platform (e.g., Salesforce Service Cloud, Zendesk, ServiceNow) that the chatbot's live-agent escalation feature must integrate with? Or will live-agent transfer be handled via a new interface provided by the contractor?

leads and other members of the public for the Office of Recruitment. This team will act as the first tier of support for live escalations from the Chatbot, although in certain cases the Chatbot will need

99. Does the Peace Corps have a defined list of required supported languages for the chatbot's multilingual functionality (PWS Section 3.1.9)?