1.2.1_P00001_Attachment 2_Answers to Questions.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 39 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Individual Assistance Modernization
- Solicitation number
- 70FA3125I00000010
- Issued by
-
Federal Emergency Management Agency
About this file
This document is a comprehensive Questions and Answers (Q&A) file for FEMA's Individual Assistance Modernization project, providing detailed vendor responses about a proposed technology modernization effort. The document reveals FEMA seeks to replace over 25 legacy systems with a modern, integrated technology platform to improve disaster survivor assistance processes, with key requirements including scalable infrastructure capable of handling up to 10,000 concurrent users during disaster periods, FedRAMP Moderate/High security compliance, and an event-based architecture that maintains survivor data across multiple disaster events.
The Q&A file highlights critical technical requirements, including real-time data integration, AI-enabled omnichannel support, multilingual interfaces (English/Spanish), electronic signature capabilities, and the ability to handle complex case management workflows. FEMA granted a one-week extension for vendor responses, which are limited to 40 pages, and is seeking solutions that can incrementally deploy functionality while decommissioning existing systems. The agency is particularly interested in improving survivor experience through technologies like AI chatbots, mobile applications, and integrated communication channels, with an emphasis on reducing manual processing and enabling more efficient, user-friendly disaster assistance services.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 1.2.1_P00001_Attachment 3_ SystemNames.pdf | ||
| 1.2.1_P00001_Attachment 4_ FEMADex.pdf | ||
| 1.2.1_P00001_DIP RFI.pdf | ||
| 1.2.1_Attachment 2_Vendor Questions.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 1.2.1_DIP RFI.pdf | ||
| 1.2.1_Attachment 1_Appendices.pdf |
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
Questions & Answers
| Vendor Questions | ||||
| Question # | Page No. | RFI Section Reference | Question | FEMA Response |
| 1 | 2 | ) Provide a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) that provides both a low and high range estimate of cost for (a) development/implementation and (b) ongoing licensing, operation, and maintenance | In order to provide you with an accurate ROM, would you provide us with number of users (internal to FEMA) that will require access to this application? *This number does NOT include survivors submitting assistance requests. | On a daily basis, year round, vendors may assume 2,500 licenses. During periods of disaster activity that number will increase dramatically and quickly to above 10,000. Any proposed solution(s) should account for a virtually unlimited number of user (survivor) accounts. |
| 2 | Use Case 0 - Use Case 10 | FEMA has provided "Specific tests" under each use case. Are these questions for vendors to answer or information supplied by FEMA to aid in our understanding? | FEMA reiterates the guidance provided in the RFI: For each use case, provide a detailed description of how your solution(s) will meet the “specific |
tests” noted. Where COTS, please articulate which feature or features from your product would be leveraged to meet the “specific tests.” Where custom, please articulate the technical approach to the feature or features you would design to meet the “specific tests.”
| 3 | N/A | N/A | Would FEMA kindly consider a one-week extension to provide offerors additional time to compile the 40-page response? | Yes, FEMA will grant a one week extension and appreciates the vendor community's thoughtful responses. | |
| 4 | 10 | Use case 0 | What is the anticipated data throughput and concurrent user volume during peak disaster events to validate scalability requirements? | In 2024, we saw about 80 million unique sessions and 4.4 million registrations. 85% of Survivors register for assistance on DisasterAssistance.gov – but even if they register via the call center, they can still check their application status online. | |
| 5 | 29 | Use case 7 | How does FEMA envision integrating SLTT co-processing and permissions models within a unified case management platform? Do these SLTT members need access to specific functions and should they need timebound access? | Conceptually, FEMA would want the ability to grant SLTT and other partners with direct access to the platform but restrict their access to Survivors who have granted permission for the respective SLTT or other partner to have access to their case. Additionally, for a non-FEMA account, FEMA would want to restrict some of the information that the partner could see (e.g., SPII) | |
| 6 | 29 | Use case 7 | Can FEMA clarify expectations for case reassessment logic (retroactive eligibility updates) in response to mid-disaster policy changes? Should the system store versions of logic or is it one logic throughout the life of a specific disaster? | Eligibility may change during the course of the disaster. Most importantly, the system must be able to apply the most up-to-date logic to Survivors (including Survivors who are newly eligible based on updated criteria). The system should be able to log changes to eligibility criteria. | |
| 7 | Will FEMA accept a user journey redesign that deviates from legacy steps if it significantly improves completion rates and reduces time to eligibility? | Absolutely! FEMA's intent is to diligently partner with partner with the selected vendor or vendors to identify journey and process improvements, leveraging best-in-class and proven approaches to customer experience. | |||
| 8 | Is FEMA planning to maintain a centralized DevSecOps environment or will vendors be responsible for their own CI/CD pipelines? | Vendors should be prepared to create and maintain their own CI/CD pipelines. | |||
| 9 | 11 | Use Case 1 - Jobs To Be Done | Are eligibility criteria going to be manually updated by specific user(s)? | Eligibility criteria are set at the program and disaster level. Eligibility for specific assistance types (e.g., reviewing all the documentation necessary to receive rental assistance) is presently manually reviewed by FEMA caseworkers. FEMA's goal is to improve this process using modern technology. | |
