Attachment 3 - JMS Matrix Technical Volume.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 22 KB Posted
- Attached to
- JURY MANAGEMENT SOLUTION (JMS) SYSTEM
- Solicitation number
- USCA27R0009
- Issued by
-
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
About this file
This is a technical evaluation matrix for the Jury Management System (JMS) solicitation USCA27R0009, serving as the scoring guide for offerors' technical volume responses.
The matrix contains 33 numbered requirements organized across four main functional areas: Jury Lifecycle Support Services (Requirements 1-10), Operational Tools & Technology Integration Services (Requirements 11-14), Financial & Data Integration Services (Requirements 15-16), and Court-Level Configurability within a National Governance Framework (Requirement 17). Additionally, the matrix addresses cross-cutting implementation and operational requirements including continuity of operations, security and compliance, reporting and analytics, transition and data migration, pilot deployment, implementation methodology, configuration and customization approach, data migration approach, testing and deployment approach, training approach, and disruption mitigation strategy (Requirements 18-33).
Key technical requirements include support for one-step and two-step jury summons and qualification processes; statutory exemption enforcement for active military, state/local fire and police, and elected officials; configurable class excuse categories; cross-divisional grand jury draws; grand juror confidentiality protections; same-day multi-courtroom jury pool management; capital case mandatory panel list disclosure within three days; bankruptcy court juror selection; scanning technology for form processing; multi-channel communication via IVR, email, SMS, and smartphone applications; proximity-based check-in/check-out; cryptographically defensible randomization algorithms compliant with NIST SP 800-90A and 800-90B standards; government-approved cloud environment compliance with NIST Risk Management Framework (NIST 800-37 revision 2); Zero Trust Architecture implementation; AO Form 12 demographic reporting; 100% data accuracy in migration; and continuous monitoring and incident response capabilities. The matrix does not specify evaluation scoring weights or point allocations but establishes the baseline technical requirements for offeror response evaluation.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 1 - Jury Management Solution PWS.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 - RFP Questions.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| USCA27R0009 - Jury Management Solution DRAFT RFP.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
ATTACHMENT 3
| Attachment 3 - JMS Matrix Technical Volume - RFP# USCA27R0009 | |||
| NARRATIVE | |||
| Req # | PWS Section | JMS Functional Area | Functional Item |
| 1 | 2 | Scope | Explain how your solution is either an authorized reseller, licensee, or owner of a product that is already integrated into of another company's JMS solution. |
| 2 | 3.1 | Jury Lifecycle Support Services | Explain how your solution provides one-step (combined summons and qualification) and two-step (separate) process support, configurable per district plan. |
| 3 | 3.1 | Jury Lifecycle Support Services | Explain how your solution handles 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; how your solution is configurable in the event the law changes; and how your solution will indicate that federal fire and law enforcement personnel are NOT exempt under the statutory provision (only state/local fire and police are exempt). |
| 4 | 3.1 | Jury Lifecycle Support Services | Explain how your solution provides class excuse categories that are configurable per district plan (e.g., persons over 70 years old, prior federal jury service within two years, caretakers, key business employees, professional categories); and how Volunteer safety personnel granted automatic excuse on individual request - mandatory, not discretionary - will be configurable. |
| 5 | 3.1 | Jury Lifecycle Support Services | Explain how your solution provides proportionate share of names drawn from each divisional wheel, pooled for district-wide grand jury panel. This is also known as a cross-divisional grand jury draw. |
| 6 | 3.1 | Jury Lifecycle Support Services | Explain how your solution provides 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. |
| 7 | 3.1 | Jury Lifecycle Support Services | Explain how your solution provides central jury pool management for same-day multi-courtroom assignments, with random panel assignment to specific courtrooms. |
| 8 | 3.1 | Jury Lifecycle Support Services | Capital case mandatory panel list disclosure to defense: Explain how your solution provides a three-day pre-trial deadline, non-waivable, auto-triggered by capital case flag under 18 U.S.C. § 3432. |
| 9 | 3.1 | Jury Lifecycle Support Services | Explain how your solution provides the ability of 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. |
| 10 | 3.1 | Jury Lifecycle Support Services | Explain how your solution provides juror selection for bankruptcy court from standard qualified wheel, with results tracked under bankruptcy case record. |
| 11 | 3.2 | Operational Tools & Technology Integration Services | Explain how your solution will incorporate scanning technology to support the efficient processing of juror forms and correspondence. |
| 12 | 3.2 | Operational Tools & Technology Integration Services | Explain how your solution will support multi channel communication, including an interactive voice response (IVR) component, email, SMS/text, and smartphone (including tablets), across all active jury pools and proceedings within a court. |
| 13 | 3.2 | Operational Tools & Technology Integration Services | Explain how your solution will incorporate 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. |
| 14 | 3.2 | Operational Tools & Technology Integration Services | Explain how your solution will enable 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. |
| 15 | 3.3 | Financial & Data Integration Services | Explain how your system will compile records to be 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, and consistent with a pending 28 USC § 1867 challenge motion; otherwise, records shall be restricted and not made public without court order. |
| 16 | 3.3 | Financial & Data Integration Services | Explain how the solution will generate AO Form 12 demographic wheel composition reports (Attachment 6 - JMS Examples PDF Portfolio - Example 3) - comparing race, ethnicity, and sex against current census citizen population data for each division and district - immediately upon request and automatically following each master wheel refill or any jury plan change affecting qualification, exemption, or excusal criteria. |
| 17 | 3.4 | Court-Level Configurability within a National Governance Framework | Explain how your solution utilizes a cryptographically defensible randomization algorithm (consistent with NIST SP 800-90A) at all four stages; how the solution provides an equal-probability selection verification - mathematical odds of any single name being selected must be substantially equal (consistent with NIST SP 800-90B); and how the solution creates a reproducible, timestamped audit log of every draw: parameters, seed or algorithm used, names selected, date and time. |
| 18 | 4.2 | Continuity of Operations | Explain how you will support dual-wheel continuity during the transition period, maintaining the existing operational wheel as active until the new master wheel produces sufficient qualified names to sustain operations; and explain how you will roll back if any errors are encountered. |
| 19 | 4.3 | Security, Governance, Risk, and Compliance | Explain how your solution Operates in a Government-approved cloud environment compliant with the NIST Risk Management Framework (RMF) (NIST 800-37 revision 2). |
| 20 | 4.3 | Security, Governance, Risk, and Compliance | Explain how your solution intends to maintain a robust cybersecurity program that aligns with the agency’s cybersecurity strategic goals such as Gartner’s Zero Trust Architecture reference model, Defense-in-Depth, DevSecOps automation, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) secure by design software development principles, and rapid response and remediation in accordance with our AO Special clauses in Section H and Clause 2-57. |
| 21 | 4.3 | Security, Governance, Risk, and Compliance | Explain how your solution provides support continuous monitoring, vulnerability management, and incident response. |
| 22 | 4.3 | Security, Governance, Risk, and Compliance | Explain how your solution will integrate with Government identity and access management services for AO and Court Personnel, be describing how your solutions is compliant with industry standards and best practices that align with Zero Trust Architecture, defense in depth principles, and facilitate single sign-on (SSO) capabilities. |
| 23 | 4.3 | Security, Governance, Risk, and Compliance | Explain how you will provide authorization (authority) to operate documentation and security artifacts to include the solution security boundary and risk information for postures of all environments and components. |
| 24 | 4.7 | Reporting, Analytics, and Integration with Enterprise Data Warehouse | Explain how you will automate data streaming to the Enterprise Data Warehouse without relying on ambiguous custom coding. |
| 25 | 4.9 | Transition and Data Migration | Explain how you will provide 100% data accuracy (juror records, history, audit logs) from the current solution to the new solution. |
| 26 | 4.15 | Pilot Deployment and Enterprise Rollout Authorization | The Offeror shall explain its approach for establishing and maintaining a test environment and supporting the ATO process for the proposed Jury Management System. The response shall identify the Offeror-provided activities, documentation, security artifacts, and support required to assist the Government in achieving and maintaining an ATO. |
| 27 | 4.3.1 | General | Implementation methodology and schedule – The Offeror shall describe its implementation methodology, including implementation activities, task sequencing, milestones, dependencies, required resources, and proposed implementation schedule. |
| 28 | 4.15 | General | Transition approach – The Offeror shall describe its approach for transitioning from the existing environment to the proposed JMS solution, including transition activities, transition schedule, responsible personnel, and actions to maintain Government operations during the transition. |
| 29 | 3.0/3.1 | General | Configuration and customization approach – The Offeror shall describe its approach for configuring the JMS solution and implementing proposed customizations, including configuration activities, customization activities, interfaces, and impacts to the JMS solution. |
| 30 | 4.9 | General | Data migration approach – The Offeror shall describe its approach for migrating Government data, including data identification, data preparation, migration activities, data validation activities, and data protection measures. |
| 31 | 4.15 | General | Testing and deployment approach – The Offeror shall describe its approach for testing and deploying the JMS solution, including test activities, test environments, test schedules, deployment activities, deployment sequencing, and resolution of identified issues. |
| 32 | 4.1 | General | Training approach – The Offeror shall describe its approach for providing training, including training materials, training delivery methods, training schedule, and training support. |
| 33 | 4.2 | General | Approach for minimizing disruption to Government operations – The Offeror shall describe its approach for minimizing impacts to Government operations during implementation, including identification of operational impacts, mitigation actions, communications, and coordination activities. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .