Addendum_2_RFP NHJB-2025-01.pdf

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHRIE

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

RFP Addendum 2

RFP NUMBER AND TITLE: RFP NHJB-2025-01

DRUG AND MENTAL HEALTH COURT

CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

AMENDMENT DATE: March 12, 2025 11:59 PM

PROPOSAL DUE DATE: March 28, 2025 11:59 PM April 08, 2025 11:59 PM

RFP ISSUED BY: State of New Hampshire Judicial Branch

Administrative Office of the Courts

Unless specifically addressed below, all other provisions and clauses of the RFP remain unchanged.

Provided below are submitted written questions received and the NHJB’s answers

Question # Question Answer

1.

Is there a preferred budget or budget ceiling allocated for this project?

Yes, we are looking for your best and final offer

2.

Would NHJB consider an extension of the deadline?

We are extending all deadlines See RFP

NHJB-25 01 Addendum 1.

3.

Who is your current software provider for the

Drug Courts?

We use an SQL database

4.

When does the current contract with the Drug

Court CMS provider end and what is the anticipated start date for this new contract?

Current contract is though 9/30/25

Go live should begin 10/1/25

5.

Page 9 - C. Covered Treatment Drug Courts

How many system users will there be for both the Drug Courts and Mental Health courts (e.g. staff, judges, attorneys, etc.)?

Please separate the two courts and also indicate whether you will have program providers accessing the system as well (e.g.

drug testing labs, program providers).

a. The RFP mentions that the State anticipates other drug and mental health courts will being established during this contract period. Do you have an approximate number of system users that will be added?

-System users: 5 to 7 per program location

-The programs will be separate

-Program providers would be limited to those on the team.

-depending on the length of the contract and if other factors. Anywhere from 1-6

-average 5 users per court

RFP NHJB-2025-01

CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

6.

Will a conversion for the existing drug court data be required? If so, please provide additional details about the database (e.g.

type, amount of data needing to be converted, rows)?

Yes – not sure about the rows but we have 5 or 6 years of data

7.

E. Business Requirements #1

You indicate that in a future phase of this project the State anticipates transferring data from multiple case management systems to this new CMS. How many “other case management” systems would we be required to integrate with? Should pricing be included in the proposal to address these future integrations?

Drug Court system has one database, the

MHC’s: some have excel, some use access, while others do not have a system.

If you choose to include that the review team will review it

8.

Would the AOC consider extending the due date for proposals by two weeks allowing enough time for vendors to review and answer questions received from the AOC?

We have extended the deadlines. See RFP

NHJB-25 01 Addendum 1.

9.

Page 32 - C.a. Detailed Response to Section

II

Please clarify which sections the State expects vendors to respond to in Section II

(pages 6-19). Subsections A, B, C, D appear to be informational only. Do we provide responses beginning with subsection E.

Business Requirements, F. and G.?

Sections A-C are informational, section D has some informational items and some response items

E-G should have a response for each item.

10.

Page 34 - G. Vendor’s Cost Proposal

Does the State expect a separate Cost

Proposal or one combined Technical and

Cost proposal?

One combined technical cost proposal that is itemized.

11.

Page 18 - F. System Design #25

Could you please provide more details on what specific aspects of SaaS 95 physical security you are looking for in this RFP?

Access control standards of physical security of hosting facilities in compliance with SOC

2 standards

12.

Appendix C, G. Vendor’s Cost Proposal, pg.

34:

This is undetermined. Cost proposals should include all costs associated with the solution.

This includes amount of storage included

Please confirm the total amount of vendor-hosted storage requested in the proposed solution.

and any charges for exceeding the defined amount.

13.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Migration, pg. 33, Migration:

a) How many files/documents/records total in the repository?

b) Of those, how many files/documents/records will be migrated?

c) If the objects to sync are documents:

a. Do documents have multiple versions that should all be maintained?

b. Should document metadata be synchronized?

A, Unavailable

B. All files/ documents/records.

C. Document history is desired,but not required. Metadata of documents migrated does not need to be synchronized.

14.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Migration, pg. 33, Migration:

How many Cases, Workspaces, records, contracts, or other non-file objects are in the repository? List object type and count.

Unavailable

15.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Migration, pg. 33, Migration:

What is the total number of data fields each matter type requires to be migrated? Of those, how many will be migrated?

Unavailable

16.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Propose a filter

What filter criteria will be applied to identify/scope the files/records to be migrated?

17.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Migration, pg. 33, Migration:

Are there security/permissions requirements for the documents/objects being migrated?

Documents related to medical/health information need to maintain HIPAA and 42

CFR Part 2 compliance. Documents related to criminal records history must maintain

CJIS compliance.

18.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Migration, pg. 33, Migration:

Will documents or metadata require conversion of any kind as part of the migration? (IE value NY convert to New

York)

Not that we are aware of

19.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Migration, pg. 33, Migration:

Briefly explain how the source system is structured. For example, if the source is

SharePoint, what constitutes a site, document library, folder, etc.

The source system can be put in a data backpack.

20.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Describe any other known deployment customizations.

None known at this time.

21.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Migration, pg. 33, Migration:

Do you have resources who can convert the data to a csv format, or would you require the vendor to do the conversion and re-engineering of the data?

Vendor would be required to perform any conversion and mapping.

22.

Appendix C, F. Innovation, pg. 33, Data

Integration and Interoperability: Integration:

Please identify all products which require integration with the solution and if they are

Cloud or On-Prem based tools.

All Drug Court data is cloud based the

MHC’s have local excel and access databases

23.

Appendix C, F. Innovation, pg. 33, Data

Integration and Interoperability: Integration:

Will this be a one-way or bi-directional data exchange? If one-way, which direction will data be transferred?

One way data to the new vendor

24.

Appendix C, F. Innovation, pg. 33, Data

Integration and Interoperability: Integration:

If the objects to sync are documents:

a) Do documents have multiple versions that should all be maintained?

b) Should document metadata be synchronized?

c) If the objects to sync are record data

(IE Users or Financial data) how many different fields of data does each record type have to synchronize?

d) Would you prefer the synchronization process be automated or would users be creating the rules for which data to synchronize?

Document history is desired, but not required. Metadata of documents migrated does not need to be synchronized.

25.

SECTION I. OVERVIEW AND

SCHEDULE, B. Schedule, pg. 4, Are you willing to extend the submission deadline of the RFP by two (2) week to following issuance of answers to the Q&A period ? This will provide adequate time to scope technical answers to the Q&A period.

We have extended the deadlines. See RFP

NHJB-25 01 Addendum 1

26.

Appendix C, G. Vendor’s Cost Proposal, pg.

34, Please confirm the total number of internal users for the proposed solution and provide a

No IT staff will require access

Each location will have on average 5 users breakdown by group/department/unit of total number of users and access they require (read only, edit, etc.). Please identify any applicable IT staff that will require access to the proposed solution.

Coordinator

Case manager

PPO or LEO

Counselor (s)

Lawyers and or Judge

27.

Have you seen demos of any product(s)? If so, can you please share which product(s)?

We have not seen demos in regard to this

RFP

28.

Appendix C, G. Vendor’s Cost Proposal, pg.

34, Is this project currently funded? If so, please identify the budgeted project amount.

We are looking for your best and final offer as stated on page 26 D. Cost Proposal

Scoring

29.

Are you currently utilizing Windows or Mac products?

A vast majority use windows products.

30.

What is your critical date to go-live? Does this date correspond with any critical dates to migrate data from the legacy system?

The current drug court database contract ends 9/30/25. There is no MHC database contract.

31.

Appendix C, C. Vender’s Detailed

Explanation of Proposed Solution, f. Data

Migration,, pg. 33, Migration:

Will you and/or proposed vendor have access to the legacy system for purposes of migration following termination of your existing contract with the legacy system?

If legacy data is migrated prior to the go live then no.

32.

(page 18-19, 34-35, G.)

What is the NHJB’s budget for this procurement?

We are looking for your best and final offer as stated on page 26 D. Cost Proposal

Scoring

33.

(page 35, #7)

What system is currently being used for Drug

Court case management & will a conversion from this system be required?

Drug Court currently uses an SQL and yes from this system or a data backpack.

34.

