Copy of RFI Vendor Questions JEP Responses 5.20.26.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 33 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- CBP-0004
About this file
This file is a compilation of vendor questions and government responses from a Request for Information (RFI) and Sources Sought Notice (SSR) for a federal contract opportunity.
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is seeking program management support services for U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) Intelligence operations, specifically to manage and support Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) platforms and Surveillance and Counterintelligence Group (SCG) technology pilots. The government anticipates a single-award contract under OASIS+ with an estimated value of $5M-$8M, using NAICS code 541611 (Management Consulting Services), with award targeted for on or before September 2026. The base period is 12 months with one 12-month option year. The contract will be a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) structure with small business set-aside eligibility, and the government does not anticipate travel requirements. Key service areas include program management and governance support; staffing and human resources support (assisting with position descriptions and recruitment for government positions only); acquisition support for developing PWS, SOW, and technical requirements documents; training support development and delivery; technology pilot assessment and evaluation; compliance support for privacy and civil liberties reviews; and monthly license utilization reporting. The government anticipates a small multi-disciplinary team (single-digit FTEs) with significant on-site presence at USBP locations, though the final on-site/remote work ratio remains under review. Security clearance requirements are under development but will likely include Secret clearance as a minimum, with some roles potentially requiring TS/SCI. Contractor personnel may access PII but not SPII, and all sensitive work will occur on government-furnished systems with existing Authorities to Operate. The RFI response deadline was extended to May 27, 2026 at 1 p.m. ET, and government responses to 32 vendor questions address page limits, past performance submission (three examples as separate attachment), deliverable due dates (to be finalized post-award), AI tool disclosure and compliance requirements, organizational conflict of interest mitigation, training modalities, and anticipated workload estimates, among other clarifications on contract terms and performance expectations.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sources Sought.pdf | ||
| Vendor Question Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| SOW.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
| Vendor | Ref No. | Document Name | Page No. | Paragraph/ | ||||
| Section | Topic | Question or Comment | Government Response | |||||
| (RFP,SOW, etc.) | ||||||||
| Visual Connections | Q-01 | RFI/SSR Notice | 2-3 | Page Limits / Past Performance | Past performance page treatment | The RFI instructs offerors to provide no more than three (3) past performance examples while also imposing a three (3) page limit for the entire response (excluding only the cover page). Given that substantive past performance examples—including contract details, relevance descriptions, and performance outcomes—will likely consume most or all of the three-page allocation, will the Government: (a) allow additional pages (e.g., two supplemental pages) specifically for demonstrating technical capabilities and approach beyond past performance; or (b) permit past performance examples to be submitted as a separate attachment outside the three-page narrative limit? Please clarify how offerors should balance the competing space requirements to provide a meaningful and complete response. | The three (3) page limit applies only to the narrative portion of the response and excludes the cover page and the past performance examples, which may be submitted as a separate attachment using the provided template. No additional narrative pages beyond the three-page limit will be permitted. | |
| iC-1 Solutions | SOW 3.5 | 4 | Training Support | Training Support | Can the customer provide any additional details on training, such as current modalities, training course frequencies, student types (e.g. civillian, beginniner/intermediate/advanced), student to instructor ratio requirements, etc.? | At this time, specific training modalities, frequencies, student types, and class sizes have not been finalized. The Government is using this RFI to gather information on a range of training approaches; any subsequent solicitation will provide additional detail on training requirements. | ||
| iC-1 Solutions | SOW 9 | 7-8 | Security Requirements | Security Requirements | Does the customer have any specific clearance level requirements (e.g. SECRET, TOP SECRET)? | Clearance requirements are under development. The Government currently anticipates that certain positions will require at least a Secret clearance and that some roles may require TS/SCI; any polygraph or additional requirements, and clearance levels by role, will be specified in any subsequent solicitation. | ||
| C3 AI, Inc | 1 | RFI/SSR | 3 | Submission Instructions | Public Q&A Release | Will Q&A from this RFI/SSR be released publicly (e.g., posted on SAM.gov) or only to vendors who submitted questions? | All responses will appear via SAM.gov. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 2 | RFI/SSR | 2 | Scope / Page Limits | Past Performance Attachment | Confirm that the three (3) page limit excludes both the cover page and the past performance examples — i.e., past performance examples may be appended as a separate attachment without counting against the 3-page narrative limit. | The 3 page limit excludes the cover page and the past performance examples. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 3 | RFI/SSR | 2 | Past Performance | Past Performance Magnitude | The past performance template requests 'Size of contract ($).' Can CBP share the anticipated value range of the contemplated effort so vendors can select most relevant past performance? | Range of $5M-$8M | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 4 | SOW | — | Acquisition Strategy (not stated) | Contract Vehicle | What contract vehicle does CBP anticipate using (open market, an existing CBP/DHS IDIQ such as EAGLE Next Gen, GSA MAS, OASIS+, or another)? Will any portion be set aside (8(a), SDVOSB, WOSB, HUBZone, or Small Business total set-aside)? | OASIS+ | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 5 | SOW | — | Acquisition Strategy (not stated) | NAICS Code (541512 vs. 541611) | What is the anticipated NAICS code and small business size standard? Specifically, is CBP considering a Computer Systems Design / IT Services NAICS (e.g., 541512) that would permit a combined software, integration, and labor delivery model, or a Management Consulting / Engineering Services NAICS (e.g., 541611 or 541330) that would scope this as professional services only? | 541611 | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 6 | SOW | — | Acquisition Strategy (not stated) | Single vs. Multiple Award | Is the Government considering a single award or multiple awards (e.g., BPAs against MAS)? | Single Award | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 7 | SOW | — | Acquisition Strategy (not stated) | Schedule | What are the anticipated RFP release date, award date, and period of performance start date? | Anticipated award on or before September 2026. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 8 | SOW | 7 | 6. Period of Performance | Option Periods | Section 6 specifies a 12-month base period, but Section 12.1 references 'Option(s)' to be invoiced after modification. How many option periods does CBP intend, and of what length? | 12-Month Base Year and 1-12 Month Option Year | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 9 | SOW | — | Overall Scope Structure | Software / Tools-Enabled Scope | Will the eventual solicitation accept proposals that combine professional services with software, platform, or commercial tool licenses delivered to the Government as part of contract performance (e.g., dashboards, governance workflow tools, analytic enablement platforms used to produce the deliverables in Section 5), or is the requirement structured exclusively as labor-based professional services? If a software or tools component is acceptable, would it be priced as a separate CLIN or as part of an integrated FFP? | The contemplated requirement is primarily for professional services. The Government has not yet determined whether any software, platform, or commercial tool licenses will be acquired under this effort. If software or tool components are included, the approach to including and pricing them (e.g., separate CLINs) will be addressed in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 10 | SOW | 2-4 | §1 Introduction / §3 Scope (OSINT & SCG) | Government Builders — Mission Applications | How does CBP envision the division of labor between government personnel and contractor personnel for the development, configuration, and ongoing operation of mission applications supporting the OSINT and SCG technology portfolios? Specifically, will USBP government personnel be expected to build, configure, or operate mission applications themselves — potentially on a contractor-provided platform with embedded governance, security, audit, and compliance controls — or will application development and ongoing operations be performed entirely by contractor personnel? | The Government anticipates that contractor personnel will provide configuration, integration, and operational support for mission applications, while USBP personnel will remain responsible for operational use, decision-making, and governance. The precise division of labor between Government and contractor personnel will be defined in any subsequent solicitation and tasking. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 11 | SOW | 3-4 | §3.3 and §3.4 | Humans-in-the-Lead AI COTS — PMO Scope | Will the eventual solicitation accept proposals that include Enterprise AI COTS solutions — already commercially available — intended to empower CBP government personnel, with humans in the lead, in performing acquisition documentation tasks (PWS, SOO, SOW), position description development, and HR staffing analysis under SOW §3.3 and §3.4? Under such a model, the contractor would provide the platform, configuration, integration, and embedded governance/compliance controls; CBP personnel would perform the substantive content creation, decision-making, and approval. This approach is intended to support FAR Subpart 7.5 considerations regarding closely-associated-with-inherently-governmental functions, and to align with the policy direction in OMB Memorandum M-25-22 on the efficient acquisition of artificial intelligence in Government. | The Government is open to approaches that employ commercially available AI-enabled tools to support development of acquisition documentation, provided that Government personnel remain responsible for all inherently governmental determinations, content approval, and decision-making. Any such approaches must comply with Section 11.4 of the SOW and applicable DHS policies; additional guidance will be provided in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 12 | SOW | 6 | §5 Deliverables — License Utilization Report | License Management Scope | The 'License Utilization Report' is a monthly deliverable. Does the contractor's scope include managing or procuring commercial licenses (OSINT platforms, SCG pilot tooling), or only reporting on Government-procured licenses? | At this time, the Government anticipates that licenses for Government-selected tools and platforms will be procured and owned by the Government. The Contractor’s scope is expected to focus on tracking and reporting on utilization of those licenses. If contractor procurement or management of licenses is required, it will be specified in any subsequent solicitation or task order. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 13 | SOW | 4 | §3.4 Acquisition Management Support | OCI Mitigation (FAR Subpart 9.5) | SOW §3.4 directs the contractor to develop or update PWSs, technical requirements, evaluation criteria, and acquisition documentation for OSINT tools and SCG-emergent capabilities. Consistent with FAR Subpart 9.5, how does CBP intend to identify and mitigate Organizational Conflict of Interest (biased ground rules, unequal access to information, impaired objectivity) for the awardee on follow-on tool acquisitions in any of the six SCG technology domains (vehicle ID/tracking, digital media exploitation, RF detection and geolocation, maritime domain awareness, vehicle counter-surveillance, AI-enabled analytic workflows) or OSINT? Specifically, will CBP impose post-award task restrictions, firewall provisions, or neutral-third-party requirements on §3.4 acquisition support and §3.6 assessment work? | The Government will address potential Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.5 in any subsequent solicitation. The Government anticipates including appropriate OCI disclosure and mitigation requirements and may, where necessary, limit participation in follow-on acquisitions or require firewalls to address biased ground rules, unequal access to information, or impaired objectivity. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 14 | SOW | 5 | §3.6 Assessment Support | OCI Between §3.4 and §3.6 | Section 3.6 requires the contractor to assess solutions for performance, usability, scalability, interoperability, reliability, and operational suitability. Will the contractor be required to assess capabilities that the same contractor recommended or evaluated under Section 3.4? If so, what OCI firewall does CBP expect? | To the extent a contractor participates in both acquisition support and assessment activities, the Government will structure work and apply OCI mitigation measures to avoid self-evaluation and impaired objectivity, consistent with FAR Subpart 9.5. Any specific restrictions or firewalls will be identified in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 15 | SOW | 3 | §3.3 Program Management and Governance Support | Inherently Governmental Activities | Section 3.3 permits the contractor to assist USBP with position descriptions, qualification criteria, interview materials, and outreach for technical hires. Will any of these activities be designated inherently governmental, or are they fully contractor-performable under direction? | Activities described in Section 3.3 (e.g., assisting with position descriptions, qualification criteria, interview materials, and outreach strategies) are intended as advisory and support functions. All inherently governmental activities, including final position approval, candidate evaluation, selection, and hiring decisions, will remain the responsibility of Government personnel. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 16 | SOW | 8 | §11.2 Travel | Travel Confirmation | Section 11.2 states 'Travel is not required.' Confirm that no travel to USBP sector HQs, stations, or pilot field sites is anticipated under any task. If travel ultimately becomes necessary, will it be added under modification or absorbed within the FFP? | The Government does not currently anticipate travel under this requirement and has structured the draft SOW accordingly. If travel is later determined to be necessary, it would be addressed via contract modification and any associated travel would be handled in accordance with applicable DHS policies. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 17 | SOW | 2 | §1 Introduction / SCG technology areas | Maritime Domain Awareness Scope | Maritime Domain Awareness is listed among the SCG capability portfolios. Confirm these maritime DA workflows are USBP-led (not Coast Guard / AMOC / MISLE) and identify the relevant USBP entity to be supported. | Maritime domain awareness activities referenced in the SOW relate to USBP-led mission support and coordination in border coastal regions. The contractor’s support will be focused on USBP Intelligence Division and SCG requirements and will be coordinated, as appropriate, with other DHS components. Specific organizations will be identified in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 18 | SOW | 10 | §12.1 Invoice Submission / Contract Type | Contract Type and CLIN Structure | The SOW is FFP across seven task areas with workload that scales with USBP demand. Will CBP price each task area as a separate FFP CLIN, by labor category mix, or as a single FFP for the full base period? Will a Labor Hour or T&M CLIN be available for surge work? | The Government anticipates a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) structure; the final CLIN structure (e.g., by task area and/or labor mix, and any use of separate CLINs for surge or other work) will be defined in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 19 | SOW | — | Workload Estimates | Workload Data for FFP Pricing | Will CBP provide estimated annual workload (pilots in flight, OSINT licenses under management, monthly tasker volume, training events per quarter) to support FFP pricing? | The Government is refining workload estimates (e.g., number of pilots, license counts, tasker volume, and training events). To the extent available and appropriate, such information will be provided in any subsequent solicitation to support offerors’ pricing. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 20 | SOW | 7-8 | §8 GFE / §9 Security Requirements | BI Adjudication Timeline | What is the expected ratio of on-site to off-site work, and CBP's current time-to-adjudicate for new contractor CBP BI submissions? | The final mix of on-site and off-site work is under review and will be specified in any subsequent solicitation. The Government currently anticipates a significant on-site presence at designated USBP locations, with any remote work subject to Government approval. Timeframes for completion of CBP background investigations can vary based on individual circumstances and workload; offerors should plan for several weeks to several months from submission to adjudication. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 21 | SOW | 24 | Contractor Employee Access — Alternate I vs Alternate II | Citizenship Restriction | The SOW attaches both Alternate I (non-US citizen waiver process via DOS Allied Nations List) and Alternate II (US citizens / LPRs only). Which alternate governs this contract? | The Government currently anticipates applying HSAR 3052.240-71, Contractor Employee Access, Alternate II (U.S. citizens / lawful permanent residents), for this requirement. Any use of Alternate I (non-U.S. citizen waiver process) would be addressed on a case-by-case basis and identified in any subsequent solicitation or contract. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 22 | SOW | 9 | §11.4 Artificial Intelligence | Scope of AI Disclosure | Section 11.4 requires the contractor to disclose how AI is used in performance and gives the Government right to disapprove. Does this requirement apply to the use of commercial AI tools by contractor PMO staff for administrative purposes (LLM-assisted drafting, summarization), or only to AI tools delivered or integrated as part of contract deliverables? | Section 11.4 applies to AI tools and capabilities used in the performance of this contract, particularly where Government data, systems, or deliverables are involved. The Government does not intend to govern purely internal contractor uses of commercial AI tools that do not process Government data or contribute to contract deliverables; however, any AI use that touches Government information or supports contract performance must be disclosed in accordance with Section 11.4. | |
| C3 AI, Inc | 23 | SOW | 15-16 | Authority to Operate (ATO) | ATO Expectation | Will the contractor be expected to obtain a Contractor IT System ATO for handling SOW-related data, or will all sensitive work occur on Government-furnished workstations within CBP facilities? | The Government currently anticipates that sensitive work under this requirement will be performed on Government-furnished systems and networks with existing Authorities to Operate (ATOs). The contractor is not expected to obtain a separate ATO for a contractor-owned system unless explicitly required in any subsequent solicitation or task order. | |
| Constellation Inc | 1 | NA | NA | NA | NA | Who is the incumbent on this contract? Please provide the contract number. | This is a new requirement; there is no incumbent contract performing this specific scope of work. | |
| Constellation Inc | 2 | NA | NA | NA | NA | Does the incumbent qualify to submit a bid for this solicitation? | This RFI is for market research only and does not constitute a solicitation. Any future solicitation will define eligibility and evaluation criteria; at this stage, any interested and capable vendors are encouraged to respond to the RFI. | |
| FGS, LLC | 1 | RFI/SSR | 1 | Introduction | Acquisition Strategy | Is the Government considering a set-aside for this requirement (e.g., small business, 8(a), SDVOSB, HUBZone), or will it be unrestricted full and open competition? | Set-Aside Small Business | |
| FGS, LLC | 2 | SOW | 7 | Section 6 | Period of Performance | The SOW specifies a 12-month base period. Does the Government anticipate option periods? If so, how many and of what duration? | 12-Month Base Year and 4 Option Years | |
| FGS, LLC | 3 | SOW | 7 | Section 6 | Contract Vehicle | Will this requirement be competed as a standalone contract, or does the Government intend to use an existing IDIQ vehicle (e.g., OASIS, Alliant 3, GSA Schedule)? | OASIS+ | |
| FGS, LLC | 4 | SOW | 7 | Section 9 | Security Requirements | What level of security clearance (Secret, Top Secret, TS/SCI) is required for contractor personnel? Are any positions requiring polygraph examinations? | Clearance requirements are under development. The Government currently anticipates that certain positions will require at least a Secret clearance and that some roles may require TS/SCI; any polygraph or additional requirements, and clearance levels by role, will be specified in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| FGS, LLC | 5 | SOW | 2-3 | Section 2 | Scope/Technical | Can the Government provide the approximate number of active or planned technology pilots the contractor would be expected to manage/govern concurrently? | The number of active or planned technology pilots may vary over time. The Government currently anticipates supporting a limited number of concurrent pilots; more detailed estimates, if available, will be provided in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| FGS, LLC | 6 | SOW | 2 | Section 2 | Scope/Technical | Can the Government provide additional detail on the current OSINT tools, platforms, or data services in use that the contractor would be expected to support or assess? | Specific tools, platforms, and data services currently in use are not being identified at this time. The Government is seeking information from vendors with experience supporting, assessing, and integrating a range of commercially available capabilities; additional detail may be provided in any subsequent solicitation as appropriate. | |
| FGS, LLC | 7 | SOW | 3 | Section 3.3 | Staffing | Section 3.3 references assisting with "identifying and attracting qualified technical expertise." Does this extend to supporting recruitment for both Government and contractor positions, or only Government positions? | Support described in Section 3.3 is intended to assist USBP in identifying and attracting qualified technical expertise for Government positions. The contractor will not be responsible for recruiting or staffing contractor personnel beyond its own internal hiring. | |
| FGS, LLC | 8 | SOW | 4 | Section 3.4 | Acquisition Support | For acquisition management support, will the contractor be expected to have Contracting Officer Representative (COR) Level I, II, or III certified personnel? | No | |
| FGS, LLC | 9 | SOW | 4-5 | Section 3.5 | Training Support | Will the contractor be responsible for developing new training curricula, or primarily maintaining and updating existing Government-provided training materials? | The Government anticipates a combination of developing new training content and maintaining/updating existing materials. The specific balance will depend on mission needs and will be clarified in any subsequent solicitation or tasking. | |
| FGS, LLC | 10 | SOW | 5 | Section 3.6 | Assessment Support | For SCG technology pilots, will the contractor have direct access to pilot systems and data to conduct assessments, or will assessments be based solely on documentation and Government-provided information? | For SCG technology pilots, the Government anticipates that the contractor will have appropriate access to pilot systems and data, under Government direction and subject to applicable security and access controls, to support assessments. Any limitations or specific access conditions will be defined in subsequent tasking. | |
| FGS, LLC | 11 | SOW | 7 | Section 7 | Place of Performance | What is the anticipated ratio of on-site versus remote work for contractor personnel? Does the Government have a minimum on-site presence requirement? | The final mix of on-site and any Government-approved remote work is under review and will be specified in any subsequent solicitation. The Government currently anticipates a significant on-site presence at designated USBP locations. | |
| FGS, LLC | 12 | SOW | 7 | Section 8 | GFE/Access | Section 8 states workstations will be provided after a CBP BI is completed. Can the Government clarify the expected timeline for completing background investigations to enable on-site access? | Timeframes for completion of CBP background investigations can vary based on individual circumstances and workload; offerors should plan for several weeks to several months from submission to adjudication. Additional guidance will be provided in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| FGS, LLC | 13 | RFI/SSR | 2-3 | Past Performance | Staffing Level | The past performance table requests "Number of FTE staff assigned." Can the Government provide a target FTE range or level of effort anticipated for this requirement to help offerors identify comparable past performance? | The Government is still refining the anticipated level of effort. Offerors may assume a small-team construct (on the order of single-digit FTEs) for purposes of identifying comparable past performance. More precise estimates, if available, will be provided in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| FGS, LLC | 14 | SOW | 6-7 | Section 5 | Deliverables | Several deliverable due dates are listed as "TBD." Will the Government provide specific due dates at time of award, or will these be negotiated during the kickoff meeting? | Specific due dates for deliverables currently marked "TBD" will be established at or shortly after award, in coordination with the selected contractor and documented in the final contract and/or project management plan. | |
| FGS, LLC | 15 | SOW | 6 | Section 5 | Deliverables | For the monthly License Utilization Report, which specific tools/platforms should be tracked? Will the Government provide access to licensing data and user activity logs? | The License Utilization Report is intended to cover Government-identified tools and platforms that fall within the contract scope. The Government will identify the specific tools/platforms to be tracked and provide access to relevant licensing and usage data, as appropriate, at or after award. | |
| FGS, LLC | 16 | SOW | 6-7 | Section 5 | Performance Standards | Can the Government provide examples of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that will be used to measure contractor performance? | Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are under development and will be finalized in any subsequent solicitation or award. Illustrative KPIs may include timeliness and completeness of deliverables, responsiveness to tasking, achievement of agreed schedules, accuracy and usefulness of analyses, and adherence to applicable security and compliance requirements. | |
| FGS, LLC | 17 | SOW | 6 | Section 5 | Acceptance Process | For deliverables requiring "Government approval," what is the expected Government review cycle time and process for providing feedback? | The Government will specify review timelines in the contract or project management plan. As a general practice, the Government seeks to review and provide feedback on deliverables within approximately 10–15 business days, subject to complexity and operational demands. | |
| FGS, LLC | 18 | SOW | 9 | Section 11.4 | Artificial Intelligence | The AI compliance and risk management plan is due within 10 days of award. Can the Government provide a template or specific format requirements for this deliverable? | The Government does not currently have a prescribed template for the AI compliance and risk management plan. Offerors may propose a format that addresses the elements identified in Section 11.4; additional guidance may be provided in any subsequent solicitation or at kickoff. | |
| FGS, LLC | 19 | SOW | 9 | Section 11.4 | Artificial Intelligence | Does the Government anticipate the contractor using AI tools (e.g., GenAI) for administrative support under this contract, or is AI use limited to supporting USBP's operational AI capabilities? | The Government anticipates that AI use under this contract may include both support to operationally focused AI capabilities and, where appropriate, the use of AI tools to assist with contract-related administrative or analytic tasks, subject to disclosure and approval in accordance with Section 11.4 and applicable DHS policies. | |
| FGS, LLC | 20 | SOW | 5-6 | Section 3.7 | Compliance Support | For compliance support related to privacy and civil liberties, will the contractor have access to existing Privacy Threshold Analyses (PTAs), Privacy Impact Assessments (PIAs), and Systems of Records Notices (SORNs) to inform compliance activities? | Yes. To the extent permitted and appropriate, the Government anticipates providing access to relevant existing Privacy Threshold Analyses (PTAs), Privacy Impact Assessments (PIAs), and Systems of Records Notices (SORNs) to inform contractor compliance support activities. | |
| FGS, LLC | 21 | Addendum A | 12-20 | Safeguarding Sensitive Information | PII Handling | Will contractor personnel have direct access to PII/SPII as part of this effort, or will access be limited to anonymized or aggregated data for assessment purposes? | Contractor personnel may have access to PII in the course of performing this effort (e.g., contact information, staffing data). Access to SPII is not anticipated as a primary requirement; if SPII access becomes necessary, it will be minimized, governed by applicable DHS policies, and clearly defined in any subsequent solicitation or tasking. | |
| FGS, LLC | 22 | Addendum A | 15-17 | Authority to Operate | System Access | Will the contractor be required to operate any independent IT systems requiring an Authority to Operate (ATO), or will all work be performed on Government-owned systems with existing ATOs? | The Government currently anticipates that work involving CUI or other sensitive data will occur on Government-owned systems with existing Authorities to Operate (ATOs). The contractor is not expected to operate independent IT systems requiring a separate ATO unless explicitly required in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| FGS, LLC | 23 | Addendum A | 25-26 | Supply Chain Risk Management | SCRM Plan | Is a Supply Chain Risk Management Plan required for this services-based contract, or does this clause primarily apply to hardware/software procurements? | This requirement is primarily for services. To the extent supply chain risk management obligations apply (e.g., for any hardware/software acquired or used under the contract), they will be addressed through applicable clauses and requirements in any subsequent solicitation. A standalone Supply Chain Risk Management Plan is not currently anticipated unless specified otherwise. | |
| FGS, LLC | 24 | Addendum A | 28-29 | Continuous Monitoring | SOC Integration | Section references integration with DHS Security Operations Center (SOC). Will the contractor be required to have its own SOC capability, or will this be managed through DHS infrastructure? | The Government does not anticipate requiring the contractor to operate an independent Security Operations Center (SOC) for this effort. Integration with DHS SOC capabilities will occur through DHS/CBP infrastructure and processes, with the contractor supporting required reporting and coordination activities. | |
| FGS, LLC | 25 | RFI/SSR | 2 | Scope | Page Limits | The RFI states a 3-page limit not including the cover page. Does the past performance table count toward the 3-page limit, or is past performance in addition to the 3 pages? | The 3 page limit excludes the cover page and the past performance examples. | |
| FGS, LLC | 26 | SOW | 4-5 | Section 3.5 | Training Delivery Method | Will training be delivered in-person, virtually, or hybrid? What is the anticipated geographic distribution of users requiring training on OSINT and SCG capabilities? | The Government anticipates a mix of virtual and, as needed, in-person training delivery, with users located at USBP Headquarters and selected sector locations. Specific modalities, locations, and schedules will be defined in any subsequent solicitation and tasking. | |
| FGS, LLC | 27 | SOW | 10 | Section 12.1 | Invoice/Payment | The SOW states "one (1) FFP invoice for the Base Period thirty days (30) after the contract award for the full amount." Can the Government confirm this is a single lump-sum payment structure, and if so, clarify the rationale for this approach versus milestone-based payments? | The invoicing language in the draft SOW is not final. The Government is evaluating appropriate invoicing and payment approaches (e.g., periodic or milestone-based payments) and will define the final structure in any subsequent solicitation and award. | |
| FGS, LLC | 28 | SOW | 3 | Section 3.3 | SCG Technology Pilot TRL | For SCG technology pilots (vehicle tracking, RF detection, maritime awareness, AI workflows), what is the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of these capabilities? | SCG technology pilots are generally expected to be in the mid-range of technology readiness (e.g., transition and operationalization rather than basic research), but specific TRL levels may vary by capability. Additional information on maturity levels will be provided, as appropriate, in any subsequent solicitation or tasking. | |
| FGS, LLC | 29 | SOW | 3 | Section 3.3 | Hiring Support Limitations | Section 3.3 mentions the contractor may assist with position descriptions and qualification criteria for Government hiring. What are the boundaries of permissible contractor involvement in this inherently governmental-adjacent activity? | Contractor support for Government hiring activities will be limited to advisory and administrative assistance, such as drafting or refining position descriptions, qualification criteria, interview questions, and outreach strategies at Government direction. Contractors will not evaluate candidates, participate in selection decisions, or perform any inherently governmental hiring functions; all such decisions remain with Government personnel. | |
| FGS, LLC | 30 | SOW | 5 | Section 3.6 | System Integration | For assessment of system integration with existing CBP/USBP systems, what are the primary systems requiring integration (e.g., TECS, ACE, ENFORCE)? | Specific systems for integration will be identified in any subsequent solicitation and tasking, consistent with operational security and system governance. Vendors should assume integration with existing CBP/USBP operational and intelligence systems and be prepared to discuss relevant experience integrating with large-scale law enforcement or border security systems. | |
| FGS, LLC | 31 | SOW | 2 | Section 2 | AI-Enabled Workflows | For AI-enabled analytic workflows mentioned in the Background, what specific AI/ML capabilities are in scope (e.g., NLP, computer vision, predictive analytics)? | The AI-enabled analytic workflows referenced in the SOW may include capabilities such as natural language processing, entity extraction, correlation and fusion, anomaly detection, and predictive analytics. The exact scope of AI/ML capabilities will depend on mission needs and will be further defined in any subsequent solicitation or tasking. | |
| FGS, LLC | 32 | SOW | 3 | Section 3.2 | Administrative Support Clearances | Will TS/SCI clearance be required for all positions including administrative roles, or will Secret clearance be acceptable for non-intelligence support functions? | The Government does not expect that all positions will require TS/SCI. Clearance requirements by role (e.g., TS/SCI for certain intelligence roles and Secret for selected support roles) will be specified in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| Logistics Research Inc. | 1 | SOW | 36 | Help Desk | Key Personnel/Labor Categories | What labor categories and key personnel positions does the Government anticipate requiring, and are there minimum certification or clearance requirements for those roles? | The Government anticipates requiring key personnel roles such as a Program Manager and selected subject-matter experts (e.g., intelligence/OSINT, technology pilot/assessment, training), with appropriate security clearances. Specific labor categories, key personnel designations, and any minimum certification requirements will be defined in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| Logistics Research Inc. | 2 | SOW | 8 | Contract Administration | Administrative Information/Contract Metrics | What is the anticipated contract value, total period of performance, and estimated level of effort/FTE staffing for this effort? | As noted in the RFI, the Government currently anticipates a contract value in the range of $5M–$8M, with a 12‑month base period and one 12‑month option period. The level of effort is expected to correspond to a small multi-disciplinary team; more detailed staffing estimates will be provided, if available, in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| Logistics Research Inc. | 3 | SOW | 2 | Introduction | Incumbent | Who is the incumbent contractor currently supporting these OSINT and SCG technology pilot activities? | This is a new requirement; there is no incumbent contract performing this specific scope of work. | |
| Logistics Research Inc. | 4 | SOW | 7 | Place of Performance | Place of Performance/Remote Work | What percentage of the work is expected to be performed on-site versus remotely, and where are the primary places of performance? | The primary place of performance is anticipated to be USBP Headquarters and other designated CBP facilities. The final mix of on-site and any Government-approved remote work, and the specific locations, will be specified in any subsequent solicitation. | |
| Logistics Research Inc. | 5 | SOW | 2 | Background, Paragraph 2 | OSINT | What specific OSINT platforms, analytic tools, AI-enabled workflows, and SCG pilot technologies are currently in use or planned for transition to operational deployment? | Specific OSINT platforms, analytic tools, AI-enabled workflows, and pilot technologies currently in use are not being identified at this time. The Government is seeking vendors with experience supporting, assessing, and integrating a range of commercially available capabilities; additional detail may be provided in any subsequent solicitation as appropriate. | |
| Logistics Research Inc. | 6 | SOW | N/A | N/A | Evaluation Criteria for Proposals | What evaluation criteria and technical capabilities will be weighted most heavily in the eventual solicitation? | To Be Determined |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .