Attachment 14 Solicitation Question Template (QA).xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 72 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 70CDCR25R00000005
- Issued by
-
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
About this file
This document is a comprehensive Solicitation Question Template for an Emergency Detention and Related Services Strategic Sourcing Vehicle (SSV) issued by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The solicitation, numbered 70CDCR25R00000005, seeks to establish a multi-vendor contract for providing detention facilities, security, transportation, medical services, and processing support for detained immigrants, with a focus on rapid deployment of detention capacity nationwide. The strategic sourcing vehicle allows vendors to propose services across eight key objectives, including facility provision, secure detention operations, ground transportation, medical care, detainee management, legal resources, record administration, and processing support.
The solicitation includes a flexible pricing model with cost ceilings for various facility sizes and durations, allowing vendors to propose pricing for one or multiple objectives. The government anticipates making at least five awards, with task orders potentially involving new or existing facilities on federal, private, or local government properties. The initial contract has a two-year period of performance, with task orders potentially extending up to 12 months beyond that timeframe. Pricing is based on per-detainee/per-day rates, with additional CLINs for specialized services like transportation, armed guards, and medical support. The evaluation will focus on corporate experience and pricing, with no mandatory small business set-asides, though small business participation is encouraged.
View the file
Other files
Show all 34
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Attachment 14- Solicitation Question Template | |||
| RFP Attachment | RFP Section/Page/Paragraph | Question | Answer |
| Attachment 1 - SSV Statement of Objectives (Final) | Section 3, Page 2, Paragraph 5 - The contractor does not have a right of refusal and shall take all referrals from ICE as applicable. | Is this reference specifically related to the classification level of the detainee? Does this include severely physically or mentally disabled persons and extreme violent offenders? | Yes, this is related to classifation levels only. Detainees with medical conditions requiring treatment outside the capabilities of the facility will not be housed at that location. |
| Attachment 1 - SSV Statement of Objectives (Final) | Section 5, Page 4, Paragraph 1 - Under this solicitation, the contractor(s) may elect to provide some or all of the services described below. | A number of the Objectives are overlapping, and as laid out would require that multiple tiers of awarded contracts be deconflicted, causing delays in performance. |
| This is an example of items that will need to be deconflicted: Bullet 2 Objective 5B references personal hygiene fixtures which should be covered under Objective 1. Objective 5D is normally addressed through a combination of efforts by Objective 2, Detention Services (one-to-one surveillance) and Objective 4, Medical Services. There are a significant number of these types of examples that would need to be deconflicted. Will the Government provide the necessary clarifications as to how contracts awarded for individual Objectives will be executed? | The objectives have been written to separate out facility build out and maintenance from detainee care and services. Multiple objetives include items related to detainee care and services and contractors are not bound to only elect to support one objective. They may propose solutions for one, several, or all objectives. | |||
| Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B-M) | L.3.1, Factor 2: Price (Page 55, Last Para) | The instructions state, "The offeror shall consider working in it's highest cost location, highest performance at a government or contractor site and the types of orders that will pose the most risk to it." The offeror's price is part of the evaluation. As such, it will not be fair for an offeror to list their highest risk location, which may be higher risk or higher priced than the experience of other offerors. To ensure a fair price evaluation, will the Goverment specify a location (Wage Determination) for all bidders to use? | To be removed from RFP. | |
| Attachment 15 - Pricing Schedule (Final) | Row 22/CLIN 0003 | The method for estimating a mileage rate is based on total costs divided by anticipated total miles. Will the Government provide a Transportation sample scenario that includes quantities and types of vehicles and annual miles so that offerors can derive a rate that can be fairly / equitably evaluated? Otherwise, there is no way for the Government to ascertain which offeror provides the best value. | Reimbursable mileage rate is independent of any particlar transportation route. Include all indirect/direct costs needed to provide transport for 1 mile. Facilities will generally be within 45 surface ground commute of infrastructure like airports and hospitals. | |
| Attachment 1 - SSV Statement of Objectives (Final) | Page 5 of 15 | Objective 1: Will the Government provide the Jail Management/Booking system (e.g. ICE ENFORCE), or is the contractor required to provide a system for managing detainees booked in/out? If the system is to be contractor-provided, which CLIN does it fall under? | Contractors are expected to use ICE ENFORCE. | |
| n/a | n/a | Can approved vendors that are awarded individual objectives later form a team to bid on total operations (all objectives) type task orders? | Yes | |
| Final Solication | H.10 OPEN SEASON ON-RAMPING PG 15 | Will ICE conduct an Open Season On-Ramping opportunity, as referenced in Section H.10, to allow additional qualified firms to be added to the contract pool as needs evolve? | It is possible | |
| Final Solication | Cover page 1.The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 561612 | Considering that NAICS 561612 (Security Guards and Patrol Services) is the primary code for this solicitation, but the Statement of Objectives (SOO) includes non-security functions—such as base camp operations, temporary housing, feeding, hygiene services, transportation, and logistics—please clarify whether these non-security services are expected to fall within the scope of NAICS 561612, or whether additional NAICS codes will be utilized to fulfill those requirements. | ERO confirm. OAQ: additional NAICS may be used to fulfill requirements. 561612 is the principal NAICS selected | |
