The questions and answers below relate to the MAF/TIGER Modernization Request for Information (RFI), which was posted to this web site during February 2001. Please note that some of the information contained in the RFI questions and answers have been superceded by subsequent events.
Q. What part of MAF is being modernized in regard to this RFI?
A. MAF/TIGER Modernization has four
objectives:
2. Implement a modern processing environment for the MAF/TIGER system that will support rapid application development, allow extensive use of COTS software, and reduce staff training time.
3. Expand and encourage geographic partnership programs with state, local, and tribal governments willing to help update the MAF/TIGER data base.
4. Implement a comprehensive plan for periodic MAF/TIGER evaluation and corrective activities that will guide planning for cost effective ongoing coverage and geocoding improvement operations.
All of these objectives serve to strengthen the integration of the MAF and TIGER data bases. Collecting the coordinates (latitude/longitude) of housing units and maintaining the coordinates in a positionally improved TIGER data base strengthens the capacity to link the addresses in the MAF to the TIGER data base. These actions assist in providing a highly accurate and up-to-date resource. Each of the four objectives is viewed as potentially enhancing the capabilities of the MAF.
Q&A #2
(2/9/01)
Q. Are there any plans under the needs of this RFI or within the Census Bureau to have commercial companies correlate the coordinates of structures to the actual MAF addresses?
A. The correlation of the structure coordinates and the actual addresses is not identified as a commercial task under this RFI. However, if a commercial company believes that they have a unique capability that would enhance the operation to precisely join these files, they may supply such information within their 10-page response that is due no later than February 28th.
Q&A #3
(2/9/01)
Q. Our company provides capabilities based upon “design to cost.” In order to determine the design we would need to know the amount of money that is set aside for MAF/TIGER Modernization.
A. MAF/TIGER Modernization is a “major project” with visibility government wide. Corporate resources will be maintained for a long period of time. In order to place an amount to the project, Geography Division must fully understand what organizations have to offer. From the information obtained in the responses to the RFI the requirements will be written and costs determined.
Q&A #4
(2/9/01)
Q. Will this be an “open compete” contract or will there be a required association with current Census contractors?
A. The plan is to make this a full and open, competitive requisition process. Having direct participation with the organizational expertise in the needed technical areas will benefit the government.
Q&A #5
(2/9/01)
Q. What companies are currently involved in assisting Geography Division with the direction of MAF/TIGER Modernization?
A. There are several companies currently providing support to the Geography Division, United States Census Bureau on many geographic topics. For example, Booz, Allen and Hamilton produced for the Geography Division, U.S. Census Bureau, The Master Address File (MAF)/TIGER Modernization Study dated June 7, 2000. It contains a good overview of the considerations required to enhance the MAF and TIGER data bases and continues to assist senior staff of the Geography division to formulate plans. We have also made it available for your review.
Q&A #6
(2/9/01)
Q. Will there be a mailing list of the interested parties sent to those who respond to this RFI?
A. All correspondence with regards to MAF/TIGER Modernization will be in accordance with paragraph 10 of the RFI dated January 31, 2001. A list of organizations that respond to the RFI will be published on the web site.
Q&A #7
(2/9/01)
Q. The RFI reads as though this request is open only to private industries. Can universities also participate?
A. Absolutely! We encourage any organization (private industry, universities, state, local, or tribal governments) to provide input to capabilities that they possess that will assist in improving the accuracy of TIGER data.
Q&A #8
(2/9/01)
Q. What is the planned process for the MAF/TIGER Modernization process following this RFI?
A. Interested parties should provide comments via e-mail no later than February 28, 2001. Based upon the input from the 10-page RFI comment sheets, the United States Census Bureau may schedule additional questions and interviews for clarification. An “Industry Day” Conference is planned for April 3, 2001 at the U.S. Census Bureau, Suitland, Maryland. The mission of the Geography Division and MAF/TIGER Modernization goals will be provided. Attendees’ questions will be answered in a panel setting. From information obtained at the conference and from the RFI, a draft RFP will be developed. This draft RFP will be released for comments as it is being developed. The RFP release date is anticipated at the end of this calendar year (first quarter of FY 02).
Q&A #9
(2/9/01)
Q. It is understood that there are currently contracts in place for testing procedures in relation to MAF/TIGER Modernization accuracy improvement. Can you provide the names of those companies you have under contract that are involved in these procedures?
A. There are contracts currently in place for improving the positional accuracy of selected TIGER/Line 2000 files. One contract focuses on counties having densely populated areas while the other is in suburban areas. These contracts require a spatial enhancement of existing features and the addition of missing features that are visible on source imagery but not currently present in the TIGER/Line 2000 files. These contracts are with ITS contractors The CENTECH Group and RS Information Systems, Inc. The Geography Division plans to subsequently improve the TIGER data base using the enhanced TIGER/Line 2000 files provided by these contractors; this further process will enable us to determine modifications and additional requirements for our internal processing systems. In addition, Booz, Allen and Hamilton is assisting with Process Modeling.
Q&A #10
(2/9/01)
Q. Do you believe the process will be a single procurement (1 RFP then award versus a “demo” phase with multiple awards followed by a single award for production)?
A. The plan is to make this a full and open, competitive requisition process. The actual process to determine award has not yet been defined. This process will depend on understanding the capabilities of the organizations that can support this project. The process will be defined during the “Industry Day” Conference.
Q&A #11
(2/9/01)
Q. Is there a technical POC that we could dialogue with?
A. The purpose of this RFI is to invite organizations that have either done work in technological areas that could potentially be applied to MAF/TIGER Modernization or who could do such work to provide a 10-page paper describing their capabilities. We are trying to identify the potential players in this field. The current plan is to maintain the dialogue through the e-mail address and POC provided in the RFI of January 31, 2001. Additional dialogue may take place on an organizational basis depending upon the information furnished in the requested 10-page paper.
Q&A #12
(2/9/01)
Q. Will the RFI responses be made public (available to other contractors)?
A. The RFI responses are considered confidential. No responses will be made available to the public. However, from the responses the Geography Division will determine capabilities and develop generic requirements. It is quite possible that information provided from the responses will be mentioned at a broad level in the RFP if it is part of a solution to a requirement. The Geography Division will not share one industry’s capabilities with another industry. However, names of respondents will be released in early March.
Q&A #13
(2/9/01)
Q. Will you use the RFI responses to pre-qualify contractors’ approaches in any way?
A. The RFI responses will not be used to pre-qualify contractors’ approaches. The RFI responses will assist the United States Census Bureau in developing the draft RFP. Any organization can respond to the RFP when issued, regardless of their input or lack of input to the RFI.
Q&A #14
(2/9/01)
Q. Do you expect the responses to the RFI to be developed by the individual organization or by the potential team that can support this project?
A. The Geography Division, United States Census Bureau is attempting to determine available capabilities that would best support MAF/TIGER Modernization. We are not looking for teaming answers (though we will accept any papers that are compiled by a team). We are attempting to locate organizations that have the skills to support such a project and determine their accomplishments to date in this field. The names of all organizations responding to the RFI will be posted on the web site and teaming arrangements can be made at the discretion of individual organizations.
Q&A #15
(2/9/01)
Q. Is there an organization chart for the TIGER Modernization Program Office (including Procurement/Contracting Officer)?
A. An organizational chart is not available. MAF/TIGER Modernization will be accomplished within Geography Division, United States Census Bureau, with the support of Acquisition Division, U.S. Census Bureau. More information on this structure will be provided at the “Industry Day” Conference scheduled for April 3, 2001.
Q&A #16
(2/16/01)
Q. Will Geography Division accept "mixed" levels of positional accuracy?
A. TIGER always has been a file with mixed levels of positional accuracy; it is a weakness but also a strength, as it allows us to "finish the job" and accomplish our mission. Our expectation is that this will remain true for the future, as our initial plan is to accept/incorporate files from state, local, and tribal governments that may have very high levels of accuracy, and integrate those with upgraded TIGER positions that may be of lesser accuracy.
Q&A #17
(2/16/01)
Q. Will Geography Division consider adding the Public Land Survey System (PLSS)?
A. Yes. One of our goals is to have the PLSS lines be part of TIGER because many times those lines are used as the boundaries for the geographic entities we must recognize in TIGER for U.S. Census Bureau data tabulation.
Q&A #18
(2/16/01)
Q. Will Geography Division consider adding "all" hydrography?
A. Yes. One of our goals is to have some relatively uniform coverage of hydrography (water features) because many times those features are used as the boundaries for the geographic entities we must recognize in TIGER for the U.S. Census Bureau data tabulation,water features are also used as administrative boundaries during U.S. Census Bureau data collection activities, and accurate representation of hydrogrpahy will also produce higher quality cartographic products from MAF/TIGER.
Q&A #19
(3/5/01)
Q. What is the minimum positional accuracy/confidence level you wish to achieve for features in the upgraded data base; e.g. 30 meters/Circular Error (90%)?
A. A precise positional accuracy has not been determined as the Census Bureau is currently identifying our requirements; though at a minimum we must be able to distinguish structures along the correct side of their street segment. Other considerations influencing our positional accuracy requirement include technology and costing considerations. We hope responses to this RFI will help us define feasible positional accuracy requirements.
Q&A #20
(3/5/01)
Q. In reviewing the various source documentation the Census has generated relating to it's modernization program, there have been several references to identifying residential and nonresidential structures by coordinates. Is the Census requesting that this information become part of the data capture effort and then an integral part of the TIGER database, along with street centerlines? Reference the Booze, Allen, and Hamilton report, section 2.1.1, pg.2-4.
A. Our structures requirements have not been determined as we are currently identifying our requirements; though at a minimum we hope to have a reference coordinate, or alternately a footprint, for each structure (a structure may or may not be limited to a housing structure.) This information may, or may not, be a part of a proposed data capture effort. The data on structures will be an integral part of the database, but currently that information is confidential per Title 13 and therefore not eligible for inclusion in TIGER/Line. Other considerations influencing our structure requirement include technology and costing considerations. We hope responses to this RFI will help us define feasible structure requirements.
Q&A #21
(3/5/01)
Q. Data storage solutions: If imagery is a viable option what opportunities are available for its access?
A. The Census Bureau is soliciting proposals for improving our MAF/TIGER data bases; responses may, but need not, include the use of imagery as a collection and update methodology. The Census Bureau is interested in receiving information about any and all solutions that respondents feel will provide current and positionally accurate data bases that can be incorporated into a field operating environment and into which coordinates collected using GPS technology may be easily integrated.
Q&A #22
(3/5/01)
Q. Require business models and policy options suggesting alternate licensing of imagery, GPS data, or other data provided. Please clarify what this question is referring to. Is there an interest in licensing the source material utilized to update TIGER?
A. The Census Bureau is focusing on the vendors proposing solutions that will meet our goal of having current information in TIGER on an ongoing basis that can be used with GPS coordinates on laptops.
Q&A #23
(3/5/01)
Q. Will the Census Bureau be sending companies responding to the RFI questions after reviewing the RFI's, asking for clarification on particular topics provided?
A. Companies may be contacted to clarify specific questions about their submissions or be asked to provide further information. This contact may take the form of a telephone conversation, e-mail exchange, or visit.
Q&A #24
(7/10/01)
Q. Have representitives of the Census Bureau visited any potential MAF/TIGER Modernization vendors, subsequent to industry day?
A. During May and June 2001, representatives of
the following organizations/companies discussed, with Geography Division (GEO)
staff, their capabilities relative to MAF/TIGER Modernization. The meetings were
held either at the Census Bureau or at each organization/companies' office
location. The GEO selected organizations/companies based upon responses to the
MAF/TIGER Modernization, Request For Information (RFI). Many other companies
were not visited because their capabilities were already well known to the GEO.
These discussions will not effect any organization/companies' opportunity to
offer a proposal in response to the MAF/TIGER Modernization, Request For
Proposal (RFP).
