CBP RFI Questions and Answers update 04.11 Final.docx

CBP - HRM Relocation Resources Website/App Development Q&A:

1. Is this a new requirement or a recompete?

· This is a new requirement

2. Does CBP have preferred or pre-approved third-party data sources (e.g., Zillow for real estate, Weatherstack for weather, local crime data) to be used for integration? No. CBP is seeking a one stop tool/solution for applicants to obtain information about proposed job duty locations The information does not have to be integrated into CBP system but rather the applicant would need to be able to access via a link or other function.

3. Will the solution be required to integrate with existing CBP or DHS systems? If so, can you share more details on these systems and integration expectations? We are open to vendor ideas regarding integration; however, we believe this could be hosted by the vendor and that some type of “portal” or hyperlink could bring the applicant into the website.

4. Is FEDRAMP authorization required for the entire platform or only for components handling sensitive data?

· Currently, this is still tbd, we are just trying to gather market information if potential companies have FEDRAMP certification

· FEDRAMP is only required if the system integrates with CBP systems. CBP envisions there are options for this service that do not require integration.

5. Will the platform require user authentication? If so, is there a preferred identity management system (e.g., PIV, AD, SSO)? We don’t believe user authentication is required since non-CBP employees (aka applicants) will need to access it

6. Is CBP seeking a native mobile application in addition to a responsive web platform, or would a mobile-optimized web application suffice? Priority is on user experience and accurate information on locations. CBP is open to platforms

7. Can CBP provide a notional timeline or estimated duration for the full lifecycle (design to launch)? Since we are still gathering market research, would like to hear from vendors on the rough order of magnitude on what is a reasonable but also urgent lifecycle timeline expectation. Again, CBP is open to Commercially off the shelf solutions.

8. Is funding already allocated for this requirement? No. Will the follow-on acquisition favor a Firm-Fixed-Price structure, or are other pricing models being considered? All pricing models will be considered.

9. Is there a notional budget range or ceiling that CBP can share to help vendors better align their Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) estimates? No, vendor ROM estimates will help shape our future ROM.

10. Is there an expected range for the number of concurrent or annual users that the system must support? Ranges based on hiring requirements- expect up to 100K per year.

11. Will CBP content administrators require a content management interface to update relocation resources, or will the platform rely solely on automated data integrations? Preference is information will be updated automatically based on a variety of sources

12. Is multilingual support required (e.g., Spanish)? If so, are there specific translation standards or vendors CBP prefers? No.

13. Are there specific DHS/CBP cybersecurity protocols (e.g., CDM) in addition to federal baselines (FISMA, NIST 800-53) that vendors should account for? Vendor will need to meet CBP security and privacy requirements. Requirements increase if systems are integrated.

14. Can CBP share details on the types of PII expected to be collected or processed, and whether a System of Records Notice (SORN) or Privacy Impact Assessment will be provided? We don’t need to collect PII. Inquiries will be based on potential job duty locations, no other specifics are required.

15. What is the expected scope of help desk support (e.g., business hours vs. 24/7)? Should vendors plan for Tier 1 through Tier 3 support coverage? Support should be 24/7 and if this is not reasonable, then vendor can outline how support can be provided within 24 hours.

16. For training deliverables, how many end-user training sessions are anticipated, and what format (virtual, in-person, or asynchronous) is preferred? A range of 3-5 training sessions, can be done virtually

17. Is the government looking for an existing application or custom development?

· Either. We are completely fine with an off the shelf tool, so long as it can fit within the technology plan, operations, and branding of CBP.

18. Is the government anticipating self-hosting or vendor hosting?

· This can be vendor hosted as long as CBP and DHS security protocols are met.

19. What types of data will be housed within the system aside from data related to relocation? Will users need to register? Create a profile? Is user information required for reporting?

· Current CBP vision for this does not require PII or individual data to be house with the vendor. Applicants would need access to research specific locations and amenities in the location, but it would not require the PII of the individual, but general reporting information (non-PII) would be needed to see how applicants are harnessing the tool.

20. Will CBP welcome and consider responses to the RFI that explore leveraging a different technology stack or platform (PaaS/SaaS) that meets the requirements other than what is described in Section 7.0 of the Draft SoW?

· Yes, we are open to that and it is acceptable for an RFI Response.

21. We are not FEDRAMP certified. We would appreciate it if you could let us know if this would disqualify us from bidding on the project.