(page 17, F. System Design)

Will a conversion of the Mental Health Court cases be required?

There is no current MHC database but some use excel spread sheets.

35.

(page 12, #64)

For the following assessments, what data points will need to be captured beyond the assessment type, date the assessment was completed, and the total score?

a. ASAM Level care

b. DSM diagnosis

c. GAINS

d. ARAS

e. LSIR yes

36.

(page 4, B.)

What’s the expected timeline from contract award to implementation / go-live?

Drug Court go live would be 10/1/25

MHC does not have a current data system with a contract.

37.

(page 10 ,#'s 21-27)

Approximately how many system users will there be in total?

Estimated 100 users

38.

(page 33, F. a. & d.)

Do any interfaces exist currently with the case management application?

Yes, the system has an internal interface for reports and analysis.

39.

Page 8 Section II, B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

What is the name of the current case management system for the Drug Courts?

N/A

40.

Page 8 Section II, B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

Why is NHJB considering replacement of the existing case management system for the

Drug Courts?

The current system was secured though an

RFP and that contract has continued. The funding for continued system will be federal grant funds.

41.

Page 8 Section II, B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire 9/30/25

What is the expiration date of the existing case management contract?

42.

Page 8 Section II, B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

What, if any, limitations exist with the current case management system?

N/A

43.

Page 9 Section II, D. Scope of Services

Given the detailed phases of the implementation timeline, would NHJB consider a longer initial contract term?

The contract term is though federal grants which have an end date. Additional funds will be explored during the contract period.

44.

Page 10 Section II, E. Business

Requirements, #2

Does the NHJB track any additional participant idemacntifiers (e.g., Medicaid

Number; Corrections ID)?

It currently does not track those numbers.

45.

Page 10 Section II, E. Business

Requirements, #2

Can NHJB provide a complete list of all

"case types"?

Drug Court

Mental Health Court

46.

Page 12 Section II, E. Business

Requirements, #64

Do NHJB staff currently administer assessments (e.g., ASAM, etc.) or would that data need to be imported from an external source?

Those are kept in treatments EHR.

Some Drug Courts upload the LADC evaluation as a PDF.

47.

Page 12 Section II, E. Business

Requirements, #64

Would NHJB be interested in additional information and/or pricing for the electronic version of any of the ASAM Criteria assessments (CONTINUUM, Co-Triage, RISE) to support this project?

That could be of interest if as an add on to the proposal.

48.

Page 12 Section II, E. Business

Requirements, #60

Confirm this is a client portal for clients to view and enter data.

#60 refers to clients being able to communicate with staff and view / review their schedules and appointments.

49.

Page 13 Section II, E. Business

Requirements, #83

Can you provide “docket case event” use cases that help clarify this requirement?

Plea hearings, treatment court hearings, 50.

Page 16 Section II, E. Business

Requirements, #97

Can you provide use cases related to transferring cases? Specifically, are cases transferred between organizations, between staff, etc.?

Cases are currently transferred from one jurisdiction to another. Staff in one location might need to be changed to a different staff member as well.

51.

Page 18 Section II, F. System Design, #22

What is meant by “automatic registration process?”

System allows for users to reset passwords o their own and logs the event.

system admin can manually create an account or a user can register to have an account created/approved

Or password resets allowing system admins to do it and allowing users to do it themselves

52.

Page 22 Section III, I. Compliance

Can NHJB confirm that changes to federal and state laws that govern Vendor’s performance may be subject to the processes for changing or otherwise amending the contract?

Yes, subject to negotiation.

53.

Page 23 Section IV, C. Proposal Format

Will NHJB allow a smaller or different font for graphics and tables (e.g., Calibri Light 10 or Arial 9)?

See page 23 C, a.

Unless the font change is to allow different graphs and tables.

54.

Page 28 Appendix A. Proposal Cover Page

Will NHJB allow bidders to use their own company created cover page as the first page of the proposal followed by NHJB’s Proposal

Cover Page?

Applicants should use the proposals cover page on page 28

55.

Page 33 Appendix C. Bidder Response

Template

Under main heading D. Risk Management, bullet d. is “Supplemental Information.” Does

NHJB want bidders to provide a response there as well as under main heading E.