| Final Solication | Section B, Page 3 | Are future task orders under this IDIQ expected to allow for the inclusion of multiple NAICS codes aligned with the specific service functions described in the SOO? | Yes | |
| Final Solication | The Evaluation of Past Performance is addressed in Section M.4 – Evaluation Approach of the RFP document titled "Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B-M). | Can past performance in emergency disaster response services—such as base camps, temporary housing, logistics, feeding, and medical support—be considered relevant for evaluation purposes, even if the work was not performed under NAICS 561612? | Yes | |
| Final Solication | Page 50–51 of the RFP | Does the Government plan to issue task orders focused on specific SOO objectives (e.g., transportation-only or medical-only services), or will each task order require full-spectrum service delivery? | Yes. Task orders may be written to cover one or multiple objectives. Requirements will be specified at the task order level and are not limited to soliciting for full-spectrum service delivery | |
| Attachment 15 – Pricing Schedule | CLIN 001 Pricing Format is primarily located in Section L.3.1 – Proposal Content and throughout the pricing instructions related to Attachment 15 – Pricing Schedule in the RFP | Should the pricing submitted under CLIN 001 (Bed Day Rate) be all-inclusive, incorporating all associated costs (e.g., shelter, food, logistics, medical, security, etc.) as outlined in the SOO? | All inclusive pricing is allowable if submitting an all inclusive proposal | |
| Attachment 15 – Pricing Schedule | CLIN Cost Allocation Guidance is addressed primarily in Section L.3.1 – Proposal Content of the RFP document titled Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B–M).pdf | If CLIN 001 is not intended to be fully burdened, can the Government provide guidance or a framework for how offerors should allocate costs across other CLINs or services? | Per answer to question 14, offerors should allocate costs according to which objectives they choose to pursue. | |
| Final Solication | pricing narrative or cost breakdown is explicitly stated in the RFP under Section L.3.1 – Proposal Content, specifically in the pricing instructions for Attachment 15: | Will the Government allow or require offerors to submit a pricing narrative or cost breakdown that outlines key assumptions behind the proposed Bed Day Rate? | A pricing narrative is requested | |
| Final Solication | Page 56 of Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B–M).pdf | For CLIN 002 (On-Call Services – Labor Hour), can the Government clarify what types of labor or services (e.g., admin, surge staffing, transport) are anticipated under this model? | Yes, these are examples of On-call services but is not an exhaustive list. | |
| Final Solication | Page 56 Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B–M). | Should offerors assume CLIN 002 is reserved for emergency or surge needs only, or will it also apply to core operational services under certain conditions? | ERO | |
| Final Solication | Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B–M) | Does the Government anticipate issuing additional CLINs or SubCLINs to distinguish functions such as medical services, logistics, or administrative support within task orders? | Additional pricing and/or CLINs may be applicable at a task order level | |
| Final Solication | supporting pricing documentation—specifically, a pricing narrative or supplemental explanation—is clearly stated in the solicitation document: | May offerors include supplemental pricing sheets or attachments explaining their pricing methodology for CLINs 001 and 002? | Offerors may address it in the pricing narrative | |
| Final Solication | Section L.3.1 – Proposal Content | Is DHS open to regional or tiered pricing structures to reflect geographic or operational differences, or must offerors propose a uniform national rate? | Yes, regional or tiered pricing is acceptable. | |
| Final Solication | RFP Section/Page/Paragraph | Given the breadth of services required under the Statement of Objectives and the complexity of pricing across multiple CLINs, what is the process for requesting an extension to the proposal submission deadline if additional time is needed to finalize a complete and compliant response? | Amendment 0001 addressed this. An extension was granted to April 7, 2025 | |
| Final Solicitation (Sec B-M) | L.3.3 | Will the Government allow Offerors to submit any necessary Provisions, Clauses, and statements as part of the Factor 2 narrative? | Yes, provisions and clauses fill-ins are not considered part of the page limitation and are not part of Factor 2 pricing narrative. All provision and/or clause fill-ins should be separately attached to the proposal submission | |
| Final Solicitation (Sec B-M) | L.3.3 | Are offerors required to submit all pages of Section I and Section K or just the provisions/clauses that will be filled in? | See above - All provision and/or clause fill-ins should be separately attached to the proposal submission | |
| Final Solicitation (Sec B-M) | L.3.1 | The cover page is excluded from the 5 page limit, may the offerors include an acronym list that will also be excluded from the page limit? | Yes. | |
| Attachment 15 | CLIN 8 | The unit indicated is "Each." Would the Government please provide more details as to what that unit represents? We recommend changing this to price providing Contractor Detention Processing Officers (CDPO) and change it to Labor Hour (LH). | ERO | |
| Attachment 15 | CLIN 8 | Is there a prescribed ratio of CDPOs per number of detainees? | ERO | |
| Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B-M) | L.3.3 / 57 / 1) Provision and Clause Fill-In | Does the Government want the provision and clause fill-in submission in a standalone document? | Yes. This is addressed in Amendment 0001. It should be a separate attachment | |
| General | Are facilities requested under this IDIQ associated with a specific length of stay? | No, specificied LOS is required. Future orders may be for short-term staging locations (less than 2 weeks) and others may be for longer-detention stays (average of 45 days). | ||
