ESBD_443357_1754487971173_PSRS RFO Final.pdf

Texas Office of Court Administration

Request for Offers No.: 212-25-0959 Class and Item: 920-05

Request for Offers for a

Public Safety Report System

Offers Due: September 15, 2025, at 3:00 p.m. Central Time

RFO No.: 212-25-0959 Request for Offers — Page 2 of 35

Table of Contents Page

1 Introduction 2 Project Objectives 3 Stakeholders

3.1 Office of Court Administration

3.2 Texas Judicial Council

3.3 Texas Courts

3.3.1 Appellate Courts

3.3.2 Court of Criminal Appeals

3.3.3 Courts of Appeals

3.3.4 Trial Courts

3.3.5 Other Stakeholders

4 Current / Future State

4.1 Current State

4.1.1 Charitable Bail Organizations

4.1.2 Required Forms

4.1.3 DPS Training and Certifications

4.1.4 Judicial Training and Education

4.1.5 APIs

4.1.6 Data Integrity

4.2 Desired Future State

5 RFO Overview

5.1 Contract Term

5.2 Schedule of Events

5.3 Designated Contact

5.4 Contact with Procurement Team Members

5.5 Evaluation Process

5.5.1 Evaluation Criteria

5.5.2 Offer Review Process

5.5.3 System Demonstrations

5.5.4 Best and Final Offers

5.5.5 Contract Award

6 Offer Response Requirements

6.1 Submittal Instructions

6.2 Delivery Instructions

Request for Offers — Page 3 of 35

6.3 Procurement Rules/Regulations

6.3.1 Obtaining Copies of the RFO

6.3.2 Offeror Questions

6.3.3 Legal Counsel

6.3.4 No Late Offers

6.3.5 Non-Conforming Offers

6.3.6 Cost of Preparation of Offers

6.3.7 No Copyrights

6.3.8 Concise Offers

6.3.9 Realistic Offers

6.3.10 Multi-Contractor Responses (Joint Ventures)

6.3.11 Multiple Offers

6.3.12 Discrepancies and Omissions

6.3.13 Confidentiality of Documents, Proprietary Information

6.3.14 Collusion or Fraud

6.3.15 Lobbying and Gratuities

6.3.16 No Communication with Media

6.3.17 OCA’s Right to Reject Offers and Waive Defects

6.3.18 OCA’s Right to Cancel Solicitation

6.3.19 Amendment or Withdrawal of Offer

6.3.20 Organizations Ineligible to Propose

6.3.21 Protests

6.4 Response Organization Instructions

6.5 Detailed Response Instructions

7 Definitions 8 Attachments

Request for Offers — Page 4 of 35

1 Introduction The Office of Court Administration (OCA) is a state agency in the judicial branch that operates under the direction and supervision of the Supreme Court of Texas and the Chief Justice. Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 17.021 requires OCA to maintain a public safety report system that generates a public safety report for review by magistrates when setting bail for defendants charged with a Class B misdemeanor or higher category of offense. Additional information regarding the current public safety report system is available on OCA’s website: https://www.txcourts.gov/bail/. The contract currently in place for OCA’s public safety report system expires on August 31, 2026, and may be extended for up to two additional 24-month periods. OCA invites submissions of offers, in compliance with the requirements and terms set forth in this Request for Offers (RFO) for the continued operation of a public safety report system and related services (System).

2 Project Objectives The project objectives are to develop, implement, host in the cloud, maintain, support, and update a scalable System; to train all statewide Authorized Users on its use; and to ensure the System complies with the requirements outlined in the Requirements Response Workbook attached as Attachment 3 and the Statement of Work attached as Attachment 1-1. The System will enable judges to review both a defendant’s criminal history and public safety report, make informed and appropriate bail decisions, make a record of those decisions, and generate necessary reports.

3 Stakeholders

3.1 Office of Court Administration

OCA’s mission is to provide resources and information for the efficient administration of the judicial branch of Texas. OCA’s role in this project is to procure the System to be used by magistrates as required by Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 17.021, Article 17.022, and Texas Government Code Sec.

72.038.

3.2 Texas Judicial Council

The Texas Judicial Council (Council) is the policy-making body for the state judiciary. The Council studies methods to simplify judicial procedures, expedite court business, and better administer justice. It examines the work accomplished by the courts and submits recommendations for improvement of the System to the Texas Legislature, the Governor, and the Supreme Court of Texas.

3.3 Texas Courts

Much of the information contained in this section is summarized from publicly available sources. To gain a complete understanding of the Texas State judiciary, Offerors are encouraged to visit the Texas Courts website. Figure 1 below offers a high-level diagram of the judiciary’s organizational structure.

https://www.txcourts.gov/bail/

Request for Offers — Page 5 of 35

Request for Offers — Page 6 of 35

3.3.1 Appellate Courts

Appellate courts in Texas hear appeals in cases which have been previously tried in the trial courts. No new evidence is presented, and no witnesses are heard on the appeal of the cases.

3.3.2 Court of Criminal Appeals

The Court of Criminal Appeals has statewide, final appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases and makes rules of post‐trial and appellate procedure for criminal cases. Most of the cases heard by this court are appeals from the 1st through 14th Courts of Appeals. An important exception is that appeals in all criminal cases in which the death penalty has been imposed are made directly from the district court to the Court of Criminal Appeals. In regard to the System, a case may be appealed which may include the original determination of bond by the judicial officer.

3.3.3 Courts of Appeals

There are 15 courts of appeals in Texas with intermediate appellate jurisdiction. The 1st through 14th Courts of Appeals have intermediate appellate jurisdiction in both civil and criminal cases appealed from district or county courts. The 15th Court of Appeals was created in September 2024 and has intermediate appellate jurisdiction over appeals from the Business Court and cases brought by or against the State, certain State entities, and their officers and employees. As it relates to the System, a case may be appealed to the 1st through 14th Courts of Appeals which may include the original determination of bond by the judicial officer and the State may directly appeal the insufficiency of a bond.

3.3.4 Trial Courts

Trial courts across Texas are the primary Authorized Users of the System. Magistrations and bail settings may occur at any level of the Texas trial courts.

• District Courts The district courts are the trial courts of general jurisdiction of Texas. The geographical area served by each court is established by the Legislature, but each district court serves an entire county, and each county must be served by at least one district court. In rural areas of the State, several counties may be served by a single district court, while an urban county may be served by many district courts. While most district courts try all cases, in the more densely populated counties the courts may specialize in civil, criminal, juvenile, or family law matters.

• Constitutional County Courts As provided in the Texas Constitution, each of the 254 counties of the State has a single county court presided over by a constitutional county judge. In addition to performing judicial functions, the county judge serves as the administrative head of the county government. In the more populated counties, the administrative duties occupy most of the time of the county judge, and the Legislature has created county courts at law and statutory probate courts to relieve the county judge of most, and in some cases all, of the judicial duties usually performed by that office.

• Statutory County Courts Under its authority in Article V of the Texas Constitution to establish courts as may be necessary, the Legislature has created county courts at law (also known as statutory county courts) in the larger counties to aid the constitutional county court in its judicial functions.

Request for Offers — Page 7 of 35

• Justice Courts The Constitution requires that each county in the State establish between one and eight justices of the peace precincts, depending upon the population of the county. Also, depending on the population of the precinct, either one or two justice courts are to be established in each precinct.

• Municipal Courts Under its authority to create such other courts as may be necessary, the Texas Legislature has created municipal courts in each of the incorporated cities of the State.

3.3.5 Other Stakeholders

• Local Law Enforcement Offices Authorized Users of the System are not limited to just court staff and judicial officers. In some jurisdictions local law enforcement is responsible for inputting the data necessary for preparing the public safety report. This includes, but is not limited to, municipal police departments, county sheriff’s offices, and other local law enforcement.

• County Pretrial and Probation Offices In some jurisdictions local pre-trial and probation office staff are responsible for inputting the data necessary for preparing the public safety report.

• Prosecutors Prosecutors will have limited access to the System to obtain certain bail information.

• Case Management System Vendors Currently there are approximately 24 vendors that provide case management systems to courts across the State of Texas, including differing configurations and versions. A primary reason that case management vendors are a stakeholder is because some courts already enter the information collected in the System within their local case management system. As such, a proper application programming interface (API) connection will benefit the jurisdiction for efficiency purposes.

• Jail Case Management System Vendors The number of vendors that provide the case management system solutions to Texas jails is unknown, but for many jurisdictions the information that would otherwise be entered into the System is contained in their local jail case management system. OCA works to help courts provide API connections to their local jail case management system if it is necessary for use of the System.

4 Current / Future State

4.1 Current State

Pursuant to Article 17.021 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, OCA shall develop and maintain a public safety report system that is available for use for purposes under Article 17.15, which addresses the rules for setting bail in Texas. The current system was originally developed and implemented by Catalis, previously known as AutoMon. The program was developed by enhancing and modifying a product that previously existed within the company but was modified to meet the requirements of Texas legislation.

Request for Offers — Page 8 of 35

The current system is a cloud-based, statewide system required to be utilized by judicial officers when setting bail in the State of Texas. The System generates a public safety report that is to be considered when setting bail for defendants charged with a Class B misdemeanor or higher category offense. This System uses an API with Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) systems (TLETS and NLETS). The bail form must be completed by magistrates, judges, sheriffs, peace officers and jailers who set bail under Chapter 17, Code of Criminal Procedure. The bail form is then submitted to OCA. Between April 1, 2022 and April 1, 2025, nearly 1.7 million bail forms have been submitted using the System, containing almost 2.2 million offenses.

The majority of the Authorized Users work in magistrate courts, followed by justice of the peace courts, municipal courts, county courts at law, sheriff’s offices, district courts and law enforcement offices. The System operates 24/7/365.

The contract with the vendor expires August 31, 2026. All future enhancements and changes must undergo significant hurdles as all changes have the potential to have significant impacts on the overall System. Examples of changes requested since its original inception include: the ability for Authorized Users to run their own data queries; changes in required fields; ability for Authorized Users to update specific fields, such as cause numbers; integration of API for local systems.

The current System has over 7,000 Authorized Users across nearly all 254 counties across the State. The technological skills of the Authorized Users range greatly, and Authorized Users undergo limited training to utilize the System. Nearly all of the training and support is provided virtually through webinars, virtual meetings, phone calls and email. Catalis provides support to all Authorized Users through three different channels: phone, email and live chat. The types of support issues addressed vary from issues using the authenticator, forgotten passwords, user rights, adding new Authorized Users, and many others.

OCA is required to post the information from the bail forms in a publicly available place on its website, without disclosing any personal information of any defendant, judge or magistrate. This is currently accomplished by the vendor sending over a new data file, known as a BACPAC file, to OCA every night.

That information is then extracted and made available in a searchable format on the website. The only information not displayed are bond conditions, as those may contain a victim’s personal information.

4.1.1 Charitable Bail Organizations

Currently, Charitable Bail Organizations (CBOs) are authorized under Texas law to post bail for certain low-level offenses. However, there is limited centralized tracking or integration of CBO activity within existing bail reporting systems. This lack of visibility hinders the ability to monitor trends, evaluate compliance with statutory thresholds, and assess impacts on pretrial outcomes.

4.1.2 Required Forms

The bail process in Texas relies heavily on a series of standardized forms prepared by OCA. These include, but are not limited to, the Magistrate’s Warning, Public Safety Report, and Order Setting Conditions of Bail. These forms are currently generated and managed in disparate systems across jurisdictions, creating challenges in consistency and data sharing.

Request for Offers — Page 9 of 35

4.1.3 DPS Training and Certifications

Authorized Users of the System must undergo specific levels of training and certification through the Department of Public Safety, depending on their level of access in the System. When the System attempts to retrieve information from DPS, that user must be authenticated by their level of access. The System will either successfully retrieve the information or produce an error and notify the user of the problem.

4.1.4 Judicial Training and Education

Only judges who are compliant with the judicial education requirements of Article 17.024, Code of Criminal Procedure, may set bail for a defendant who has been charged with a Class B misdemeanor or higher category offense. Article 17.024 requires the completion of an 8-hour judicial education course on the duties of a magistrate, including duties with respect to setting bail in criminal cases. After the initial 8-hour training, judges must take a 2-hour judicial education course on the duties of a magistrate in each subsequent State fiscal biennium in which the judge serves.

Judges who are appointed/elected after April 1, 2022, must complete training within 90 days. The Texas Center for the Judiciary provides training for district and statutory county court judges, the Texas Association of Counties provides training for constitutional county judges, the Texas Municipal Court Education Center for Municipal Judges, and the Justice Court Training Center for Justices of the Peace.

4.1.5 APIs

Catalis works with vendors to utilize API technology that serves to make the process of using the System efficient and less time consuming, by eliminating the task of duplicative data entry.

4.1.6 Data Integrity

Data integrity remains a significant concern across the bail and pretrial reporting process. Discrepancies in arrest data, duplicated entries, missing identifiers, and manual input errors can lead to incorrect risk assessments or release decisions. There is currently no standardized error-checking or data validation protocol statewide.

The graphic below provides a high-level diagram of the current functionality of the System.

Request for Offers — Page 10 of 35

4.2 Desired Future State

The future state must include a vendor who provides exemplary support to both Authorized Users and to OCA. For Authorized Users, this includes enhanced customer support, prompt response and resolution times, multiple ways of receiving support, support available 24/7, and adequate training. For OCA, there is a need for efficient implementation of requested System enhancements, modifications and general System troubleshooting. Modifications and enhancements can occur at any time in response to the needs of the State and the organization. Specifically, many changes occur as a result of new legislation passed during legislative sessions that occur every two years. The timelines for those changes are often set by the Legislature and directed to OCA. The new System should support dynamic form generation, electronic submission, and version control to align with statutory mandates and reduce manual entry errors. The System should implement robust data validation, audit logging, and reconciliation tools to ensure accuracy and confidence in reporting. In addition to the System capabilities, Contractor will manage and coordinate Authorized Users’ connection to the API and provide operational support related to the API and/or user interface.

5 RFO Overview

5.1 Contract Term

The contract term of the Master Services Agreement (MSA) will be five (5) years and may be extended for up to four (4) one-year terms, at the discretion of OCA.

5.2 Schedule of Events

The following provides the schedule of events (Schedule of Events) for this RFO. OCA reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to amend the schedule upon notice to prospective Offerors through posting on the Electronic State Business Daily (ESBD) website at http://txsmartbuy.com/esbd. It is the responsibility of interested parties to periodically check the ESBD for updates to the RFO prior to submitting an offer.

Request for Offers — Page 11 of 35

Event Date / Time* Publish Solicitation August 6, 2025 Pre-Offer Conference** August 11, 2025 at 10 am Offeror Question Deadline August 18, 2025 at 3 pm OCA Response to Offeror Questions (Anticipated) August 20, 2025 Deadline for Submission of Offers September 15, 2025 at 3 pm Demonstrations, if selected October 13 - 17, 2025 Best and Final Offer (BAFO) Responses from Selected Offerors, if requested

October 22 - 25, 2025

Notify Selected Offerors for Commencement of Negotiations

October 20 - 27, 2025

Contract Negotiations Commence (Estimated) October 27, 2025 Expected Award of Contract(s) (Estimated) November 21, 2025

* All times referenced in this RFO refer to Central Time.

** The optional Pre-Offer Conference will be conducted via Zoom at 10:00 am Central Time on August 11, 2025. Please register for the Pre-Offer Conference in advance at:

https://txcourts.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_nCJfyYM9Syy__fRZlzxg8A. A recording of the Pre-Offer Conference will be posted to the ESBD.

5.3 Designated Contact

Any communication required by this RFO should be sent via email to Paula Garner, OCA’s designated contact (Designated Contact), at Paula.Garner@txcourts.gov.

5.4 Contact with Procurement Team Members

Other than OCA’s Designated Contact, a prospective Offeror may not directly contact anyone involved in this procurement process to discuss this RFO. Doing so risks elimination of the Offeror from further consideration.

Prospective Offerors currently doing business with any Texas court who require contact in the normal course of doing that business may continue such contact but may not discuss this RFO with any court clerk or staff involved with the preparation of this RFO or the evaluation of any offers received in response to this RFO.

5.5 Evaluation Process

OCA will use a formal evaluation process to select the successful Offeror. OCA will consider capabilities or advantages that are clearly described in the offer, which may be confirmed by in-person or virtual presentations, demonstrations, and references contacted by OCA. OCA reserves the right to contact individuals, entities, or organizations that have had dealings with Offeror or proposed staff, whether or not identified in the offer.

https://txcourts.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_nCJfyYM9Syy__fRZlzxg8A

Request for Offers — Page 12 of 35

5.5.1 Evaluation Criteria

The following evaluation criteria will be used:

Criteria Weight Offeror Qualifications 25% Requirements 20% Implementation and Production Services 15% Program and Project Management 25% Cost 15%

TOTAL 100%

5.5.2 Offer Review Process

Offers shall undergo review phases prior to contract award, if any.

The first review phase will confirm that the offer meets the RFO requirements.

The second review phase will evaluate offers deemed responsive using a scoring system based upon the evaluation criteria above.

The optional third review phase will evaluate system demonstrations based upon the evaluation criteria set forth below.

The optional fourth review phase will evaluate the best and final offer if requested by OCA.

OCA reserves the right to conduct studies and other investigations as necessary to evaluate any offer.

OCA reserves the right to reject any offer and to waive any immaterial formality of this procurement.

Submission of offers confers no legal rights upon any Offeror. OCA will narrow those Offerors in each successive review phase and the evaluation in each review phase will be independent of the prior review phase results.

5.5.3 System Demonstrations

At the conclusion of the second review described in Section 5.5.2 above, OCA may, at OCA’s discretion, invite one or more Offerors, based on their scores following the second review, to participate in an in-person or virtual presentation and demonstrate aspects of the proposed System. Such demonstrations may include scripted scenarios provided in advance by OCA and non-scripted events requested at the time of the demonstration and will be scored based on the following criteria.

Criteria Weight

Engagement Interview 50% System Demonstration 50% Total 100%

5.5.4 Best and Final Offers

The evaluation process may, at OCA’s discretion, include a request for selected Offeror(s) to prepare a Best and Final Offer (BAFO) for review. Offerors selected to participate in the BAFO will be provided

Request for Offers — Page 13 of 35 guidance by OCA on aspects of the offer that may be changed by Offeror. An Offeror’s participation in the BAFO process shall not be construed as a present or future award of the contract.

5.5.5 Contract Award

OCA may enter into contract negotiations with one Offeror deemed to provide best value to OCA. Upon successful completion of contract negotiations, OCA shall proceed to contract award, subject to the State of Texas Quality Assurance Team review (if applicable). The notice of award will be posted to the ESBD.

6 Offer Response Requirements

6.1 Submittal Instructions

The submitted offer must follow the rules and format established within this RFO. Adherence to these rules will ensure a fair and objective analysis of all offers. Failure to comply with or complete any portion of these instructions may result in rejection of an offer.

Offerors must submit one electronic copy of the offer on a standard USB flash drive.

The offer must:

be completed in its original format (i.e., MS Word and MS Excel) and converted into a searchable PDF;

include page numbers and contain a single organized, paginated table of contents;

be organized according to the Section 6.4 Response Organization Instructions (below);

not contain audio, video, or embedded fonts; and include Attachment 4 (Cost Workbook) as a separate, clearly designated file on the

USB. No pricing information may be included outside of Attachment 4 (Cost Workbook).

6.2 Delivery Instructions

Offers must be submitted in sealed packages, plainly marked with the Offeror’s name and with the title:

Statewide Public Safety Report System, RFO # 212-25-0959 written on the face of the package. Offers must be sent by mail or delivered in person. Printed, emailed, or faxed copies of offers are not allowed and will not be considered.

Offers must be delivered to OCA’s Designated Contact at the appropriate address provided in the table below by the date and time specified in Section 5.2 Schedule of Events.

Offers received after the specified date and time will not be considered. There will not be a public opening of the Offeror submissions.

U.S. Postal Service Overnight/Express Mail OR Hand Delivery

Office of Court Administration Attn: Paula Garner, CTCD PO Box 12066 Austin, TX 78711-2066

Office of Court Administration Attn: Paula Garner, CTCD 205 W. 14th Street, Suite 600 Austin, TX 78701 Hours: 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. CT

Request for Offers — Page 14 of 35

Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not deliver to OCA’s physical address. Proposals sent via U.S. Postal Service must be sent only to the P.O. Box address provided above and allow additional time for processing through the state mail service center. Failure to follow these guidelines may result in the delay of the delivery of your response by the deadline date/time and will be rejected.

6.3 Procurement Rules/Regulations

6.3.1 Obtaining Copies of the RFO

This RFO and any addenda are available in electronic format only on the ESBD website. Offerors with a disability may receive accommodations regarding the means of participating in the procurement process.

For more information, contact the Designated Contact immediately.

6.3.2 Offeror Questions

All questions must be submitted by email to the OCA Designated Contact. Answers to questions will be posted to the ESBD each Friday during the question submission period. All questions must be received by the date and time specified in the Schedule of Events. A final compilation of all questions and answers will be available in the form of an addendum to this RFO and will be posted to the ESBD by the date and time specified in the Schedule of Events.

6.3.3 Legal Counsel

OCA has retained Jackson Walker, LLP as legal counsel to assist with the procurement of the System.

Offerors must not contact OCA’s legal counsel on any matter related to this RFO.

6.3.4 No Late Offers

Offers received after the date and time specified per the deadline for submission of offers in the table provided in Section 5.2 Schedule of Events will be rejected.

6.3.5 Non-Conforming Offers

Offers must be submitted as described in Section 6.1 Submittal Instructions. Non-conforming offers will not be considered. Non-conforming offers are defined as those that do not meet the requirements of this RFO, including the format for the response.

6.3.6 Cost of Preparation of Offers

Offerors are responsible for their own costs to participate in this solicitation. OCA will not pay any costs incurred by any Offeror for any aspect of responding to this solicitation.

6.3.7 No Copyrights

OCA will not consider any offer that bears a copyright. However, if an offer bearing a copyright is received, the Offeror will be given the opportunity to rescind the copyright to be considered.

6.3.8 Concise Offers

OCA desires thorough, concise, and responsive offers and discourages overly lengthy responses, elaborate brochures or other promotional materials beyond those necessary to present a complete and effective offer.

Request for Offers — Page 15 of 35

6.3.9 Realistic Offers

Offers must be realistic and represent the best estimate of time, effort, and other costs, including the impact of inflation and any economic or other factors. OCA expects that Offeror is responsible for and can fully satisfy the obligations of its offer in the manner, timeframe, and costs provided in its offer.

6.3.10 Multi-Contractor Responses (Joint Ventures)

Multi-Contractor (e.g., joint ventures) responses will be allowed only if one party is designated as the prime contractor. If such a response is proposed by more than one party, Offeror must list the parties and information regarding each party’s organization as required by Section 4 Company Background & Experience of the response template. Additionally, a copy of the agreement between the parties clearly describing the responsibilities of each party required by response template Section 4 Company Background & Experience must be submitted with the offer. Services specified in the offer shall not be subcontracted without prior written approval of OCA, and approval of a request to subcontract shall not in any way relieve the prime contractor of responsibility for the accuracy and adequacy of the work.

Multi-Contractor offers must be a consolidated response with all cost items submitted in Attachment 4 (Cost Workbook).

6.3.11 Multiple Offers

An Offeror may not submit more than one offer as a prime contractor in response to this RFO. However, sub-contracting contractors may participate in multiple offers.

6.3.12 Discrepancies and Omissions

Offeror is fully responsible for the completeness and accuracy of its offer and for examining this RFO and all addenda. Failure to do so will be at the sole risk of the Offeror. Should an Offeror find discrepancies, omissions, unclear or ambiguous intent or meaning, or should any question arise concerning this RFO, Offeror shall notify OCA’s Designated Contact by email following instructions and timing for questions. All unresolved issues should be addressed in the offer.

6.3.13 Confidentiality of Documents, Proprietary Information

All documents submitted as part of the Offeror’s submission will be deemed confidential during the evaluation process. There will not be a public opening of Offeror submissions. Offeror submissions will not be reviewed by anyone other than the OCA’s evaluation team or its designated agents.

Following the award of a final contract, responses to this RFO will be subject to release under Rule 12 of the Texas Rules of Judicial Administration. OCA will also post to the Legislative Budget Board’s public website information about this solicitation, response documents, and any awarded contract. If an Offeror believes that any portion of the offer is confidential, then Offeror must indicate the specific part or page of the offer which Offeror believes to be confidential and provide a separate copy of the offer that has this information redacted. All Offerors are advised to consult with their legal counsel regarding disclosure issues and to take the appropriate precautions to safeguard trade secrets or other proprietary information.

OCA is not responsible for discerning confidential or proprietary information within an offer.

If a requestor appeals OCA’s withholding of any information designated by Offeror as confidential, OCA will notify the Offeror whose offer is the subject of the request so Offeror may have the opportunity to

Request for Offers — Page 16 of 35 submit to the Rule 12 appeal panel any authority for withholding the information. The decision of a Rule 12 appeal panel is final and binding on OCA.

OCA assumes no obligation or responsibility relating to the disclosure or nondisclosure of information submitted by Offeror.

6.3.14 Collusion or Fraud

Any evidence of agreement or conspiracy among Offeror(s) and prospective Offeror(s) to illegally restrain trade or competition by engaging in bid-rigging or price-fixing, or otherwise, will render the offers of such Offeror(s) void.

By submitting an offer, Offeror represents that its offer is not made in coordination with any competing offer submitted in response to this RFO and is fair and without collusion or fraud; that Offeror did not participate in the RFO development process and had no knowledge of the specific contents of the RFO prior to its issuance; and that no one involved in the procurement process participated directly or indirectly in Offeror’s offer preparation.

6.3.15 Lobbying and Gratuities

Lobbying or providing gratuities to anyone acting on behalf of OCA or participating in the preparation of this RFO or evaluating offers submitted in response to the RFO is strictly prohibited. If an Offeror (or its representatives) violates this prohibition its offer will be rejected. A person who violates this provision may not serve as part of a joint venture under Section 6.3.10 Multi-Contractor Responses (Joint Ventures), be retained as a subcontractor, or otherwise participate in the preparation of an offer in response to this RFO. All contacts with OCA employees, contractors, or agents concerning this RFO must be conducted in strict accordance with the manner, forum, and conditions set forth in this RFO.

6.3.16 No Communication with Media

Offerors may not, at any time, issue or disseminate any media release, public announcement or public disclosure (whether for publication in the press, on the radio, television, internet or any other medium) in relation to this RFO or any subsequent agreement entered into pursuant to this RFO without first obtaining the written permission of OCA.

6.3.17 OCA’s Right to Reject Offers and Waive Defects

OCA reserves the right to reject offers or any part thereof and to waive defects, technicalities or any specifications (in the RFO or the Offeror’s response).

6.3.18 OCA’s Right to Cancel Solicitation

OCA reserves the right to cancel this RFO for any or no reason at any time during the procurement process. OCA makes no commitments, expressed or implied, that this process will result in a business transaction with any organization.

This RFO does not constitute an offer by OCA. An Offeror’s participation in this process may result in OCA selecting the Offeror to engage in further discussions and negotiations toward execution of a contract. The commencement of such negotiations does not, however, signify a commitment by OCA to

Request for Offers — Page 17 of 35 execute a contract nor to continue negotiations. OCA may terminate negotiations at any time and for any or no reason.

6.3.19 Amendment or Withdrawal of Offer

An Offeror may modify or withdraw its offer by written request before the offer submission deadline.

Offers cannot be revised or withdrawn after the offer submission deadline. Offers become the property of OCA at the offer submission deadline.

6.3.20 Organizations Ineligible to Propose

Any individual, business, organization, corporation, consortium, partnership, joint venture, or other entity currently debarred or suspended is ineligible to submit an offer. Any entity ineligible to conduct business in the State of Texas for any reason is also ineligible.

OCA reserves the right to refuse to consider an offer if OCA determines the Offeror has a record of criminal convictions, civil judgments and/or violations of contractual provisions such that OCA deems the Offeror ineligible to provide the services specified in this RFO.

6.3.21 Protests

Protests after the award must be submitted within ten (10) calendar days after notification of award. OCA shall rule on the protest in accordance with its procurement protest procedures. Protests based on the content of the solicitation will be disallowed if these faults have not been brought to the attention of the Designated Contact in writing by the due date for final questions.

6.4 Response Organization Instructions

Offers must be organized according to the structure below. This provides the opportunity for Offerors to answer text-based questions and operational scenarios about the Solution proposed. Offerors may include attachments where necessary or appropriate but must provide all content in the sequence described below.

The template consists of the following sections:

Section 1: Title Page Section 2: Cover Letter Section 3: Table of Contents Section 4: Company Background & Experience o Section 4.A – Company Profile o Section 4.B – Company Background o Section 4.C – Offeror Experience

Section 5: Solution Overview o Section 5.A – Solution Overview o Section 5.B – Solution Roadmap

Section 6: Functional Solution Section 7: Technical Solution Section 8: Solution Understanding and Delivery o Section 8.A – Solution Delivery o Section 8.B – Staffing Requirements o Section 8.C – Offeror References

Request for Offers — Page 18 of 35 o Section 8.D – Project Management Approach o Section 8.E – Implementation Approach / Deployment Strategy o Section 8.F – Configuration Strategy o Section 8.G – Test Strategy o Section 8.H – Data Conversion and Migration Strategy o Section 8.I – Training and Knowledge Transfer o Section 8.J – Production Transition, Hosting and Operations Support

Section 9: Master Services Agreement o Section 9.A – Acceptance of Non-Negotiable Provisions o Section 9.B – Other MSA Provisions

Section 10: Requirements Response Workbook Section 11: Statement of Work Section 12: Service Levels o Section 12.A – Service Level Agreement o Section 12.B – Service Level Requirements

Section 13: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation o Section 13.A – Required HUB Subcontracting Plan o Section 13.B – CPA Centralized Master Bidders List o Section 13.C – Potential Subcontracting Opportunities o Section 13.D – HUB Subcontracting Forms and Resources o Section 13.E – Post-Award HUB Subcontracting Plan Requirements

Section 14: Assumptions & Dependencies Section 15: Antitrust Certification Statement Section 16: Execution of Offer Section 17: Pricing

6.5 Detailed Response Instructions

Section 1: Title Page The Title Page must include the title and number of the RFO, name and address of the Offeror(s), and the date of the offer.

Section 2: Cover Letter The Cover Letter must include the title, address and telephone number of the person or persons authorized to represent the Offeror regarding all matters related to the offer and any contract subsequently awarded to said Offeror. This letter must be signed by a person(s) authorized to bind the company to all commitments made in the offer.

Offeror must provide a summary of its offer that highlights the key points and explains how the offered Solution and approach provides the best value in meeting the needs of the State.

The summary must additionally describe why the Solution described in the offer is important to the Offeror’s organization, and why the Offeror is best qualified to implement and operate the System.

The cover letter is limited to two (2) pages.

Section 3: Table of Contents The Table of Contents must outline the structure of the offer and include the sections required by the template.

Request for Offers — Page 19 of 35

Section 4: Company Background & Experience Section 4.A – Company Profile Provide a brief overview of your company, describing the history, size, mission, primary line of business, how it is organized, and how its available products and resources will be used to meet this RFO’s requirements.

Complete the following table to provide OCA with an overview of the Offeror’s organization. If Offeror will be using multiple vendors to provide any System/service component items, Offeror must complete the following table for each vendor that will be actively participating in the project. Duplicate the table as needed.

Information Requested Response Company Name Address Telephone Number Website Address Parent Company Subsidiaries or Affiliated Companies Date Company Founded Number of years Company has been providing the Services specified in this

RFO

Most recent three (3) Fiscal Years’ revenue and net income in USD

Company Ownership Structure (e.g., public, private, joint venture)

Stock Exchange and Symbol (if publicly traded)

Locations in the U.S., and total number of staff in each location

Section 4.B – Company Background

i) Recent Contracts Identify all contracts for similar systems or services which the Offeror has entered into within the past three (3) years. If client confidentiality is necessary, provide descriptive information to allow OCA to understand the type and size of client served.

If no contracts have been entered into within the timeframe above, state “None.”

ii) Contract Terminations Disclose any contract terminations prior to contract completion for any reason during the past five (5) years. Describe the circumstances, and provide the customer names, addresses, and telephone numbers.

If no contract terminations have occurred within the timeframe above, state “None.”

Request for Offers — Page 20 of 35

iii) Business Disputes, Outstanding Litigation and Bankruptcy Disclose any judgments that have occurred within the past five (5) years and any current or pending litigation. Disclose any bankruptcy litigation and filings within the past five (5) years. If the Offeror has partnered with other organizations for this project, any judgments or litigation of the partner organizations must be provided.

If none exist for any organization included in this offer, state “None.”

iv) Mergers and Acquisitions Disclose any announced or planned sale, merger, or acquisition of any participating organization or its products relevant to the scope of this project. Disclose any mergers or acquisitions that have occurred to the Offeror (including an organization partnering with the Offeror) during the past eighteen (18) months and describe the impact to the organization or products.

v) Conflicts of Interest Identify any potential conflicts of interest with OCA by any organization proposed to participate in this project.

vi) Financial Solvency and Insurance Information Offeror must provide most recent annual financial reports or year-end financial statements, and proof of liability insurance and workers compensation coverage.

Section 4.C – Offeror Experience Describe the Offeror’s experience providing similar systems and services as detailed in this RFO. This section must also include the following information:

The total number of years of experience serving the public sector and the size of these projects;

A brief summary of the Offeror’s experience with the systems and services in an environment of similar size and structure to Texas; and

Identification of the Offeror’s significant strengths.

Section 5: Solution Overview Section 5.A – Solution Overview Provide a high-level overview of all components to be included in the Solution.

If any third-party vendor will be providing any components (including software) for the Solution, please identify each vendor separately detailing the components to be provided by the vendor.

Add additional lines as needed.

Vendor Product/Service Provided

Request for Offers — Page 21 of 35

Additionally, the Offeror must identify any unique aspects of the System components and overall functionality that differentiate it from other market offerings.

Section 5.B – Solution Roadmap Provide the Offeror’s Solution roadmap for the next five (5) years and key technology investments that your organization anticipates making to enhance your relevant offerings.

Section 6: Functional Solution Provide background information in experience configuring, migrating and implementing a System that can report criminal history and collect data, including public dashboards and a website, highlighting:

1. Experience connecting to National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and Texas Crime Information Center (TCIC) (or other local state-run information center) to gather official criminal history, in a secure CJIS environment;

2. 3rd party systems/products previously integrated with the proposed software relevant to this project;

3. Report development, including dashboards and publicly searchable websites;

4. Data migration; and

5. Training on products and providing support to Authorized Users.

Section 7: Technical Solution Provide an overview of all the technology components (hardware and software) that are included in the offer, highlighting:

1. Conceptual architecture, including confirmation that the proposed System is a cloud-based software as a service;

2. Security architecture;

3. Technical approach to necessary integrations, including APIs;

4. Data migration strategy; and

5. Hosting solution and technology to support disaster recovery and high availability.

Section 8: Solution Understanding and Delivery

Section 8.A – Solution Delivery Describe Offeror’s proposed processes and methodologies for providing the Solution.

Offeror’s proposal must reflect a clear understanding of the nature of the work to be undertaken and must include detailed descriptions of how the Offeror intends to meet each requirement within the proposed Solution and successfully perform. Responses which simply repeat the requirement or include marketing materials will be considered non-responsive.

Provide an implementation schedule and high-level work plan to deliver the Solution. The schedule should identify an overall timeline, with key start dates and end dates for major project milestones, including any phased deployments proposed and assumptions that correspond to the response in section 8.E - Implementation Approach / Deployment Strategy.

Request for Offers — Page 22 of 35

Contents must also include elaboration of, and details related to, the following:

1. Method used to estimate the project level of effort and schedule. Include tools and techniques used to obtain the estimates. Identify the source or basis of the estimates used to develop the Offeror’s offer and the level of uncertainty and risk associated with the estimates;

2. The work plan must provide tasks, durations, key deliverables, and key milestones that correspond to the project schedule, deployment approach proposed, and deliverables proposed, as detailed in other sections of the offer; and

3. Key milestones schedule and work plan considerations:

a. Provide an integrated, milestone-level and detailed (level 2 work breakdown structure minimum) work plan, including a Gantt chart of the proposed project schedule that includes all services requested in this RFO;

b. Schedule milestones should correspond with the deliverable milestones required in the Statement of Work;

c. Offeror must include reasonable and incremental review periods for Deliverable Expectations Document and deliverables that allow sufficient time for both OCA review and Offeror to update deliverables based on OCA review feedback; and

d. Offeror must clearly plan for and indicate slack/contingency in the project schedule to account for potential delays or issues.

Section 8.B – Staffing Requirements Provide a staffing plan and résumés for Key Project Team Members for OCA for review and approval. Key Project Team Members include the Project Manager and Program Manager.

Offeror may identify other roles that the Offeror considers to be a Key Project Team Member.

Contents must include elaboration of, and details related to, the following. Offeror must demonstrate that it can provide the project team necessary to implement the proposed Solution.

To demonstrate the strength of your project team, provide the following information:

1. Organization chart of the proposed Key Project Team;

2. Project staffing roster with roles/responsibilities for each proposed Key Project Team

Member;

3. Résumés for each listed Key Project Team Member, including subcontractors. The résumé must contain at a minimum:

a. A description of the specific roles and responsibilities that will be assigned to each subcontractor;

b. Identify any certifications that may be relevant to the delivery of the services requested in this RFO; and

c. Number of years with the Offeror in the role proposed.

Describe your organization’s experience working with personnel from any partner or subcontractor included on the project team; and

Request for Offers — Page 23 of 35

Describe how your organization will handle the replacement of Key Project Team Members if such a replacement is needed, and your ability to quickly bring in additional resources if required.

Please note the following regarding Contractor personnel:

1. Contractor will be responsible for verifying that all personnel:

a. are authorized to work in any location in which they are assigned to perform services;

b. meet the criteria for responsibilities articulated under the MSA; and

c. have not been convicted of or accepted responsibility for a felony or a misdemeanor involving a dishonest or violent act, do not use illegal drugs and are not otherwise disqualified from performing their assigned services under applicable laws.

2. Contractor agrees to utilize during the term of the MSA the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s E-Verify system to determine the eligibility of:

a. all persons employed to perform duties within Texas during the term of the MSA;

and

b. all persons, including subcontractors, assigned by Contractor to perform work pursuant to the MSA within the United States of America. Contractor must require its subcontractors to comply with these requirements.

3. Nothing herein is intended to exclude compliance by Contractor and its subcontractors with all other applicable federal immigration statutes and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto.

Section 8.C – Offeror References Using the table below as a template, Offeror must provide references for three projects completed within the last five years that showcase the Offeror’s experience in defining, developing, and deploying a solution like OCA’s business and technical requirements as described in this RFO and the scope and complexity of the Solution.

Offeror is also to identify roles on any included reference projects that were performed by Key Project Team Members proposed for this project. In describing the reference projects, the Offeror must refer to the Offeror’s experience as well as applicable involvement of any subcontractors.

OCA may, at its discretion, contact third parties regarding experience with Offeror.

References where the Offeror has previously worked with the identified partner or subcontractor should be noted and are preferred. Additionally, provide a description of how the corporate relationship with your offered partners or subcontractors has contributed to the success of past projects.

Request for Offers — Page 24 of 35

Information Requested Response Reference Organization Name Reference Organization Primary Function

R…