Supplemental Information?”

Yes, D.d is for supplemental risk assessment and E.is for other information.

56.

Page 34 Appendix C. Bidder Response

Template, G. Vendor’s Cost Proposal

Does NHJB want bidders to include cost information in the same document as the rest of the required information?

yes

57.

Page 38 Appendix D, 11. Event of Default and Remedies

Will NHJB consider a mutual termination for default provision to address potential breaches by NHJB?

Subject to negation

58.

Page 38 Appendix D, 11.2 Remedy

Will NHJB consider an edit to the Default and Remedies section to require a cure period prior to the other remedies listed in that section becoming available to NHJB?

Yes

59.

Page 39 Appendix D, 16. Indemnification

Will NHJB consider an edit to this Section that states the Vendor’s indemnification obligations are reduced to the extent that

NHJB contributed to the event that resulted in the obligation?

No

60.

Appendix D

Will NHJB consider a cap on Vendor’s liability to the total amounts paid or payable to Vendor within the 12 months directly before the date the claim was made?

Subject to negation

61.

Appendix D

Will NHJB consider an edit to disclaim indirect and consequential damages to limit uncertainty and to avoid unquantifiable risk?

Subject to negation

62. Do financials need to be audited? yes

63.

Due to the sensitive nature of a vendor’s customer list, would the state consider a list of references for the proposal submission with a complete customer list provided at a later stage in the process?

5-7 references from customers some of those need to include other courts but a complete customer list can be provided at contract negotiation.

64.

In Appendix C; Section C; Item d.iii: Disaster

Recovery Plans - The response should include a projected written schedule based on the methodology steps outlined in Section II, Can you please clarify? Does this mean schedule timeline for recovery after disaster?

yes

65.

In Appendix C; Section C; Item f.ii: Data

Migration - The vendor must also provide the number of records and total storage in gigabites and what data type i.e. Microsoft

SQL Server, etc .

Can you provide further clarification? Are you requesting the data limits of the Vendor’s system? If you are looking for the amount of data to be migrated from current system to ours, this amount of data would be dependent on information currently unavailable to us.

What are the limits of your system for total storage in gigabytes and what type of data is it?

66.

In Appendix C; Section C; Item e. i: Vendor should include an electronic copy of sample end-user manual or help documentation and

Network and system level architecture that identifies responsibilities of the vendor, third-party, and customer. Administrative guide should also include all configuration an electronic copy of the system documentation.

What level of system documentation is required?

possibilities and expected outcome/impact to configuration changes.

67.

Page, 6

Thank you for the number of participants per court, can you provide the number of users per court as well?

On average 5 per court but some might have more.

68.

Are we correct to assume if the County has multiple circuits that would be multiple installs in that County, or would they be using the same instance and configuration?

Only if the courts in that county had independent programs.

69.

Page 5, Section D

Contract Term – This is a large project and will require investment from the winning vendor. In an effort to keep the initial cost down is the court open to a 3 year contract provided they had performance protections written in?

The initial contract is one year with the ability to extend the contract an additional two years given satisfactory performance and funding availably.

70.

Page, 14

Reporting – Does the AOC desire the ability to report across the different courts vs. just reporting on an individual location. Ex. The need to see consolidated reporting for all

Mental Health or all Drug Courts? Should the State coordinator have access to report on the individual locations?

Yes, there maybe instances where having joint data could be useful.

The State coordinator should have access to all records and programs.

71.

Page 11, #35

Mentions each organization having the ability to set up their own codes. How standard are the courts going to be? Would the AOC estimate that Drug Courts are 90% standard and Mental Health Courts are 90% standard.

The more standardized the courts the lower the cost to implement.

Yes, they would be mostly standardize with local program able to add additional drop down options in certain fields and run their own reports on their data

72.

Page 12, #61

Requests a mobile app for alerts. Would the

AOC accept other alert methods such as email or text?

Yes

73.

Page 31, Section B – subsection d - Customer

List

Will the vendor be penalized for not providing a full customer list? This is typically not something we include in responses because of FOIA requests.

The RFP states a complete list.

74.

Page 23, Section IV.C (Proposal Format)

How long do you expect the proposal to be?

As long as needed to address each section and question.

75.

Page 19, Section II.H (Payment Schedule)

Can you provide more details on the budget constraints or funding availability?

The source of funding is federal grants. We are asking for the the bidders best and final offers.

76.

Page 6, Section II.D (Scope of Services)

What are the anticipated changes in project scope or priorities?

Not able to locate referenced page 6, Section

II.D for this question

77.

Page 8, Section II.B (Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New

Hampshire)

Can you detail any previous challenges encountered in similar projects?

N/A

78.

Page 25, Section V.A (Evaluation of

Proposals)

What are the key evaluation criteria for proposals?

The key evaluation criteria is in the chart on

79.

Page 9, Section II.D (Scope of Services -

Existing System and Integration)

What are the existing infrastructures in place?

Current cloud database for the Drug Courts.

Mental Health Courts use excel and other documents while a few programs have an access database.

80.

Page 8, Section II.B (Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New

Hampshire)

What were the challenges with the previous solutions?

N/A

81.

Page 27, Section VI (Contract Document)

Is there an incumbent? If so, how much was their contract worth?

Drug Court uses an SQL, Mental Health

Court does not have a system.

82.

Page 25, Section V.A (Evaluation of

Proposals)

Do commercial or government references carry different significance in the evaluation process?

No

83.

Page 6, Section II.D (Scope of Services)

Are there any additional or optional features you would desire beyond the stated requirements?

Yes, that would be factored into page 25 evaluation chart: Innovation

84.

Page 4, Section I.B (Schedule of Events)

Is there an ideal timeline for project implementation and completion?

Go live for the Drug Courts would be

10/1/25. Mental Health Courts do not have an active system/ contract.

85.

Page 19, Section II.H (Payment Schedule -

Warranty Period)

What level of post-implementation support is expected?

Support with bugs and glitches, incorrect data, reporting, etc.

86.

Page 20, Section III.B (Vendor Inquiries)

Have you worked with any vendor to conduct market research or assist in developing this

RFP?

No

87.

Page 4, Section I.B (Schedule of Events)

When do you expect this RFP to be awarded?

Once we have a signed contract. Estimated

Notification of Selection and Begin Contract

Development is noted in the Addendum 1.

88.

Page 25, Section V.A (Evaluation of

Proposals - Technical Proposal) N/A

How much weight does a Salesforce-based solution carry in the evaluation process?

89.

Page 19, Section II.H (Payment Schedule &

Pricing)

Are you interested in a vendor who has GSA

Schedule pricing?

Page 26 states best and final offer

90.

Page 6, Section II.D (Scope of Services -

Training and Implementation)

Do you prefer in-person training or virtual training for end users and administrators?

No preference

91.

Page 9, Section II.D (Scope of Services -

Vendor Support & Hosting Requirements)

Is this project expected to be fully remote, or are there on-site requirements?

This can be fully remote

92.

Page 6, Section II.D (Scope of Services -

Subcontracting & Vendor Roles)

Is it acceptable if our subcontractor is a

ServiceNow partner while the prime is not, given that the subcontractor will be completing the entirety of the work?

If the work is encrypted and confidential the vendor must identify all third-parties and their responsibilities and that the vendor is ultimately responsible for all of the third-parties involved. Third-parties must adhere to the same compliance/security requirements as the vendor.

93.

Page 23, Section IV.A (Proposal Submission, Deadline, and Location Instructions)

The RFP specifies submission via email. Will submissions through GSA eBuy also be accepted?

No

94.

Page 4, Section I.B (Schedule of Events)

We would like to request a one-week extension to provide a more comprehensive response to this RFP. Would this be considered?

We have extended the proposal due date please see addendum 1 to the RFP.

95.

Page 6, Section II.D (Scope of Services -

System Preferences & Technical

Requirements)

Is there a preferred software solution the state would like vendors to consider when proposing solutions

SaaS solutions are preferred.

96.

RFP Reference: Page 9, Section II.D. Scope of Services

What are the primary objectives for the new

TCMS, and how will success be measured?

Success will be measured on its functionality

97.

RFP Reference: Page 8, Section II.B.

Evaluation and Data Collection of Drug

Courts in New Hampshire

Please provide specific examples of the challenges or inefficiencies NHJB is experiencing

N/A

98.

RFP Reference: Page 9, Section II.D. Scope of Services

What are NHJB’s top three priorities in this project (e.g., automation, integration, user experience, compliance, reporting)?

Functionality, reporting, automation

99.

Page 9, Section II.D. Scope of Services

Beyond solving current challenges, what future capabilities does NHJB anticipate needing?

N/A

100.

Page 9, Section II.C. Covered Treatment

Drug Courts

Are there additional case types, modules, or workflow expansions that should be considered?

N/A

101.

Page 9, Section II.D. Scope of Services

What are the long-term modernization goals for NHJB’s court technology?

Program functionality, reporting, and automation

102.

Page 17, Section F. System Design

Are there regulatory, statutory, or policy-driven mandates that the system must enforce?

Confidentiality and encryption following

CFR 42 Part 2, and HIPAA

103.

Page 9, Section II.E. Business Requirements

Can NHJB provide a list of specific legal requirements that dictate how cases must be processed?

Cases must follow confidentiality, CFR 42

Part 2, and HIPAA

104.

Page 9, Section II.E. Business Requirements

Are there court rules, compliance audits, or reporting obligations that must be embedded in the system?

N/A

105.

Page 8, Section B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

What are the existing systems used for managing Drug and Mental Health Court cases, and how do they function?

SQL for the Drug Courts. Mental Health

Courts do not have a system, programs use excel, access systems for data.

106.

Page 8, Section B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

Please describe whether these systems are vendor-supplied, custom-built, or manually managed.

Vendor-supplied with custom reports.

107.

Page 8, Section B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

What functional gaps exist in the current system?

N/A

108.

Page 10, Section E. Business Requirements

How will historical data be handled in the transition to the new system?

Data migration

109.

Page 8, Section B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

What is the volume of case records (e.g., number of cases, documents, transactions)?

Unavailable

110.

Page 9, Section B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

Are there structured (SQL databases) and unstructured (PDFs, handwritten notes) data sources that need migration?

Yes

111.

Page 10, Section E. Business Requirements

Will NHJB require a data cleansing or normalization process before migration?

probably since each system has different processes and data storage fields.

112.

Page 9, Section D. Scope of Services

What integrations currently exist between

NHJB’s systems and external entities?

One system with a drug testing company.

113.

Page 9, Section D. Scope of Services

Should the new TCMS replace, enhance, or maintain these existing integrations?

Depends on the capabilities of the system.

114.

Page 9, Section B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

Are there known limitations or pain points in these integrations today?

N/A

115.

Page 8, Section B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

Who are all the user groups that will interact with the TCMS, and what are their primary functions?

Treatment team members, entering data and reporting out.

116.

Page 12, Section Referral and Admission

Process

Please provide a breakdown by role (e.g., judges, clerks, attorneys, probation officers, case managers, treatment providers).

Coordinator – oversees day to day operations

Case manager- work directly with clients and data entry

PPO or LEO – public safety and field visits and data entry

Counselor (s) - treatment and data entry

Lawyers – legal procedures

Judge – legal procedures and program operations

State Coordinators – view data on a statewide level.

117.

Page 13, Section Case Management and

Document Generation

What are the most critical daily tasks performed by each role?

Case management and data entry

118.

Page 13, Section Case Management and

Document Generation

What workflow scenarios should be accounted for in the system?

Referral, screening, admittance, Phases, benchmarks, sanctions, incentives, therapeutic responses, court hearings, completion

119.

Page 9, Section D. Scope of Services

Can NHJB provide sample user stories or process flow diagrams detailing case handling from start to finish?

N/A

120.

Page 8, Section B. Evaluation and Data

Collection of Drug Courts in New Hampshire

What are the most time-consuming tasks today, and how should automation improve them?

Data entry and report building

121.

Page 18, Section F. System Design

What system accessibility requirements exist for different users?

State Managers – access to all data, edit, add, remove access, Local managers- access to local data, edit, add, remove entries

Other users – access local data, data entry

122.

Page 17, Section F. System Design

Should users be able to access the system remotely, via mobile devices, or offline?

Yes but not offline.

123.

Page 18, Section F. System Design

Will the system need to support multilingual access for users with language preferences?

Not a requirement but could be useful.

124.

Page 13, Section E Case Management and

Peak M-F 8-5pm

What are the peak usage periods, and what is the expected system load?

During business hours 2-3 individuals per program could be signed in and entering data at any given time.

Estimated on average 30-40 new cases per week.

Modified cases estimated on average 200 a day but this is a best guess.

125.

Page 10, Section E. Business Requirements

How many users log in concurrently during peak times?

126.

Page 13, Section E Case Management and

Document Generation

Are there specific events, filing deadlines, or court sessions that cause system surges?

N/A

127.

Page 17, Section F. System Design

Which external agencies require access to the system, and what level of access is needed?

N/A

128.

Page 17, Section F. System Design

Should external parties be able to view, edit, or submit case data?

Only Drug Court and Mental Health Court team members will have access to view, edit, or submit case data. Some “team members” may be from external agencies, i.e. NH

Probation or a separate treatment agency that is contracted with the Drug Court.

129.

Page 17, Section F. System Design

How frequently will external agencies need to exchange data with NHJB?

If referring to non-team members then never.

Teams are comprised of non NHJB employees.

130.

Page 18, Section F. System Design

Will any form of public access be required, and what information should be made available?

No public access will be required.

Information may be pulled from the database to distribute as appropriate for legal hearings

(terminations, etc)

131.

Page 18, Section F. System Design

Should public users have self-service access to case status, payments, or filings?

No

132.

Page 11, Section Security & Access Controls

Are there specific access control policies governing public records?

CFR42 Part 2, HIPAA, 133.

Page 10, Section E. Business Requirements

What security policies apply to external access and data sharing?

CFR42 Part 2, HIPAA, 134.

Page 17, Section F. System Design

Should the system enforce time-limited access for external users?

Not needed

135.

Page 17, Section F. System Design

How will NHJB audit and monitor external user interactions?

Program Admin will assign new users and their access.

136.

Page 9, Section D. Scope of Services

What core case management functionalities must be included?

Which program, what phase, benchmarks, appointments, notes, reports

137.

Page 10, Section E. Business Requirements

Please specify required case types, workflow stages, and automation rules.

Which program, what phase, benchmarks, appointments, 138.

Page 13, Section Referral and Admission

Process

Should the system support parallel cases for the same defendant in multiple programs?

They will not be in multiple programs in this system.

139.

Page 13, Section Case Management and

Document Generation

What types of case relationships must the system support?

State level with all programs in a drug court or mental health court for reporting

Local level for each program to gather data on trends from demographics to service adjustments, court sessions, drug testing, etc

To one case being able to report progress within that one case and or trends.

140.

Page 13, Section Case Management and

Yes

Should it track linked cases, co-defendants, family members, or treatment history?

141.

Page 13, Section Case Management and

Document Generation

What scheduling functions should be automated, and what flexibility is needed?

Court sessions, drug testing, Office Visits and treatment sessions

142.

Page 13, Section Case Management and

Document Generation

Should hearings and appointments be auto-assigned based on availability?

Yes, based on the programs schedule and the phase

143.

Page 13, Section Case Management and

Document Generation

Should the system support rescheduling logic with conflict resolution?

This is not a requirement but if it is a feature reflect it in the proposal with and without it.

144.

Page 17, Section System Design

What notifications and alerts must be included?

Messages, appointments, court dates, drug tests, 145.

Page 14, Section Case Management and

Document Generation

Should notifications be triggered for court dates, compliance deadlines, and violations?

Yes, and other appointments; treatment, drug testing.

146.

Page 17, Section System Design

What delivery methods should be supported

(email, SMS, in-app, IVR calls)?

in-app and email at a minimum, also might want to consider text and automated voice messages

147.

Page 9, Section D. Scope of Services

What is NHJB’s preferred system hosting and deployment model?

No preference as long as it is 100% SaaS and browser agnostic and requires zero client footprint

148.

Page 9, Section D. Scope of Services

Should it be cloud-hosted (AWS, Azure, Private Cloud) or on-premises?

The current system is Azure. The system holds private health information and sensitive personal information.

149.

Page 33, Section Vendor’s Proposed Disaster

Recovery Plan

A copy of the vendor’s DR is not required but is encouraged. A SLA that covers uptime, RTO, and RPO is required. A RTO

Does NHJB require a disaster recovery plan, and what are the RTO/RPO expectations?

of two hours is desired, with a RPO of 24 hours desired.

150.

Page 33, Section Vendor’s Proposed Disaster

Recovery Plan

What are the system uptime, performance, and redundancy requirements?

99.9% during business hours, M-F 8AM –

5PM, 99.5% annually 365x24.

151.

Page 33, Section Vendor’s Proposed Disaster

Recovery Plan

What are the expectations for load balancing, failover, and recovery mechanisms?

System should be able to handle peak loads during business hours without any perceived performance degradation by users. System should have the appropriate recovery mechanisms in place to maintain 99.5% uptime. All systems and data must be in the

USA

152.

Page 17, Section System Design

What security frameworks must be enforced?

Unable to locate this in page 17, system design

153.

Page 18, Section System Design

Must comply with CJIS, HIPAA, FedRAMP, SOC 2 Type 2, NIST 800-171?

FedRAMP, HIPPAA, NIST, CJIS; some of this information will not be linked to outside systems but could have the information keyed into it.

154.

Page 18, Section System Design

Should data be encrypted at rest and in transit, and what key management requirements apply?

Yes to encrypted in transit and at rest. The vendor is expected to perform due-diligence in handling and protection of encryption keys used to secure Court data.

155.

Page 17, Section System Design

What authentication mechanisms must be in place?

MFA and RBAC. AD sync for SSO is desired but not required.

156.

Page 10, Section E. Business Requirements

Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA), SSO

(Okta, Azure AD), Role-Based Access

Controls (RBAC)?

Azure AD is preferred.

157.

Page 9, Section D. Scope of Services

What external systems must the TCMS integrate with, and how should data be exchanged?

We do not currently have a plan for integration with a system.

158.

Page 18, Section F. System Design

Are there existing API endpoints NHJB provides, or must new APIs be developed?

The NHJB does not provide API’s to the existing database.

159.

Page 17, Section System Design

Should integrations support real-time updates or batch processing?

Either, depending on the type of integrations to the system.

160.

Page 18, Section F. System Design

What are the requirements for API authentication and security?

API connections must be authenticated.

While Certificate-Based Authentication is preferred, we do not have a defined requirement.

161.

Page 18, Section F. System Design

Must the system support OAuth 2.0, API

Keys, SAML, certificate-based authentication?

We do not have a defined requirement, Certificate-Based Authentication is preferred.

162.

Page 9, Section D. Scope of Services

What is NHJB’s preferred implementation strategy?

Statewide

163.

Page 9, Section C. Covered Treatment Drug

Courts

Will the rollout be statewide at once or phased by court location?

Statewide.

164.

Page 9, Section D. Scope of Services

Should there be a pilot phase with specific courts before full deployment?

There could be a pilot phase to ensure proper data entry and migration.

165.

Page 33, Section Vendor Training and

Support

What training and support should the vendor provide?

Propose what training is standard with the product

Support should have email and call in options.

166.

Page 33, Section Vendor Training and

Support

Should training include on-site workshops, webinars, or self-paced e-learning?

Vender should propose options for learning along with pricing for each .

167.

Page 34, Section G. Vendor’s Cost Proposal

Does NHJB have a predefined budget, or should vendors propose tiered pricing options?

Vendor can propose tiered pricing but page

26 D states Best and Final Offer

168.

Page 34, Section G. Vendor’s Cost Proposal

Are there funding restrictions on subscription-based vs. one-time licensing models?

Funding restrictions are based on the federal grants the NHJB manages.

169.

Page 34, Section G. Vendor’s Cost Proposal

2Should the proposal include separate pricing for Drug Court CMS vs. Mental Health Court

CMS?

Yes, please itemize costs and include which

CMS the cost is for

170.

Page 18, Section H. Payment Schedule

Are there incentives or penalties tied to project deadlines, deliverables, or performance SLAs?

SLA should identify incentives/penalties for not hitting target uptime, RTO and RPO