| RFP | E.1/5/table | Will the government please remove clauses 52.246-4 and 52.246-6, which are identified as being incorporated by reference? This is a commercial services contract and inspection is covered under clause 52.212-4. | Yes | |
| RFP | F.1/8/table | Will the government please remove clause 52.242-15, which is identified as being incorporated by reference? This is a commercial services contract and this clause is not permitted to be used. | Yes | |
| RFP | I.1/16/table | Will the government please remove clauses 52.215-8 and 52.216-7? This is a commercial services contract and order of precedence and payment are covered under clause 52.212-4. Also, per FAR subsection 16.307(a), clause 52.216-7 is not permitted for labor hour contracts. | Yes | |
| RFP | I.1/16/table | Will the government please provide the fill-in information for clauses 52.216-18, 52.216-19, and 52.216-22? | These clause fill-ins will be finalized upon award; however the projected dates and values can be found in Sections B and F | |
| RFP | I.1/17/table | Will the government please remove clauses 52.232-1, 52.232-7, 52.232-8, 52.232-9, 52.232-11, 52.232-23, 52.232-25, 52.232-39, and 52.232-40? This is a commercial services contract and payment terms are covered under clause 52.212-4. | Yes | |
| RFP | I.1/17/table | Will the government please remove clauses 52.249-2 and 52.249-8? This is a commercial services contract and termination is covered under clause 52.212-4. | Yes | |
| RFP | I.1/I.2/16-18 | Will the government removed multiple clauses that are covered in 52.212-5. 204-23(IBR & FT), 204-25(IBR & FT), 209-10, 219-16, 233-3, 233-4. | Yes | |
| RFP | K.2/43/FAR 52.215-6 | Will the government please remove provision 52.215-6? Place of performance will be determined at the task order level. | Yes | |
| RFP | L.3.1/56/Factor 2: Price | Will the government please correct the sentence that reads: "One the offeror populates the cells in Column B based on the instructions provided above, Columns H through I will auto-populate with prices for the 12-month ordering increments."? According to "the instructions above" and the Attachment 15 Pricing Schedule, offerors shall not modify Column B but should instead insert their pricing in Columns H and I. | Yes, this is addressed in Amendment 0002. | |
| RFP/Attachment 15 | L.3.1/55/Factor 2: Price M.4/60/Factor 2: Price Attachment 15: Pricing Schedule | Will the government please remove the restriction against pricing higher than the government's provided amounts and instead evaluate prices for reasonableness by comparing offerors' pricing as contemplated by FAR 15.404-1(b)(2)(i)? We are concerned that maximum pricing as provided in the Pricing Schedule will result in many no-bids on task orders that cannot be performed at these rates. The RFP directs offerors to consider the highest cost locations, highest performance requirements, and greatest amount of risk, but the dictated maximum pricing provided in the Pricing Schedule does not account for that risk. The RFP also contemplates competition at the task order level, where the contractors will be provided detailed information about the specific requirements for that order and the ability to develop appropriate pricing in an apples-to-apples competition, so the government will have the opportunity to obtain the best prices at the task order level when the funds will actually by obligated. | The "maximum pricing" applies to the IDIQ competition. Price will be evaluated on the task order level as requirements become known. | |
| RFP/Attachment 15 | If the government will not remove the price ceilings, will the government please confirm that pricing at the task order level will be permitted to exceed the IDIQ pricing? | Price will be evaluated on the task order level as requirements become known. | ||
| RFP/Attachment 15 | L.3.1/55/Factor 2: Price | In the requirement, "Once the offeror populated the cells in Column B based on the instructions provided above..." Can the Goverment clarify what rates are to be inser in Column B as that does not appear to be a column the contractor should change. | Column B should not be changed | |
| RFP/Attachment 1 | L.3.1/54/Corporate Experience 7/5/Specific Objectives | In these two locations in the RFP package, it appears the government may have included a brand name ("sprung") rather than a generic descriptive ("tension-fabric"). Did the government intend for this aspect to be a brand name or equal, or will the government please replace the (lower-cased) word "sprung" with the generic description, "tension-fabric"? | Yes, the RFP will be updated accordingly. | |
| SF33 | N/A | There is not explicit instruction for completion or inclusion of the SF33 - will the USG please confirm this can be completed and provided either as a separate file, or included with completed Section I and K clauses? | All provision and/or clause fill-ins should be separately attached to the proposal submission. This can be included with the completed SF-33 | |
| SF33 - Section B | N/A | There is not explicit instruction for completion of Section B pricing in the SF33 - will the USG confirm if the Offeror is expected to provide completed pricing in Section B as well as the Attachment 15 pricing template? | See Pricing instructions in Section L and complete Attachment 15 and the Pricing narrative | |
| SF33 | Section A / Page 1 / Block 1 – Solicitation Number | The SF33 form lists the solicitation number as 70CDCR25R000005, while all other solicitation documents—including the Statement of Objectives and Sections B–M—refer to the solicitation as 70CDCR25R00000005 (with an extra zero). Can the Government please confirm the correct and official solicitation number for this procurement, and clarify whether the number listed in SF33 Block 1 (i.e., 70CDCR25R000005) should be corrected to match the rest of the solicitation documentation? | It will be corrected. The solicitation number is 70CDCR25R00000005 | |
| SF33 | SF33 – Section A / Page 1 / Blocks 26–28 – Government Execution Section | Block 27 of the SF33 includes an electronic signature for the Contracting Officer, and Block 28 includes a corresponding award date. These fields are traditionally completed only upon contract award. Since this document is part of the solicitation, it is unclear whether the inclusion of these completed fields represents an official contract execution or a pre-populated administrative placeholder. | The SF-33 was revised | |
| Solicitation | Cover page (page 1 of 61) | The Cover Page references that FAR 52.212-1 applies, which notes provision of "technical description of the items being offered in sufficient detail to evaluate compliance with the requirements of the solicitation". As there are no instructions, nor evaluation criteria for "technical descriptions" can the USG please confirm that no technical proposal or narrative is required with Offeror response? | No technical proposal or narrative is required. See Sections L and M for submission requirements and evaluation criteria | |
| SOO | Section 7.0 (page 5 of 15) | Statement of Objective (SOO), Section 7.0 provides details for presumed future work - can the USG please confirm that development of any PWS for work cited in Section 7.0 is to be provided at the task order level when the specific work has been identified? | Yes | |
| SOO | Section 8.0 Security Management (page 14 of 15) | Security Management Section notes appointment of Senior Official as Corporate Security Officer. Will the USG please confirm this name / appointment is due following SSV award? | Yes | |
| Solicitation | L.3 - Election of Applicable Objectives (page 54 of 61) | There is no proposal content requirement listed in Section L.3.1, nor evaluation criteria associated with any response to the SOO objectives. Will the USG please clarify if any technical response or identification of bid objectives is required in the SSV response? And/or confirm that this will be required with task order proposals? | This solicitation requires a Corporate Experience submission for IDIQ evaluation in consideration of SOO objectives and should be aligned as appropriate to the pricing documentation. Task order proposals may have different/unique evaluation criteria for submission | |
| Solicitation | L.3 - Election of Applicable Objectives (page 54 of 61) | If the USG is requesting technical content in response to the SOO objectives, will the USG please confirm any explicit instructions or evaluation associated with the SOO responses? | Offerors are expected to describe capabilities and proposed approach for achieving the objectives they choose to bid. Refer to Sections L and M for instructions and evaluation. | |
| Solicitation | L.3.1 (page 54 of 61) | RFP states in Section L.3.1, "Offerors shall provide sufficient information for the government to determine its level of confidence in the ability of the offeror to perform the (elected) requirements of the SOO based on an assessment | ||
| of their submitted responses." Will the USG please clarify if the Offeror is to provide details of their elected SOO objectives within the Corporate Experience Response? Or should this be provided somewhere separately? | Yes elected objectives should be covered in the Corporate Experience response | |||
| Solicitation | L.3.1 (page 56 of 61) | Section L.3.1 notes that, "Offerors shall also provide a pricing narrative as part of its pricing proposal that includes the basis of proposed pricing and other relevant information e.g., any proposed discounts." Will the USG provide any guidance on minimum or maximum page counts for pricing narrative? | Yes. Amendment 0001 addressed this. | |
| Solicitation | L.3.1 (page 56 of 61) | Section L.3.1 notes, "The offeror may elect the items to price based on SOO objective electives; therefore, not all | ||
| lines must be priced." Will the USG confirm if Offerors should include details of which items within the SOO they have elected to bid in their pricing response narrative for clarity? | Yes, this was updated in Amendment 0001. Refer to Sections B and L. | |||
| Solicitation | L.3.3 (page 57 of 61) | Section L.3.3 notes, "1) Provision and Clause Fill-in: Offerors must complete any provision and/or clause requiring fillin | ||
| included in Sections I and K. In addition, offerors must include one (1) of the following two (2) statements within this volume regarding the terms and conditions applicable to this solicitation". Will the USG please clarify which volume this is referring to? Shall Offerors provide a volume including contract clauses completed? | All provision and/or clause fill-ins should be separately attached to the proposal submission | |||
| Solicitation | M.4 (page 58 of 61) | M.4 states, "The government will assess each offeror’s demonstration of its prior experience for confidence and | ||
| its ability to meet the mission needs of providing comprehensive detention or detention-related services as elected by the vendor in accordance with the SOO." Will the USG please clarify where and how the Offeror is to provide these elections? | this is updated in Amendment 0001. Refer to Sections B and L. | |||
| Solicitation | I.1 (page 16 and 23 of 61) | FAR 52.219-16 regarding liquidated damages - subcontracting, notes a requirement for small business subcontracting plan, which is not noted in the solicitation instructions as a requirement. FAR 52.219-9 is cited as well. Will the USG confirm that should this plan be required, that it is to be provided following contract award? | OAQ: Yes, the clause has been included to allow for subcontracting possibilities at the order level but the plan will not be evaluated | |
| Final Solicitation | Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B–M).pdf / Page 3 / Section B.3 – Minimum and Maximum Quantities | Section B.3 of the solicitation establishes a shared ceiling of $45 billion for the Strategic Sourcing Vehicle (SSV). This amount appears significantly higher than historical spending levels for detention and related services contracts, and no supporting rationale or budgetary justification is provided in the solicitation. Can the Government please confirm the $45 billion ceiling stated in Section B.3 and provide the rationale, funding strategy, or supporting budgetary authority that justifies this ceiling amount? Additionally, will the Government clarify whether the ceiling includes potential task orders across all DHS components and eligible federal entities? | The maximum is a shared / combined ceiling across all task orders issued for all ordering activities / authorized federal entities | |
| Final Solicitation | Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B–M).pdf / Page 9 / Section F.3 – Task Order Period of Performance (POP) | Section F.3 of the solicitation states that task orders issued under this IDIQ may extend up to 12 months beyond the period of performance (POP) of the base contract. However, in accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(1)(ii)(D), task order durations may only extend beyond the contract’s expiration date if specifically authorized in the base contract and supported by appropriate justification. Can the Government confirm whether it intends to authorize task orders that extend beyond the expiration of the base IDIQ contract under the authority of FAR 16.505(b)(1)(ii)(D)? If so, can the Government provide confirmation of this authority and any applicable justification language that will be included in the base award? | In accordance with Section F.3 task orders may extend 12 months beyond the POP of the IDIQ. | |
| Final Solicitation | Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B–M).pdf / Page 10 / Section H.1 – Performance-Based Services Contracting (PBSC) | Section H.1 of the solicitation states that performance-based contracting will be used “to the maximum extent practicable” and that a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) will be developed at the task order level. However, the solicitation does not provide a sample QASP, performance metric framework, or evaluation criteria applicable to the base IDIQ. Can the Government please provide a sample QASP, performance requirements summary (PRS), or performance metric framework that will serve as a baseline for task orders issued under the base IDIQ? This will assist offerors in understanding the performance expectations and developing responsive technical approaches. | Sample to be provided. | |
| Final Solicitation | Final Solicitation 70CDCR25R00000005 (Sec B–M).pdf / Page 11 / Section H.3 – Contractor’s Insurance | Section H.3 of the solicitation specifies that contractors must maintain general liability insurance coverage of $500,000 per occurrence and automobile liability coverage of $200,000 per person, $500,000 per occurrence, and $20,000 for property damage. Given the potential national scale and risk exposure of detention operations under this contract, it is unclear whether these coverage thresholds are current, adequate, and compliant with DHS or ICE risk management policies. Can the Government please confirm whether the general liability and automobile insurance thresholds listed in Section H.3 are correct, and whether they meet current DHS and ICE risk policy requirements for a nationwide detention support contract? If not, will updated insurance requirements be issued? | These limits are likely adequate at the task order level | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 13 / Section: 1. Introduction, Paragraph referencing the Executive Order “Protecting the American People Against Invasion” issued on January 20, 2025 | The Statement of Objectives references Executive Order titled “Protecting the American People Against Invasion,” issued on January 20, 2025, as foundational authority for this procurement. While the Executive Order is included by title, the solicitation does not describe how its policies or directives are intended to inform or shape contractor operations, prioritization, or task order execution under the Strategic Sourcing Vehicle. Can the Government please clarify how Executive Order “Protecting the American People Against Invasion” (January 20, 2025) is intended to guide contractor responsibilities, operational priorities, or performance requirements under this IDIQ? Will task orders explicitly reference this Executive Order, and are there specific implementation directives contractors should be aware of in fulfilling their obligations? | References to the executive order provide context related to the emergent need for additional detention capacity and services. Individual task orders will reference specific national detention standards or equivalent which will guide the contractors performance. | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 13 / Section: 1. Introduction, Paragraph referencing CONUS and OCONUS service delivery | The Statement of Objectives notes that detention-related services may be required both within the contiguous United States (CONUS) and in areas outside the contiguous United States (OCONUS) “under U.S. jurisdiction.” However, the solicitation does not define the specific geographic limits, legal boundaries, or eligibility criteria for OCONUS operations under this vehicle. Can the Government please clarify the scope and limitations of potential OCONUS operations authorized under this contract? Specifically, are there predefined jurisdictions, restrictions, or preferred geographic areas outside the contiguous United States where services may be ordered, and what criteria determine eligibility for such deployments? | This information is not available at this time. OCONUS locations my include areas such as U.S. military installations such as Guantanamo Bay. Individual tasks order will be drafted for specific locations or regions. | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 14 / Section: 3. Scope of Work, Paragraph addressing contractor acceptance of referrals and exceptions | Section 3 of the Statement of Objectives states that the contractor “does not have a right of refusal” for referrals from ICE. However, it also notes that exceptions may be permitted at the discretion of the COR or ACOR, such as in cases involving medical conditions that exceed the contractor’s capabilities. The criteria and procedures for such exceptions are not further defined. Can the Government please clarify whether any exceptions to the mandatory acceptance of referrals—such as due to facility capacity, medical or mental health conditions, or security concerns—will be permitted, and what specific process or documentation is required for a contractor to request and obtain approval for such exceptions? | This process will be defined at the task order level and will be incorporated into the detainee intake and screening process. Local processes may vary based on resource availability within the region. | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 16 / Section: Facility (when applicable to the solicitation), Paragraph referencing NDS 2019, ICE Minimum Standards, and Army Regulation 190-4 | |||
| The Statement of Objectives references multiple applicable standards for detention services, including the ICE National Detention Standards (NDS 2019), ICE Minimum Standards, and the Department of Defense Army Regulation 190-4. However, the solicitation does not establish an order of precedence or a conflict resolution process in the event that these standards impose differing or inconsistent requirements. Can the Government please clarify the hierarchy or order of precedence among the referenced detention standards—specifically NDS 2019, ICE Minimum Standards, and Army Regulation 190-4—in the event of a conflict? Additionally, will the Government issue guidance or interpretation in cases where compliance with multiple standards creates ambiguity? | Individual task orders will reference specific detention standards. Any deconfliction or priortization will take place at that time. | |||
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 16 / Section: Facility (when applicable to the solicitation), Paragraphs discussing new construction and soft-sided structures | The Statement of Objectives permits the use of temporary, soft-sided, or semi-rigid structures to house detainees. However, the solicitation does not define minimum structural standards, environmental resilience requirements, or expected service lifespans for such facilities, including considerations for deployment in severe weather regions such as hurricane or high-wind zones. Can the Government please clarify the structural requirements, environmental durability standards, and expected operational lifespan for soft-sided and semi-rigid facilities? Specifically, are there minimum specifications for use in areas subject to extreme weather conditions (e.g., hurricanes, high winds, heavy snow)? | The period of performance for this effort has a two-year ordering period (with possibility for a third year at task order level). Structures are expected to provide structures capable of providing safe and secure housing for ICE detainees for the entire period of performance. The vendor will be required to maintain emergency plans including providing for alternative temporary housing should the provided structure face extreme weather events that place detainees and staff in potential harmsway. | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 17 / Section: Facility (when applicable to the solicitation), Paragraph discussing emergency response plans | The Statement of Objectives requires that contractors maintain an emergency response plan to ensure continued operations in the event of power outages and other unexpected events. However, the solicitation does not specify minimum requirements or performance thresholds for backup power systems, fuel storage capacity, or duration of autonomous operations. Can the Government please clarify the minimum requirements for emergency power systems, including specifications for backup generators, fuel storage capacity, and the minimum duration for which a facility must be capable of operating independently in the event of a power outage or service disruption? | These requirements will be defined at the task order level which will reference specific national detention standards or equivalent as well as design standards. | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Pages 18–22 / Section: 5. Statement of Objectives and Section 7. Specific Objectives (Objectives I–VIII) | The Statement of Objectives outlines eight high-level objectives (Objectives I–VIII) that may be fulfilled individually or collectively by the contractor. However, the solicitation does not provide information on how these objectives will be evaluated, prioritized, or scored during proposal evaluation. It is unclear whether offerors will be evaluated differently based on the number or combination of objectives they propose to support. Can the Government please clarify how the objectives listed in the Statement of Objectives (Objectives I–VIII) will be evaluated for award purposes? Specifically, will offerors be evaluated or scored differently based on whether they propose to fulfill all versus only some objectives, and is there any prioritization or weighting among the objectives that offerors should consider when structuring their proposals? | Offerors will be evaluated based on the merits of their proposal according to the objective(s) they proposed on. There is no prioritization or weighting among the objectives elected | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 19 / Section: Objective 4A – Provide adequate medical care to detained aliens | Objective 4A requires the contractor to ensure access to general acute hospital care, including emergency room, surgical, and mental health services. However, the solicitation does not specify whether the contractor is responsible for establishing these services through direct partnerships or subcontracts with local hospitals, or if ICE will coordinate and execute such transfers independently. Can the Government please clarify whether the contractor is required to subcontract or establish formal partnerships with local hospitals and healthcare providers to deliver all necessary advanced medical care, or whether ICE will be responsible for arranging and managing such transfers for detainees? | A contract medical provider will be expected to provide medical care. As such the contractors will need to establish local agreements with providers. | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 19 / Section: Objective 4A – Provide adequate medical care to detained aliens | Objective 4 of the Statement of Objectives requires contractors to use the ICE Medical and Public Health Information Sharing Environment (MPHISE) Electronic Medical Record (EMR) system to document all medical information and data, in accordance with applicable ICE Health Service Corps (IHSC) standards. However, the solicitation does not provide technical specifications, user access procedures, training requirements, or integration expectations for contractor-operated systems. Can the Government please clarify the procedures for contractor access to the ICE MPHISE EMR system, including any required system specifications, onboarding or training requirements, and whether contractors are expected to integrate their own medical systems with MPHISE? | Additional information will be provided at the task order level. | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 21 / Section: Objective 5G – Provide designated private consultation room(s) with video teleconferencing capabilities | Objective 5G requires that contractors provide designated private consultation rooms with video teleconferencing capabilities to support legal visitation for a minimum of eight hours per day on regular business days, and a minimum of four hours per day on weekends and holidays. However, the solicitation does not indicate whether these hours are mandatory for all facilities regardless of size or population, or whether they may be adjusted based on facility-specific needs or capacity constraints. Can the Government please clarify whether the legal visitation hours specified in Objective 5G are mandatory minimums for all facilities under this contract, or if they may be tailored based on actual facility population, legal visitation demand, or operational limitations? | Specific time requirements will be reflected at the task order level which will operate under a national set of detention standards or equivalent. | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 21 / Section: Objective 6A – Provide access to required legal resources | Objective 6 requires the contractor to provide a designated room or suitable area for a law library, including access to legal materials and equipment such as computers, printers, and writing supplies. However, the solicitation does not specify whether the Government will provide or fund subscriptions to legal research platforms (e.g., LexisNexis or Westlaw), nor does it clarify whether legal materials must be made available in multiple languages to support non-English-speaking detainees. Can the Government please clarify whether ICE will furnish or reimburse subscriptions to legal research databases (e.g., LexisNexis, Westlaw) for the required legal library, and whether the contractor is responsible for providing legal materials in multiple languages to accommodate the limited English proficiency of the detainee population? | ICE will provide access to law library materials (LexisNexis, etc.). External hard drives can be provided for the law library, which contain resources available in multiple languages. | |
| Attachment 1 | Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Pages 26–30 / Section: 8. Security Language, Subsections: Preliminary Fitness Determination and Background Investigations | The Security Requirements section outlines extensive vetting processes for contractor personnel, including background investigations in accordance with 5 CFR 731 and DHS Instruction 121-01-007, as well as PREA-related screening for positions involving direct detainee contact. These requirements, while appropriate for the sensitivity of the work, may significantly delay mobilization and the contractor’s ability to staff critical positions in a timely manner. Will the Government allow for conditional onboarding or phased access for contractor personnel—such as granting preliminary fitness determinations—while full background investigations and PREA screenings are pending, in order to expedite initial contract startup and ensure continuity of operations? | Answer forthcoming | |
| Attachment 02 | Attachment 02 – Contract Detention Facility Design Standards / Page ii / Dated Title Page and Table of Contents | The design standards document is dated May 14, 2007 and references infrastructure requirements, building codes, and institutional layouts that may have since been superseded or revised. Recent developments—including Executive Orders and the 2019 National Detention Standards (NDS)—may affect its applicability. Can the Government confirm whether the 2007 ICE Contract Detention Facility Design Standards remain fully applicable and authoritative for this procurement? If updates or addendums exist, will they be provided? | The design standards are provided as a reference. As these facilities are generally expected to be temporary in nature, ERO will provide waivers as appropriate at the task order level. | |
| Attachment 02 | Attachment 02 – Contract Detention Facility Design Standards / Page 1.1–1.6 / Sections: Introduction and Application of the Design Standards | The document uses a mix of mandatory language (e.g., "shall comply") and advisory language (e.g., "should consider"), and includes sections with “alternative acceptable solutions,” but does not provide a legend or matrix to differentiate between enforceable requirements and recommendations. Can the Government provide clarification on which design elements within Attachment 02 are considered mandatory and which are advisory? Will a compliance checklist or summary table of “must-comply” provisions be provided? | Referneces to "shall" or "will" are mandatory. References to "should" are not mandatory. | |
| Attachment 02 | Attachment 02 – Contract Detention Facility Design Standards / Entire Document – Focus on fixed construction with no reference to temporary structures |
| Cross-reference: Statement of Objectives / Page 10 / Section 7 – Objective 1B | The Design Standards focus almost exclusively on permanent, hardened facilities and do not reference modular, soft-sided, or semi-rigid structures, which are permitted under Objective 1 of the Statement of Objectives. Can the Government clarify whether the 2007 Design Standards apply in full to soft-sided or temporary structures? If not, will supplemental structural or environmental performance standards be issued (e.g., high-wind rating, insulation, fire safety)? | The design standards are provided as a reference. As these facilities are generally expected to be temporary in nature, ERO will provide waivers as appropriate at the task order level. |
| Attachment 02 | Attachment 02 – Contract Detention Facility Design Standards / Entire Document – No references to language access or LEP accommodations |
Cross-reference: Attachment 1 – Statement of Objectives / Page 21 / Objective 6A – Legal Resources
| Executive Reference: Executive Order 14224, “Designating English as the Official Language of the United States,” March 1, 2025, Section 3(b) – Revocation of Executive Order 13166. | Attachment 02 – Contract Detention Facility Design Standards does not address requirements for multilingual signage, written materials, or other accommodations for individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP). These considerations are especially relevant in areas such as intake processing, legal libraries, facility signage, and grievance procedures. While LEP accommodations were historically guided by Executive Order 13166, that order was revoked under Executive Order 14224, titled “Designating English as the Official Language of the United States,” issued on March 1, 2025. The absence of updated guidance in the design standards creates ambiguity regarding current language access expectations. Can the Government please clarify whether LEP accommodations—such as multilingual signage, translated written materials, and language interpretation access—are still required under this contract? If so, will ICE issue updated language access guidance or policy requirements consistent with the current Executive framework? | While Executive Order (EO) 14224, Designating English as the Official Language of The United States (March 1, 2025), revokes the prior language access-related EO 13166, Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency (August 11, 2000), nothing in EO 14224 requires or directs any change in the language services provided by an Agency, and ICE does not have to amend, remove, or otherwise stop production of documents, products, or other services prepared or offered in languages other than English. Per Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the government (and recipients of financial Federal assistance) cannot discriminate against others based on national origin, which includes language, and must make their programs, services, and activities accessible to eligible limited English proficient (LEP) individuals. Hence, ICE will continue to uphold existing Detention Standards and policies requiring facility vendors to provide information to LEP detainees in a language and manner they understand. The facilities’ obligation to provide access to these detainees, whether via translated written material or oral interpretation, extends to all aspects of detention, including but not limited to intake, disciplinary proceedings, placement in segregation, sexual abuse and assault prevention and intervention, staff-detainee communication, and mental health and medical care. Required access may be accomplished through professional in-person or telephonic interpretation and translation services or bilingual personnel, as appropriate. | ||
| Attachment 03 | Attachment 03 – EOIR Design Standards / Entire Document – No references to LEP or interpreter access | The EOIR Design Standards contain no mention of accommodations for limited English proficiency (LEP) individuals, including interpreter booths, multilingual signage, or simultaneous interpretation infrastructure. This omission may conflict with EOIR's mission and standard courtroom practice. Can the Government confirm whether LEP accommodations are required in EOIR courtroom and interview spaces—such as interpreter booths, multilingual signage, or real-time language support—and whether these must be incorporated into facility design? | ICE does not have the authority to manage language access obligations related to DOJ EOIR processes. Any questions or concerns facility vendors have with these requirements shsould be directed to DOJ. Otherwise, see response to previous question about language requirements for facility requirements. | |
| Attachment 03 | Attachment 03 – EOIR Design Standards / Sections 2.0 and 4.0 – Court Interface Zone; Technical Requirements |
| Cross-reference: Statement of Objectives, Objective 5G – Legal Teleconferencing Requirements | The EOIR Design Standards do not include requirements for remote or hybrid hearing capabilities such as video teleconferencing, digital evidence sharing, or interpreter access for remote participants. These are now common in EOIR proceedings and referenced elsewhere in the solicitation. Can the Government clarify whether EOIR-designated courtroom space must support virtual and hybrid hearing formats, and if so, what the minimum technical requirements are (e.g., video, audio, secure connections, interpreter access)? | Given the temporary nature of these facilities the contract should plan for remote capabilities. | ||
| Attachment 03 | Attachment 03 – EOIR Design Standards / Section 4.1 – Processing and Holding Areas; Critical Workflow Patterns | Although the document discusses general courtroom security, it does not address whether detainees awaiting hearings must be separated based on security classification (e.g., high-risk vs. low-risk), gender, or age. Can the Government clarify whether separation of detainees by classification, gender, or age is required in court holding areas and how this should be addressed in facility design? | This will be defined at the task order stage which will refernece a set of national standards or equivalent. | |
| Attachment 03 | Attachment 03 – EOIR Design Standards / Section 5.2 Reference Publications | The EOIR Design Standards are dated 2008 and reference legacy standards and building codes (e.g., UFAS, 2003 IBC, and early ASHRAE guidance). There is no reference to more current guidance, such as the 2010 ADA Standards, modern courthouse design best practices, or post-pandemic public health design requirements. Can the Government confirm whether the 2008 EOIR Design Standards remain fully authoritative for this procurement, or if an updated version (or supplemental guidance) is available that reflects current federal facility security, ADA compliance, and courtroom infrastructure expectations? | The design standards are provided as a reference. As these facilities are generally expected to be temporary in nature, ERO will provide waivers as appropriate at the task order level. | |
| Attachment 04 | Attachment 04 – Section 1.3 – Purpose / Page 5 | Section 1.3 of the document states that this cabling standard supplements the “latest edition of the ICE Facility Design Guide,” but does not specify which version that is. Without access to the referenced guide, it's difficult to ensure architectural alignment or determine which provisions take precedence in the event of conflicts. Can the Government confirm which version of the ICE Facility Design Guide is currently in effect for this solicitation and whether it will be made available to offerors to ensure design consistency with the structured cabling standards? | The design standards are provided as a reference. As these facilities are generally expected to be temporary in nature, ERO will provide waivers as appropriate at the task order level. | |
| Attachment 04 | Attachment 04 – Sections 1.3 and throughout Sections 5–7 – Referencing OCIO Cabling Package | The document repeatedly refers to a site-specific “OCIO Cabling Package” as an integral companion to this standard, including drawings, WAO configurations, and closet layouts. However, the solicitation does not appear to include these packages or specify when or how they will be provided. Can the Government clarify when the OCIO Cabling Package will be made available to offerors (e.g., at task order issuance, post-award, or during proposal development)? Will a sample package be provided with the base solicitation for planning purposes? | This information will be provided at the task order level. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .