Attachment 1 - Jury Management Solution PWS.pdf

USCA27R0009 - Attachment 1 - Section C

Jury Management Solution (JMS)

Performance Work Statement

1.0 Background

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO) (Government) currently operates a legacy Jury Management System (“Legacy JMS”) that supports jury operations across all the federal district courts (courts), of which there are 94 today.

Federal district courts must comply with Title 28, U.S.C. § 1861 et seq. (Jury Selection and Service Act) and related policies (Guide to Judiciary Policy, Volume 4, Chapter 3) governing random selection, qualification, summoning, and compensation of petit and grand jurors. For the purpose of this solicitation, all references of judiciary policies and court-specific procedures governing jury management are Judiciary-sensitive and will be provided at contract award.

Unlike state-court jury management systems, which typically serve a single court under a uniform statewide framework, a federal Jury Management Solution (JMS) simultaneously supports the full operational diversity of the federal judiciary. Each federal district court operates under a court-specific jury selection plan approved by the relevant circuit judicial council, resulting in significant and legally mandated variation in source-list composition, divisional wheel architecture, refill scheduling, excusal and exemption categories, grand jury selection methodology, and panel disclosure timing.

The current environment presents increasing operational risk due to aging platform dependencies, limited configurability, fragile integrations, high manual workload, constrained observability, and rising support and maintenance burden.

2.0 Scope

The scope is to acquire a modern, centralized, secure JMS capable of supporting the full lifecycle of federal jury operations, including the storage, processing, and transfer of highly sensitive data.

3.0 Operational Requirements

The Contractor shall provide and maintain an end-to-end JMS that includes hosting, application administration, monitoring, incident response, problem management, release and change management, identity and access integration, interface operations, disaster recovery, service reporting, and user support escalation. The Contractor’s operating model for the JMS shall clearly distinguish Government and Contractor responsibilities and align with Judiciary service management processes.

The JMS shall provide secure and supportable nationwide jury management that preserves continuity of jury operations, maintains accurate financial processing, supports standards-based interoperability, enables low-risk transition from the Legacy JMS, and provides a resilient cloud-

Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement: Jury Management System (JMS) Modernization hosted JMS for current and future Judiciary needs. The JMS shall be capable of preserving existing mission-critical capabilities while enabling future enhancements, improved usability, and long-term sustainability.

The Contractor shall ensure that the JMS supports the Judiciary in complying with Title 28, U.S.C. § 1861 et seq. (Jury Selection and Service Act), judiciary policies (Guide to Judiciary Policy, Volumes 4, 11, 13, and 19), and court-specific procedures governing jury management.

The contractor’s existing JMS must be in active production use in courts across multiple jurisdictions, including state, federal, or international systems, demonstrating operational maturity at a scale sufficient to support nationwide (all federal district courts and AO sites, including OCONUS court locations) deployment.

The JMS shall support the selection, management, and tracking of both prospective and impaneled jurors for courts that use either a one‑step or a two‑step qualification and summoning workflow; perform all required financial and statistical calculations; and integrate with the Government’s current financial management system.

The JMS shall be a court configurable solution that enhances the juror experience, improves operational efficiency, empowers courts with real-time data-driven insights to support informed decision making, supports iterative improvement, and complies with all applicable Federal security, privacy, and statutory requirements.

The JMS must support court jury staff, AO program and oversight functions, technical integration stakeholders, and juror-facing services in a manner that preserves continuity of operations, statutory compliance, and nationwide supportability.

3.1 Jury Lifecycle Support Services

The Contractor shall ensure the JMS fully supports all jury operations from qualification through service completion for both petit and grand jury tracks, providing secure tools for staff and accessible services for jurors across all court-specific configurations.

1. Support the complete jury lifecycle from qualification through service completion for both petit and grand jury operations as distinct functional tracks with differing qualification criteria, service durations, selection processes, and administrative workflows.

2. Support jury wheel construction, management, replenishment, and depletion tracking in accordance with each federal district court’s jury plan; including those courts that operate one-step and two-step qualification and summoning processes. The JMS shall allow courts the ability to opt out of jury wheel construction.

3. Support two distinct juror types, grand and petit, each with independent lifecycle, term, selection workflow, and financial processing rules.

4. Support four trial types: civil, criminal, bankruptcy, and summary trials.

5. Enable each federal district court to define and manage its own qualification criteria, statutory exemptions, excuse categories, and deferral/postponement rules in accordance with its court-approved jury plan, without requiring custom development or Contractor involvement for plan-level configuration changes.

6. Support simultaneous management of multiple active jury pools, panels, and trials within a single district, including courts with multiple divisions, courthouses, or concurrent proceedings before the same or different judges.

7. Ability to redact jurors’ information (e.g., names and addresses) for the purpose of selecting anonymous juries.

8. Provide a secure, web-based interface for court personnel.

9. Provide an online portal for prospective jurors to complete court-required forms and submit documentation to support postponement and excusal requests; as well as update demographic/personal information, such as full name, mailing address, social security number, date of birth, phone number, and email address. Additional reporting and data collection fields may be found at Attachment 2 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio; Example 12.

10. Support juror financial processing as an operational workflow, including tracking of attendance, calculation of fees and mileage reimbursement, and management of payment-related status throughout the jury lifecycle.

11. Support the ability for a court to export a juror postal mailing list for any specific batch of forms to be mailed.

12. Provide automatic calculation of the juror mileage from the juror’s home address to the physical address of the courthouse, with the ability to manually enter distance in special circumstances.

3.2 Operational Tools & Technology Integration Services

The Contractor shall enable efficient, modern court operations by integrating the JMS with essential technologies used for document processing, communication, juror check-in, multi-pool and multi-proceeding coordination, and operational forms. The Contractor shall provide a JMS that:

1. Provides scanning capabilities sufficient to support the volume and operational needs of federal courts. Currently, approximately 99 scanners are utilized nationwide, to enable efficient processing of juror forms, documentation, and juror correspondence using optical character recognition and optical mark recognition to automatically feed data into JMS for the respective juror record.

2. Integrates with scanning technology, including hardware, software, and support supplied by the Contractor, to support efficient processing of juror forms and correspondence.

3. Supports multi-channel communication, including an interactive voice response (IVR) component, email, SMS/text, and mobile technology (smartphones and tablets), across all active jury pools and proceedings within a court.

4. Supports proximity-based technologies to streamline juror check-in and check-out and related workflows to support the jury lifecycle, including environments where multiple pools or panels are reporting simultaneously.

5. Enables court staff to manage and track juror status, availability, and assignment across concurrent pools, panels, and trial proceedings within a district without loss of data integrity or operational visibility.

6. Supports forms JS-11, JS-11G, and AO-12 forms prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States to report on the operations of the district jury selection plan and to report on juror usage (Attachment 2 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio; Examples 1, 2 and 3). Instructions for completing the forms will be provided at contract award.

3.3 Financial & Data Integration Services

The Contractor shall ensure accurate financial processing and seamless integration with current Judiciary financial system. The JMS shall:

1. Integrate with the Government’s financial management system, currently Judiciary Integrated Financial Management System (JIFMS) configured from CGI’s Momentum Enterprise Suite by producing an export file with specified column definitions to be provided at contract award.

2. Provide accurate, timely financial and statistical calculations, including juror attendance fees and mileage reimbursement computed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1871 and applicable judiciary policy (Guide to Judiciary Policy, Volumes 4 and 13).

3. Support national-level aggregation and reporting of juror cost and utilization data across all federal district courts, enabling the AO to fulfill its oversight and policy responsibilities.

4. Produce financial and statistical outputs that are auditable and traceable to individual juror records, supporting court and AO accountability requirements.

5. Provide a method to produce an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Form 1099-MISC (Miscellaneous Information) document for each juror with a court-customizable dollar threshold that triggers an IRS Form 1099-MISC. This data may also be submitted to the financial management system via the export file for later production of IRS Form 1099- MISC. See Attachment 2 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio; Examples 4 and 5 for extract mapping and a sample.

6. Apply federal employee-specific attendance fee logic in accordance with 5 U.S.C. § 5537, including conditional pay-status determination, court leave substitution, United States Postal Service (USPS) employee treatment as non-federal Government employees, and hourly excess-service calculations, with employer type captured per juror record and fee logic applied conditionally.

7. Generate AO-12 demographic wheel composition reports (Attachment 2 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio; Example 3). These reports compare race, ethnicity, and sex data against current census citizen population data for each division and district. These reports shall be available immediately upon request and automatically following each master wheel refill or any jury plan change affecting qualification, exemption, or excusal criteria.

3.4 Court-Level Configurability within a National Governance Framework

The Contractor shall enable each federal district court to operate the JMS in accordance with its own court-approved jury plan while preserving the AO’s ability to maintain oversight visibility across all courts. The Contractor shall:

1. Support court-specific configuration of jury plan parameters, including source list definitions, selection methodologies, wheel sizes, qualification criteria, and excuse categories, without requiring custom development, Contractor involvement, or modifications that affect other courts.

2. Provide the AO with aggregate operational visibility across all courts, including the ability to monitor system usage, juror utilization rates, financial data, and compliance indicators at the judiciary-wide level.

3. Support a governance model in which court-level configuration changes can be made independently by authorized court personnel, while AO-controlled standards and required form language remain protected from court-level modification.

4. Utilize jury selection randomness with written documentation demonstrating the randomization approach by the JMS, including a letter from a qualified external organization, such as National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or another standards body specializing in testing and certifying random number generators, sufficient to support the integrity of the selection processes against challenges under 28 U.S.C. § 1867.

During key stages of the jury selection process, prospective jurors must be selected using a demonstrably random method to address potential challenges to the jury selection process. The JMS must ensure genuine randomness during selection, capable of withstanding legal scrutiny in a court of law. The following processes require random selection:

• For two-step courts, selecting persons to receive a juror qualification questionnaire or, for one-step courts, both a juror qualification questionnaire and a summons.

• For two-step courts, selecting persons for reporting jury pool.

• Creating panels for voir dire.

• Any substitution or replacement functions by zip code.

The JMS shall create a reproducible, time-stamped audit log of every random draw.

3.5 Requirements Table

The items enumerated below provide standard functions applicable to all federal district courts.

Item

JMS Functional Area

Functional Requirements

Master Wheel

Multiple simultaneous divisional master wheels within a single district, each tied to a defined county roster

Master Wheel

Per-division proportional fill logic - each county's name drawn in proportion to its share of that division's primary source list

Master Wheel

Configurable wheel size with both statutory floor (1,000 names or 0.5% of source list) and district-set upper cap

Master Wheel

Election-cycle-anchored refill scheduling (e.g., refill reminder within specified months after federal general elections in even-numbered years)

Master Wheel

Clerk-discretion refill model with staleness indicators (undeliverable rate, source file age) to support the decision

Master Wheel

Four-year ceiling enforcement on wheel age with automated alerts as deadline approaches

Master Wheel

Dual-wheel continuity during transition - old qualified wheel remains operational until new master wheel produces sufficient qualified names, then old wheel retired

Master Wheel

AO Form 12 demographic composition report generated immediately upon request and at least after each refill (race, ethnicity, and sex compared against current census citizen population data for the division and district) or if any jury plan change affecting qualification, exemption, or excusal

Master Wheel

Wheel records retained for four years after emptying and refilling and completion of service by all persons selected from that wheel, though a court can maintain (and not use) for however longer they wish.

Randomization

Four-stage randomization: (1) source list to master wheel, (2) master wheel to qualification draw, (3) qualification draw to summons, and (4) summons pool to specific panel assignment

Randomization

Cryptographically defensible randomization algorithm (consistent with NIST SP 800-90A) at all four stages

Randomization

Equal-probability selection verification - mathematical odds of any single name being selected must be substantially equal (consistent with

NIST SP 800-90B)

Randomization

Reproducible, timestamped audit log of every draw: parameters, seed or algorithm used, names selected, date and time

Qualification

One-step (combined summons and qualification) and two-step (separate) process support, configurable per district plan

Qualification

Online juror qualification questionnaire (JQQ) submission via external court website or a mail return that is scanned into JMS and automatically populates the respective juror’s record

Qualification

Ten-day JQQ return deadline tracking with reporting on those requiring follow up.

Qualification

Quarterly clerk review of randomly sampled qualification questionnaires for processing consistency, with documented results – JMS must create a list of random JQQs for court staff to check.

Qualification

Residency validation: one-year district residency required; intra-district division moves do not disqualify; out-of-district moves disqualify

Qualification

If juror moves within district to another division, have the ability to update the mailing address and division code, and re-assign and re-issue the summons; or to defer.

Qualification

Civil rights restoration determination for felony-convicted prospective jurors, with state-law-specific logic (restoration varies by convicting jurisdiction)

Qualification

Non-citizen flag and configurable reporting workflow to state election officials, plan-driven on/off toggle per district

Qualification

Qualification determination recorded on the questionnaire and in the JMS simultaneously

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Statutorily exempt categories (active military, state/local fire and police, actively serving elected/appointed public officers) enforced as hard bars - exempt persons may not serve even if willing; is configurable in the event the law changes.

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Federal fire and law enforcement personnel are NOT exempt under the statutory provision (only state/local fire and police are exempt) - this distinction must be captured correctly

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Space Force now included in Armed Forces definition under 10 U.S.C.

§ 101(a)(4) - system must reflect current military branch list and be configurable at a district or national AO level.

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Volunteer safety personnel granted automatic excuse on individual request - mandatory, not discretionary; is configurable.

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Class excuse categories configurable per district plan (e.g., persons over 70 years old, prior federal jury service within two years, caretakers, key business employees, professional categories)

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Prior federal jury service tracking: no person is required to serve more than 30 days as petit juror in any two-year period; no person is required to serve on more than one grand jury in two years; and no person is required to serve as both grand and petit juror in two years - system must enforce all three limits

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Prior service history search across grand and petit jury service within the two-year look-back window

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Temporary excuse workflow distinct from permanent class excuse:

temporary excuse has a defined end date, after which juror is either resummoned or reinserted into qualified wheel per district plan

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Grand-jury-specific excuse with configurable workflow allowing automatic wheel reinsertion or insertion to the current petit juror panel

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Deferral workflow (distinct from excuse): written request required, including electronic submission, reassignment to different pool within same wheel cycle, recorded and reportable to court on request

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Travel hardship evaluated case-by-case only - no automatic distance-based excuse permitted; may qualify for subsistence reimbursement or temporary excuse only

Exemptions, Excusals, Disqualifications

Clerk authority to grant excuses and deferrals only if expressly authorized in the jury plan - system must enforce this role-based authorization that a jury clerk will enter

Grand Jury

Grand jury as a distinct jury type with its own selection workflow, separate from petit jury

Grand Jury

Cross-divisional grand jury draw: proportionate share of names drawn from each divisional wheel, pooled for district-wide grand jury panel

Grand Jury

Single-division grand jury as permissible alternative, with recommendation that at least occasional district-wide draws occur to give all citizens opportunity to serve

Grand Jury

Grand jury size enforcement: 16–23 members with 4–8 alternates standard; quorum tracking; indictment requires 12 concurring jurors

Grand Jury

Grand jury term tracking up to 18 months, with court-ordered extension up to 6 additional months (24 months total for regular grand jury)

Grand Jury

Special grand jury as a third jury type: term up to 18 months, extendable in three 6-month increments up to 36 months, with further extension possible for noncriminal misconduct reports - term tracking and alert system required

Grand Jury

Grand jury service continuity: grand jury terms are not affected by master wheel emptying and refilling - jurors remain seated through wheel transition

Grand Jury

Grand juror identity - hard confidentiality: names, addresses, and phone numbers not disclosed to public or media without court order; data segregated from petit juror records with stricter role-based access controls

Grand Jury

Grand juror alternate management: alternates designated at empanelment, empaneled on permanent excuse of a seated grand juror

Grand Jury

Grand juror who moves out of district mid-term: flag for judicial review and potential dismissal (unlike petit jurors who may complete service if qualified at time of selection)

Petit Jury

Petit juror service term configurable per division (recommendation of no more than two months)

Petit Jury

30-day maximum petit juror service limit (except when necessary to complete service in a particular case) in any two-year period enforced at system level, with look-back across service history

Petit Jury

Central jury pool management for same-day multi-courtroom assignments, with random panel assignment to specific courtrooms

Petit Jury

Jurors excluded by peremptory challenge or cause in one case may be returned to central pool and eligible for reassignment

Petit Jury

Panel list disclosure to parties: configurable days-before-trial disclosure trigger (e.g., three business days); separate two-tier workflow for party disclosure vs. media/public disclosure (media may require written judicial authorization)

Petit Jury

Capital case mandatory panel list disclosure to defense: typically, three-day pre-trial deadline, non-waivable, auto-triggered by capital case flag under 18 U.S.C. § 3432

Petit Jury

Anonymous jury support: juror names and addresses withheld during selection when court orders, with other identifying information (e.g., zip code, employment type, questionnaire responses) still provided to parties during voir dire

Petit Jury

Juror moving out of district mid-trial: flag for clerk attention; petit juror may complete service if qualified at time of selection, but prompt party notification supported

Petit Jury

Configurable panel size calculator based on case type (civil, criminal misdemeanor, felony non-capital, capital), number of defendants, number of alternates, peremptory challenge counts per federal rules, and reserve for cause challenges

Petit Jury

Peremptory challenge tracking with ability to modify: 20 per side in capital criminal cases, 6 for the government and 10 for the defendant in non-capital felony cases, 3 per side for misdemeanor cases, and 3 per side in civil cases - plus alternate-specific additional challenges

Summary Trial

Summary trial juror as a distinct juror type (in addition to grand and petit)

Summary Trial

Summary jurors may be drawn from the pool of summoned but unused petit jurors at end of their service term - end-of-term remainder identification customizable workflow

Summary Trial

Discrimination protections applied to summary jurors identically to grand and petit jurors

Summary Trial

Summary juror service tracking and records maintained consistent with other juror types

59 Bankruptcy Trial Bankruptcy court jury trial flag on case record

Bankruptcy Trial

Extended service fee certification routed to bankruptcy judge (not district judge) for bankruptcy court proceedings

Bankruptcy Trial

Juror selection for bankruptcy court from standard qualified wheel, with results tracked under bankruptcy case record

Financial

Standard attendance fee: $50/day flat rate for all non-federal/D.C.

government jurors; fee modifiable by the court.

Financial

Extended service fee - petit jurors: judge-discretionary additional up to $10/day after 10 days on one case; district judge order required; clerk certification may be backdated to first day of extended service

Financial

Extended service fee - grand jurors: judge-discretionary additional up to $10/day after 45 days of actual service; separate threshold from petit jurors; district judge order required; clerk certification may be backdated to first day of extended service

Financial

Sequestered juror attendance fee: paid for each day actual attendance ordered, including weekends and holidays

Financial

Travel-day attendance fee: paid for travel days in going to and returning from court at start/end of service and during service; paid for day after last service day if juror cannot reach home until after midnight

Financial

Subsistence reimbursement for jurors traveling significant distance, separate from attendance fee. Mileage is calculated point-to-point from home to court, or manually overridden to a new start or end address.

Mileage reimbursement amount may be updated by the court whenever needed. Ability to enter hotel cost, taxes, and meal dollar amounts to total the subsistence amount. Multiple payments per juror may be input during different dates and later exported in payment file.

Financial

Employer type field (federal government / USPS / other) captured per juror with conditional fee logic; depending on response, juror may or may not be eligible for an attendance fee

Financial

Payment frequency: clerk discretion, with option for 10-day interval payments for extended service jurors

70 Financial Juror fee waiver workflow: signed acknowledgment required

Financial

Attendance recording and payment editing must be assigned to two different users - separation of duties enforced at the role/permission level in the system; may be disabled if court has authority to proceed without this separation of duties.

Financial

Attendance records reconciled against accounts payable reports with discrepancy resolution documentation

Financial

Generation of an AP payable file that can be imported to JIFMS (Momentum) to process juror payments. Required fields are name, address, email address, and payment information.

Financial

Collect social security number from each juror to include in the AP payable file. Title 31 CFR § 1.32.

Records, Audit, Reporting

Jury selection records (e.g., wheel contents, qualification records, draw logs): four-year retention after wheel is emptied, refilled, and all selected persons complete service

Records, Audit, Reporting

Financial/payment records: six years and three months retention under financial records disposition schedule

Records, Audit, Reporting

Records available for public inspection for the purpose of determining the validity of the selection of any jury after wheel emptying/refilling and completion of service by all persons from that wheel

Records, Audit, Reporting

Active wheel records: restricted during wheel life; accessible only as provided in jury plan and to parties with pending § 1867 challenge motion, with prohibition on further disclosure

Records, Audit, Reporting

AO Form 12 completed immediately upon request and at least after each master wheel refill and if any jury plan change affecting qualification, exemption, or excusal - retained as part of wheel records for four years in clerk's office

Records, Audit, Reporting

Non-citizen report generated in JMS for potential transmission to state election officials (plan-configured)

4.0 System Performance Requirements

The JMS shall achieve the following high-level performance outcomes that collectively ensure a modern, secure, interoperable, and operationally resilient capability for all federal district courts.

4.1 Form Creation

The Contractor shall deliver a modern, scalable, cloud-hosted JMS that improves usability for court staff and jurors while expanding operational functionality.

To meet this requirement, the JMS shall:

1. Provide an intuitive, accessible user experience for courts and jurors.

2. Support scanning, pool, panel, and attendance management, and online engagement throughout the jury lifecycle.

3. Enable the design, generation, and management of Government-defined juror forms and communications (e.g., juror qualification questionnaires, jury summonses, and supplemental questionnaires) (Attachment 2 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio; Example 6).

4. Ensure all forms comply with current requirements and judiciary policy (Guide to Judiciary Policy, Volume 4, Chapter 3) for the life of the award.

5. Allow courts to configure and version-control forms while preserving required standard language and approval controls.

4.2 Continuity of Operations

The Contractor shall maintain uninterrupted jury operations.

To meet this requirement, the Contractor shall:

1. Support court-specific deployment, cutover, and rollback strategies.

2. Prevent degradation of ongoing court operations during deployment.

3. Provide proactive monitoring and rapid recovery mechanisms.

4. Remediate 100% of identified high-risk and critical vulnerabilities within agreed timelines in accordance with the task order.

4.3 Security, Governance, Risk, and Compliance

The Contractor shall ensure the JMS operates in a secure, compliant environment that protects sensitive juror and court data and meets all judiciary security requirements.

To meet this requirement, the Contractor shall:

1. Obtain an Authority to Operate (ATO) as described in Section 4.3.1.

2. Integrate with Government identity and access management services for AO and court personnel, such as personal identity verification (PIV), single sign-on (SSO) (SAML 2.0, OIDC, OAuth 2.0), and multi-factor authentication (MFA). Solutions for internal users (such as AO or court personnel) and external users (such as current or potential jurors) should be compliant with industry standards and best practices that align with Zero Trust Architecture, defense in depth principles, and facilitate SSO capabilities.

3. Support continuous monitoring, vulnerability management, and incident response.

4. Encrypt data using FIPS 140-3 compliant cryptographic modules for data that is in transit and at rest while segmenting appropriately to ensure safeguarding from unauthorized access while ensuring role-based access controls are enforced.

5. Provide authentication, document and data governance, and auditable activity logs supporting judiciary oversight, visibility, and transparency while enforcing role-based access control.

6. Store and process all data exclusively within the United States.

7. Collaborate with the Government on developing governance processes that integrate efficiently with key stakeholders, services, and resources.

8. Maintain a robust cybersecurity program that aligns with the Judiciary’s following:

o Gartner’s Zero Trust Architecture reference model;

o Defense-in-Depth, DevSecOps automation; and o Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) secure by design software development principles, and rapid response and remediation.

9. The JMS shall enforce separation of duties in juror financial processing, ensuring that attendance recording and payment authorization functions cannot be performed by the same user account. In situations where a court has a valid exception in place, this control may be disabled by a local court administrator.

10. In support of the AO’s Authority to Operate (ATO) process, provide supporting documentation and security artifacts to include the JMS security boundary and risk information for postures of all environments and components.

4.3.1 Authority to Operate (ATO) Support. The Contractor shall obtain and maintain AO’s Authority to Operate for the JMS in accordance with the NIST Risk Management Framework (RMF), as described in NIST SP 800-37 Revision 2. Specific responsibilities include:

1. System Security Plan (SSP) Development. The Contractor shall develop, or support Government development of an SSP documenting how each applicable control is implemented within the system. The SSP should be delivered to CSAM and updated within 2 business days of any significant system change.

2. Control Implementation Evidence. The Contractor shall implement required security controls in the system design and configuration and shall provide implementation evidence (configuration screenshots, policy document, architecture diagrams, code-scanning results, etc.) sufficient to support independent assessment.

3. Security Assessment Support. The Contractor shall support the third-party assessment organization, 3PAO, during the security assessment.

4. Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M) Remediation. The Contractor shall remediate findings identified during assessment or continuous monitoring according to Judiciary’s defined timelines and shall provide POA&M status updates bi-weekly until closure.

5. Continuous (ConMon). Following ATO issuance, the Contractor shall support continuous monitoring activities, including vulnerability scanning, providing scan results, patching per Judiciary’s timeline, and support annual control assessments, static and dynamic code analysis reports, and significant change requests.

6. Artifacts and Deliverables. The Contractor shall deliver the following artifacts in support of the ATO package: SSP, Security Assessment Report

(SAR) inputs, POA&M, Contingency Plan, Incident Response Plan, Configuration Management Plan, and any Judiciary required annexes.

4.4 Interoperability

The Contractor shall enable secure, standards-based data exchange with judiciary systems and external services to support operations, reporting, and future migrations.

To meet this requirement, the JMS shall:

1. Provide documented Representational State Transfer/JavaScript Object Notation (REST/JSON) Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), at the Government’s request, for secure, standards-based interoperability.

2. Support routine or event-driven data exchanges which may consist of error notification and logging, configurable mappings, error handling, auditing and monitoring.

3. Enable export of data in non-proprietary formats for reporting, archival, and future migrations.

4. Data exchanges are completed successfully without manual intervention at least 98% of the time, with 100% of critical integration defects remediated within agreed timelines in accordance with the task order.

4.5 Openness and Vendor Independence

The Contractor shall ensure the JMS uses open standards and that the Government, or any qualified authorized third party, has access to and use the system’s data at the Government’s discretion at any time.

To meet this requirement, the Contractor shall:

1. Avoid vendor lock-in by ensuring that core system components, data structures, and integration mechanisms do not rely on proprietary formats or Contractor-unique customizations.

2. Ensure all core data entities, including juror records, forms, communications, and configuration metadata, are exportable in non-proprietary, machine-readable formats (e.g., JSON, Comma-Separated Values (CSV), Extensible Markup Language (XML), or other open standards) without custom development.

3. Support long-term sustainability by maintaining compatibility with standard upgrade paths and minimizing customizations that increase lifecycle costs or impede future modernization.

4.6 User Experience

The Contractor shall improve the experience of jurors and court staff by providing intuitive interfaces, streamlined workflows, and clear artifacts that support consistent adoption across all courts.

To meet this requirement, the JMS shall:

1. Provide intuitive, responsive web design and accessible user interfaces for both jurors and court personnel.

2. Support multi‑channel engagement to simplify communication and reduce burden on staff.

3. Enable creation and use of workflow artifacts that document, guide, and support new processes to ensure effective adoption across courts.

4. Provide analytic reporting for Government to review and confirm that the JMS is meeting the following User Experience metrics:

a. user interface task completion success at 100%, i.e. users do not encounter any errors when completing tasks.

b. task completion time, where 100% of users are able to complete the tasks in the least amount of time as measured in the usability test plan provided by the Contractor.

4.7 Reporting, Analytics, and Integration with Enterprise Data Warehouse (EDW)

The Contractor shall ensure the provision of operational and analytical data that is collected, curated, managed, and/or maintained in the JMS for downstream consumption by the Judiciary Enterprise Data Warehouse (EDW).

To meet this requirement, the Contractor shall:

1. Deliver flexible reporting and analytics capabilities that support efficient operational decision making, trend analysis, and workload management across the jury lifecycle.

2. Provide reporting tools that meet statutory (28 U.S.C. § 1863(a)) and judiciary policy (Guide to Judiciary Policy, Volume 4, Chapter 3) requirements at both the court and national level to allow the court to create custom reports and to use pre-created reports.

See Attachment 2 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio; Example 11 for currently used reports.

3. Deliver or facilitate the ingestion of JMS data on an agreed upon cadence and format in an automated fashion into the EDW platform in accordance with the task order.

4. Publish and maintain the data model, data access restriction model to run by a user’s court district or by an AO user for any court, glossaries and dictionaries, and other metadata to accurately reflect JMS data structures.

4.8 System Performance and Reliability

The Contractor shall ensure the JMS delivers high availability, fast response times, and resilient operations that scale to nationwide demand and protect continuity of service.

To meet this requirement, the JMS shall:

1. Maintain at least 99.9% system uptime per calendar month, excluding Government pre-approved scheduled maintenance.

2. Deliver standard web page loads and routine user transaction response times of two (2) seconds or less under peak concurrent loads in least 95% of all transactions.

3. Complete complex search queries, data exports, and heavy report generation within five

(5) seconds, or initiate them asynchronously with real-time status tracking

4. Automatically scale to handle peak concurrent user traffic across all national time zones without performance degradation or service interruption.

5. Limit planned maintenance to off-peak hours (nights or weekends) with a maximum of eight (8) hours per month, subject to Government approval seven (7) calendar days in advance, while prioritizing continuous availability for 24/7 public operations.

6. Recover full system operations within four (4) hours (Recovery Time Objective) and restore data to within one (1) hour of failure (Recovery Point Objective) in the event of a major disruption.

4.9 Data Migration

The Contractor shall create a smooth, accurate, and low-risk Data Migration process of the Legacy JMS data to the JMS through a rigorous, validated data migration process. For each court, Government will provide Contractor necessary access to data related to all active jury wheels, including master wheel composition, qualification status of individual jurors, depletion tracking, and randomization audit records.

To meet this requirement, the Contractor shall:

1. Migrate all juror data from Legacy JMS in advance of each court's cutover to the JMS, ensuring that migrated data is fully loaded, validated, and operational.

2. Ensure that the migrated wheel is immediately operational in the JMS without requiring reconstruction, re-randomization, or any action that would alter the legal integrity of the existing wheel. The Contractor shall provide a report that demonstrates that the migrated wheel data in the JMS is identical in composition and sequence to the Legacy JMS wheel data before the Government authorizes cutover for that court.

3. Migrate all active jury pools, impaneled panels, pending summonses, outstanding qualification questionnaires, and in-progress financial records to the JMS at the time of cutover. No court shall be required to cutover while active jury events would be disrupted by incomplete data migration.

4. Migrate all historical juror records, prior wheel data, financial transaction history, and audit logs and make them accessible in the JMS in accordance with applicable statutory retention schedules. Historical data shall not be truncated, summarized, or otherwise reduced in fidelity during migration.

5. Prior to authorizing cutovers for each court, provide the Government with a data validation report confirming record counts, wheel composition integrity, financial balance reconciliation, and completeness of active operational records. The Government shall not authorize cutover until the validation report is reviewed and accepted.

6. The JMS shall maintain two separate statutory records retention schedules: jury selection records retained for four years at a minimum (court-defined maximum) after the wheel is emptied, refilled, and all selected persons have complete service; and financial and payment records retained for six years and three months. Records shall not be transferred to the Federal Records Center and must remain accessible for public inspection purposes consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 1868.

4.10 Training and Knowledge Transfer

The Contractor shall ensure the JMS equips all users with the knowledge and skills needed to effectively operate the JMS and sustain proficiency throughout the contract Period of Performance.

To meet this requirement, the Contractor shall:

1. Provide role-based training via instructor-led, virtual, and self-paced formats.

2. Maintain current training materials and job aids for the initial release and all subsequent releases for the contract period.

3. Deliver training for new users throughout the contract period.

4.11 Nationwide User Support Coverage

The Contractor shall ensure all courts and jurors receive timely support.

To meet this requirement, the Contractor shall:

1. Provide Tier 2 and Tier 3 nationwide support, Monday to Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

Eastern Time, excluding weekends and federal holidays. Upon request by the Government, the Contractor shall provide extended help desk hours beyond those specified in this section.

2. Assist court staff and court technical personnel responsible for integration and operations for all parts of the JMS.

3. Maintain sufficient staffing to meet all of the requirements.

4. The Contractor shall configure and integrate the JMS to work with the AO’s Application Performance Monitoring System to provide real-time operational visibility.

4.11.1 Support Coverage Aligned with the National IT Operations Office

The Contractor shall ensure operational requests for user assistance are aligned with the AO’s National IT Operations Office (NIOO).

To meet this requirement, the Contractor shall:

1. Receive calls, emails, and tickets from the National Support Division (NSD) seeking Tier 2 and Tier 3 support during the hours in Section 4.11.

2. Process Integration: Integrate Tier 2 and Tier 3 operations into NIOO’s Incident, Problem, and Request Fulfillment processes using NSD’s ticketing system.

3. Incident Response: Adhere to Judiciary restoration targets, including less than two (2) hours for Priority 1 and less than eight (8) hours for Priority 2 incidents. See Attachment 2 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio; Example 8 for Tier 2 and/or Tier 3 supported teams when interacting with the Tier 1 NSD support.

4. Communication & Reporting: Join NSD communication bridges for critical issues and provide a root cause analysis (RCA) within three (3) business days of resolution.

5. Readiness & Training: Provide NSD staff with training and knowledge articles three weeks prior to any production release, followed by two (2) weeks of Early Life Support.

6. Monitoring & Security: The Contractor shall monitor the JMS 24/7/365 and provide the Government with view access to system performance dashboards and report security incidents immediately to the AO’s Security Operations Center (SOC) via the NSD.

7. Knowledge Management: Maintain a Known Error Database (KEDB) and provide documented workarounds to Tier 1 support. Ticket volumes may be found at Attachment 2 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio; Example 7.

4.12 Technology Modernization and Future Proofing

The Contractor shall ensure the JMS remains modern, maintainable, and upgradable over time through configuration-driven design, minimal customizations, and a sustainable upgrade path.

To meet this requirement, the JMS shall:

1. Preserve a sustainable upgrade path with a documented roadmap and upgrade strategy.

2. Undergo regression testing across all courts for each release.

4.13 Hosting and Environments

The Contractor shall provide a JMS that resides in a secure cloud environment and is securely hosted and operated.

To meet this requirement, the Contractor shall:

1. Operate the JMS in a secure cloud architecture in accordance with section 4.3, supporting all required environments: production and test environments for each court and the AO;

and a Contractor development and testing environment for external testing.

2. Deliver timely, reliable, high performing changes without degrading availability or performance.

4.14 Security Requirements for Government System Connectivity

The Contractor shall ensure the JMS can securely connect to and interoperate with all Judiciary-owned and operated information systems, Judiciary-owned and Contractor-operated information systems, and Contractor-owned and/or operated information systems operating on behalf of the Judiciary while maintaining compliance with judiciary security standards.

To meet this requirement, the JMS shall:

1. Support secure integration with all existing Government systems using approved protocols and authentication mechanisms.

2. Maintain compatibility with interfaces that exist with Legacy JMS where required.

3. Provide secure, standards-based connectivity (REST/JSON, Secure File Transfer Protocol (SFTP), message queues, etc.).

4. Authenticate and authorize system-to-system connections in compliance with Judiciary Application and Authentication standards (JISF documentation to be provided at award).

5. Support continuous monitoring and audit logging for all connections and data exchanges.

6. Maintain and provide current integration specifications, data dictionaries, field mapping documentation, and exchange format definitions sufficient for the Government to independently verify integration accuracy, brief successor Contractors, and reconstruct Government-side integration components without Contractor involvement. In consultation with the Government, the Contractor shall support future transitions to new Government systems without service disruption.

7. Coordinate with Government security teams to ensure compliance with NIST RMF and court-specific controls by collaborating on security control implementation, reviewing System Security Plans (SSPs), assessing technical and operational safeguards, addressing Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M) findings, providing compliance evidence, and supporting Assessment and Authorization (A&A) activities to achieve and maintain Authority to Operate (ATO).

4.14.1 Interconnection Security Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding

Where the JMS establishes a system connection with a third-party or external system, the Contractor shall support development, execution, and maintenance of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Interconnection Security Agreement (ISA) in accordance with NIST SP 800-47 (Managing the Security of Information Exchanges) and the JISF, e.g., a print and mailing vendor. All ISAs and MOUs will be incorporated in to the contract or task order via a contract modification.

4.14.2 ISA Development Support

The Contractor shall support the Government in drafting the ISA, which shall document the technical and security requirements of the interconnection, including but not limited to, System architecture and data flow diagrams depicting the interconnection, Categorization of data per EDO Workbook and FIPS 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems.

The data flow diagrams should depict data traversing the connection, security controls in place to protect the interconnection (e.g., encryption in transit, boundary protection, authentication mechanisms), connection type, ports, protocols, and services used, incident reporting and notification procedures specific to the interconnection, rules of behavior for administrators/users of the interconnected systems, and contingency and disconnection procedures, including conditions of termination or renewal.

4.14.3 MOU Development Support

The Contractor shall support the Government in drafting the MOU, which shall document the management and business relationship between the interconnecting organizations, including but limited to, purpose and scope of the interconnection, roles and responsibilities of each organization, points of contact (technical, security, and management) for each side, cost/funding responsibilities for establishing and maintaining the connection, duration of the agreement, and conditions for termination or renewal.

4.15 Pilot Deployment and Nationwide Rollout Authorization

The scope and extent of implementation validation activities shall be commensurate with the capabilities and deployment approach of the JMS.

The Contractor shall validate that the configured JMS is properly integrated,…