| 10 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | How many users will need access across all use cases to the system? | On a daily basis, year round, vendors may assume 2,500 licenses. During periods of disaster activity that number will increase dramatically and quickly to above 10,000. Any proposed solution(s) should account for a virtually unlimited number of user (survivor) accounts. Beyond FEMA users, the system should be capable of handling hundreds of thousands survivors accessing the infrastructure simultaneously. | |
| 11 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | Should all external correspondence (email, SMS) also be stored within the system? | The system should log records of all inbound and outbound correspondence. | |
| 12 | 29 | Use Case 7 - Jobs To Be Done | Should partners have their own site to be able to view only the information they have access to? Would this require their own login? | Conceptually, FEMA would want the ability to grant SLTT and other partners with direct access to the platform but restrict their access to Survivors who have granted permission for the respective SLTT or other partner to have access to their case. Additionally, for a non-FEMA account, FEMA would want to restrict some of the information that the partner could see (e.g., SPII) | |
| 13 | 32 | Use Case 8 - Specific Tests | Are there any approvals needed on materials uploaded (like receipts)? | FEMA is unsure what is meant by "approvals needed." FEMA does review uploaded material, like receipts, to render eligibility decisions and authorize payments. There is no "approval" needed at the upload phase. | |
| 14 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | How is data being validated by the current system? | Validation varies by the type of data being submitted by Survivors. For example, FEMA leverages CoreLogic for address validation and correction; LexisNexis for identity, occupancy, and ownership verification; and Login.gov for account authentication. | |
| 15 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | How often are you anticipating survivors log in to view status, update applications, etc.? | In 2024, we saw about 80 million unique sessions and 4.4 million registrations. 85% of Survivors register for assistance on DisasterAssistance.gov – but even if they register via the call center, they can still check their application status online. However, FEMA is committed to a more modern survivor experience where Survivors do not need to regularly check their status by logging in but, instead, are updated about their case asynchronously via omnichannel means. | |
| 16 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | Are any of the current integrations not working/unreliable? Do any have major gaps you'd be looking to replace as top priority? | All integrations are currently operational. As described in the RFI, FEMA's intent is to add additional integration points to improve the Survivor experience and reduce processing burden. FEMA invites the vendor community to offer creative suggestions. | |
| 17 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | What data currently requires to be exported to other systems? | Virtually all data collected is shared with one or more systems, including inspection systems, financial systems, etc. | |
| 18 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | What use cases do you believe could benefit from AI? | A significant portion of FEMA's inbound call volume are for relatively simple requests (e.g., status checks, registration intake, updating an application) that we believe can be easily handled via AI-enabled omnichannel solutions. Additionally, FEMA relies heavily on human capital and manual processes to review submissions from survivors to substantiate their assistance applications. We believe significant portions of this work can be make more efficient by applying AI. | |
| 19 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | Is there any need for verifying if duplicate applications are created for one household? | In the current system, FEMA has logic that checks for duplicate registrations in the same household. However, the system requires manual workarounds for eligible applicants who reside at the same address but are still eligible for assistance (e.g., roommates, informal lease agreements, etc.) | |
| 20 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | If a change occurs on a survivor's application, how is a FEMA employee currently notified? Should this process change moving forward or stay the same? | In FEMA's current system, changes to a Survivor's application must be done via phone or by sending in a letter. Following that action, corrections are made, and work packets (work orders) are created for follow-on actions (e.g., assigning an inspector, reviewing documentation for a different assistance type, etc.). In the future, FEMA's ultimate goal is to move to a more self-service model with an corresponding event based architecture that automatically triggers the necessary actions based on Survivor input. | |
| 21 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | For integrations, how often is external data synced into the current system? Is there any need for data to be synced sooner? | Current integrations are a combination of asynchronously and batch synced with external services. Going forward, FEMA's goal is to move to an completely asynchronous (real-time) model for all integrations. | |
| 22 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | Is there any need for the use of electronic signatures? | Yes. FEMA believes that implementation of electronic forms/collections and associated signatures (similar to those available from a series of commercial providers) would add much needed efficiency and standardization to our current collection and review process. | |
| 23 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | Is there any requirement for internal FEMA users to correspond on cases? | Yes, while not a primary requirement for "go live" the ability for FEMA personnel to correspond on specific cases within an integrated tool would be beneficial. | |
| 24 | 1 | Instructions, items 1,2,3,4 and 6 | How often are backups required? | As noted in Use Case 0, FEMA's Maximum Tolerable Period of Downtime and Maximum Acceptable Outage is no longer than 15 minutes. The Maximum Tolerable Data Loss is zero (0) transactions. On any given day and particularly during periods of high disaster activity, FEMA may be receiving and processing tens of thousands of applications per hour. As such, FEMA is interested in options for asynchronous, real-time back-ups. | |
| 25 | 2 | Question 6 | Can you please make us aware of the toal amount of agents that would be required for licensing? Ie. # of call center agents and # of field service technicians that would be providing inspections. it is not specified in the document. Initial estimates had 2,000 call center agents, and 2,000 Field Service Tech's doing site inspections. Is that # Accurate? | On a daily basis, year round, vendors may assume 2,500 licenses. During periods of disaster activity that number will increase dramatically and quickly to above 10,000. With respect to field inspectors, FEMA expands and contracts based on the size, complexity of the disaster, ranging from several dozen to as many as 6,000+ at any one time. Any proposed solution(s) should account for a virtually unlimited number of user accounts. | |
| 26 | 1 | Question 5 | If you're a technology vendor responding, do you need us to respond to question 5 , 5a, 5b since we rely mostly on our partner community to deliver our technology. | FEMA recommends vendors respond to each question as thoroughly as possible. | |
| 27 | 2 | Question 7 | If you're a technology vendor responding, do you need us to respond to question 7 which would usually come from the partner conducting the implementation work | FEMA recommends vendors respond to each question as thoroughly as possible. | |
| 28 | 2 | Question 7 | Can you help us understand what type of information you're inquiring about from the Survivor, FEMA employee, and FEMA technologists? Are you looking for screenshots based on the type of personas? The view of what they will see, or just looking at text to describe how these individuals will interact with the system? Can you please elaborate? | Correct. FEMA is looking for descriptions and, to the extent they exist and are relevant, screenshots of the identified perspectives. | |
| 29 | 1 | Instructions | Can responses be longer than 40 pages? Is that a hard cap? | FEMA is looking for detailed but succinct responses. While we encourage vendors to stay as close to the cap as possible, FEMA will not limit its review to the first 40 pages. | |
| 30 | 1 | Instructions | Is their any migration of data that needs to be accounted for in any new platform/system? | FEMA has not made a firm decision on the need for integration with or data migration from legacy systems. FEMA encourages vendors to provide information about the pros/cons of each, including in terms of cost and time to market. | |
| 31 | 1 | Instructions | Due to the limit of 40 pages for a response, would fema be okay with just providing responses to each use case tests in a numbered format and omit including the test statement? This would help us keep page length to the allotted 40 page limit? | FEMA is looking for detailed but succinct responses. While we encourage vendors to stay as close to the cap as possible, FEMA will not limit its review to the first 40 pages. | |
| 32 | 1 | Instructions | Will the Government please provide a one week extension to the due date for RFI responses? | Yes, FEMA will grant a one week extension and appreciates the vendor community's thoughtful responses. | |
| 33 | 5 | Appendix A - Maintain Non-functional requirements | Will the government confirm if there are any data security requirements that are a part of non-functional requirements that may require separate environments or databases to support? What FedRAMP Level is required to support the new system? | Given the sensitivity of the data, FEMA will require high-levels of data security for all elements of the system. FedRAMP Moderate and FedRAMP High levels are preferred but FEMA's Office of the Chief Information Security Officer will review relevant artifacts for all components and make risk-informed decisions regarding ATO. | |
| 34 | 5 | Appendix A - Maintain Non-functional requirements | Will the government state if there are any data migration requirements as part of the project? This will aid in estimating a ROM cost. | FEMA has not made a firm decision on the need for integration with or data migration from legacy systems. FEMA encourages vendors to provide information about the pros/cons of each, including in terms of cost and time to market. | |
| 35 | 2 | Instructions - bullet (7) | Has FEMA determined if any capabilities are a higher priority to be deployed earlier in the project? This will aid in sequencing the project plan requested. | Basic customer relationship management tools and case processing (including verification, fraud prevention, and payment) are among the most important requirements. | |
| 36 | 2 | Background | Will the government provide the names of the legacy systems currently considered to be in scope for this modernization effort? | Applications/Systems: | |
| • | Contact Center Capability Modernization Program (Genesys Cloud) – call center application. | ||||
| • | Individual Assistance Survivor Online Applications & Resources Portal (SOAR) - on-line disaster assistance registration application) (Amazon Web Service (AWS) Gov Cloud) West) | ||||
| • | NEMIS-EC - National Emergency Management Information System – Emergency Coordination (Oracle) | ||||
| • | Function | ||||
| • | Incident Management | ||||
| • | Declaration Management | ||||
| • | NEMIS-IA - National Emergency Management Information System – Individual Assistance (Oracle) | ||||
| • | ASTC PB/Web - Assistance Client Power Builder - (Generates letters advising survivors of impacts to their applications for assistance.) | ||||
| • | HOMES - Housing Operations Management Enterprise System | ||||
| • | IM - Inspection Management – inspection assignment and management | ||||
| • | JAVA Address Correction Software (JACS) (Automation to identify and correct addresses.) | ||||
| • | Java Auto-determination Engine (JADE) (Automation to process survivor assistance. Evaluates survivor information against a set of business rules to award assistance.) | ||||
| • | Mail Utility Module (MUM) (Used when processing letters. Admin interface to manage batches, routing changes, outgoing correspondence, and special situation letters.) | ||||
| • | Transitional Housing Assistance (TSA) | ||||
| • | FACT – Field Assessment and Collection Tools | ||||
| • | Disaster Survivor Assistance (DSA) – Survivor assistance/interaction, observation | ||||
| • | DRC-DOT Disaster Recovery Center Disaster Operations Tool - DRC DOT | ||||
| • | Virginia System Repository VSR | ||||
| • | Applicant Services Dashboard IA Pre-shift Notes (ASD/IAPN): knowledge management system provides pre-shift notes for call center agents | ||||
| • | AutoDialer is a mass communication tool (via phone, email, and SMS text) | ||||
| • | Callout and Review System (CARS) - computer assisted telephone interviews (CATI) with disaster survivors. CARS dynamically creates the question-and-answer flow used in telephone interviews using a web interface | ||||
| • | Customer Service Performance Application (CSPA) – inspections comments/complaints management | ||||
| • | FEMA Information and Data Analysis (FIDA) – report management system | ||||
| • | Inspection Management Review (IMR) – QAQC for inspections management | ||||
| • | Enterprise Customer Survey System (ECSS) – Amazon Web Services (AWS) Gov | ||||
| • | ACE - Automated Construction Estimator - (inspections services mobile application – used by both contract support and in-house inspectors) | ||||
| • | DMARTS - Document Management and Records Tracking System - (document repository – linked to NEMIS for casework review) | ||||
| • | ESF6-SS Emergency Support Function 6 – Support System – Azure Cloud |
Integrations:
| • | Lexis Nexis (identity, ownership, occupancy verification for damaged dwelling, Social Security, death master file) |
| • | Login.gov (account creation and verification) |
| • | CoreLogic (address correction with USPS standards and format) |
| • | OCFO systems make the payments |
| • | National Flood Insurance Reform Act (NIFRA) (flood policy verification, flood zone cases – impacts case’s path) |
| • | Trumpia text messaging provider (external affairs) |
| • | RS means – low, medium, high-cost estimates for construction materials based on geographic area. |
| • | Process to replicate data to data repositories (ODS, EDW – future replication to FEMA Dex Data Lake) |
| • | Corporate Lodging – CLC – send them data files of eligible applicants to be shared to participating hotels. |
| • | RS means – low, medium, high-cost estimates for construction materials based on geographic area. |
| 37 | 2 | Background | Will the government be providing a tool to track user stories in support of solution delivery? If so, what tool? | FEMA expects the vendor to provide this tool and associated project management support. | |
| 38 | 7 | Background | Of the current integrations/automations, how many are owned and operated by FEMA? For those that are external connections, how many have interconnection agreements? | ||
| 39 | 7 | Background | What portion of the ATO process would be the responsibility of the contractor to provide? | The contractor will be responsible for development, refinement, and submission of all required artifacts, presentations, and technical documentation associated with ATO. | |
| 40 | 1 | Due Date | Due to the in-depth RFI Technical Requirements and Use Cases, Would it be possible to ask for a two week extension in order to properly respond | FEMA will grant a one week extension and appreciates the vendor community's thoughtful responses. | |
| 41 | 3 | Proposed Solutions | Is FEMA expecting the proposed solutions to be FedRAMP moderate or high a requirement? | Given the sensitivity of the data, FEMA will require high-levels of data security for all elements of the system. FedRAMP Moderate and FedRAMP High levels are preferred but FEMA's Office of the Chief Information Security Officer will review relevant artifacts for all components and make risk-informed decisions regarding ATO. | |
| 42 | 7 | Section "Current Integrations/Automations (for validation checks, payments, fraud detection etc.)" | In reference to the bullet "DMARTS (document repository – linked to NEMIS for casework review)*" the reference to open or replace is shown, while should the response include both approaches? | ||
| At this time, FEMA is open to both approaches but its ultimate goal is to reduce complexity and associated technical debt. | |||||
| 43 | 23 | Use Case 3, Specific Tests, Number 19. | In reference to the bullet "System describes how historical data can be leverages to facilitate year-over-year comparisons to support accurate staffing forecasts" is listed as a Specific Test. Will any data from existing systems be migrated into the new solution? | ||
| FEMA has not made a firm decision on the need for integration with or data migration from legacy systems. FEMA encourages vendors to provide information about the pros/cons of each, including in terms of cost and time to market. With respect to data associated with call levels and staffing, FEMA can make that data available following an award. | |||||
| 44 | 23 | Use Case 3, Specific Tests, Number 19. | In reference to the bullet "System describes how historical data can be leverages to facilitate year-over-year comparisons to support accurate staffing forecasts" is listed as a Specific Test. Is it in scope to include data mapping of old or in-flight cases into the new solution? | ||
| FEMA has not made a firm decision on the need for integration with or data migration from legacy systems. FEMA encourages vendors to provide information about the pros/cons of each, including in terms of cost and time to market. Even if FEMA decides not to proceed with wholesale data migration, vendors should plan for some "active cases" to be migrated over to the new solution. | |||||
| 45 | 1 | Instructions | There is a very significant amount of information requested in the RFI. Would FEMA consider providing and additional 14-21 days to allow responders to provide a more thorough response? | FEMA will grant a one week extension and appreciates the vendor community's thoughtful responses. | |
| 46 | 3 | Background | Can we have access to the independent market research and notes from the meetings with vendors? | Any relevant FEMA-specific information shared with vendors during one-on-one meetings that is important for proposal development will be communicated to all vendors during the solicitation process. However, FEMA cannot release its internal notes or any proprietary or sensitive information provided by other vendors. | |
| 47 | 3 | Background | What are the security restrictions the solution needs to meet? Should proposers presume that an Authority to Operate (ATO) process will be initiated so that providers can work within the FEMA environment? | Given the sensitivity of the data, FEMA will require high-levels of data security for all elements of the system. FedRAMP Moderate and FedRAMP High levels are preferred but FEMA's Office of the Chief Information Security Officer will review relevant artifacts for all components and make risk-informed decisions regarding ATO. If vendors are proposing needing access to FEMA's environment for development they should describe the type of access, tools, and applications needed. | |
| 48 | 3, 17 | Background and Use Case 2 | 1. | How many users are we expecting? | |
| a. | How many users from the public? All survivors (and additive)? Presume 5M, 10M to start? | ||||
| b. | How many users from FEMA and its affiliates - over 10k? Up to 15k users? | ||||
| c. Should the program now hold user data for from event to event? How many years should the disaster survivor data be held? | On a daily basis, year round, vendors may assume 2,500 licenses. During periods of disaster activity that number will increase dramatically and quickly to above 10,000. With respect to field inspectors, FEMA expands and contracts based on the size, complexity of the disaster, ranging from several dozen to as many as 6,000+ at any one time. Any proposed solution(s) should account for a virtually unlimited number of user accounts. In 2024, FEMA had 4.4 million survivor registrations. The proposed solution MUST hold data from event to event, allowing Survivors the ability to simply update (instead of resubmit) their information during subsequent disasters and enabling FEMA to (a) understand the history of a survivor's engagement with the agency across disasters and (b) proactively reach out to potential survivors following a newly declared disaster in their area. | ||||
| 49 | 7 | Background | Does the existing list of integrations also apply to the new software solution? | Generally, yes. FEMA desires to increase its integrations and capabilities in a new system. To the extent there are native tools in the proposed system that renders an existing integration moot (e.g., the proposed solution offers its own tool for address correction), vendors may propose that in lieu of integration. | |
| 50 | 7 | Background | Is FEMA IA looking for this new solution(s) to replace NEMIS? Or will these systems need to integrate with NEMIS? | While a final decision on integration vs. data migration has not been made, FEMA is interested in replacing NEMIS and other disparate, legacy systems and applications. | |
| 51 | 9 | Background | Will recommended solution(s) need to be FedRamp Compliant? | Given the sensitivity of the data, FEMA will require high-levels of data security for all elements of the system. FedRAMP Moderate and FedRAMP High levels are preferred but FEMA's Office of the Chief Information Security Officer will review relevant artifacts for all components and make risk-informed decisions regarding ATO. | |
| 52 | 9 | Background | To support the development of ROM costs (if still being requested) is there a time-frame for development/delivery of these new systems? | FEMA is eager to move quickly to implement a new solution following award. FEMA encourages vendors to offer cost options related to time to market. | |
| 53 | 7 | Background | Can the government provide a technical description or architecture documentation for the FEMA Dex Data Lake? | FEMADex doesn’t use a data lake but instead uses a Lakehouse in the architecture and Databricks uses this also. Here’s the design, at the highest level: |
What is a lakehouse?
A lakehouse is a new, open architecture that combines the best elements of data lakes and data warehouses. Lakehouses are enabled by a new system design: implementing similar data structures and data management features to those in a data warehouse directly on top of low-cost cloud storage in open formats.
A lakehouse has the following key features:
| • | Transaction support: In an enterprise lakehouse many data pipelines will be reading and writing data concurrently. Support for ACID transactions ensures consistency as multiple parties concurrently read or write data, typically using SQL. |
| • | Schema enforcement and governance: The Lakehouse should have a way to support schema enforcement and evolution, supporting DW schema architectures such as star/snowflake-schemas. The system should have robust governance and auditing mechanisms. |
| • | BI support: Lakehouses enable using BI tools directly on the source data. This reduces staleness and improves recency, reduces latency, and lowers the cost of having to operationalize two copies of the data in both a data lake and a warehouse. |
| • | Storage is decoupled from compute: In practice this means storage and compute use separate clusters, thus these systems are able to scale to many more concurrent users and larger data sizes. Some modern data warehouses also have this property. |
| • | Openness: The storage formats they use are open and standardized, such as Parquet, and they provide an API so a variety of tools and engines, including machine learning and Python/R libraries, can efficiently access the data directly. |
| • | Support for diverse data types ranging from unstructured to structured data: The lakehouse can be used to store, refine, analyze, and access data types needed for many new data applications, including images, video, audio, semi-structured data, and text. |
| • | Support for diverse workloads: including data science, machine learning, and SQL and analytics. Multiple tools might be needed to support all these workloads but they all rely on the same data repository. |
| • | End-to-end streaming: Real-time reports are the norm in many enterprises. Support for streaming eliminates the need for separate systems dedicated to serving real-time data applications. |
| 54 | 8 | Background | Can the government tell us how many permanent FEMA employees and staff are expected to use the system on a daily basis? (not accounting for disaster-related usage spikes, which we understand will affect the system usage) | On a daily basis, year round, vendors may assume 2,500 licenses. During periods of disaster activity that number will increase dramatically and quickly to above 10,000. With respect to field inspectors, FEMA expands and contracts based on the size, complexity of the disaster, ranging from several dozen to as many as 6,000+ at any one time. Any proposed solution(s) should account for a virtually unlimited number of user accounts. In 2024, FEMA had 4.4 million survivor registrations. | |
| 55 | 7 | Background | Can the government provide the full names and technical architecture documentation for the systems listed on page 7 that are proprietary to FEMA? | Applications/Systems: | |
| • | Contact Center Capability Modernization Program (Genesys Cloud) – call center application. | ||||
| • | Individual Assistance Survivor Online Applications & Resources Portal (SOAR) - on-line disaster assistance registration application) (Amazon Web Service (AWS) Gov Cloud) West) | ||||
| • | NEMIS-EC - National Emergency Management Information System – Emergency Coordination (Oracle) | ||||
| • | Function | ||||
| • | Incident Management | ||||
| • | Declaration Management | ||||
| • | NEMIS-IA - National Emergency Management Information System – Individual Assistance (Oracle) | ||||
| • | ASTC PB/Web - Assistance Client Power Builder - (Generates letters advising survivors of impacts to their applications for assistance.) | ||||
| • | HOMES - Housing Operations Management Enterprise System | ||||
| • | IM - Inspection Management – inspection assignment and management | ||||
| • | JAVA Address Correction Software (JACS) (Automation to identify and correct addresses.) | ||||
| • | Java Auto-determination Engine (JADE) (Automation to process survivor assistance. Evaluates survivor information against a set of business rules to award assistance.) | ||||
| • | Mail Utility Module (MUM) (Used when processing letters. Admin interface to manage batches, routing changes, outgoing correspondence, and special situation letters.) | ||||
| • | Transitional Housing Assistance (TSA) | ||||
| • | FACT – Field Assessment and Collection Tools | ||||
| • | Disaster Survivor Assistance (DSA) – Survivor assistance/interaction, observation | ||||
| • | DRC-DOT Disaster Recovery Center Disaster Operations Tool - DRC DOT | ||||
| • | Virginia System Repository VSR | ||||
| • | Applicant Services Dashboard IA Pre-shift Notes (ASD/IAPN): knowledge management system provides pre-shift notes for call center agents | ||||
| • | AutoDialer is a mass communication tool (via phone, email, and SMS text) | ||||
| • | Callout and Review System (CARS) - computer assisted telephone interviews (CATI) with disaster survivors. CARS dynamically creates the question-and-answer flow used in telephone interviews using a web interface | ||||
| • | Customer Service Performance Application (CSPA) – inspections comments/complaints management | ||||
| • | FEMA Information and Data Analysis (FIDA) – report management system | ||||
| • | Inspection Management Review (IMR) – QAQC for inspections management | ||||
| • | Enterprise Customer Survey System (ECSS) – Amazon Web Services (AWS) Gov | ||||
| • | ACE - Automated Construction Estimator - (inspections services mobile application – used by both contract support and in-house inspectors) | ||||
| • | DMARTS - Document Management and Records Tracking System - (document repository – linked to NEMIS for casework review) | ||||
| • | ESF6-SS Emergency Support Function 6 – Support System – Azure Cloud |
Integrations:
| • | Lexis Nexis (identity, ownership, occupancy verification for damaged dwelling, Social Security, death master file) |
| • | Login.gov (account creation and verification) |
| • | CoreLogic (address correction with USPS standards and format) |
| • | OCFO systems make the payments |
| • | National Flood Insurance Reform Act (NIFRA) (flood policy verification, flood zone cases – impacts case’s path) |
| • | Trumpia text messaging provider (external affairs) |
| • | RS means – low, medium, high-cost estimates for construction materials based on geographic area. |
| • | Process to replicate data to data repositories (ODS, EDW – future replication to FEMA Dex Data Lake) |
| • | Corporate Lodging – CLC – send them data files of eligible applicants to be shared to participating hotels. |
| • | RS means – low, medium, high-cost estimates for construction materials based on geographic area. |
| 56 | 7 | Background | Can the government explain what type and volume of data needs to be migrated into the new system? | FEMA has not made a firm decision on the need for integration with or data migration from legacy systems. FEMA encourages vendors to provide information about the pros/cons of each, including in terms of cost and time to market. Even if FEMA decides not to proceed with wholesale data migration, vendors should plan for some "active cases" to be migrated over to the new solution. |
| 57 | 7 | Background | Can the government explain their current use of ODS and EDW data repositories and the planned work to replicate that data within the FEMA Dex Data Lake? | FEMA currently utilizes Operational Data Stores (ODS) for operational reporting and day-to-day transaction processing, integrating data from multiple sources to support immediate decision-making. The Enterprise Data Warehouse (EDW) is used for long-term data storage, strategic decision-making, and business intelligence activities, storing historical data optimized for complex queries and analysis. FEMA EOPS uses Oracle Goldengate for near real-time replication from source systems to the ODS, ensuring that the ODS contains current or near-current data to support operational processes. ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) jobs run every two hours, and the EDW data is refreshed every 2-4 hours, except work packet data which refreshes hourly. |
The planned replication of data from ODS and EDW into the FEMA Dex Data Lake aims to enhance data accessibility, scalability, and analytical capabilities. This process involves ingesting data using various integration tools, including batch processing, real-time streaming, and ETL processes. The data will be transformed and normalized to ensure consistency and compatibility within the data lake environment. The data lake will store both raw and processed data, enabling users to perform advanced analytics, machine learning, and data exploration. This approach will ultimately improve data integration and support more informed decision-making across FEMA.
| 58 | 7 | Background | Can FEMA clarify its long-term vision for the Individual Assistance (IA) platform? Specifically, is this effort intended to become a single authoritative system of record, or a services-based ecosystem that federates and orchestrates multiple systems? | FEMA anticipates the new system will replace NEMIS as the System of Record for Individual Assistance. While FEMA is firm on an event-based architecture, it invites the vendor community to offer their perspective on Custom, COTS, or hybrid. In this context, hybrid related to one or more COTS products/services along with some elements of custom development. |
| 59 | 17 | Use Case | As FEMA looks to improve survivor experience across all channels, could you clarify whether the expectation is for shared, persistent data across all access points, like web, call center, and in-person DRCs, so survivors don’t need to re-explain or re-enter information? | One of FEMA's current-state challenges is incomplete information available across survivor touchpoints. FEMA absolutely seeks an integrated solution that offers a unified survivor experience regardless of touchpoint (e.g., web, call center, in-person, chat bot, etc.) |
| 60 | 1 | Instructions | Does FEMA have a target timeframe for releasing the RFP associated with this RFI? Knowing when the agency expects to move forward would help us plan resourcing and teaming accordingly. | FEMA is using this RFI to inform development of a possible RFP (or similar). This is a priority project for FEMA. |
| 61 | 1 | Instructions | Does FEMA expect the disasterasssitance.gov website and supporting eco system to be integrated in the DIP? If so, does the government desire for perspective offerors to include in the response to question 3? | FEMA has not made a firm decision about the future of disasterassistance.gov as an independent and integrated entry point vs. leveraging a survivor front-end of a new solution. FEMA encourages vendors to offer optionality and pros/cons as part of their response. |
| 62 | 1 | Instructions | Can a cover letter be submitted with the RFI Response? If yes, will this be excluded from the 40 page count limit? | FEMA is happy to exclude the cover letter from the 40 page count limit. FEMA is looking for detailed but succinct responses. While we encourage vendors to stay as close to the cap as possible, FEMA will not limit its review to the first 40 pages |
| 63 | 1 | Instructions | Will the government confirm that a font smaller than 12pt for tables, graphics, headers/footers, footnotes, and disclaimers is allowed? | FEMA will allow smaller font sizes for tables, graphics, headers/footers, footnotes, and disclaimers. |
| 64 | 2 | Instructions, (7) | What is the desired timeline from contract award to full operational capability? Is there a target launch date or phased milestone expectation? | FEMA is eager to move quickly to implement a new solution following award. FEMA encourages vendors to offer cost options related to time to market. |
| 65 | 2 | Instructions, (7) | Will FEMA consider a rolling deployment by functionality (e.g., registration, identity verification, assistance adjudication) or does it require a complete cutover? | Yes, FEMA prefers an implementation approach that would allow us to release functionality incrementally, while decommissioning existing systems. |
| 66 | 3 | Background | For the “rules engine,” are there expectations that FEMA staff can configure eligibility criteria without vendor assistance? If so, what level of technical expertise can be assumed? | Yes, FEMA would like elements of the solution related to eligibility criteria to be low code so changes can be made by federal staff. Vendors should provide recommendations on technical expertise as part of their "train and sustain" response. |
| 67 | 6 | Background | For assistance types that may be capped "per household" or "per decedent," how should systems differentiate and enforce these caps, especially across overlapping disaster registrations? | FEMA anticipates that the new system would include business rules that perform checks on duplication prior to processing assistance to prevent duplicate benefits being received by multiple members of a household. Assistance holds could be manually or automatically cleared with additional information about an individuals case. |
| 68 | 7 | Background | Are there current pain points or limitations in any of the listed third-party integrations that FEMA hopes to improve upon or eliminate? | Current integrations are a combination of asynchronously and batch synced with external services. Going forward, FEMA's goal is to move to an completely asynchronous (real-time) model for all integrations. |
| 69 | 7,8 | Background | What is the expectation around data residency and replication across FEMA data repositories (ODS, EDW, future DEX)? | FEMA currently utilizes Operational Data Stores (ODS) for operational reporting and day-to-day transaction processing, integrating data from multiple sources to support immediate decision-making. The Enterprise Data Warehouse (EDW) is used for long-term data storage, strategic decision-making, and business intelligence activities, storing historical data optimized for complex queries and analysis. FEMA EOPS uses Oracle GoldenGate for near real-time replication from source systems to the ODS, ensuring that the ODS contains current or near-current data to support operational processes. ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) jobs run every two hours, and the EDW data is refreshed every 2-4 hours, except work packet data which refreshes hourly. |
The planned replication of data from ODS and EDW into the FEMA Dex Data Lake aims to enhance data accessibility, scalability, and analytical capabilities. This process involves ingesting data using various integration tools, including batch processing, real-time streaming, and ETL processes. The data will be transformed and normalized to ensure consistency and compatibility within the data lake environment. The data lake will store both raw and processed data, enabling users to perform advanced analytics, machine learning, and data exploration. This approach will ultimately improve data integration and support more informed decision-making across FEMA.
| 70 | 7 | Background | What is FEMA's strategy for ensuring the consolidation of tools for this current effort is aligned with any ongoing efforts? Are these existing modernization projects related to disaster response that would align with this solution? Would the strategy be to use the same technologies? | Presently, FEMA is making incremental improvements using existing, legacy technologies with two notable exceptions: (1) Document upload and processing - FEMA is in the process of replacing legacy technology with a series of AWS S3 storage and processing tools (expected release July 2025); and (2) FEMA's cloud-based telephony system (Genesys Cloud). With respect to #1, this system may be reused and integrated with a new system. With respect to #2, any system must integrate with Genesys Cloud and/or other commercially available, could-based telephony systems. As noted in the RFI, FEMA is open to replacing all other elements of IA technology and ensuring seamless interoperability between all elements going forward. |
| 71 | 17 | Use Case 2 | Is FEMA interested in the use of a mobile app? If yes, would users be able to create an account such they could be automatically notified of important status updates allowing for call deflection and self service? | Currently, FEMA's mobile application links to DisasterAssistance.Gov. A more integrated mobile app solution, including push notifications, is appealing. More broadly, FEMA wants to move to an omnichannel model. |
| 72 | 17 | Use Case 2 | Does FEMA have an existing brand identity it wishes to preserve for the general public to see? For example, were there to be a mobile app, would it be expected that app have a specific brand in the app store? Would a solution that bears the commercially available brand be acceptable? | FEMA does need to maintain its brand identity across all channels. |
| 73 | 20 | Use Case 3 | Is FEMA interested in enabling call deflection through the use of AI chat bots that can integrate with the core solution to answer common questions or provide status updates? | Yes. FEMA is very interested in providing omnichannel support, including AI chat bots. |
| 74 | 26 | Use Case 5 | Do inspectors need to make use of any FEMA provided equipment to perform their inspections that they may or may not have been allocated and thus, would need to be taken into account for scheduling a specific inspector to perform a given inspection? (i.e.: does inspector Bill Board have a moisture detector issued to him to complete an inspection related to flood damage?) | No, inspectors do not need FEMA equipment to complete inspections. FEMA is open to validating damages through means other than and, in addition to, in person inspections (e.g., remote inspections). Additionally, FEMA is interested in inspection scheduling and smart routing of deployed resources based on geography, travel time, and other factors (e.g., skill level, reported damage level, etc.) |
| 75 | 28 | Use Case 6 | Does a proposed system need to ingest GIS files to then provide an overlap comparison based on the polygons in the uploaded file and known parcel coordinates? Or is matching of parcels/addresses done in another manner and the proposed system simply needs to be able to present parcel information graphically? | The proposed system does need to have a mechanism to update and/or take action of survivor cases in mass based on multi-source intelligence, including geospatial data. One approach would be to ingest a GIS file and identify the registrations with addresses within a particular polygon or polygons. Another approach would be to compare address/parcel level data in another manner. FEMA is interested in the vendor communities recommendation on these and other approaches to meet the requirement. |
| 76 | 29 | Use Case 7 | Are there any known use cases to provide FEMA partners with governed data feeds into systems of their own? For example, integrate case data into a provider's system via API to automate third party services? | FEMA routinely shares data, in bulk, with SLTT partners. Organizationally, the primary vehicle for data sharing going forward will be FEMADex. Any solution will need to integrate asynchronously with that platform. |
| 77 | 34 | Use Case 9 | Does FEMA have interest in consolidating tooling for physical correspondence? For example, if the system can automatically generate the physical correspondence as a PDF to be sent for print, would that be desirable? This correspondence could then be stored with the case file. | Yes, FEMA's current document generation functionality is extremly constraining. As part of the modernization effort, FEMA is eager to update its document generation and tailoring capability. |
| 78 | Appendix A p. 3 | Provide Support to Applicants | Some JTBD outcomes relate to survivor satisfaction. Is FEMA planning to provide a baseline metric (e.g., % of satisfied applicants) or should vendors include survey tooling? | FEMA is interested in intergrated surveying tools (e.g., post-call, post-registration, post-website use surveys). However, FEMA is also interested in vendors proposing other commercially-adopted methods of measuring and reporting on customer satisfaction passively. |
| 79 | N/A | Does FEMA require multilingual support at launch for end-user facing interfaces? | FEMA currently offers registration intake and other DisasterAssistance.gov functions in English and Spanish. Maintaining that capability at launch is a requirement. |
Abbreviations Acronyms
| Abbreviations / Acronyms | |
| CLIN | Contract Line Item Number |
| FEMA | Federal Emergency Management Agency |
| FIMA | Federal Insurance & Mitigation Administration |
| FFP | Firm-Fixed-Price |
| LH | Labor-Hour |
| NSP | Not Separately Priced |
| NTE | Not-to-Exceed |
| ODC | Other Direct Cost |
| QTY | Quantity |
| T&M | Time-and-Materials |
| DEL: Deliverable | |
| IAW: In Accordance With | |
| NLT: No Later Than | |
| TOA: Task Order Award | |
| All references to days: Government Workdays | |
| DEFINITION OF TERM: TO will end based on the period of performance (term). See FAR 16.306(d)(2). Level of effort must be defined; see FAR 16.306(d)(4). Majority of FEDSIM TOs will be TERM |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .