Attachment A_Response_FE.pdf
PDF 345 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Online Presence Vetting (OPV)
- Solicitation number
- DT-CST-2026-RFI-001
About this file
This document is a Response Template for Request for Information (RFI) DT-CST-2026-RFI-001 regarding an Online Presence Vetting (OPV) Solution, issued by the U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Technology, Office of Consular Systems and Technology. The RFI is designed to gather market research and capability information from vendors to support future procurement planning for an online presence vetting system.
The template is divided into seven sections plus proprietary marking guidance. Section A collects company information including legal name, CAGE code, UEI, business size, socioeconomic categories, facility clearance level, and points of contact. Section B addresses capability statements across three service categories: data collection capabilities (social media platform coverage, criminal records, commercial financial data, publications, comprehensive online presence coverage, vital records, real-time collection, anonymous collection, seed parameter processing, historical data retrieval, multilingual capabilities, account scrubbing detection, new platform integration, and throughput capacity); entity resolution services (link analysis, confidence scoring, facial recognition and image matching, cross-platform identity linking, false positive management); and analytical platform features (user interface, risk indicators, content analysis, API capabilities, audit logging, data retention, and reporting). Section C requires technical approach information covering scalability to 18 million applicants per year, processing time requirements, dedicated infrastructure capability, Authority to Operate (ATO) timelines, security clearance requirements, government system integration experience, platform terms of service compliance, multilingual content analysis, AI and algorithm transparency per OMB M-24-10, data governance and privacy, data rights and IP restrictions, and solution management. Section D requests up to five past performance references with contract details, work description, and government points of contact. Section E solicits pricing information in the form of a non-binding Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) across three applicant volume scenarios (5 million, 10 million, and 18 million annually), infrastructure pricing, optional services, and identification of top cost drivers. Section F seeks acquisition strategy feedback on period of performance feasibility, requirements clarity, contract vehicle recommendations, phased deployment approaches, operational timelines, legal/regulatory concerns, competitive landscape assessment, and small business considerations. Section G addresses teaming and subcontracting intent, arrangements, capability gaps, and subcontracting opportunities. Responses must be submitted as a single PDF (≤25 MB) to KayaniBA@state.gov, formatted in Times New Roman 12-point with one-inch margins, with a maximum of 40 pages excluding cover page, table of contents, Section A, and Section D. The template notes that proprietary information must be clearly marked and classified information is prohibited.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFI_OPV_FE.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
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
ATTACHMENT A
RESPONSE TEMPLATE
Request for Information (RFI) DT-CST-2026-RFI-001 Online Presence Vetting (OPV) Solution
U.S. Department of State
Bureau of Diplomatic Technology Office of Consular Systems and Technology
Instructions to Respondents
1. Use of this template is encouraged but not required.
2. Complete all sections. If a section is not applicable, enter "Not Applicable" with a brief explanation.
3. Maximum response length: 40 pages, excluding cover page, table of contents, Section A, and
Section D.
4. Format: New Roman, minimum 12 point, 1-inch margins.
5. Submit as a single PDF (≤25 MB) to KayaniBA@state.gov.
6. Mark any proprietary information clearly.
7. Do not include classified information.
COVER PAGE
Field Response
Company Legal Name
RFI Number DT-CST-2026-RFI-001
Response Date
Primary POC (Name/Email/Phone)
Proprietary Info Included? (Y/N)
SECTION A: COMPANY INFORMATION
(Not counted against page limit)
Field Response
A1. Company Legal Name
A2. Company Address
A3. CAGE Code
A4. UEI
A5. Business Size
A6: Applicable Socioeconomic Categories See below
A7. Number of Employees
A8. Annual Revenue
A9. Current Facility Clearance Level
A10. Primary Point of Contact See below
A11. Secondary Point of Contact See below
A12. Company Website
A6. Socioeconomic Categories (check all that apply)
Check Category
☐ Small Business
☐ Small Disadvantaged Business
☐ 8(a) Certified
☐ Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB)
☐ Economically Disadvantaged WOSB (EDWOSB)
☐ SDVOSB
☐ HUBZone Small Business
☐ None of the above
A10. Primary Point of Contact
Name
Title
Phone
A11. Secondary Point of Contact
Name
Title
Phone
SECTION B: CAPABILITY STATEMENT
B1. Data Collection Service Capability
B1.1 Social Media Platform Coverage
Currently supported platforms:
Platform Content Types Depth Limitations
Platforms not currently covered (and reason):
Platforms on near-term roadmap (with expected availability):
B1.2 Criminal Records Coverage Identify
B1.3 Commercial Financial Data
B1.4 Publications Coverage
B1.5 Comprehensive Online Presence Coverage
B1.6 Vital Records Coverage
B1.7 Real-Time Collection
B1.8 Anonymous Collection
B1.9 Seed Parameter Processing
B1.10 Historical Data Retrieval
Item Response
Maximum lookback period
Storage and retrieval method
Limitations by major platform
B1.11 Multilingual Capabilities
Languages supported for collection
Languages supported for content analysis
Approach to non-Latin scripts
Translation services (integrated/separate)
B1.12 Account Scrubbing Detection
B1.13 New Platform Integration
Current average integration timeline
Factors affecting timeline
Can commit to 90-day integration? (Y/N)
B1.14 Throughput and Capacity
Metric Demonstrated Capacity
Max applicants per day
Max concurrent queries
API rate limits
Processing time (seed → results)
Factors affecting speed
B2. Entity Resolution Service
B2.1 Link Analysis and Account Discovery
B2.2 Confidence Scoring
Methodology
Thresholds (high vs. low confidence)
How presented to reviewer
Customer ability to adjust thresholds
B2.3 Facial Recognition and Image Matching
Technology / algorithm used
Most recent NIST FRVT submission
Accuracy for standard images
Performance with low-quality images
False positive rate
Platforms / image sources searched
Demographic performance disparities
Regulatory/compliance posture
B2.4 Cross-Platform Identity Linking
B2.5 False Positive Management
B3. Analytical Platform
B3.1 User Interface and Dashboard
B3.2 Risk Indicators and Filtering
B3.3 Content Analysis
Sentiment analysis methodology
Theme identification
Language support
Indicators of inadmissibility
Presentation to reviewer
B3.4 API Capabilities and Integration Experience
API Technical Capabilities:
Item Response
Available endpoints
Authentication methods
Batch upload formats
Results retrieval (webhook/polling)
Rate limits / throughput
Response time benchmarks
API documentation
Sandbox availability
API Integration Experience:
Item Response
# of integrations completed
Types of client systems
Typical integration timeline
Integration support model
Common challenges and resolutions
Customer references available? (Y/N)
B3.5 Audit Logging and Compliance
B3.6 Data Retention and Purging
B3.7 Reporting
SECTION C: TECHNICAL APPROACH
C1. Scalability
Item Response
Approach to scaling to 18M/year
Largest scale deployed (evidence)
Infrastructure investments required
Current max throughput
C2. Processing Time
Item Response
Current avg processing time
Factors affecting speed
When processing exceeds 30 min
SLA violation handling
C3. Dedicated Infrastructure
Item Response
Ability to provide dedicated infra
Physical location of infrastructure
All infra on U.S. soil? (Y/N)
Prior gov experience
C4. Authority to Operate
Item Response
Prior ATOs obtained
FedRAMP authorized?
Estimated DOS ATO timeline
Anticipated challenges
C5. Security Clearances
Item Response
Current facility clearance level
% workforce SECRET or above
Classified program experience
Cleared personnel onboarding capacity
C6. Integration with Government Systems
Demonstrated integrations:
Customer/System Pattern Volume Auth/Security Timeline Operational?
Additional narrative:
Anticipated challenges for OPV
Info needed from Government
Estimated integration timeline
Integration testing approach
Experience with DOS auth/PKI standards
C7. Platform Terms of Service Compliance
C8. Multilingual Content Analysis
C9. AI and Algorithm Transparency
AI/ML components
How findings are explained to reviewers
Bias identification/mitigation
Model validation and update cadence
Human review mechanisms
OMB M-24-10 compliance
C10. Data Governance and Privacy
Data governance framework
Restrictions on Gov data use for AI training
Handling of U.S. person data
Data destruction and certification
C11. Data Rights, Intellectual Property, or Proprietary Restrictions
C12. Solution Management
SECTION D: PAST PERFORMANCE
(Not counted against page limit. Up to 5 contracts. Duplicate block as needed.)
Past Performance Reference #___
D1. Contract Information
Item Response
Contract Name
Contract Number
Contracting Agency
Period of Performance
Total Contract Value
Contract Type
Current Status
D2. Work Description
Item Response
Type of data collected and analyzed
Individuals screened
Platforms and sources
Scale of operations
Clearance requirements
ATO obtained
D3. Government Point of Contact
Item Response
Name
Title
Agency
Phone
Relationship to Contract
D4. Relevance Assessment
Check Rating
☐ Highly Relevant
☐ Relevant
☐ Somewhat Relevant
Justification:
SECTION E: PRICING
(Non-binding ROM for IGCE development only)
E1. Pricing Model
Check Model
☐ Per query
☐ Per applicant
☐ Annual subscription
☐ Tiered (volume-based)
☐ Hybrid
☐ Other
Rationale:
E2. ROM Pricing
Scenario A: 5 Million Applicants/Year
Item Response
Annual cost estimate
Cost per applicant
Key cost drivers
Scenario B: 10 Million Applicants/Year
Item Response
Annual cost estimate
Cost per applicant
Key cost drivers
Scenario C: 18 Million Applicants/Year
Annual cost estimate
Cost per applicant
Key cost drivers
E3. Infrastructure Pricing
Item Response
Premium for dedicated vs. shared
Fixed vs. variable costs
E4. Optional Services Pricing
Optional Service ROM Price
Adding new platform
Surge capacity
Additional training
Enhanced support
Custom report development
E5. Period of Performance Pricing
E6. Top Five Cost Drivers
# Cost Driver How It Affects Pricing
E7. Small Business Subcontracting
% suitable for SB subcontracting
Types of work suitable for SB
SECTION F: ACQUISITION STRATEGY FEEDBACK
F1. Period of Performance
F2. Base Period Feasibility
F3. Requirements Feasibility
Requirement Challenge Proposed Alternative
Suggested Metric(s)? Acceptance Criteria or AQL?
F4. Requirements Clarity
Requirement Ambiguity Proposed Clarification
F5. Suggested Contract Vehicle / Evaluation Criteria / Performance Incentives
F6. Phased Deployment Approach
Recommended phasing structure
Pilot post selection criteria
Applicant volume / # posts per phase
Duration and exit criteria
Dependencies
Risks of full-scale deployment
Alignment with PoP structure
F7. Operational Timeline
F8. Legal and Regulatory Concerns
F9. Competitive Landscape
Estimated # capable vendors
Requirements limiting competition
Modifications to increase competition
F10. Small Business Considerations
F11. Additional Recommendations
SECTION G: TEAMING AND SUBCONTRACTING
G1. Prime Contractor Intent
Check Intent
☐ Prime contractor
☐ Subcontractor
☐ Both
Rationale:
G2. Teaming Arrangements
G3. Capability Gaps
Capability Gap How Addressed
G4. Subcontracting Opportunities
Types of work suitable for subs
Estimated subcontracting %
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION MARKING
Page Description of Proprietary Content
END OF RESPONSE TEMPLATE
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
| ATTACHMENT A RESPONSE TEMPLATE |
| Instructions to Respondents |
| COVER PAGE |
| SECTION A: COMPANY INFORMATION |
| A6. Socioeconomic Categories (check all that apply) |
| A10. Primary Point of Contact |
| A11. Secondary Point of Contact |
| SECTION B: CAPABILITY STATEMENT |
| B1. Data Collection Service Capability |
| B1.1 Social Media Platform Coverage |
| B1.2 Criminal Records Coverage Identify |
| B1.3 Commercial Financial Data |
| B1.4 Publications Coverage |
| B1.5 Comprehensive Online Presence Coverage |
| B1.6 Vital Records Coverage |
| B1.7 Real-Time Collection |
| B1.8 Anonymous Collection |
| B1.9 Seed Parameter Processing |
| B1.10 Historical Data Retrieval |
| B1.11 Multilingual Capabilities |
| B1.12 Account Scrubbing Detection |
| B1.13 New Platform Integration |
| B1.14 Throughput and Capacity |
| B2. Entity Resolution Service |
| B2.1 Link Analysis and Account Discovery |
| B2.2 Confidence Scoring |
| B2.3 Facial Recognition and Image Matching |
| B2.4 Cross-Platform Identity Linking |
| B2.5 False Positive Management |
| B3. Analytical Platform |
| B3.1 User Interface and Dashboard |
| B3.2 Risk Indicators and Filtering |
| B3.3 Content Analysis |
| B3.4 API Capabilities and Integration Experience |
| B3.5 Audit Logging and Compliance |
| B3.6 Data Retention and Purging |
| B3.7 Reporting |
| SECTION C: TECHNICAL APPROACH |
| C1. Scalability |
| C2. Processing Time |
| C3. Dedicated Infrastructure |
| C4. Authority to Operate |
| C5. Security Clearances |
| C6. Integration with Government Systems |
| C7. Platform Terms of Service Compliance |
| C8. Multilingual Content Analysis |
| C9. AI and Algorithm Transparency |
| C10. Data Governance and Privacy |
| C11. Data Rights, Intellectual Property, or Proprietary Restrictions |
| C12. Solution Management |
| SECTION D: PAST PERFORMANCE |
| Past Performance Reference #___ |
| D1. Contract Information |
| D2. Work Description |
| D3. Government Point of Contact |
| D4. Relevance Assessment |
| SECTION E: PRICING |
| E1. Pricing Model |
| E2. ROM Pricing |
| E3. Infrastructure Pricing |
| E4. Optional Services Pricing |
| E5. Period of Performance Pricing |
| E6. Top Five Cost Drivers |
| E7. Small Business Subcontracting |
| SECTION F: ACQUISITION STRATEGY FEEDBACK |
| F1. Period of Performance |
| F2. Base Period Feasibility |
| F3. Requirements Feasibility |
| F4. Requirements Clarity |
| F5. Suggested Contract Vehicle / Evaluation Criteria / Performance Incentives |
| F6. Phased Deployment Approach |
| F7. Operational Timeline |
| F8. Legal and Regulatory Concerns |
| F9. Competitive Landscape |
| F10. Small Business Considerations |
| F11. Additional Recommendations |
| SECTION G: TEAMING AND SUBCONTRACTING |
| G1. Prime Contractor Intent |
| G2. Teaming Arrangements |
| G3. Capability Gaps |
| G4. Subcontracting Opportunities |
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION MARKING
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .