A0001_Question Responses.pdf

Question No.

Reference (RFQ Section and Page #)

Question Category

(Contract or Technical)

Question / Comments Response

PWS Section 1 (page 1); RFQ

Section G (page 6) Contract

RFQ Language: Section 1 of the PWS states that ERO has a requirement to conduct an estimated 100,000 safety and wellness checks of UAC across the U.S.

Section B of the RFQ reflects multiple IDIQ awards, each with the maximum of 100,000 cases per IDIQ.

Question: For planning purposes, please clarify if ICE's goal is to process 100,000 total cases under all IDIQ awards, or 100,000 cases under each IDIQ award.

There is a total estimate of 100,000 total cases for the entire requirement.

2 RFQ Section F (page 5) Contract

Question: Does the Government intend to issue additional batches of case files to an IDIQ holder upon successful completion of their previous batch, or does the Government plan to compete each batch of task orders among the IDIQ holders?

All IDIQ awardees will receive an initial task order for at least the guaranteed minimum of 1,000 cases. After award of the initial task orders, the government intends to track the progress of each task order and release an additional batch of cases when the awardee has closed out 90 percent of the cases.

Section B (page 1); Section F

(page 5) Contract

RFQ Language: "The two-year base will be split up as two one-year ordering periods" and "The existence of an ordering period does not obligate the Government to place any orders in that period"

Question: Beyond the 100-case minimum guarantee, what is the Government's anticipated ordering pattern and volume distribution across the two ordering periods?

See response to question #2.

4 Section H (pages 7-50) Contract

RFQ Language: "Extensive IT security, CUI handling, and FASCSA requirements"

Question: For field staff using mobile devices to document wellness checks and collect data, what are the specific IT security requirements?

See FAR 52.249-93 Basic Safeguarding of Covered Contractor Information Systems (Deviation 25/23), 52.240-91 Security Prohibitions and Exclusions (Deviation 25-23) on page 8 and 30, respectively, of the solicitation and resulting contract.

5 PWS Section 11 (page 8) Technical

RFQ Language: "PWS 11 describes the requirements during the Transition-In and refers to incumbent employees."

Question: This implies UAC SVI is a follow-on to an existing contract. Would the Government provide the name of the incumbent contractor(s) and the contract number(s)?

This is a new requirement.

The PWS has been updated

RFQ Section B (page 1);

Pricing Worksheet Technical

RFQ Language: Offerors are to price Site Visits under CLIN 002 and Wellness Checks under CLIN 003.

Question: How does the Government define the difference between a Site Visit and a Wellness Check? We noted this distinction is not clear in the PWS.

A site visit is the physical act of visiting the site. A wellness check is an assessment of the overall "wellness" that is completed as part of the site visit.

There may be times where the vendor visits the site but the child is not there, therefore a wellness check is not possible at the time of the site visit and the wellness check must be completed at another time.

There also may be times where a site visit confirms the child is not there but then a new location arises, then the vendor would do another site visit at a new location.

7 PWS Section 3.2 (page 2) Technical

RFQ Language: "Note there could be occasions where more than one visit is required for final confirmation of wellness"

Question: Would the Government confirm that the contractor shall invoice for each visit per their proposed FFUP?

The vendor should make every effort to complete a wellness check at the time of the site visit. Multiple site visits may be conducted at the same address if necessary to achieve confirmation, or site visits may be conducted at multiple different addresses for the same child. Cases can have multiple steps or events. For example, staff may conduct an initial site visit at the address identified and discover that the UAC no longer resides there. In such instances, the vendor is responsible for identifying and confirming the child’s new address using available databases and records. Once the new address is confirmed, staff must conduct a site visit at the updated location to verify the child’s presence. Following the site visit, staff should proceed to observe and document the child’s overall wellness, including assessing living arrangements, school enrollment, and any potential indicators of abuse, neglect, abandonment, or trafficking. This process may be repeated as necessary until the child’s location and wellness are fully confirmed and documented. Throughout the process, the vendor should contact the government to confirm whether a separate site visit is required. If so then the Government will determine if invoicing for a separate visit is appropriate. The PWS has been updated to provide more clarity.

PWS Section 6.4 (page 3);

RFQ Section F (page 5) Technical

RFQ Language: PWS 6.4 states that the contractor will maintain adequate staffing at each location to support the requirement. Section F of the RFQ describes the place of performance "any location directed by the Government within the United States (50 states and District of Columbia)."

Question: Will the Government please clarify what is meant by "each location" in

PWS 6.4?

The locations addressed in PWS Section 6.4 are the vendor's own corporate/management facilities.

PWS 7.1 (page 3); PWS 10.1

(page 7) Technical

RFQ Language: PWS 7.1 lists the Program Director as the one Key Person on this contract. PWS 10.1 refers to the Project Manager.

Question: Please clarify, do these two titles refer to the same position, or are these two separate positions?

Program Director.

The PWS has been updated

PWS 13 (page 8); PWS 17 #2

(page 14) Technical

RFQ Language: PWS 13 requires implementation of a Quality Control Plan (QCP).

PWS 17 #2 (Deliverables) requires delivery of a Quality Assurance Plan (QAP).

Question: Will the Government please clarify which type of plan (QCP or QAP) is required?

The purpose of a quality control plan is to demonstrate how the vendor will ensure the quality of the services will meet the requirements of the contract as well as the levels established in Attachment 2 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).

The PWS has been updated for clarity.

11 RFQ Section L.5.3 (page 59) Contract

RFQ Language: Offerors shall describe one project of similar size (such as staffing requirements and volume) and scope that demonstrates their relevant prior experience locating and conducting wellness/safety checks on missing or at-risk children and working with unaccompanied alien children or similar foreign-national child populations, on a large geographic or national scale.

Question: Would the Government allow an offeror to submit two or three experience references that when combined demonstrate the full scope of work of this contract (e.g. locating UACs and performing wellness checks)?

No.

12 RFQ Section L.5.3 (page 59) Contract

RFQ Language: Offerors shall describe one project of similar size (such as staffing requirements and volume) and scope that demonstrates their relevant prior experience locating and conducting wellness/safety checks on missing or at-risk children and working with unaccompanied alien children or similar foreign-national child populations, on a large geographic or national scale.

Question: Would the Government reduce the minimum number of months from 6 to 3 to determine if a contract's performance is relevant? Such an approach would enable an offeror to submit ICE skip tracing contracts as relevant experience.

No.

PWS 7.3 (page 3) PWS 11 (page 8)

Technical

RFQ Language: 7.3. All staff will be required to complete a DHS background investigation, and other checks as required by state law. 11.2. Ensure they have all required staffing to begin performance under the contract.

Question: Please confirm the expectation is for the awardee to be fully staffed with cleared personnel by the end of the 60-day Transition-In.

The government's intention is for the vendor to be able to start processing cases at the end of 60 days in accordance with requirements within the PWS.

PWS 7.1 (page 3) PWS 17 (page 14)

Technical

RFQ Language: PWS 7.1 requires that resumes of key personnel be provided within five calendar days of contract award. PWS 17 Deliverable number 10 requires that key personnel resumes be provided with the proposal.

Question: Since no pages have been allocated for key personnel resumes, please confirm that the requirement at PWS 7.1 is correct.

Resumes are not part of the initial evaluation of proposals.

However, key personnel resumes will be required to be submitted for approval within five days after the award (PWS 7.1)

The PWS has been updated

Att 2 QASP; RFQ Section 6

(page 61); Att 3 Pricing Worksheet

Contract

RFQ Language: The metric for case timeliness in the QASP is listed as 100% of cases have initiation contact completed within 7 calendar days of assignment.

However, the Incentives listed in Section 6 of the RFQ and in the Pricing Worksheet provide incentives for completion in 7 calendar days, 14 calendar days, and 28 calendar days.

Question: Should the QASP be updated to align with the incentive structure?

Please see the updated QASP for changes. The QASP establishes the requirement to be 100% completed within 10 days. The acceptable quality level (AQL) is 90%. So the vendor would have to achieve 90% or better on timeliness, to be providing satisfactory level of performance.

16 PWS 5 (page 2) Contract

RFQ Language: Section 5 of the PWS states that all communications are to be provided in a language that the participant understands via bilingual staff and/or through professional interpretation services.

Question: Please clarify, does the Government provide the IDIQ holders with free access to an established platform or interpretation service, or are the IDIQ holders responsible for this and shall include interpretation in their pricing?

The offerors are responsible for providing their own language translation services

PWS 2 – Background and

Scope - Page 1 Contract

Will the Government provide estimated case distribution by region, state, or ICE Field Office to support contractor staffing and travel planning for the anticipated caseload of approximately 100,000 UAC?

No, the government does not intend to provide an estimated case distribution by region, state, or ICE field office. All IDIQ awardees will receive an initial task order for at least the guaranteed minimum of 1,000 cases.

PWS 3.1 – Confirm Location -

Technical

What documentation or verification standards must be met for a case to be considered successfully 'located' for reporting purposes?

A case is considered “located” when the contractor has physically confirmed the child's presence at the address through a site visit and updated ICE systems with complete and accurate data.

PWS is updated to provide clarity.

19 General Technical Will contractors be granted access to ORR systems (e.g., the ORR Portal) or other federal systems of record to obtain case information related to UAC, or will ICE provide all necessary case data?

No, contractors will not be granted access to ORR systems (e.g., the ORR Portal) or other federal systems of record to obtain case information related to UAC. ICE will provide all necessary case data for the program. Contractors are expected to perform their duties without access to ORR’s systems and should utilize all available databases, including open source and commercially available resources, to locate UACs. Government databases are not expected to add value or yield beneficial information for this purpose.

PWS 3.2 – Conduct Site Visit and Observe Overall Wellness - Page 1-2

Contract Is it the Government’s intent that all cases require an in-person site visit, or may alternative verification methods (e.g., telephone, video engagement, or third-party confirmation) be used when appropriate?

The Government’s intent is that cases require an in-person site visit to confirm the child’s location and observe overall wellness. The PWS specifies that contractors must conduct site visits, identify who lives with the minor, and directly observe for signs of abuse, abandonment, neglect, or trafficking. While alternative verification methods such as telephone, video engagement, or third-party confirmation may be used as supplemental tools, they do not replace the requirement for an in-person site visit when confirming location and wellness. If an in-person visit cannot be completed, the contractor can document the attempts and escalate the case as appropriate, but the standard for a successfully “located” case is a physical site visit and direct observation.

PWS 3.6 – Update ICE

Systems of Record - Page 2 Technical

Which ICE systems will contractors be required to use for case reporting, and will system access and training be provided during transition?

Contractors will likely be required to use an external portal currently in use by ICE for case reporting and data exchange. This portal is designed to securely share data between ICE and contracted vendors, enabling vendors to access necessary case information and provide timely updates. Data can be submitted either individually (row by row) or via batch upload, supporting operational efficiency and compliance. System access and training will be provided during the transition phase to ensure contractors are able to use the portal effectively. The portal offers a streamlined, secure, and auditable workflow for data exchange and is intended to improve data integrity and operational efficiency. Discussions are ongoing, but this approach is expected to lay the groundwork for future expansion to additional partners and use cases.

22 PWS 6.4 – Staffing - Page 4 Contract What is the estimated timeline for ICE preliminary fitness determinations and full background investigations for contractor personnel?

This information is highly dependent on many factors and providing an estimate would not due the offeror any service. Ultimately, the clearance time varies based on how well the vendor manages their own clearance submission process with their candidates, the vendor's pre-clearance/review process, the candidate's actual background (how much they moved, how much they travel, etc.), how responsive candidates are for follow-ups, and the quality/accuracy of the responses. If incomplete packages are submitted then it forces the investigators to request the missing information which then pushes the timeline. If candidates then do not respond to those requests, then the investigators will turn to responsive candidates and investigations that can be completed. It is not the government's responsibility to continue to follow up with candidates. It falls on the candidate to ensure that all required information is provided to the investigation can be completed.

PWS 6.5 - Program

Management - Page 4 Contract

Will ICE accept staff clearance/background results from other federal agencies for contractor personnel?

Reciprocity will be granted as appropriate in accordance with the ICE Office of Personal Security Division's policies and procedures.

QASP – Case Timeliness

Metric - Attachment 2 QASP -

Contract Does the seven-calendar-day requirement for initial contact apply to attempted contact or confirmed contact with the UAC or Sponsor?

Confirmed contact with the UAC or Sponsor

25 Section L Contract

Font Size Requirements. Will the Government exempt charts and graphs from the standard font size requirements, provided the text remains legible? This flexibility would allow for more comprehensive data visualization and workflows within the page constraints.

This is acceptable, however they will still count against the page count.

26 PWS Section 7.1 Contract

Resume Requirement. Section 7.1 of the PWS states that key personnel resumes are due "within five calendar days of contract award"; however, the Deliverables Table suggests they should be submitted with the proposal. Can you please confirm that the Program Director resume should be submitted with the proposal.

Resumes are due five days after award

The PWS has been updated.

QASP and Pricing

Spreadsheet Technical and

Contract

QASP vs. Pricing Tiered Incentives. The QASP establishes a 100% compliance threshold for initial contact within 7 calendar days. However, the Pricing Sheet provides tiered incentives for address verification completed within 7, 14, and 28 days. Will the Government please clarify if the 7-day requirement in the QASP is the mandatory minimum (SLA), or if the QASP will be revised to align with the 28-day tiered incentive structure found in the Pricing Instructions?

see response to question #15

Section B, page 1 - Task

Orders Technical

Case Assignment Timing. Can the Government provide guidance on the anticipated cadence of case assignments? Fluctuations in assignment volume significantly impact staffing levels and the ability to meet 100% compliance within 7 days. Does the Government intend to implement a 'cap' on the number of cases assigned per week, or will the contractor be expected to maintain a 'surge' capacity for large, non-incremental assignments?

The government intends to track the progress associated with each task order and will release an additional batch of cases when the awardee has closed out 90 percent of the cases from the current batch. It is anticipated that follow on batches will be for 1,000 additional cases. The government does not intend to establish a hard cap on the number of cases assigned.

29 Pricing Spreadsheet Contract

Pricing Spreadsheet - Timeliness Incentive. CLIN x001 requires the contractor to “Confirm Address” and provides a tier of incentives based on how long it takes to complete this action. However, the PWS does not define what steps will be considered as meeting this requirement. Can you please clarify the following: 1) what constitures verification that a UAC’s address has been confirmed and 2) at what point does the clock start on the incentive timeline?

To verify that a UAC’s address has been confirmed, the contractor must first confirm the accuracy of the address provided by ICE using available databases and records. The contractor is then required to conduct an in-person site visit to the address to verify that the child is physically residing there. Findings from the site visit, including whether the child was located at the address and any relevant observations, must be documented and submitted to ICE for review and recordkeeping.

The incentive timeline begins when the contractor receives the list of cases from ICE, and the time to complete address confirmation is measured from the date the case list is provided.

30 Pricing Spreadsheet Contract

Pricing Spreadsheet – Inaccurate Address. The PWS states that the address should be confirmed using “available databases and other records”. It’s possible that a contractor might use the best available sources to identify an apparent address, but that the gathered information proves to be inaccurate once the site visit is conducted. If the information in the available databases turns out to be incorrect, how should this be treated from a billing perspective?

If the contractor finds that the provided address is inaccurate or a "bad address," this still constitutes valid address confirmation and can be billed accordingly. However, if the contractor is able to identify a new address and successfully locate the child outside of the originally provided address, that outcome is strongly preferred and represents the desired result for the program. The Government encourages contractors to use all available resources to locate children at their actual residence, as this demonstrates both thoroughness and effectiveness in fulfilling the program’s objectives.

31 Pricing Spreadsheet Contract

Pricing Spreadsheet – Confirm Address. It is likely that many UACs and Sponsors may try to avoid having their current address disclosed to ICE or an ICE contractor. A contractor may spend significant time attempting to confirm a UAC’s location but ultimately be unable to do so for a variety of valid reasons.

Can you please clarify how billing for this situation will be handled? If the contractor is unable to confirm the UAC’s address, are all of its efforts to do so considered unbillable?

If a contractor is unable to confirm a UAC’s address because the individual or sponsor refuses to disclose information, all reasonable efforts made to locate and verify the address are still considered billable. The service provider will have the opportunity to annotate cases where individuals failed to disclose information, and should document all attempts made to confirm the address. Additionally, the contractor may direct individuals to appropriate systems, such as EOIR and ORR, to update their address information. The goal of this effort is to check on the child’s safety and ensure they are aware of their immigration obligations, so thorough documentation of all actions taken, even when address confirmation is not possible, is expected and billable.

32 Pricing Spreadsheet Contract

Pricing Spreadsheet - CLIN definition. The Pricing Spreadsheet has separate CLINs (x002 and x003) for "conduct site visit" and "observe overall wellness". The two activities seem closely related. Question: Can you clarify that "conduct site visit" is accomplished by sending a team to the confirmed address, but that it may or may not be possible for the team to "observe overall wellness"? Can you also provide specific criteria for accomplishing "observing overall wellness"?

Yes, "conduct site visit" and "observe overall wellness" are distinct activities within the PWS, although they are often performed together. Conducting a site visit is accomplished by sending a team to the address provided to physically verify whether the child resides there, which fulfills the address confirmation requirement.

However, it may not always be possible for the team to observe overall wellness during the site visit, for example, if the child or sponsor refuses entry or interaction. Observing overall wellness involves assessing the child’s safety and welfare, which includes directly interacting with the child and household members to evaluate their physical and emotional well-being, identifying and documenting any signs of abuse, abandonment, neglect, or trafficking. If the team is unable to observe overall wellness due to lack of access or cooperation, this should be documented and the contractor should annotate the case accordingly. In summary, the site visit fulfills the address verification requirement, while observation of overall wellness is dependent on access and cooperation during the visit.

PWS 3.2 and Pricing

Spreadsheet Contract

Possibility of Multiple Site Visits on One Case. PWS Section 3.2 states that “there could be occasions where more than one visit is required for final confirmation of wellness”. If multiple home visits are required, can you confirm that each site visit is billable? How should the contractor document and explain that multiple home visits were necessary?

See response to Question #7.

34 L.4 Multiple Awards Contract

Expected Number of IDIQ Awards. PWS section 6.2 states that the contractor “shall provide all necessary personnel, facilities, equipment, and services to meet the requirements.” PWS section 7.2 states that “Contractor must have the infrastructure to recruit, onboard, train, and retain an adequate workforce to meet the requirements of this contract.” Any contractor that is awarded an IDIQ contract will need to make a significant investment to build the needed infrastructure and be ready to start large-scale service very quickly. However, an awardee’s only assurance of revenue is the small minimum guarantee of 100 cases over the life of the contract. Question: To help contractors assess the likelihood of receiving sufficient work to justify the necessary investment, can you clarify how many IDIQ awards are anticipated?

At this time the government cannot provide an estimate of how many IDIQs will be awarded as it is dependent on the number and quality of the proposals received.

Section B, page 1 - Task

Orders Contract

Anticipated Case Content of Task Orders. The RFP states that approximately 100,000 cases are expected to be awarded over the two-year contract period.

Can you please clarify how the government intends to “package” the estimated 100,000 cases by Task Order. Question: 1) Will a Task Order consist of a random set of cases, or 2) will the Task Orders be grouped by some common feature (such as geography, risk profile, length of time since last contact, etc.)

All IDIQ awardees will receive an initial task order for at least the guaranteed minimum of 1000 cases. After award of the initial task orders, the government intends to track the progress of each task order and release an additional batch of cases when the awardee has closed out 90 percent of the cases. It is anticipated that batches will be composed of 1,000 random cases.

Section B, page 1 - Task

Orders Contract

Anticipated Size of Task Orders. Can you provide an estimate of the approximate number of cases expected per Task Order? For example, do you expect to issue two TOs of 50,000 cases each, or ten TOs of 10,000 cases each?

At this time the government cannot provide an estimate of the number of cases provided to each contractor. This is dependent on many factors including the speed and quality of the cases the vendor is able to complete.

Vendors who are more successful at closing cases successfully and with high quality will receive more cases than vendors who are unsuccessful or provide a lower level of performance.

Section B, page 1 - Task

Orders Contract

Anticipated Timing of Cases Provided to Contractor on a Task Order. Can you please clarify if all of the cases on a Task Order will be provided to the contractor at the time of the TO award? Or will the cases be provided in batches over the length of the Task Order?

Cases will be in batches over the length of the Task Order.

Section B, page 1 - Task

Orders Contract

Fair Opportunity Procedures for Task Orders. RFP Section B states that “fair opportunity procedures” per FAR 16.507-2(c) will be followed for all Task Orders.

Can you please provide additional description of the planned process including 1) the expected content of a Task Order proposal and 2) the planned evaluation criteria for Task Order awards.

The expected content of a task order proposal and the planned evaluation criteria are still under consideration.

Section B, page 1 - Task

Orders Contract

Timing of Task Order Solicitations. The RFP estimates that approximately 100,000 cases are expected to be assigned to contractors through the Task Order bidding process. Can you provide further details on the planned timing of the TO solicitations? For example, does the government plan to compete Task Orders for all 100,000 cases shortly after the IDIQ awards are made? Or will the TOs be issued using some sort of rolling process over the length of the contract?

This is dependent on many variables, including the number of awarded IDIQs, quality of performance during the initial period, timeline to complete the initial cases, etc.

See response to Question #2 for additional details on the anticipated batch process.

Section B, page 1 - Task

Orders Contract

Period of Performance per Task Order. Can you clarify whether the period of performance for each Task Orders will be for the full duration of the IDIQ? Or will the period of performance be for a shorter period?

It is anticipated that the task orders will be for a two year period of performance.

41 PWS 3.1, page 1 Techical and

Contract

Expected Difficulty of Identifying Current Location of UACs. Based on its experience to date, does ICE have any guidance on the expected difficulty of identifying a child’s location? Proposed pricing will be heavily dependent on an accurate estimate of the effort involved to identify a UAC's current location.

At this time the government does not have an expected difficulty.

42 PWS Section 3.1 - page 1 Technical

UAC Information Provided to Contractor. PWS Section 3.1 states that the contractor should “identify and review the child’s location using available databases and other records.” Can you provide further guidance on what records or system access will be provided to the contractor to assist in the location identification process?

ICE does not have definitive guidance on the expected difficulty of identifying a child’s location, as this is the first time such an effort is being conducted through industry partners. Based on experience, ICE anticipates that vendors with dedicated resources and strong community ties should be able to locate these children. While children typically do not have the same digital footprint as adults, industry partners may find it easier to locate children by leveraging tools and resources commonly associated with minors, such as community organizations, and youth-focused databases. However, the overall level of difficulty remains uncertain and may vary case by case. Vendors should factor this uncertainty into their proposed pricing and operational planning.

43 PWS Section 2 - page 1 Technical

Age of UACs Receiving SVI Safety Checks. The RFP states that the UACs targeted for safety verification checks were released to Sponsors between 2021to 2024.

We assume many UACs who were matched with Sponsors during this period are now over the age of 18 and have “aged out” of UAC status. Can you confirm that the planned 100,000 UAC cases that will be provided to contractors are all still under the age of 18 and still classified as UACs?

Yes, the planned 100,000 UAC cases that will be provided to contractors for SVI safety checks will only include individuals who are still under the age of 18. Cases involving individuals who have “aged out” and are now over 18 will not be included in this effort.

The focus is exclusively on children under 18 at the time of assignment.

44 PWS Section 2 - page 1 Technical

Profile of 100,000 Planned Cases. The PWS states that 479,000 UACs were released from federal custody nationwide between 2021 and 2024. This solicitation is seeking safety and wellness checks for 100,000 cases. Can you provide any background on the subset of 100,000 cases that have been identified for this contract? Are there particular issues or characteristics that have caused ICE to identify this particular set of cases for safety checks?

The 100,000 cases selected for safety and wellness checks under this contract represent a targeted subset of UACs who may present specific challenges, such as difficulty in contacting, lack of recent welfare verification, or increased vulnerability. By locating these children, confirming their well-being, and identifying potential signs of abuse, neglect, abandonment, or trafficking, this initiative seeks to protect vulnerable minors from exploitation and trafficking. This effort is one of several initiatives designed to supplement ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations’ ongoing activities and focuses on safeguarding UACs.

Section B (Quantities), Page

Contract Is there an anticipated surge profile or seasonal fluctuation in case volume?

Not at this time.

PWS Section 8 (Media & Organizational Inquiries), Page 6-7 Contract

In the event of external inquiries or public attention related to site visits, what is the expected role of the contractor versus ICE Public Affairs?

All external inquiries are to be directed to ICE Public Affairs. The contractor has no role.

Section F (Period of

Performance), Page 5 Contract When is the anticipated start date?

Two months after award

PWS Section 7.3–7.4 /

Section 15, Page 3-4, 9-11 Technical

Given DHS background investigation requirements, what is the expected timeline for staff clearance?

See response to Question #22

Section I (FAR 52.216-27

Single or Multiple Awards), Contract How many awards is ICE anticipating?

See response to Question #34

PWS Section 1 & 2 (Purpose

/ Scope), Page 1 Contract

Can the Government clarify whether the primary objective of this effort is limited to safety and wellness verification, or if it includes support to broader enforcement or compliance activities?

The primary objective of this effort is to conduct safety and wellness verification checks for UAC. The focus is on locating these children, confirming their well-being, and identifying any potential indicators of abuse, neglect, abandonment, or trafficking. While the effort also includes informing UACs and their sponsors of their legal responsibilities and immigration obligations, the main goal is to protect vulnerable minors and ensure their safety.

PWS Section 3 (Tasks) /

Section 5 (Communications), Contract What activities are explicitly reserved for ICE personnel versus those expected of contractor staff during and after site visits?

The contractor shall be required to perform the services established in Attachment 01 - PWS

PWS Section 3.2–3.4 (Tasks), Page 1-2 Contract

Can the Government clarify the downstream actions associated with negative site visit findings, particularly in cases where discrepancies are identified related to sponsor arrangements, school enrollment, or other compliance-related observations?

When negative site visit findings are identified, such as discrepancies related to sponsor arrangements, the contractor is required to document these findings and report them to ICE within the specified timeframes outlined in the PWS. The primary objective is to ensure the safety and well-being of the child, so any indicators of abuse, neglect, abandonment, or trafficking must be reported immediately to the designated ERO point of contact and Contracting Officer’s Representative after discovery. For other compliance-related issues, such as unverified school enrollment or irregular sponsor arrangements, the contractor should annotate the case and provide detailed information to ICE. ICE will review these findings and determine any appropriate downstream actions, which may include additional follow-up, coordination with relevant authorities, or further investigation. The contractor’s role is to accurately identify, document, and report these issues; ICE retains responsibility for any subsequent enforcement, compliance, or protective actions based on the information provided.

53 PWS 3.1-3.2, Section M.8 Technical

PWS Sections 3.1-3.2 require field staff to navigate potentially dangerous environments and professionally assess child wellness, including trafficking indicators. These are two distinct skill sets requiring formal training, yet the PWS prescribes no minimum qualifications for field personnel. Without a common staffing baseline, pricing will vary widely across offerors, undermining the Government's reasonableness comparison. Would the Government specify minimum qualifications for both field safety and child welfare assessment personnel to ensure mission effectiveness and equitable pricing?

The contractor is expected to use their professional and business expertise to propose an approach and provide staff that are qualified to meet the requirements of this PWS. It would be very apparent if a contractor fails to do so.

54 Section L.5, Factor 1 (p. 59) Contract

Factor 1 limits offerors to a single project example, yet it is the highest-weighted non-price factor and the PWS requires capabilities spanning child location, wellness checks, UAC populations, multi-state operations, and federal coordination. Would the Government allow up to three references to reduce the risk of an incomplete capability assessment and provide a more robust basis for confidence ratings?

No.

55 Section M.8 (p. 66) Contract

Section M.8 reserves the right to conduct price realism, yet the solicitation does not require disclosure of staffing assumptions. Offerors could submit identical unit prices while proposing fundamentally different models, from trained two-person teams to solo untrained individuals. Would the Government add a mandatory staffing approach narrative to Section L.5 requiring visit team composition, safety measures, and supervision ratios to provide a substantive basis for any realism analysis?

At this time, the Government does not intend to prescribe a mandatory staffing approach or team composition in Section L.5.

The Government recognizes that it may not know which staffing model will work best for this effort and therefore seeks to review all proposals and the rationale supporting each approach. Offerors are encouraged to provide a detailed staffing approach narrative, including visit team composition, safety measures, and supervision ratios, along with fact-based justification demonstrating the effectiveness of their proposed model in similar programs. This information will allow the Government to conduct a meaningful price realism analysis and evaluate the feasibility, safety, and quality of each proposal, if it is determined to be necessary.

Section L.5, Factors 2 & 3

(pp. 60-61) Contract

Factors 2 and 3 require a technical approach and scenario responses but not the proposed staffing model, which is the most significant cost driver in this contract.

An offeror could describe an excellent approach while planning to deploy untrained solo individuals. Would the Government require a staffing approach submission detailing team composition, qualifications, safety protocols, and supervision ratios, and weight it in the technical evaluation?

The Government will not require a staffing approach that details team composition, qualifications, safety protocols, and supervision ratios. Vendor's are responsible for ensuring the requirements outlined in the PWS and applicable laws, such as the TVPRA, VAWA, and the Flores Settlement Agreement are met. These statutes and agreements establish expectations for the treatment and processing of unaccompanied alien children, including ensuring their safety, dignity, and appropriate handling during interactions.

57 PWS Section 3.2 (p. 1-2) Technical

PWS Section 3.2 requires staff to identify trafficking, abuse, or neglect during site visits. For cases where ICE records suggest heightened risk, will ERO provide advance notification so contractors can implement safety measures? Will field staff have access to a law enforcement contact or ability to request accompaniment for high-risk visits?

Currently, the information provided typically includes the name, date of birth, and last known location of the UAC. If ICE records indicate heightened risk for a particular case, ERO will share any relevant details with the contractor to support appropriate safety measures.

58 Section 4 (p. 2) Technical

Section 4 requires compliance with the TVPRA, VAWA, and the Flores Settlement Agreement, all carrying specific expectations for interactions with vulnerable minors. Would the Government establish minimum qualification standards for field personnel and provide these prior to proposal submission so offerors can accurately reflect staffing costs in their pricing?

The Government will not prescribe minimum staffing levels or specific qualification standards for field personnel beyond the requirements outlined in the PWS and applicable laws, such as the TVPRA, VAWA, and the Flores Settlement Agreement. These statutes and agreements establish expectations for the treatment and processing of unaccompanied alien children, including ensuring their safety, dignity, and appropriate handling during interactions.

Offerors are expected to develop and propose staffing models and qualification standards that fully comply with these requirements and demonstrate their ability to appropriately interact with vulnerable minors. The Government will provide all relevant information and expectations in the solicitation, but will not dictate minimum qualifications or staffing levels. Offerors should rely on their own expertise and prior experience to determine the necessary qualifications and staffing costs, and must provide fact-based justification for their proposed approach in their submission.

59 PWS Section 3.1 (p. 1), Technical

PWS requires contractors to locate children using available databases and records, yet the solicitation does not identify which Government systems will be accessible, the level of access, or restrictions on third-party sources. Data availability directly drives per-case level of effort and pricing. Would the Government clarify: (1) which databases will be accessible, (2) whether all awardees receive equal data access, and (3) whether restrictions exist on commercial database use?

The expectation is that contractors will primarily rely on the information provided by ICE, which typically includes name, date of birth, and last known location, and use all available databases, including open source and commercially available resources, to locate UACs. Contractors will not be granted access to ORR systems or other federal systems of record, and government databases are not expected to add significant value for this purpose. All awardees will receive equal access to the case data provided by ICE, ensuring a consistent starting point for each contractor. There are no current restrictions on the use of commercial databases, as long as their use complies with applicable laws and regulations governing privacy and data protection. Contractors are expected to use all lawful and appropriate resources to locate children and confirm their addresses. Data availability and access will be clarified further as the contract structure and reporting portal are finalized.

60 PWS Section 2 (p. 1) Contract

This initiative exists to independently verify UAC safety following release from federal custody. Contractors who previously performed sponsor vetting, reunification, or post-release case management for the same population have an inherent organizational interest in confirming their prior determinations were correct rather than identifying harmful placements. This structural conflict cannot be mitigated through firewalls or training, and it compromises the reliable data collection Section 2 identifies as the foundation for policy decisions. Would the Government include an OCI provision precluding offerors and their teaming partners who previously provided these services as this is an unmitigatable conflict?

The Government is committed to ensuring a fair and competitive process for this initiative. Prior experience with sponsor vetting, reunification, or post-release case management will not preclude offerors or their teaming partners from participating. We welcome both previous and new experience, as long as the offeror demonstrates the capability to locate children and fulfill the requirements of the program. All proposals will be evaluated based on their ability to deliver objective, reliable results and meet the program’s goals. The Government will ensure that all offerors have an equal opportunity to compete, and will not exclude organizations solely based on prior involvement with the UAC population.