DOC-ILAP-2026-MA.pdf

STATE OF CONNECTICUT STANDARD RFP FOR POS PROCUREMENTS 7.20.21

Department of Correction Page 1 of 31

STATE OF CONNECTICUT PROCUREMENT NOTICE

Request for Proposals (RFP) For

Inmate Legal Assistance RFP Name: DOC-ILAP-2026-MA

Issued By:

State of Connecticut Department of

Correction

March 5, 2026

The Request for Proposal is available in electronic format on the State Contracting Portal by filtering by

Organization for Department of Correction: https://portal.ct.gov/DAS/CTSource/BidBoard or from the Agency’s Official Contact:

Name: Maria Antoniou Address: 24 Wolcott Hill Road, Wethersfield, Connecticut, 06109 Phone: (860) 692-7635 E-Mail: DOC.RFP@ct.gov

The RFP is also available on the Department’s website at https://portal.ct.gov/DOC

RESPONSES MUST BE RECEIVED NO LATER THAN

April 27, 2026

At 3:00 PM The Connecticut Department of Correction is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer.

The Agency reserves the right to reject any and all submissions or cancel this procurement at any time if deemed in the best interest of the State of Connecticut (State).

https://portal.ct.gov/DAS/CTSource/BidBoard

Department of Correction Page 2 of 31

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Section I — GENERAL INFORMATION A. Introduction B. Instructions

Section II — PURPOSE OF RFP AND SCOPE OF SERVICES A. Agency Overview B. Program Overview C. Scope of Services Description D. Performance Measures E. Contract Management/Data Reporting

Section III — PROPOSAL SUBMISSION OVERVIEW A. Submission Format Information B. Evaluation of Proposals

Section IV — PROPOSAL SUBMISSION OUTLINE AND REQUIREMENTS A. Cover Sheet B. Table of Contents C. Executive Summary D. Main Proposal Submission Questions E. Attachments F. Declaration of Confidential Information G. Conflict of Interest – Disclosure Statement H. Statement of Assurances

Section V — MANDATORY PROVISIONS A. POS Standard Contract, Parts I and II B. Assurances C. Terms and Conditions D. Rights Reserved to the State E. Statutory and Regulatory Compliance

Section VI — APPENDIX A. Abbreviations / Acronyms / Definitions B. Statement of Assurances C. Proposal Checklist

Section VII — ATTACHMENTS A. Form #1 - Proposal Coversheet B. Form # 2 - Statement of Assurances C. Form # 3 - Proposed Budget D. Form # 4 - Letter of Intent

Department of Correction Page 3 of 31

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

A. INTRODUCTION

1. RFP Name and Number. DOC-ILAP-2026-MA/ Inmate Legal Assistance

2. RFP Summary. The purpose of this request is to provide legal services for incarcerated individuals, consistent with applicable state and federal law and court rulings.

3. Commodity Codes. The services that the Agency wishes to provide through this RFP are as follows:

• 0600: Professional Support Consulting and Miscellaneous Services

• 2000: Community and Social Services

B. INSTRUCTIONS

1. Official Contact. The Agency has designated the individual below as the Official Contact for purposes of this RFP. The Official Contact is the only authorized contact for this procurement and, as such, handles all related communications on behalf of the Agency. Proposers, prospective proposers, and other interested parties are advised that any communication with any other Agency employee(s) (including appointed officials) or personnel under contract to the Agency about this RFP is strictly prohibited. Proposers or prospective proposers who violate this instruction may risk disqualification from further consideration.

Name: Maria Antoniou Address: 24 Wolcott Hill Road, Wethersfield, Connecticut, 06109 Phone: (860) 692-7635 E-Mail: DOC.RFP@ct.gov

Please ensure that e-mail screening software (if used) recognizes and accepts e-mails from the Official Contact.

2. Registering with State Contracting Portal. Respondents must register with the State of CT contracting portal at https://portal.ct.gov/DAS/CTSource/Registration if not already registered.

Respondents shall submit the following information pertaining to this application to this portal (on their supplier profile), which will be checked by the Agency contact.

• Secretary of State recognition – Click on appropriate response

• Non-profit status, if applicable

• Notification to Bidders, Parts I-V

• Campaign Contribution Certification (OPM Ethics Form 1): https://portal.ct.gov/OPM/Fin- PSA/Forms/Ethics-Forms

3. RFP Information. The RFP, amendments to the RFP, and other information associated with this procurement are available in electronic format from the Official Contact or from the Internet at the following locations:

• Agency’s RFP Web Page https://portal.ct.gov/DOC

• State Contracting Portal (go to CTSource bid board, filter by Department of Correction)

It is strongly recommended that any proposer or prospective proposer interested in this procurement check the Bid Board for any solicitation changes. Interested proposers may receive additional e-mails from CTSource announcing addendums that are posted on the portal. This service is provided as a courtesy to assist in monitoring activities associated with State procurements, including this RFP.

https://portal.ct.gov/DAS/CTSource/Registration https://portal.ct.gov/OPM/Fin-PSA/Forms/Ethics-Forms https://portal.ct.gov/OPM/Fin-PSA/Forms/Ethics-Forms

Department of Correction Page 4 of 31

4. Procurement Schedule. See below. Dates after the due date for proposals (“Proposals Due”) are non-binding target dates only (*). The Agency may amend the schedule as needed. Any change to non-target dates will be made by means of an amendment to this RFP and will be posted on the State Contracting Portal and, if available, the Agency’s RFP Web Page.

• RFP Released: March 5, 2026

• RFP Conference: Not Applicable

• Letter of Intent Due: March 20, 2026, 3:00PM

• Deadline for Questions: March 26, 2026, 3:00PM

• Answers Released: April 3, 2026

• Proposals Due: April 27, 2026, 3:00PM

• (*) Proposer Selection: May 2026

• (*) Start of Contract Negotiations: May 2026

• (*) Contract Executed to Include May/June 2026

Transition Period

• (*) Start of Contract: July 1, 2026

5. Contract Awards. The award of any contract pursuant to this RFP is dependent upon the availability of funding to the Agency. The Agency anticipates the following:

• Total Funding Available: To Be Determined by State budget appropriations

• Number of Awards: To Be Determined

• Contract Cost: To Be Determined

• Contract Term: Two years, with the option of three (3) one (1) year renewals, at the discretion of the Department.

• Funding Source: Inmate Legal Assistance Program (ILAP)

6. Eligibility. Pursuant to C.G.S. § 4-70b, the Department must award purchase of service contracts to a municipality or a private provider organization. A private provider organization as defined in C.G.S. § 4- 70b (5) means a non-state entity that is either a nonprofit or proprietary corporation or partnership which receives funds from the state, and may receive federal or other funds, to provide direct health or human services to agency clients.

7. Minimum Qualifications of Proposers. Bids will be accepted from private, non-profit organizations, for profit organizations, or state agencies which can clearly demonstrate an ability to provide the requested services. Preference will be given to respondents with a proven history of providing the requested or substantially similar services as well as those with a proven history of financial stability.

8. Letter of Intent. A Letter of Intent (LOI) IS required by this RFP. The LOI is non-binding and does not obligate the sender to submit a proposal. The LOI must be submitted to the Official Contact by e-mail by the deadline established in the Procurement Schedule. The LOI must clearly identify the sender, including name, postal address, telephone number, and e-mail address. It is the sender’s responsibility to confirm the Agency’s receipt of the LOI. Failure to submit the required LOI in accordance with the requirements set forth herein shall result in disqualification from further consideration.

9. Inquiry Procedures. All questions regarding this RFP or the Agency’s procurement process must be directed, in writing, electronically, (e-mail) to the Official Contact before the deadline specified in the Procurement Schedule. The early submission of questions is encouraged. Questions will not be accepted or answered verbally – neither in person nor over the telephone. All questions received before the deadline(s) will be answered. However, the Agency will not answer questions when the source is unknown (i.e., nuisance or anonymous questions). Questions deemed unrelated to the RFP, or the procurement process will not be answered. At its discretion, the Agency may or may not respond to questions received after the deadline. If this RFP requires a Letter of Intent, the Agency reserves the

Department of Correction Page 5 of 31 right to answer questions only from those who have submitted such a letter. The Agency may combine similar questions and give only one answer. All questions and answers will be compiled into a written amendment to this RFP. If any answer to any question constitutes a material change to the RFP, the question and answer will be placed at the beginning of the amendment and duly noted as such.

The Agency will release the answers to questions on the date(s) established in the Procurement Schedule. The Agency will publish any and all amendments to this RFP on the State Contracting Portal and, if available, on the Agency’s RFP Web Page. At its discretion, the Agency may distribute any amendments to this RFP to prospective proposers who submitted a Letter of Intent or attended the RFP Conference.

10. RFP Conference. An RFP conference WILL NOT be held to answer questions from prospective proposers.

11. Proposal Due Date and Time. The Official Contact is the only authorized recipient of proposals submitted in response to this RFP. Proposals must be received by the Official Contact on or before the due date and time.

Proposals received after the due date and time will be ineligible and will not be evaluated. The Agency will send an official letter alerting late respondents of ineligibility.

An acceptable submission must include the following:

• One (1) conforming electronic copy of the original proposal.

The proposal must be complete, properly formatted and outlined, and ready for evaluation by the Screening Committee.

The electronic copy of the proposal must be emailed to official agency contact for this procurement. The subject line of the email must read: DOC-ILAP-2026-MA.

The electronic copy of the proposal must be compatible with Microsoft Office Word 2016 or Microsoft Office Excel 2016.

Required forms and appendices may be scanned and submitted as PDFs at the end of the main proposal document. Please ensure the entire email submission is less than 25MB as this reflects The Agency’s server limitations. Respondents should work to ensure there are no additional IT limitations from the provider’s side.

12. Multiple Proposals. The submission of multiple proposals IS NOT an option for this procurement.

II. PURPOSE OF RFP AND SCOPE OF SERVICES

A. AGENCY OVERVIEW

The Department currently operates thirteen (13) correctional facilities throughout the state, with a current population of 11,049 incarcerated inmates, as of December 1, 2025:

Facility Location Security

Level Population

Bridgeport Correctional Center Bridgeport Level 4 626 Male Adults Brooklyn Correctional Institution Brooklyn Level 3 396 Male Adults

Carl Robinson Correctional Institution

Enfield Level 3 1221 Male Adults

Department of Correction Page 6 of 31

Cheshire Correctional Institution Cheshire Level 4 1216 Male Adults Corrigan-Radgowski Correctional

Center Uncasville Level 3/4 687 Male Adults

Garner Correctional Institution Newtown Level 4 548 Male Adults Hartford Correctional Center Hartford Level 4 922 Male Adults

MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution

Suffield Level 4/5 1444 Male Adults

Manson Youth Institution Cheshire Level 4 285 Male Youths/Adults New Haven Correctional Center New

Haven Level 4 665 Male Adults

Osborn Correctional Institution Somers Level 3 1222 Male Adults Willard-Cybulski Correctional

Institution Enfield Level 2 600 Male Adults

York Correctional Institution Niantic Level 2-5 892 Female Youth/Adults

The Department is required by state statute, federal law and by federal court precedent, to provide “meaningful access to courts” for this population. Through a variety of court rulings, a standard of services for “meaningful access to court” has been established. This RFP solicits programs that are designed to meet those standards in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Connecticut General Statutes § 18-81 provides that the Commissioner of Correction “shall, within available appropriations for such purpose, arrange for provision of legal assistance of a civil nature to indigent inmates of department institutions and facilities and legal representation for such inmates before administrative boards where permitted or constitutionally required.”

B. PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Through this RFP, the Department is seeking to establish meaningful access to court for inmates incarcerated in Connecticut correctional facilities and limited services to Connecticut inmates incarcerated in other states.

The Department is seeking competitive bids from legal services or other organizations to facilitate access to court and legal assistance of a civil nature to offenders. The program goal is to: “provide offenders with access to court when challenging their sentences and to challenge the terms and conditions of their confinement.” Representation of inmates in state and federal courts, as well as before administrative agencies, is not included in the provision of access to court.

The Department envisions a system whereby inmates are provided with sufficient assistance to meet current legal requirements. The Department foresees a program which should include pre-packaged forms and instructions for the filing of many court documents.

A cost-effective program may have limited reliance on attorney intervention and may rely more heavily on assistance by paralegal staff members under the supervision of an attorney licensed in the state of Connecticut.

The Department will accept proposals for a singular provider to provide state-wide services, and proposals for a singular provider that accomplishes statewide services through sub-contract with eligible parties throughout the state of Connecticut (collaborative service provision). The Department will also accept proposals for an administrative organization that collects inmate complaints/correspondence, reviews for validity, and passes valid complaints/correspondence to local attorneys within the state of Connecticut.

Department of Correction Page 7 of 31

Relevant Case Law and Scope of Services

The Department is providing the following relevant case references to assist in the development of a proposal. The cases delineated below serve to define court-upheld adequate access to court for the challenge of criminal sentence and the terms and conditions of confinement of an inmate population.

The contractor may need to provide assistance from time to time to self-represented prisoner litigants;

for example, with formatting and typing Connecticut Appellate Court briefs There are numerous other cases which should be reviewed to identify and assess the components that constitute appropriate inmate access to court. Such cases should be delineated in any proposal submitted in response to this RFP to define the proposed services and their responsiveness to applicable law.

Challenges to the criminal sentence for the most part are handled by the Public Defender’s Office or assigned counsel appointed by the Office of the Chief Public Defender.

Access to Court

1. Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 828, 97 S. Ct. 1491, 52 L. Ed. 2d 72 (1977): Held that “the fundamental constitutional right of access to the courts requires prison authorities to assist inmates in the preparation and filing of meaningful legal papers by providing prisoners with adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from persons trained in the law.”

2. Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 355, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 135 L. Ed. 2d 606 (1996): Clarified and limited Bounds by stating: “Bounds does not guarantee inmates the wherewithal to transform themselves into litigating engines capable of filing everything from shareholder derivative actions to slip and fall claims. The tools it requires to be provided are those that the inmates need in order to attack their sentences, directly or collaterally, and in order to challenge the conditions of their confinement.

Impairment of any other litigating capacity is simply one of the individuals (and perfectly constitutional) consequences of conviction and incarceration.”

Conditions of Confinement

3. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 832, 114 S. Ct. 1970, 128 L. Ed. 2d 811 (1994): Defined humane conditions of confinement: ”prison officials must provide humane conditions of confinement;

prison officials must ensure that inmates receive adequate food, clothing, shelter, and medical care, and must take ‘reasonable measures to guarantee the safety of the inmates.’ Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 526-527 (1984).”

4. Sandin v. Conner 515 U.S. 472, 484, 115 S. Ct. 2293, 132 L. Ed. 2d 418 (1995): Altered the standard by which federal courts determine when due process attaches to prisoners’ liberty interests.

This new standard recognizes prisoners’ liberty interests only upon a showing of an “atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life.”

5. Hudson v. McMillian 503 U.S. 1, 9, 112 S. Ct. 995, 117 L. Ed. 2d 156 (1992): Held that the use of excessive physical force against a prisoner may constitute cruel and unusual punishment even though the inmate does not suffer serious injury. “When prison officials maliciously and sadistically use force to cause harm, contemporary standards of decency always are violated. This is true whether or not significant injury is evident.” (Internal citation omitted.).

6. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 US 97, 106, 97 S. Ct. 285, 50 L. Ed. 2d 251 (1976): held that prisoners have a constitutional right to be free from deliberate indifference to serious and treatable medical conditions. In Estelle, the Supreme Court stated, “a complaint that a physician has been negligent in diagnosing or treating a medical condition does not state a valid claim of medical mistreatment under the Eighth Amendment. Medical malpractice does not become a constitutional violation merely because the victim is a prisoner.” “We . . . conclude that deliberate indifference to serious medical needs of prisoners constitutes the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain, proscribed by the Eighth

Department of Correction Page 8 of 31

Amendment. This is true whether the indifference is manifested by prison doctors in their response to the prisoner’s needs or by prison guards in intentionally denying or delaying access to medical care or intentionally interfering with the treatment once prescribed.” (Internal citation omitted.). Id., at 104- 105.

Proposals for meeting the Commissioner of Correction’s obligation of assisting inmates to gain access to court shall also focus on meeting all legal requirements of access to court, but such assistance is not required where, for example, other state appointed counsel, such as assigned counsel from the Office of the Public Defender, or assigned counsel appointed in a state court habeas matter is available.

Pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes § 51-296(a), indigent inmates in any habeas corpus proceeding arising from a criminal matter or in any extradition proceeding may be represented by such assigned counsel. However, the Office of the Chief Public Defender and assigned counsel may not be able to assist in helping prepare and file a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and the contractor would be expected to provide such assistance when appropriate, i.e., when the inmate claims “he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 USC §2254 (a). The submitted proposal must provide this assistance.

Legal Approach

While adequate law libraries and assistance from persons trained in the law are two ways to assure meaningful access to the courts, as noted in Bounds, “a legal access program need not include any particular element…and we encourage local experimentation. Any plan, however, must be evaluated as a whole to ascertain its compliance with constitutional standards.” (Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. at 832) Proposals to address and satisfy the Commissioner of Correction’s obligation to provide access to court for indigent inmates should be creative and should encourage experimentation. As the Supreme Court points out in Lewis v. Casey, “States are free to experiment with the types of legal assistance that they provide to inmates, as long as the experiment provides adequate access.” Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S.

406.

C. SCOPE OF SERVICE DESCRIPTION

1. Organizational Expectations

(a) Purpose / Mission / Philosophy: Briefly describe the purpose, mission, and philosophy of the proposer’s agency and the proposed program.

(b) Entity Type / Years of Operation: Include a summary of the agency’s history.

(c) Office Location: Please provide the location of the proposer agency’s administrative offices and the location from which the program will operate. Budgets must reflect all expenses associated with this location.

(d) Qualifications / Certification / Licensure: Please describe the proposer agency’s experience providing the kinds of services being requested through this RFP. If the proposer agency or program being proposed holds any certifications or licensures, please detail the type(s) and how long the certificate or license has been held.

2. Service Expectations Proposals should address each of the following areas and should delineate the proposer’s philosophy for each component, as well as the proposer’s approach to managing each component:

(a) Satisfying Prisoners’ Right of Access to Court: The proposer shall attest, and be willing to annually provide a sworn affidavit, that they will provide assistance that is sufficient and adequate at all times to satisfy any legal requirements incumbent upon the Department concerning inmates’ right of access to court as has been determined by state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

Department of Correction Page 9 of 31

Proposals must describe the proposer’s approach to ensuring legally sufficient and adequate access to court for inmates. Proposals must include justification as to how such approach has been determined to withstand legal challenge.

(b) Assistance in Preparation and Filing of Meaningful Legal Papers: Except as specifically delineated herein, assistance shall be limited to enabling inmates to prepare and file meaningful legal papers in civil actions and may include limited assistance such as articulating and researching legal claims.

It is anticipated that the chosen provider of these services will develop, maintain, and rely heavily on standard legal form packages for common or routine complaints. It is anticipated that such packages will be maintained and made available to inmates.

It is anticipated that the obligation of the contractor will be deemed to have been fulfilled once the inmate has either filed his/her claim with the court or the contractor has determined that the inmate’s claim is not a matter wherein a prima facie (as defined in Black’s Law Dictionary) case is presented.

From time to time, the filing of meaningful legal papers may entail assistance with appellate court briefs where the rules of the particular court have specific formatting requirements and the inmate requests assistance, such as with help typing briefs in the Connecticut Appellate Court.

(c) Assistance Limited to Terms and Conditions of Confinement and to Challenge Sentences: Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, meaningful papers referred to are limited to those needed to provide inmates a reasonably adequate opportunity to present to the courts claimed violations of legal rights concerning only the terms and conditions of their confinement, and to challenge their sentences, as defined by relevant federal and state law, where a state public defender or assigned counsel is not available. For example, civil actions concerning family matters, business matters, tax issues, or security deposits are not related to the terms and conditions of confinement or sentencing.

Proposals must delineate all matter types that the proposer believes to be germane to the intent of the l law, as supported by relevant case law, as well as those matter types relevant to ensuring the Commissioner’s compliance with federal and state law obligations regarding inmate access to court.

(d) No Assistance in Administrative Matters: This restriction on services applies to administrative matters, including but not limited to FOIA requests and appeals, and actions before the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities.

(e) No Court Appearance or Representation Assistance under the contract shall not permit the Contractor filing an appearance in the case or extend to actual trial or appellate proceedings or to proceedings ancillary thereto.

(f) Family Law Seminars: The contractor must agree to provide, at a minimum, at least one (1) family law seminar at each active correctional facility in Connecticut at least once per year. The family law seminar will cover issues including divorce, custody, visitation, and other civil family law matters.

This seminar will be open to the entire offender population at every facility. The contractor will not provide representation to any offender in family law matters. The contractor will ensure that family law materials found on CTLawHelp.org and other comparable and appropriate legal materials are made available to offenders upon request.

(g) Limited Services for Offenders Housed in Other States: Proposal must provide for limited services to inmates from other states confined in Connecticut facilities, as well as limited services for Connecticut inmates incarcerated in other states. Assistance, in all cases, shall be limited to matters concerning the conditions of confinement while incarcerated in Connecticut, or assisting in filing a federal habeas petition under 28 USC 2254, or otherwise may be required to meet the Department’s obligation for access to courts in Connecticut for those Connecticut prisoners who may be confined in other jurisdictions.

https://ctlawhelp.org/

Department of Correction Page 10 of 31

(h) Exclusion for Represented Offenders: The legal services to be provided shall exclude any services in which an attorney is provided for by law or made available to offenders without cost to the offender, including, but not limited to, the State of Connecticut Division of Public Defender Services or those attorneys appointed by the court.

(i) Provision of Extra-Contractual Services: There may be instances when the Commissioner or designee, in the interest of judicial or administrative economy, shall require legal assistance for prisoners in given case(s) to extend to trial and/or appellate or administrative services, including services ancillary thereto. In such event, the Commissioner, or designee, shall notify the contractor and upon such notification the contractor and the Department shall enter into negotiations for agreement outside the master contract for the provision of the requested services. In no case, however, shall the contractor be obligated to provide any legal assistance in instances wherein to do so would be contrary to an attorney’s duty to abide by all applicable ethical standards, rules of court, or to serve as an officer of the Court.

(j) Date of Program Availability: Proposals must detail the timelines leading up to the date that the program will begin providing services to inmates. The Department anticipates a contract start date of July 1, 2026.

(k) Performance Outcome Measures: Proposals should describe measurable objectives that are relevant to the performance of services described herein. Final performance measures will be determined by the Department prior to contract execution.

3. Staffing Expectations Proposals must describe the staff categories to be assigned to this project, including the extent to which such staff have the appropriate training and experience to perform assigned duties. The proposal must describe the extent to which staff is multi-lingual and multi-cultural. Job descriptions, minimum qualifications, licensing requirements, hours per week, and hourly wages must be provided for all staff categories assigned to this project. Please do not include resumes. If the staff person to be assigned to the position is known at the time of proposal submission, a brief narrative summarizing that person’s qualifications is sufficient.

Staffing must include at least one full time attorney who is a member in good standing with the Connecticut Bar, as well as at least one attorney who is admitted to the United States District Court and is familiar with federal rules of civil procedure, local rules for the District of Connecticut, and any procedural and substantive rules related to successful, timely, and meaningful filing of federal habeas corpus petitions.

Proposals must demonstrate the appropriate utilization of staff. For example, attorneys should not perform tasks which may be performed by paralegals or other support staff. Preference will be given to proposals delineating the most creatively efficient and adequate use of staffing.

4. Data and Technology Expectations Proposals must describe the extent to which the applicant agency and the proposed program have the capability to access the internet, send/receive outside email, and view PDF documents.

Proposals must describe how the program will provide for the installation and maintenance of a toll-free telephone number to facilitate access to the program by all inmates. Where toll free access is not available, the proposer must describe another means for ensuring telephone access to the program for inmates.

Proposals must describe the proposed methods for tracking correspondence, telephonic communication, and workloads on a monthly and annual basis. Proposals should include the extent of the applicant’s capabilities in Office Applications.

Department of Correction Page 11 of 31

5. Financial Expectations Proposers must submit cover letters from their auditor for the last 3 annual audits of their agency and a copy of their most recent financial audit, included in Section H of the proposal. If less than 3 audits were conducted, details must be provided as to why, and any supporting documentation assuring the financial efficacy of the agency should be included (e.g., an accountant-prepared financial statement, a tax return).

If the 3 most recent audits are available via the Office of Policy and Management’s EARS system, such may be noted in the proposal. A hard copy of the audit cover letters and the last audit should not be included in the proposal.

6. Budget Expectations Proposals must contain an itemized budget on the budget form included as Form #3. in Section VII, pages 31 of this RFP. All startup costs must be clearly identified as (one) 1-line item in the budget.

A budget narrative must be provided, explaining all costs contained in the budget. All startup costs must also be separately and clearly detailed in the budget narrative. The budget must also disclose any related party transactions associated with any budget expenditure.

All other funding, including applicant agency, financial support, and income from other sources must be identified. The program may not assess fees to inmates for services.

Offenders residing in the community under supervision of the Commissioner of Correction are not eligible for assistance.

Note: The program proposed through this RFP must be funded, in accordance with Connecticut General Statute § 18-81, within available appropriations from the State Legislature, as such may be modified from year to year.

D. PERFORMANCE MEASURES

The performance metrics highlight key priorities that will be analyzed collaboratively with providers during the life of the contract. This is not an exhaustive list, but rather an indication of significant performance metrics of interest to The Agency. The Agency looks forward to working with providers to define additional important performance metrics.

E. CONTRACT MANAGEMENT/DATA REPORTING

As part of the State’s commitment to becoming more outcomes-oriented, Department of Correction seeks to actively and regularly collaborate with providers to enhance contract management, improve results, and adjust service delivery and policy based on learning what works. Reliable and relevant data is necessary to ensure compliance, inform trends to be monitored, evaluate results and performance, and drive service improvements. As such, Department of Correction reserves the right to request/collect other key data and metrics from providers.

III. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION OVERVIEW

A. SUBMISSION FORMAT INFORMATION

1. Required Outline. All proposals must follow the required outline presented in Section IV – Proposal Outline. Proposals that fail to follow the required outline will be deemed non-responsive and not evaluated.

2. Cover Sheet. The Cover Sheet is Page 1 of the proposal. Proposers must complete and use the Cover Sheet form provided by the Agency in the Appendix.

Department of Correction Page 12 of 31

3. Table of Contents. All proposals must include a Table of Contents that conforms with the required proposal outline.

4. Executive Summary. Proposals must include a high-level summary, not exceeding 1 page of the main proposal and cost proposal. The summary must also include the organization’s eligibility and qualifications to respond to this RFP.

5. Attachments. Attachments other than the required Appendices or Forms identified in the RFP are not permitted and will not be evaluated. Further, the required Appendices or Forms must not be altered or used to extend, enhance, or replace any component required by this RFP. Failure to abide by these instructions will result in disqualification.

6. Style Requirements. THIS IS AN ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION.

The proposals submitted must conform to the following specifications:

Paper Size: 8 ½ x 11 (letter-sized) Page Limit: 20 pages (not including the cover sheet, table of contents or attachments) Font Size: 12-point Font Type: Times New Roman Margins: Normal (1 inch) Line Spacing: Single Space

7. Pagination. The proposer’s name must be displayed in the header of each page. All pages, including the required Appendices and Forms, must be numbered in the footer.

8. Declaration of Confidential Information. Proposers are advised that all materials associated with this procurement are subject to the terms of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Privacy Act, and all rules, regulations and interpretations resulting from them. If a proposer deems that certain information required by this RFP is confidential, the proposer must label such information as CONFIDENTIAL prior to submission. In the subsection of the proposal submission, the proposer must reference where the information labeled CONFIDENTIAL is located in the proposal. EXAMPLE: Section G.1.a. For each subsection so referenced, the proposer must provide a convincing explanation and rationale sufficient to justify an exemption of the information from release under the FOIA. The explanation and rationale must be stated in terms of (a) the prospective harm to the competitive position of the proposer that would result if the identified information were to be released and (b) the reasons why the information is legally exempt from release pursuant to C.G.S. § 1-210(b).

9. Conflict of Interest - Disclosure Statement. Proposers must include a disclosure statement concerning any current business relationships (within the last three (3) years) that pose a conflict of interest, as defined by C.G.S. § 1-85. A conflict of interest exists when a relationship exists between the proposer and a public official (including an elected official) or State employee that may interfere with fair competition or may be averse to the interests of the State. The existence of a conflict of interest is not, in and of itself, evidence of wrongdoing. A conflict of interest may, however, become a legal matter if a proposer tries to influence, or succeeds in influencing, the outcome of an official decision for their personal or corporate benefit. The Agency will determine whether any disclosed conflict of interest poses a substantial advantage to the proposer over the competition, decreases the overall competitiveness of this procurement, or is not in the best interests of the State. In the absence of any conflict of interest, a proposer must affirm such in the disclosure statement. Example: “[name of proposer] has no current business relationship (within the last three (3) years) that poses a conflict of interest, as defined by C.G.S. § 1-85.”

B. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

1. Evaluation Process. It is the intent of the Agency to conduct a comprehensive, fair, and impartial evaluation of proposals received in response to this RFP. When evaluating proposals, Department of Correction Page 13 of 31 negotiating with successful proposers, and awarding contracts, the Agency will conform with its written procedures for POS and PSA procurements (pursuant to C.G.S. § 4-217) and the State’s Code of Ethics (pursuant to C.G.S. §§ 1-84 and 1-85). Final funding allocation decisions will be determined during contract negotiation.

2. Evaluation Review Committee. The Agency will designate a Review Committee to evaluate proposals submitted in response to this RFP. The Review Committee will be composed of individuals, Agency staff or other designees as deemed appropriate. The contents of all submitted proposals, including any confidential information, will be shared with the Review Committee. Only proposals found to be responsive (that is, complying with all instructions and requirements described herein) will be reviewed, rated, and scored. Proposals that fail to comply with all instructions will be rejected without further consideration. The Review Committee shall evaluate all proposals that meet the Minimum Submission Requirements by score and rank ordered and make recommendations for awards. The Commissioner will make the final selection. Attempts by any proposer (or representative of any proposer) to contact or influence any member of the Review Committee may result in disqualification of the proposer.

3. Minimum Submission Requirements. To be eligible for evaluation, proposals must (1) be received on or before the due date and time; (2) meet the Proposal Format requirements; (3) meet the Eligibility and Qualification requirements to respond to the procurement, (4) follow the required Proposal Outline; and (5) be complete. Proposals that fail to follow instructions or satisfy the minimum submission requirements will not be reviewed further The Agency will reject any proposal that deviates significantly from the requirements of this RFP.

4. Evaluation Criteria (and Weights). Proposals meeting the Minimum Submission Requirements will be evaluated according to the established criteria. The criteria are the objective standards that the Review Committee will use to evaluate the technical merits of the proposals. Only the criteria listed below will be used to evaluate proposals. The weights are disclosed below.

• Organizational Profile 10 points

• Scope of Services 20 points

• Staffing Plan 10 points

• Data and Technology 10 points

• Work Plan 15 points

• Financial Profile 10 points

• Budget and Budget Narrative 15 points

• Appendices 10 points

Evaluation Criterion Title

Percentage of Total

What would a top score look like?

Organizational Profile

10% • Applicants possess experience in civil and family litigation (to include conditions of confinement)

• Applicant possesses experience in filing complaints/cases in state and federal court and managing large and diverse caseloads

• Proposal demonstrates applicant's ability to provide offenders with timely, efficient, and streamlined access to court

Scope of Services 20% • Program design is highly efficient

• Proposal clearly describes utilization of standardized legal form packages

• Proposal clearly describes education and provision of such packages to the offender population

• Proposed service model would require minimal modification/negotiation

Staffing Plan 10% • Staffing plan is highly efficient in number

Department of Correction Page 14 of 31

• Staffing plan is highly efficient in utilization of appropriate job classes

• Qualifications are sufficient to provide the proposed services

• Proposal includes staff who are multi-lingual

Data & Technology 10% • Proposal demonstrates applicant's ability to provide standardized legal form packages to offenders

• Proposal describes applicant’s ability to install and maintain a toll-free number to facilitate access for inmates

• Proposal describes applicant's ability to electronically file and maintain case files

• Proposal describes applicant's ability to provide statistical and programmatic reports

Work Plan 15% • Proposal indicates availability to be fully operational by July 1, 2026

• Proposal clearly describes implementation timelines/procedures

• Work plan highlights applicants’ understanding of implementation requirements

• Applicants are already sufficiently staffed to begin implementation activities

Financial Profile 10% • Proposal includes auditor affidavits or documents sufficient to prove applicant's solvency

• Affidavits demonstrate solvency of applicant

• If a current state contractor, no cognizant and/or grantor agency findings have been identified

Budget and Budget Narrative

15% • Costs are all inclusive and delineated in a highly efficient manner

• Budget is completed properly

• Narrative clearly describes all costs

• Includes realistic allocation of funding

• Highlights applicant's knowledge of services requested, and costs associated with such

Appendices 10% • Proposal adheres to all required format and submission requirements

• Proposal includes required forms/affidavits

• All forms/affidavits are properly completed

• Proposal includes any referenced documentation

Note:

As part of its evaluation of the Staffing Plan, the Review Committee will review the proposer’s demonstrated commitment to affirmative action, as required by the Regulations of CT State Agencies § 46A-68j-30(10).

5. Proposer Selection. Upon completing its evaluation of proposals, the Review Committee will submit the rankings of all proposals to the Commissioner or Agency Head. The final selection of a successful proposal is at the discretion of the Commissioner or Agency Head. Any proposer selected will be notified and awarded an opportunity to negotiate a contract with the Agency. Such negotiations may, but will not automatically, result in a contract. Any resulting contract will be posted on the State Contracting Portal. All unsuccessful proposers will be notified by e-mail or U.S. mail, at the Agency’s discretion, about the outcome of the evaluation and proposer selection process. The Agency reserves the right to decline to award contracts for activities in which the Commissioner or Agency Head considers there are not adequate respondents.

Department of Correction Page 15 of 31

6. Debriefing. Within ten (10) days of receiving notification from the Agency, unsuccessful proposers may contact the Official Contact and request information about the evaluation and proposer selection process. The e-mail sent date will be considered “day one” of the ten (10) days. If unsuccessful proposers still have questions after receiving this information, they may contact the Official Contact and request a meeting with the Agency to discuss the evaluation process and their proposals. If held, the debriefing meeting will not include any comparisons of unsuccessful proposals with other proposals. The Agency may schedule and hold the debriefing meeting within fifteen (15) days of the request. The Agency will not change, alter, or modify the outcome of the evaluation or selection process as a result of any debriefing meeting.

7. Appeal Process. Proposers may appeal any aspect of the Agency’s competitive procurement, including the evaluation and proposer selection process. Any such appeal must be submitted to the Agency head. A proposer may file an appeal at any time after the proposal’s due date, but not later than thirty (30) days after an agency notifies unsuccessful proposers about the outcome of the evaluation and proposer selection process. The e-mail sent date or the postmark date on the notification envelope will be considered “day one” of the thirty (30) days. The filing of an appeal shall not be deemed sufficient reason for the Agency to delay, suspend, cancel, or terminate the procurement process or execution of a contract. More detailed information about filing an appeal may be obtained from the Official Contact.

8. Contract Execution. Any contract developed and executed as a result of this RFP is subject to the Agency’s contracting procedures, which may include approval by the Office of the Attorney General.

Fully executed and approved contracts will be posted on State Contracting Portal and the Agency website.

IV. REQUIRED PROPOSAL SUBMISSION OUTLINE AND REQUIREMENTS

A: Cover Sheet

The Respondent must use a Cover Sheet capturing the following information:

• RFP Name or Number:

• Legal Name:

• FEIN (not required for currently contracted providers/vendors):

• Street Address:

• Town/City/State/Zip:

• Contact Person:

• Title:

• Phone Number:

• E-Mail Address:

• Authorized Official:

• Title:

• Signature:

Legal Name is defined as the name of private provider organization, CT State agency, or municipality submitting the proposal. Contact Person is defined as the individual who can provide additional information about the proposal or who has immediate responsibility for the proposal. Authorized Official is defined as the individual empowered to submit a binding offer on behalf of the proposer to provide services in accordance with the terms and provisions described in this RFP and any amendments or attachments hereto.

Department of Correction Page 16 of 31

B: Table of Contents

Proposers must include a Table of Contents that lists sections and subsections with page numbers that follow the organization outline and sequence for this proposal.

C: Proposer Executive Summary

The page limitation for this section is 1 page briefly describing how the Respondent meets the eligibility and qualification criteria outlined in the Proposal Overview and a brief overview of why the Respondent should be selected for the activities highlighted in the scope of services.

D: Main Proposal Submission Requirements to Submit a Responsive Proposal

***Please note the maximum total page length for this section is 25 (all appendices and other attachments should be referred to in section D and then placed in section E). The Agency Review Committee will not read answers longer than 25 pages in this section.

1. Organizational Profile (Possible areas of inquiry may include, but are not limited, to the following)

a. Purpose / Mission / Philosophy

b. Entity Type / Years of Operation

c. Administrative Office Location

d. Current Range of Services / Clients

f. Qualifications

g. Relevant Experience

h. Accreditation / Certification / Licensure

2. Scope of Services

a. Satisfying Prisoner Right of Access to Court

b. Assistance in Preparation and Filing of Meaningful Legal Papers

c. Assistance Limited to Terms and Conditions of Confinement and to Challenge Sentencing . . .

d. No Assistance in Administrative Matters

e. No Court Appearance or Representation

f. Family Law Seminars

g. Limited Services for Offenders Housed Out of State

h. Exclusion for Represented Offenders

i. Provision of Extra-Contractual Services

j. Date of Program Availability

k. Performance Outcome Measures

3. Staffing Plan (Possible areas of inquiry may include, but are not limited, to the following) . .

a. Staffing Plan/Key Personnel

b. Job Descriptions

c. Retention Practices

4. Data and Technology

a. E-Mail / Internet Capabilities

b. Toll-Free Telephone/ Hardware & Software Quality

c. Data Collection / Storage / Reporting

5. Work Plan

a. Start Date

b. Timetable / Schedule

c. Tasks, Deliverables

Department of Correction Page 17 of 31

d. Methodologies

e. Measurable Objectives

6. Financial Profile

a. Annual Budget and Revenues

b. Financial Standing

c. Financial Management Systems

d. Revenue Generation / Billing / Third Party Reimbursement . . .

e. History of Violations (financial or programming)

7. Competitive Cost and Budget Narrative

a. Narrative

b. Line-Item Budget Form

c. Subcontractor Costs, if applicable

8. Forms

• Form #1: Cover Sheet

• Form #2: Statement of Assurances

• Form #3: Budget

• Form #4: Letter of Intent

E: Attachments

Attachments other than the required attachments identified are not permitted and will not be evaluated. See the Proposal Checklist in Appendix C for a list of relevant attachments. Further, the required attachments must not be altered or used to extend, enhance, or replace any component required by this RFP. Failure to abide by these instructions may result in disqualification.

The purpose of this subsection is to gather any other additional information that the Department needs to evaluate the proposer.:

a. Relevant Memorandum of Agreement

b. References: If the proposer does not currently, or has not in the past 3 years, provided contracted services to the Department, at least two reference letters must be included in the proposal to support the description of your experience in providing these services. Letter must include applicant agency’s name, contact name, mailing address, phone number and email address of the writer. Letter must also include the nature of the writer’s relationship with the proposer and the extent of the proposer’s provision of services to the writer.