RFQ 19GT5026Q0051 Social Listening and Digital Monitoring Services Amendment 0002.pdf

PAGE OF PAGESAMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

1 10

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

08/31/2026

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

PR16111338-0002

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE GT500 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

AMERICAN EMBASSY GUATEMALA CITY

Boulevard Austriaco 11-51, Zona 16, ATTN: GSO - PROCUREMENT SECTION Guatemala

GUATEMALA

AMERICAN EMBASSY GUATEMALA CITY

Boulevard Austriaco 11-51, Zona 16, ATTN: GSO - PROCUREMENT SECTION Guatemala

GUATEMALA

(X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

NO.

19GT5026Q0051

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

07/31/2026

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

CODE FACILITY CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

x The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers x is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

By completing items 8 and 15, and returning(a) one copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

This amendment is to incorporate the Questions and Answers as official attachment to the solicitation. This document is hereby added as:

Attachment 1: Questions and Answers and extend due date to submit offers. Date to submit offers is September 7, 2026.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Attachment 1: RFQ 19GT5026Q0051 – Social Listening and Digital Monitoring Services Questions and Answers

Q1. Could you please confirm which methodology governs. If a point system will be applied, please identify the factors, their relative weights, and the relationship of technical merit to price in the award decision.

R1. Lowest Price Technically Acceptable will be applied considering the Section 11 of the Schedule .2 Selection Criteria (Pre-Award) of the Statement of Work. Please refer to this section for clarity on the factors that will be evaluated. An offer must be rated acceptable on all the factors listed therein to be eligible for award.

Q2. Could you please confirm that potential vendors should price a base year plus four option years?

R2. Yes, proposals must include a Base Year plus four optional years, for a total of a 5-year contract.

Q3. Could you please confirm the definitive list of required documents.

R3. Please review Section 3 – Solicitation Provisions, of the solicitation for offer submission requirements.

Q4. Could you please clarify whether "Section II" refers to Section 1 (The Schedule) or Section 2 (Contract Clauses).?

R4. Section II refers to Pricing of the Schedule.

Q5. Could you please confirm that a U.S. person may satisfy the requirement of submitting the Form W- 14 by completing the representation at 52.229-11(d) as a non-foreign person, without the quotation being deemed incomplete.

R5. Yes, only potential vendors that are foreign citizens, as defined in FAR 52.229-11, are required to submit IRS Form W-14. A U.S. citizen satisfies this requirement by completing the non-foreign person representation at FAR 52.229-11(d); the quotation will not be deemed incomplete for omitting Form W-14 if the potential vendor is a U.S. citizen.

All potential vendors, U.S. and foreign, must address this provision in some form: foreign citizens by submitting Form W-14, and U.S. citizens by completing the 52.229-11(d) representation.

Q6. Could you please clarify whether in-country registration and licensing in Guatemala is required where analytical work is performed remotely from a secure facility located outside Guatemala.

R6. In-country registration and licensing in Guatemala are not required if the contractor's secure facility and analytical work are located outside Guatemala. This solicitation requires the contractor to be authorized to do business, with all necessary licenses and permits, in the country where the work is actually performed. The contractor must provide evidence of legal establishment and good standing in that jurisdiction, whichever country it is.

Q7. Could you please confirm that no Government Furnished Property will be provided under this contract.

R7. No. Government Furnished Property will not be provided under this contract.

Q8. Could you please clarify whether a live demonstration is anticipated and, if so, the expected format and timing, or whether representative sample outputs submitted with the quotation are sufficient.

R8. No live demonstration is required. Potential vendors shall submit representative sample outputs as evidence of their platform's functionality, along with a comprehensive written description of the platform's capabilities, as part of their proposal.

Q9. Could you please clarify the estimated quantities to be used in the price evaluation. If available, we would also appreciate identification of the incumbent contractor and the current annual contract value.

R9. Please refer to Section II Prices - 2.8 Summary of the Schedule. Potential vendors may calculate the total evaluated price using either the sum of the 12 monthly quantities per year or the equivalent annual total per period — both methods will yield the same total evaluated price, provided the monthly rate is applied consistently across each 12-month period. The Government is not able to release this information as part of this solicitation process. Information regarding prior contract awards, including contractor identity and contract value, is publicly available to interested parties through the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) and may be researched independently by potential vendors. We encourage potential vendors to base their proposals on the requirements, scope, and performance standards set forth in the solicitation and the Performance Work Statement.

Q10. Could you please clarify if the contractor be required to use any Government-furnished networks, platforms, accounts, collection methods, or tradecraft, or should potential vendors assume that the contractor will provide the complete technical and research environment needed to perform the work?

R10. No, the Government will not provide access to any Government-furnished networks.

Q11. Is it acceptable to use a cloud-hosted OSINT platform that is external to the contractor's secure network, provided analysts access it from the contractor's compliant secure environment and all contractor-generated data is handled in accordance with the solicitation's security requirements?

R11. All monitoring, research, analysis, and data handling must be performed exclusively by dedicated analysts physically operating inside the Contractor's Security Operations Center-protected facility, and using a Linux environment as required. If a cloud-hosted platform is proposed, the hosting environment itself must meet equivalent security, isolation, and auditability standards consistent with the SOW, and the platform must be configured to prevent analyst access from any location outside the compliant secure environment. All contractor-generated data must be handled, transmitted, and stored in accordance with the data protection requirements. Vendors proposing a cloud-hosted solution must describe their hosting architecture, the security controls in place, and why they use that alternative.

Q12. Does the “hardened Linux environment” requirement apply to the analyst workstation or virtual machine, the OSINT platform hosting environment, or both? Please also identify any required hardening standard or baseline.

R12. Both the analyst workstation/virtual machine and the OSINT platform hosting environment must be based on Linux. If a potential vendor proposes an alternative, the vendor must identify the proposed alternative, describe its security controls, and demonstrate how it meets the same isolation, auditability, and access-control objectives required.

Q13. Would the Government accept a technical solution that provides analysts with securely hardened Windows workstations if the environment meets the same isolation, auditability, access-control, and security objectives described in Section 4.2, or is Linux mandatory?

R13. The SOW requires a platform based on Linux. If a potential vendor proposes a Windows-based solution as an alternative, the vendor must identify the proposed hardening standard or baseline applied to the Windows environment, describe its security controls, and demonstrate how it meets the same isolation, auditability, and access-control objectives required. Potential vendors must be aware that no licensing cost may be charged as an extra or separate cost for user access.

Q14. Does the Government currently have any OSINT capabilities, software, scripts, data feeds, integrations, or other technical components that the contractor will be expected to use, maintain, or integrate with during performance?

R14. Potential vendors must propose and provide the complete technical and research environment necessary to perform all requirements of the SOW, including all networks, platforms, accounts, collection methods, and tradecraft needed to meet the objectives and deliverables described therein. Proposals should be structured on this basis.

Q15. For the “dedicated secure facility” requirement, would a dedicated, access-controlled workspace within an existing contractor or subcontractor facility be acceptable, or must the entire facility be dedicated exclusively to this contract?

R15. The entire facility does not need to be dedicated exclusively to this contract. Potential vendors must ensure that the dedicated area, access, and equipment used for this contract meets the security requirements of the SOW, and must explain in their proposal what they are offering to satisfy these requirements.

Q16. Can the Government confirm the permitted place of performance? May the monitoring, research, analysis, data handling, and reporting be performed from a compliant contractor facility in the United States, or is performance required in Guatemala or at a Government facility?

R16. Performance is not required from a specific country. Potential vendors must identify the location of their facility and confirm it is consistent with the location of their certified business, as described in their proposal.

Q17. It is required the secure facility to be protected by a 24/7/365 Security Operations Center (SOC).

Does this require a continuously staffed human SOC, or would 24/7/365 monitoring through an automated SIEM/SOC platform or a qualified third-party managed SOC service satisfy the requirement?

R17. Yes, the secure facility must be protected by a 24/7/365 Security Operations Center. A continuously staffed human is not required to monitor the SOC. Potential vendors must explain how they are meeting this requirement. If using an automated system or a qualified third-party managed SOC service, vendors must demonstrate that it provides 24/7/365 monitoring, and must identify the provider and describe the scope of services covered under this contract.

Q18. What cybersecurity and data-handling standards must the secure environment meet for SBU information? Would a CMMC Level 2 compliant environment be considered sufficient evidence of a secure environment, or are additional Department of State, NIST, or other controls required?

R18. The SOW does not specify a named cybersecurity certification framework for this requirement. CMMC Level 2 is an acceptable framework if the potential vendor already holds this certification. Potential vendors must ensure they comply with the specific technical controls required, including defense-in-depth architecture, enterprise VPNs, next-generation firewalls, virtual machine isolation, and compartmented/segmented equipment for SBU data handling, as well as general U.S. Government data protection standards. Potential vendors must explain in detail how they will meet these requirements, including any additional certifications or controls they apply.

Q19. Is Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) the highest information sensitivity level expected under this contract? Please confirm whether any facility clearance, personnel security clearance, SCIF accreditation, or classified information handling capability is required.

R19. SBU is the highest information sensitivity level expected under this contract. No facility clearance, personnel security clearance, SCIF accreditation, or classified information handling capability is required. Vendors must certify that all personnel assigned to this contract have undergone a background screening consistent with the company's standard hiring practices.

Q20. The SOW calls for monitoring closed networks, encrypted channels, and non-indexed platforms. Is the requirement limited to content that is lawfully available through public, commercial, or otherwise authorized access, or does the Government expect access to private, invitation-only, credentialed, or restricted communities?

R20. All monitoring and collection activities under this contract must be conducted through lawful means, in compliance with applicable laws, platform terms of service, and authorized access methods. Vendors must describe, as part of their proposal, the specific methods, tools, and access channels they will use to monitor closed networks, encrypted channels, and non-indexed platforms, and must demonstrate that these methods comply with all applicable legal and platform requirements.

Q21. May the contractor meet the technical requirements through an integrated suite of commercial tools or modules, or does the Government expect a single OSINT product to provide all collection, social listening, managed attribution, analytics, sentiment, narrative, and network-analysis capabilities?

R21. The SOW requires an OSINT analytical software platform that integrates the required capabilities, including collection, social listening, analytics, sentiment, narrative, and network-analysis functions. Potential vendors may propose any combination of legally available commercial or open-source tools or modules, and describe in their proposal how these tools will function as an integrated platform meeting all required capabilities under the SOW.

Q22. Does the Government require direct user access to the proposed OSINT platform, or is the platform intended for contractor analyst use with the Government receiving the required reports and analytical outputs? If Government access is required, how many user licenses are needed?

R22. No. The platform is intended for contractor analyst use, with the Government receiving the required reports and analytical outputs.

Q23. Should sample outputs be included with the quotation, and does the Government anticipate a live or recorded platform demonstration after submission? If so, please provide the expected format and evaluation criteria.

R23. No live or recorded demonstration is required. Vendors shall submit sample outputs, as required under the SOW, along with any combination of screenshots, written technical descriptions, or case study examples that demonstrate the platform's functionality.

Q24. What certifications does the Government expect? For example, does this refer to platform security certifications, vendor-issued user or analyst certifications, individual professional certifications, or another type of certification?

R24. Vendors must list and describe the certifications applicable to the big-data and analytical tools they propose to use for monitoring and analysis, and explain how these certifications support the platform's functionality and security.

Q25. Can the Government confirm the minimum staffing requirement? Would one dedicated OSINT Analyst assigned at or near 100% to the effort be acceptable if qualified management and backup resources are available, or does the reference to a “small, dedicated cadre” require more than one full-time analyst?

R25. SOW §4.4 states: "The project team shall be a small, dedicated cadre with personnel allocated at or near 100% to this effort during the period of performance" and "the contractor shall assign one or more dedicated OSINT Analyst(s) to this project." In response to this question, vendors must assign at least one OSINT analyst to the project, and as part of their proposal, describe the team they are assigning to the contract, including staffing levels and roles.

Q26. May the designated OSINT Analyst also serve as the Project Manager/POC if that individual meets the Spanish-language, regional expertise, and professional English requirements, or must the roles be filled by separate personnel?

R26. Nothing in the SOW prohibits the designated OSINT Analyst from also serving as the Project Manager/POC. If a single individual meets all applicable requirements, vendors may propose combining these roles. While the preference is separate personnel for each role, either approach is acceptable provided all applicable requirements are met. Vendors must describe in their proposal how their proposed staffing structure satisfies these requirements.

Q27. What analyst coverage hours does the Government expect? Is continuous platform monitoring with analysts working defined business hours acceptable, or is 24/7/365 analyst staffing required in addition to the 24/7/365 SOC requirement?

R27. Vendors are responsible for determining and managing their own staffing model to ensure timely delivery of the required weekly thematic reports and responsiveness to tailored report requests, as defined in the SOW.

Q28. Is any specific nationality required, what documentation will the Government accept as proof, and may the potential vendors provide the required Central American dialect expertise attestation?

R28. There is no nationality preference for the designated OSINT Analyst if the person meets the requirements of the SOW, including native Spanish-language proficiency and demonstrated comprehension of Central American regional colloquialisms, slang, and idiomatic expressions. For proof of nationality, vendors may submit a copy of a valid passport, national identification document, or equivalent government-issued document. The dialect expertise attestation may be provided by the potential vendor itself, describing the analyst's relevant background, lived experience, or professional history supporting this expertise.

Q29. Can the Government provide an estimated number of tailored reports per month or year, the expected turnaround time, and the typical level of effort or report length? Please also confirm whether these reports are included in the monthly firm-fixed price.

R29. Tailored reports are generally incorporated into the standard weekly report cycle; the distinction is that certain weeks require the contractor to address specific themes. The awarded contractor usually has sufficient lead time to research and produce these tailored reports within the standard weekly production cycle. On rare occasions, an urgent request may require a shorter turnaround of a few days. Timing and feasibility for any tailored request are coordinated and agreed with the awarded contractor. Tailored reports remain within the same monthly firm-fixed price, as they do not constitute an additional or separate deliverable.

Q30. When a source or platform does not make metrics available, will the Government accept the available platform-specific metrics and a notation that the requested metric is not available?

R30. Metrics are valuable, and contractors should include them whenever available or needed, and they are not the primary measure of the requested reports. The contract prioritizes analytical quality, depth, and actionable insight over metric completeness.

Q31. When evaluating relevant experience and past performance, will the Government consider the experience of proposed subcontractors and commercial technology partners together with the prime contractor's experience, including U.S. Government or Central America work performed within the 24 months before proposal submission?

R31. No. The prime contractor must independently hold and demonstrate the required experience in the SOW. The evaluation will not credit the experience of proposed subcontractors or commercial technology partners toward the prime contractor's qualifying experience.

Q32. What documentation will the Government accept as “clear and verifiable evidence” that a potential vendors’ revenue is derived from lawful activities and that the company has no association with drug trafficking or criminal organizations? Would a corporate officer certification together with current SAM representations and standard corporate documentation be sufficient?

R.32. Potential vendors may submit whatever evidence they, or their legal counsel, deem sufficient to demonstrate that: (1) their business is legally established and operating in good standing under applicable law; (2) they have no affiliation, association, or connection with drug trafficking organizations or other criminal enterprises; and (3) their revenue is derived exclusively from lawful business activities. The sufficiency of such evidence will be subject to review and determination by the U.S. Embassy in Guatemala.

Q33. Could you please confirm if the Government provides the point allocation and minimum score for technical acceptability and confirm whether the point system is used only to determine acceptability, rather than for a technical-price tradeoff?

R33. Lowest Price Technically Acceptable will be applied considering the Section 11 of the Schedule .2 Selection Criteria (Pre-Award) of the Statement of Work. Please refer to this section for the factors that will be evaluated. An offer must be rated acceptable on all the factors listed therein to be eligible for award. Evaluation does not use a point system. Instead, the evaluation will determine whether each offeror meets or does not meet each requirement, with all requirements carrying equal importance for eligibility purposes.

Q34. Could you please confirm if there are any restrictions on the size or length of the proposal, including page limits, required proposal volumes, font size, margins, or other formatting requirements beyond the file type and 10 MB email attachment limitation stated in the cover letter?

R34. No, there are no page limits, required proposal volumes, font size, margin requirements, or other formatting restrictions beyond the file type and 10 MB email attachment limitation stated in the cover letter. Potential Vendors should ensure their proposal is clear, organized, and responsive to all solicitation requirements, while remaining within the stated file size and format limitations.

Q35. Could you please confirm if there are insurance requirements for this procurement?

R35. No, there are no insurance requirements that apply to this solicitation.

Q36. To ensure real-time database updates and continuous integration of new OSINT threat feeds, is it technically acceptable to utilize a secure Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) deployment model, provided that the contractor strictly guarantees the following security controls? Strict Physical Containment: All monitoring, research, analysis, and data handling will be performed 100% exclusively by dedicated analysts physically operating inside the Contractor's secure, SOC-protected facility (complying fully with Paragraph 4.3).

Certified Cloud Infrastructure: The SaaS platform's hosting environment utilizes a highly secure, federal-grade cloud infrastructure that guarantees strict logical data isolation, robust encryption in transit and at rest, and auditable transaction logs.

R36. All monitoring, research, analysis, and data handling must be performed exclusively by dedicated analysts physically operating inside the contractor's Security Operations Center-protected facility, using a Linux environment as required. If a cloud-hosted platform is proposed, such as a SaaS deployment model, the hosting environment itself must meet equivalent security, isolation, and auditability standards consistent with the SOW, and the platform must be configured to prevent analyst access from any location outside the compliant secure environment. All contractor-generated data must be handled, transmitted, and stored in accordance with the data protection requirements. Vendors proposing a cloud-hosted solution must describe their hosting architecture, the security controls in place, and why they use that alternative.

End of Questions and Answers