· That does not disqualify you from submitting a response to the RFI. We are trying to gather as much information on the available market for this work. Please submit your response but also indicate in your response that you do not have FEDRAMP Certification.

22. The SOW mentions integrating third-party APIs for weather, real estate, and crime data. Are there preferred or mandated data providers? No, but information should be current, accurate, and a common trusted source.. What are the specific requirements or constraints regarding the use, licensing, attribution, and update frequency for data from these APIs? Data should be updated and accurate based on industry standards.

23. The SOW and RFI refer to a "website/app" or "website and/or mobile app" Is the requirement for both a responsive website and native mobile apps (iOS & Android), or would a responsive website accessible on mobile devices suffice? If native apps are required, should they mirror all website functionality? There should be full functionality to the end user via either website or mobile application/mobile website.

24. Will access be restricted (require login credentials provided by CBP), or will parts or all of the platforms be publicly accessible? Vendors should provide options to the govt.

25. Is there a place of performance intended for this work? No

26. The SOW mandates 33 months of post-launch support. Could CBP further define the scope of this support? Support should ensure that the end user is able to access and obtain all information that the software solution offers. Does it cover only corrective maintenance (bug fixes, critical updates, O&M). It should also provide a level of customer service that creates a good end user experience. What are the specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the help desk support? Some KPI’s should include (but not limited to)

· First Call Resolution (FCR): The percentage of issues resolved on the first contact with the help desk.

· Average Resolution Time: The average time taken to resolve a ticket from the time it is logged.

· Ticket Volume: The total number of tickets received within a specific period.

· Customer Satisfaction (CSAT): A measure of customer satisfaction with the help desk services, often gathered through surveys.

· Response Time: The average time taken to respond to a ticket after it is logged.

· Ticket Backlog: The number of unresolved tickets at any given time.

· Escalation Rate: The percentage of tickets that are escalated to higher levels of support.

· Cost per Ticket: The average cost incurred by the help desk to resolve a ticket.

· Agent Utilization: The percentage of time help desk agents spend on resolving tickets versus other activities.

· Net Promoter Score (NPS): A metric that measures the likelihood of customers recommending the help desk services to others.

These KPIs help in monitoring performance, identifying areas for improvement, and ensuring that the help desk is meeting its service level agreements (SLAs).

27. Would the government entertain non-GWAC vehicles? Yes, considering all options to better advise the Government’s acquisition strategy. However, a GWAC would be the Government’s desired preference if the market indicates that multiple offerors on an existing GWAC and effectively and timely satisfy the requirement.

28. Are there any restrictions on data generated or collected from this application? (Example: Data stored must use AWS Gov) This solution should not store any PII.

29. Will CBP provide any specific information, resources, software licenses, or testing environments (GFI/GFE) to aid in the development, integration, or testing process? A formal testing process/timeline should be provided by the vendor. Depending on how the software will be delivered, CBP may need to provide a testing environment.

30. Are there security clearance requirements for the staff? If access to CBP networks are needed, then there will be security clearance requirements for any contractors that are working within CBP networks.

31. What are the CI/CD requirements? The vendor can provide this outline based upon industry standards.

32. In section 5. Submission Instructions and Contact Information of the RFI, the government states, "Please submit your RFI response by April 15th, 2025…" Can the government please clarify if there is a particular time that RFI responses are due by on April 15th? The RFI responses are now updated to be due by 3:00 PM EST on 04/22.

33. Do we need to provide a list of key personnel and their resumes with the RFI? It is not a requirement for a response to this RFI. However, you can include a recommended list of key personnel positions/LCATs that you would intend to propose given the opportunity. The Government is not seeking resumes currently

34. SOW Point 2: Will the Information on “overview of Relocation Area”, “Neighborhood Guide”, and “Moving Guide” be provided? The Requirements of each of these three referenced SOW sections are already laid out in the SOW under the respective sections.

35. SOW Point 7: “Weather, Real Estate, Crime API: Third-party APIs (Weatherstack, Zillow, local crime data providers)”- Will the API information on crime rate local providers be provided to us? No, we would like interested vendors to provide recommendations on how they will capture this info.

36. RFI indicates that it may be a mobile solution or web-based - is there a preference? Does the app need to be deployed to the app stores or can a responsive solution be used to target all platforms? Should be web and mobile based. Not sure if we’ll need an app, but we might need a link inside of a CBP hosted app. Looking for vendor input on this.

37. Timeline - not typically provided in an RFI......what type of timeline are they looking for? We could provide "Discovery", "UI/UX", "Sprint 0", "Development Sprints", etc. but not have actual defined # of sprints since functionality is not defined This recommendation for a timeline sounds good if the vendor is proposing a custom built solution.

38. Do they know what integration points are required and how they plan to integrate with these 3rd parties for school information, neighborhoods, home prices, etc. We have basic community information that we would like captured and available, how that information is captured and portrayed is up to the vendor.

39. Without requirements it's hard to define the menu navigation, etc. - are they looking for general approach? Yes, a general approach is fine for the RFI.

40. Browser consistency: what browsers are they looking to support as that would drive the technology (Dave: The RFI says "The platform must render correctly on all major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, etc.)" so assuming this is the case on PC's but what about mobile devices)? We would like to follow industry standards in this case. Open to recommendations from the vendors here.

41. Reporting: Sounds more like app analytics more than reporting? Open to recommendations from the vendor

42. Accessibility: Looking for more details on our experience with WCAG2.1 & 508? - which is all accessibility. The Government would desire to better understand your company’s ability to adhere to all accessibility compliances that you can meet.

43. Mobile Compatibility - it's interesting this is in here when it's not specifically calling out that they are looking for a mobile solution.....their comments are "if you are proposing a native app" - do they want one? Open to vendor recommendations, but this could be a web-based solution accessible through a CBP hosted application.

44. Regulations - they are calling out data breaches, etc. but our assumption would be that this is hosted in their environments? Open to vendor recommendations, but it seems like the solution would be more economical if hosted through CBP environments

45. Are they looking for a custom build or an OTS product that is configurable? Seems more like the latter. It can be either

46. What exactly are they looking for in the Detailed Approach - more of a project approach? Technical? Both? both

47. Cost Estimate: We could give a swag number, but it would be pretty hard to commit to with fixed bid. The Government is just looking for a very rough order of magnitude amount to help gauge the Government’s potential budget for this effort.

48. Is there a cloud platform preference? I'm assuming that this would be hosted in public cloud provider but there's nothing stated and there's a Section asking to describe how it would be integrated into CBP's network and systems platform. Without knowing what the integration points and options, this would be difficult. Ideally, we would pick something aligned with where they already are to minimize the discrepancies between platforms. Open to vendor recommendations, however, one concept could be a web-based solution that provides a link within the CBP application/applicant portal.

49. There's is a support section in the RFI, what is the expectations for support? Would they have a support staff our would we be expected to handle and is it 24/7? The vendor would provide the support (staff if needed) and can be based upon industry standards/vendor recommendations

50. They ask about metrics and reporting platform, understanding if they're using something today for metrics and reporting (an existing data warehouse or something) and where it resides would be helpful as we would ideally feed data to that platform and report on it in the way they're used to seeing. Open to vendor recommendations, but it seems the reporting/data would be housed on the software solution and accessed via that source.

51. On the same vein as question above, are there success metrics defined currently that would be used to gather and measure based on the business case for the ROI on this RFI? There are a few items listed but they have, "etc" after some of the items they would like reporting on. We would like to know things like what regions, communities info/resources are most viewed and most important for the potential applicants, this data might help enhance the solution post-launch.

52. Can you provide more detail around the potential demo? Is this a demo of an application we have built for someone else, or are you asking for a mockup of this solution for you? Not known at this time, however if a company shares a commercially available ready solution that the Government would like to learn more about, the Government may ask the vendor to provide a demo of their available solution.

53. How big is the potential user base for this tool within CBP? Could be between 2k-250k

54. Have DHS/CBP stakeholders found any software products that offer all or a portion of what they intend this tool to do (eg, Zillow, various moving checklist sites)? During Market Research, CBP was made aware of a tool called "Neighborhood Navigator" from ATTOM, however CBP has not explored the tool in depth and is posting this RFI to assess what is available in the market

55. What prompted the desire to build this tool from scratch? What problem will this solve that existing solutions can't? We want a one-stop shop that is both easy from a consolidated info source and also intuitive for the person that has never considered relocating for a job.

56. To what degree have DHS/CBP stakeholders conducted user research to gather user needs/voice of the end-user data? Very little research has been done in this area as we are providing a new service to applicants to enhance their applicant experience. In result, this is why we are conducting this RFI.

57. Are there existing DHS/CBP interfaces the Relocation tool needs to look and behave consistently with? There may be CBP tools/systems that this tool could interact with. Open to vendor recommendation on how to deliver it.

58. Will we be able to recruit government employees to participate in interviews and evaluative concept testing (ideally those who have recently relocated for a government job)? This may be possible

59. If not, is it appropriate to recruit more general participants for these purposes? Yes, this would be possible and will be at vendor’s discretion

60. Who will make up the team responsible for evaluating concepts in order to narrow toward a final direction? What are their backgrounds/qualifications? The Government has not determined a source selection team at this time, nor does the Government plan to publicly share this information.

61. What will determine the priority of features to deliver? Is it our responsibility to determine this or the client's? The Government is in the early stages of building the requirement, the responses to this RFI will help provide feedback to the Government on requirement features to consider.

62. What government standards, processes (eg, quality management system), or protocols do you expect the chosen vendor to adhere to, if any? We expect the vendor to follow both general government and industry standards, but there may be DHS/CBP security and IT protocols to adhere to as we get deeper into the procurement process these standards and protocols will become more evident. Familiarizing your self with DHS Standard Homeland Security Acquisition Regulation (HSAR) Security Clauses (e.g., HSAR 3052.204-72 and 3052.204-73) would be recommended.

63. Is the accessibility audit expected to be conducted by a third party? There may be an accessibility audit conducted by a third party and possibly internal to DHS/CBP

64. To what extent will UX concepts and research artifacts need to be archived (for quality control purposes)? Open to vendor recommendations

65. Per the “Data and Reporting” functional expectation, will this manifest as a separate dashboard/application or integrate into an existing tool? Open to vendor recommendation, but it seems like this could be housed and accessed through the vendor solution/or a portal.

66. Who is the intended user for this reporting output? Government Management/Analyst/Administrative users

67. Please provide examples/expectations on level of interaction for the requirement of "Interactive tools for neighborhood comparison, real estate shopping, and crime statistics." Open to vendor recommendation, but some examples could be comparative analysis, insight analysis, informative videos, reviews, printing of info/reports, etc

68. Can CBP provide a complete list of CBP duty stations? This is public info, CBP duty stations include, CBP offices, border patrol sectors, port of entries, etc.

69. Section 3, Data and Reporting: Can CBP provide further clarity on what specific data reporting metrics it will require to be communicated? Open to vendor recommendations, however examples would be: how is the tool being used, what are the most popular areas/regions, what community info sections are being used the most. Etc.

70. SOW: Section 2.2, bullet 5: Can CBP provide any specific requirements for the Neighborhood Comparison Tool? (E.g.: side-by-side comparison of data, or development of a scoring rubric to compare requirements -> neighborhood X = 8.5 vs neighborhood Y = 8.1) open to vendor recommendation

71. SOW: Section 4, bullet 3: Is the requirement for interactive tools for real estate shopping and crime statistics satisfied by the API integration for real estate and crime data described in bullet 2, or is the vendor expected to provide additional functionality for this requirement? If additional functionality is required, can CBP provide specific requirements? Additional functionality may be required and would be open to vendor recommendations, for example comparative analysis is an excellent example of additional functionality needed.

72. SOW: Section 5: Does the Government have an expected timeline range? Open to vendor recommendation, for example, if this is a commercially of the shelf (OTS) solution, perhaps it can be done much quicker than a customized build. In both scenarios, time, price, and overall final product will help the govt decide on which route to take.

73. The RFI references the use of forms and associated capabilities (validation, error messaging) but doesn't detail which information is being sent to CBP systems from the client application (to be developed). Can the government provide more detail regarding what information CBP is looking to collect/accept from prospective job applicants? Open to vendor recommendation, however, It would be helpful to understand what regions (near CBP locations) are being looked at the most, what topics are most important to prospective job applicants, are just some examples we would be interested in learning

74. Would the government consider paying for this as a monthly subscription fee? The Government would consider a monthly subscription fee. The Government is trying to understand how industry would intend to price out this requirement.

75. Are there any specific requirements that would require the development of both web-based and native applications? Open to vendor recommendation, however as an example, this solution could be a web-based solution that provides a link within a CBP application/portal

76. Does the Government have a anticipated timeline/period of performance for this work? A ROM is requested so details related to POP/schedule would help vendors/offerors better estimate 0&M support costs. Open to vendor recommendation on how long this project will take, taking into account a level of urgency for the government to deploy the final product.

77. Does CBP anticipate expanding this tool to additional user groups beyond applicants (e.g., families, internal HR staff)? How does CBP envision the platform evolving post launch? The solution may require enhancement or other development post-launch and once we’re able to assess how it’s being utilized and how it can better service the end user.

78. Will CBP handle the procurement/licensing of third party APIs (e.g., Zillow, Weatherstack), or is the vendor responsible for all costs and legal compliance with their terms of service? CBP would only procure though the prime vendor, who would be responsible for all costs with their service.

79. SOW, Page 4, Section 3.9: Is there a recommended feedback form like Qualtrics or does this need to be developed? Open to vendor recommendation

80. Will CBP provide its own security scanning tools and perform assessments, or is the vendor expected to include third party penetration testing in its budget and project plan? CBP may have their own security scanning tools, but the vendor may also have to include them

81. Beyond FedRAMP (if cloud hosted), does CBP require other specific certifications (e.g., FISMA Moderate, SOC2 Type II)? Should the vendor host within a FedRAMP authorized environment? This is not known currently. Please indicate in your response if you do have FEDRAMP Certification, also please see response to previous questions regarding FEDRAMP.

82. Does the application require an Authority to Operate (ATO)? Who is responsible? This is not known currently and will be reviewed by CBP’s Office of Information Technology.

83. What is CBP's preferred Sprint cadence (e.g., 2 week sprints)? Will the CBP product owner participate in Sprint reviews and backlog grooming, or is vendor led reporting sufficient? CBP may want to participate in sprint reviews and backlog grooming.

84. Is CBP expecting vendors to host the solution initially (SaaS model), or will the government own and host the solution in its own environment (e.g., DHS AWS tenant) after delivery? Open to vendor recommendation, but one possible delivery method could be having the web-based tool and then providing a link within a CBP hosted application.

85. Does CBP currently favor a particular vehicle (e.g., GSA MAS, Aliant 2, CIO-SP3)? Is the planned RFQ release scheduled for FY25 Q3 or later? The Government is in the early stages of this and cannot say when planned RFQ is scheduled for.

86. Post Launch Support Scope: Could CBP clarify expectations for enhancements during this period? Are vendors expected to make continuous updates, add features, or just perform bug fixes? There may be additional features or enhancements added post-launch and once we are able to get feedback and usage reports, open to vendor recommendations on how this will be handled/priced/scoped etc. It will be important to get an understanding of how the vendor would charge the government for added features, updates, and bug fixes so that they likely could be incorporated as optional CLINs that the Government may exercise if needed.

87. Could CBP share any specific SLAs or benchmark metrics for uptime, load time, and data refresh intervals (e.g., crime data updated weekly)? Open to vendor recommendation based upon industry standards, but ideally this would be as close to real-time updates and as accurate as possible.

88. What is the expected timeframe for onboarding personnel that could impact staffing levels or timelines? If access is needed to CBP systems then these contractors will need to undergo a CBP background investigation and this timeline is dependent on internal CBP workload as well as the individual’s background specifics.

89. Are there any dependencies on CBP’s internal systems, third-party APIs, or government approvals (e.g., security certifications) that could impact the project timeline? Open to vendor recommendations, but one concept would be to provide a web-based solution and provide a link within the CBP applicant portal. In any scenario, security certifications will be reviewed by CBP and may require additional approvals to meet DHS/CBP protocols

90. The SAM.gov description states that responses must be limited to 20 pages. Will the Government consider the cover page and table of contents exempt from page count, please? 20 pages does not include cover page and table of contents.

91. Are there distinct user segments CBP anticipates—such as Border Patrol Agents versus HQ staff, first-time versus experienced federal movers, or individuals with versus without dependents—whose relocation needs or decisionmaking criteria the platform must uniquely support? There may be distinct user segments, intent is to leave this answer as vague as possible because we don’t know what we don’t know until we start using the product. The hope here is that based upon end-user feedback and reporting functionality of the tool, CBP may want to do post-launch development and enhancement to create a better tool and experience for the end user.

92. What specific user goals does CBP envision the platform facilitating (e.g., comparing duty stations, understanding relocation benefits, identifying community services)? Clarifying these goals will help inform feature prioritization and UX strategy. Open to vendor recommendations, intent is to provide a one stop shop for all things related to relocating to new area/region. We want all the factors of relocating to be at the fingertips of the end-user to ensure that nothing is forgotten during their relocation research. We want the end user to have an informed understanding of the area they are interested in moving to.

93. To minimize the risk of developing misaligned features, what process does CBP envision for early validation of platform designs with real users? Would CBP support an iterative prototyping phase with structured user feedback loops before full-scale development? Yes, CBP would support an iterative prototyping phase and this could be handled possibly during the demo phase early in the procurement process.

94. Can CBP provide an overview of required system integrations, including identity/authentication protocols (e.g., SAML, OAuth 2.0), API standards (e.g., REST, SOAP), data formats, and anticipated transaction volume or concurrency requirements?

Yes, some or all aspects of this may be provided by CBP.

95. Are there any technology platforms, frameworks, or cloud environments currently preferred or mandated by CBP that vendors should align with? Not necessarily, we are open to vendor recommendations, however one concept could be a web-based solution that provides a link within a CBP hosted applicant portal.

96. Given the end-of-life status of Internet Explorer, can CBP confirm that legacy browser support (including IE11) will not be required? Are there other legacy constraints vendors should be aware of? Unaware of end-of-life status of IE, however, we are open to vendor recommendations as to how this solution will be developed and delivered for many years to come without the hiccups of end-of-life cycles of certain products on the current market.

97. What are the core use cases for mobile access (e.g., quick reference while traveling, full task execution, offline readiness)? Will users primarily consume information, or are transactional features expected on mobile? Open to vendor recommendations

98. Would CBP prefer a Progressive Web App (PWA) that offers native-like capabilities with a single codebase, or are native mobile apps required due to deeper hardware integrations or offline needs? Open to vendor recommendations, however one concept would be a web-based solution that provides a link to a CBP hosted application/applicant portal.

99. If native development is preferred, should vendors prioritize iOS, Android, or both for the initial release? Both. Are there specific mobile features (e.g., geolocation, push notifications) that are required? There may be depending on the solution provided by the vendor

100. Regarding front-end frameworks, how much architectural flexibility will vendors have? Open to vendor recommendation Is CBP open to modern performance-optimized frameworks such as Tailwind CSS or utility-first CSS methodologies in lieu of older UI libraries like Bootstrap. Yes, we’re open

101. What are the expectations around data freshness and sync frequency (e.g., real-time updates for housing data vs. weekly or monthly updates for demographic information)? Prefer real-time updates, but open to vendor recommendation based upon industry standards. Does CBP have defined standards for data accuracy or completeness. Prefer a high-level of accuracy (99-100%), however we’re open to vendor recommendations based upon industry standards.

102. Beyond general usage, what business outcomes does CBP aim to improve through this platform (e.g., increased applicant conversion, reduced relocation-related declinations, enhanced time-to-fill metrics) we’re looking to provide a service for applicants to increase their applicant experience within CBP.

103. What KPIs or success metrics does CBP plan to use to evaluate platform effectiveness (e.g., task completion rate, community comparison usage, NPS or CSAT scores, decreased applicant attrition). Some KPI’s should include (but not limited to) First Call Resolution (FCR): The percentage of issues resolved on the first contact with the help desk.

Average Resolution Time: The average time taken to resolve a ticket from the time it is logged.

Ticket Volume: The total number of tickets received within a specific period.

Customer Satisfaction (CSAT): A measure of customer satisfaction with the help desk services, often gathered through surveys.

Response Time: The average time taken to respond to a ticket after it is logged.

Ticket Backlog: The number of unresolved tickets at any given time.

Escalation Rate: The percentage of tickets that are escalated to higher levels of support.

Cost per Ticket: The average cost incurred by the help desk to resolve a ticket.

Agent Utilization: The percentage of time help desk agents spend on resolving tickets versus other activities.

Net Promoter Score (NPS): A metric that measures the likelihood of customers recommending the help desk services to others. Support should be 24/7 and if this is not reasonable, then vendor can outline how support can be provided within 24 hours.

104. What is the anticipated content management workflow (e.g., content creation, review, and approval for duty station pages)? Which CBP teams or roles will own this process? Not sure yet, however it is likely this will be managed/maintained with the office of HR within CBP.

105. Will non-technical staff require direct access to update content? If so, does CBP prefer a low-code/no-code CMS with features like WYSIWYG editing, version control, approval workflows, and localization support. Open to vendor recommendations.

106. What is the expected growth of total users over time? Could be anywhere from 2k to 250k users/per year dependent on how CBP decides to use the tool

107. What is the expected concurrent user growth over time? Could be anywhere from 2k to 250k users/per year dependent on how CBP decides to use the tool

108. How many locations/cities will the app be supporting? Will it initially be limited to a few specific locations or CBP components and then grow. Will be available for all CBP duty locations globally.

109. Is the government expecting to procure product licenses and services from the provider, or just services? Open to vendor recommendations.

110. Is the government considering low-code/nocode platforms for this solution? Open to vendor recommendations.

111. What is the government preferred cloud platform (public, on-prem, or hybrid)? Open to vendor recommendations.

112. In addition to the provided tech stack, what Enterprise tools (cybersecurity, monitoring, DevSecOps, etc.) platforms will support the application? Open to vendor recommendations.

113. AI & Automation: Are you open to integrating AI-assisted chatbots or automation features for enhanced functionality? Open to vendor recommendations.

114. Compliance & Security Assessments: Will external teams conduct accessibility compliance testing, security assessments, or vulnerability scanning? What is the estimated duration for these assessments? There may be external teams conducting accessibility compliance testing, we will know more about this process as we get deeper into the procurement process.

115. Security & Authentication: Will authentication, authorization, or integration with Active Directory (AD) be required? We don’t believe user authentication is required since non-CBP employees (aka applicants) will need to access it. Open to vendor recommendations.

116. Hosting Preference: What is the preferred hosting platform—on-premises or public cloud? Will the hosting environment be pre-configured, or should the vendor handle setup and maintenance? We are open to vendor ideas.

117. System Integrations: Will the new solution require integration with ERP, CRM, in-house applications, or external data sources? We are open to vendor ideas regarding integration; however, we believe this could be hosted by the vendor and that some type of “portal” or hyperlink could bring the applicant into the website. CBP is seeking a one stop tool/solution for applicants to obtain information about proposed job duty locations We have basic community information that we would like captured and available, how that information is captured and portrayed via third party APIs is up to the vendor.

118. Existing Website: Is there an existing website serving this purpose? This is for the vendor to determine. There are websites available that provide this information, but not all in one tool. If so, should we enhance the current site or build a new one? CBP is seeking a one stop tool/solution for applicants to obtain information about proposed job duty locations The information does not have to be integrated into CBP system but rather the applicant would need to be able to access. Would data migration be required? We are open to vendor input.

119. Past Performance: We currently have Commercial Past Performance. If we do not have State or Federal references, can we use our Commercial Past Performance instead? Yes

120. What is the preferred method for delivering training materials (e.g., video tutorials, manuals, workshops)? We are open to vendor input.

121. Who will be responsible for incident response and security monitoring – CBP or the vendor? The Vendor. CBP may have their own security scanning tools, but the vendor may also have to include them

122. Are there specific user demographics or roles that should guide the UI/UX design (e.g., families, single applicants)? We are open to vendor input.

123. What is the preferred data update frequency for third-party integrations (real-time, daily, weekly)? We are open to vendor input.

124. Does the mobile app need to be deployed to the App Store or Google Play store or something else available for download or what will be the possible distribution channels? We are open to vendor input.

125. May the vendor suggest the technology stack to be used? We are open to vendor input.

126. The platform will provide critical community-specific information to help applicants make informed decisions about relocation. Would the Government please define “community”? CBP is seeking a one stop tool/solution for applicants to obtain information about proposed job duty locations We have basic community information that we would like captured and available for the applicant. Particular area in the country.

127. The product must be integrated into CBP’s software platform/environment and may require system integration. Please provide more details on the CBP systems with which the solution will need to integrate. We are open to vendor ideas regarding integration; however, we believe this could be hosted by the vendor and that some type of “portal” or hyperlink could bring the applicant into the website.

128. Please confirm the number of distinct personas and the number of users for each, such as 1) CBP job applicants who have secured job offers, 2) all CBP potential applicants, and 3) existing CBP employees who can interact with the solution. Please specify whether user access is authenticated or unauthenticated. Intent is to provide CBP applicants as well as current employees to utilize the tool to search areas that are potential duty stations. Open to vendor recommendations.

129. Please provide more details on the expectations of a real estate shopping tool? Tool that provides real-time real estate opportunities available in specific duty location the applicant is looking at.

130. This section will provide essential information about the region, including (but not limited to): How does the Government define a “region”? Port of Entry’s or Border Patrol Sectors

131. Does the Government already have information/content for the Moving Guide section, or will the vendor be expected to provide it? The vendor would provide this information.

132. Included in the description of community information, the document states a "Real Estate (Shopping Tool)" is required. Is there a particular vendor CBP requires integration with, or is the shopping capability expected to be a native experience? How that information is captured and portrayed via third party APIs is up to the vendor.

133. What are the intended sources for the community data (real estate, schools, crime rates, demographics, etc.)? Are they public APIs, licensed data feeds, internal CBP databases, or manually curated content? CBP is seeking a one stop tool/solution for applicants to obtain information about proposed job duty locations We have basic community information that we would like captured and available, how that information is captured and portrayed via third party APIs is up to the vendor.

134. If the targeted users are 'prospective job applicants' will they be required to create a user profile or will they be given one? Vendors should provide options to the government. Initial thought is the applicant would create a user profile. Will an approval process be required for individuals requesting access? Vendors should provide options to the government.

135. Will the solution require integration into CBP-specific systems such as SSO/LDAP, NOC/SOC, data warehouse, etc.? We are open to vendor ideas regarding integration; however, we believe this could be hosted by the vendor and that some type of “portal” or hyperlink could bring the applicant into the website.

136. Will the solution require integration with Login.gov? No

137. Could this tool later integrate with CBP's actual applicant tracking or onboarding processes? Is the envisioned tool purely a standalone resource, or are there plans for it to evolve and integrate into broader CBP recruitment/relocation/onboarding processes? CBP is open to vendor solutions. The intent is to have a one-stop shop that provides applicants with information pertaining to a potential duty location.

138. Please confirm our mapping of information data sets to 3rd party APIs:

2.1 Weather Information - Weatherstock

2.1 Regional Summary - Zillow

2.2 School Information & Rating - Zillow

2.2 Real Estate & Home Values - Zillow

2.2 Real Estate Shopping Tool - Zillow or custom developed solution?

2.2 Crime Rates - Please define data source(s)

2.2 Neighborhood Comparison Tool - Zillow or custom developed solution?

2.3 Preparing to Move - Please define data source(s)

2.3 Moving Your Personal Property - Please define data source(s)

2.3 Settling In After Moving - Please define data source(s)

CBP is seeking a one stop tool/solution for applicants to obtain information about proposed job duty locations We have basic community information that we would like captured and available, how that information is captured and portrayed via third party APIs is up to the vendor.

139. In our experience, solutions that have truly 'effective and intuitive navigation' do not require formal training materials nor formal training execution for end-users (i.e., lack of user guides with your iPhone). The Government should consider cheaper alternatives such as You Tube videos that can be easily distributed and updated as the solution evolves over time if necessary. What 'administrators' is the Government targeting for training? This can be discussed with the vendor, but the agency does not intend to have any ‘administrators’. Is this for 'functional administrators' focused on user roles, etc. or 'technical administrators' that support the stability and operations of the solution and its integration points? The vendor would manage the functional and technical roles.

140. What are the required operational support hours for the Help Desk and On-Call Support? We are assuming On-Call Support is required for after-hours critical issues, is that correct? What support tier(s) is being requested (Tier 2 or Tier 2 & 3)? Will Tier 1 support be provided centrally by CBP to perform initial triage? To enable consistent evaluation of vendor response we recommend the Government define KPI and SLA minimums for the Help Desk and On-Call Support. Support should be 24/7 and if this is not reasonable, then vendor can outline how support can be provided and satisfied within 24 hours.

141. Is technical hosting only in the US a requirement? At this time, yes. Assuming Cloud solutions are acceptable, is FedRAMP Moderate the targeted security classification level? Data residency is negotiable provided the hosting environment meets FedRAMP Moderate or other security requirements. Do not have enough information to answer these questions accurately but provided potential response. Will only US-based resources, as well as US citizens/green card holders, be able to support the design, build, implementation, and O&M of the solution? The requirement may include personnel clearance, specifically requiring that resources involved in the design, build, implementation, and operations & maintenance (O&M) phases may need to be US citizens or green card holders. Do not have enough information to answer these questions accurately but provided potential response.