IT-2026-213-RB-RFP-NextGen_Voice_Translator.docx

RFP No. - RFP-IT-2026-212-RB RFP title - Next-Generation Voice Translator Solution and Managed Services

Request for Proposals (RFP)

Judicial Council of California

REGARDING:

Next-Generation Voice Translator Solution and Managed Services

RFP NUMBER: IT-2026-212-RB

PROPOSALS DUE:

September 22, 2026

NO LATER THAN 2:00 PM PACIFIC TIME (PT)

RFP No. @Number RFP General Contractors

Article B: Request for Prequalification submittal for Construction Management Services at Risk with a Guaranteed Maximum Price Page 8 of 9 pages September 16, 2002 JBCM RFP IT Goods-Services vJudicial Council – Rev. 07-2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ATTACHMENTS

A. ADMINISTRATIVE RULES GOVERNING REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS

B. JUDICIAL COUNCIL MASTER AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS (sample contract document)

C. SUBMISSION OF QUESTIONS

D. GENERAL CERTIFICATIONS

E. DARFUR

F. UNRUH

G. IRAN CONTRACTING

H. PAYEE DATA RECORD & SUPPLEMENT

I. SMALL BUSINESS

J. BIDDER DECLARATION

K. DVBE DECLARATION

L. PRICE SHEET (COST PROPOSAL)

M. BUSINESS AND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

N. ACCESSIBILITY ADDENDUM

LINKS

GENERAL CERTIFICATIONS FORM

(https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-general-certifications.pdf)

DARFUR CONTRACTING ACT CERTIFICATION

(https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-darfur-certification.pdf)

UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT AND CALIFORNIA FEHA CERTIFICATION

(https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-unruh-feha-certification.pdf)

IRAN CONTRACTING ACT CERTIFICATION

(https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-iran-certification.pdf)

PAYEE DATA RECORD FORM (STD 204)

(https://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/fmc/pdf/std204.pdf)

PAYEE DATA RECORD SUPPLEMENT (STD 205)

(https://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/fmc/pdf/std205.pdf)

SMALL BUSINESS DECLARATION

(https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-small-business-declaration.pdf)

BIDDER DECLARATION

(https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-dvbe-bidder-declaration.pdf)

DVBE DECLARATION

(https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-dvbe-declaration.pdf)

RFP No. [@RFP-FS-####-XX] RFP [@insert type] Consulting Services RFP No. - RFP-IT-2026-212-RB RFP title - Next-Generation Voice Translator Solution and Managed Services

455 Golden Gate Avenue · San Francisco, California 94102-3688 Telephone 415-865-4200 · Fax 415-865-4205

Request for PROPOSALS

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1.1 Judicial Council of California

The Judicial Council of California (Judicial Council), chaired by the Chief Justice of California, is the policy‑making entity of the California judicial branch. The California Constitution directs the Judicial Council to improve the administration of justice by surveying judicial business, recommending improvements to the courts, and making recommendations annually to the governor and the legislature. The Judicial Council also adopts rules for court administration, practice, and procedure, and performs other functions prescribed by law.

1.2 The Information Technology Services Office

The Information Technology (IT) Services Office is housed in the Judicial Council’s Judicial and Court Administrative Services Division. The office is responsible for assisting the trial courts in achieving the Judicial Council’s technology objectives and for the development, acquisition, implementation, and support of automated systems in the Supreme Court, Appellate Courts and the Judicial Council.

1.3 Voice-to-Text Translation (VTT) Program

The Voice‑to‑Text Translation (VTT) Program provides the California Courts Translator services to support branch wide efforts to improve language access for limited English proficient court users. The program enables real‑time, bilingual communication at public‑facing service points, including clerk’s counters, public windows, self‑help centers, and other similar locations. Originally launched as experimental pilot, the program had since expanded to more than 30 trial courts and provided access to communication in over 130 languages and dialects. The application allowed court staff and members of the public to communicate using automated speech recognition, translation, text‑to‑speech, and chat‑based interaction, and also included features such as secure staff authentication and usage data to support program operations.

The VTT Program collaborates with participating courts through regular touchpoints, pilot activities, onboarding planning, and program‑level coordination. These activities help the Judicial Council understand usage patterns, emerging needs, and opportunities to further enhance the program’s support for equitable access to justice.

To continue advancing statewide language access initiatives, the Judicial Council is seeking qualified vendors to deliver a next‑generation voice translator solution that includes implementation, configuration, deployment support, and long‑term maintenance for use across California courts.

DESCRIPTION OF GOODS AND/OR SERVICES

1.4 Description of Proposed Solution

The Proposers shall provide a scalable, secure, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) platform that delivers real-time multilingual voice translation and speech-to-text transcription solution. The Proposers must provide all required software, hardware, services, configuration, integration, testing, training, and ongoing support necessary to deploy the solution.

The proposed solution must leverage standard out-of-the-box functionality wherever possible while supporting accurate, reliable, and court-appropriate translation and transcription capabilities for court-facing interactions. Core capabilities shall align with the Requirements Attachment (Attachment M) and include, at minimum, automated real-time speech speech-to-text and text-to-speech translation, multilingual communication support, administrative controls, reporting and audit logging, support for tablet or kiosk-based client devices, and compliance with applicable privacy, confidentiality, retention, security, accessibility, and effective-communication requirements.

The proposed solution shall support communication between court personnel and members of the public, including individuals with limited English proficiency and individuals with disabilities. The solution should support effective communication for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, individuals who rely on visual text-based communication, individuals with speech-related disabilities, individuals who are blind or have low vision, and individuals who use assistive technology.

Accessibility and effective communication requirements applicable to the Solution are detailed in Attachment N - Accessibility, Effective Communication, and Next-Generation Voice Translator Requirements.

The selected vendors shall provide all products and professional services necessary to implement and deliver a fully operational production solution. The Proposers shall provide all personnel, tools, documentation, devices, and expertise required to complete the implementation and shall work collaboratively with the courts throughout the project lifecycle to ensure successful delivery of the solution.

Services and tasks to be provided include, but are not limited to, the following:

· Project initiation & planning

· Requirements validation

· Environment setup & configuration

· Testing & staging

· Preparation for deployment

· Deployment

· Support & maintenance

1.5 Solution Requirements

The vendors must deliver a solution that enables real‑time, multilingual communication at clerk counters, public windows, self‑help centers, and similar service points. The Next-Generation Voice Translator solution must support accurate transcription and translation, text‑to‑speech and speech‑to‑text capabilities, secure staff authentication, and analytical data to support program operations. Requirements for the Next‑Generation Voice Translator solution are contained in the Requirements documentation found in the Attachment M.

The Proposer shall comply with all:

· Functional & Technical requirements

· ADA Accessibility requirements

· Security Requirements

· Accessibility, effective communication, and speech-to-text translation requirements

· Data protection and confidentiality

· Cloud Hosting Requirements (if solution has a cloud component)

· All other requirements listed in the related document

Accessibility and effective communication are material requirements of the Solution. The Proposers shall comply with all requirements contained in Attachment N.

Accessibility requirements apply to software, hardware, user-facing functionality, administrative functionality, translation workflows, speech-to-text functionality, text-to-speech functionality, training materials, documentation, support materials, tablet devices, kiosk devices, and any other components provided under the resulting contract. The Proposers shall maintain accessibility and effective communication capabilities throughout the contract term, including upgrades, releases, patches, enhancements, hardware refreshes, and configuration changes.

1.6 Location

Work may be performed remotely unless otherwise required. The Judicial Council may request onsite participation for demonstrations, training, or meetings with trial courts. All hosting, development, and support services must comply with Judicial Council security, privacy, and data‑handling requirements.

1.7 Proposers Hosted Facility Environment

The Next‑Generation Voice Translator solution shall be deployed in a secure, Proposers‑hosted cloud environment. The Proposers must provide an infrastructure and hosting model that meets all applicable State of California and Judicial Branch security, privacy, and data protection requirements. The hosting environment shall meet the Cloud Hosting Requirements, Data Residency & Compliance Requirements, and other additional expectations regarding data residency and compliance described in Attachment M.

1.8 Proposers Responsibilities

The Proposers shall provide qualified personnel and program management to oversee delivery of all contract deliverables, ensure compliance with documented requirements—including Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT), testing methodology, accessibility governance, and accessibility contact obligations—and coordinate all contract activities with the Judicial Council.

The Proposers shall perform all technical and operational tasks required to implement the solution, including solution configuration, environment setup, authentication integration, translation accuracy and performance testing, pilot deployment, delivery of training and documentation, onboarding support for additional courts, and ongoing post‑implementation operational support.

1.9 Minimum Qualifications

To be considered for full evaluation and potential award, the Proposers must meet the threshold minimum qualification requirements listed below; refer to Attachments M and N for all related requirements.

· Five (5) or more years of experience providing services. The Proposers’ proposal shall include the contact information, duration and time frame and must identify the agency if a government entity.

· It has the necessary infrastructure, internal staffing, and systems in place and is fully operational to begin services immediately upon contract award.

· Has and maintains an SOC II Type 2 Certification.

· Maintain products and services to meet accessibility standards. Products and services must meet the WCAG-2.1 Level AA Compliance Standard as described in Attachment N.

· Provide a current Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) based on the VPAT for the proposed solution, applicable to the proposed version and dated within the prior twelve (12) months.

· Identify an accessibility point of contact responsible for accessibility support, accessibility issue escalation, and remediation coordination throughout the contract term.

· Demonstrate an established accessibility governance and quality-assurance process that includes accessibility testing, issue tracking, remediation management, and accessibility maintenance activities.

· Describe the accessibility testing methodology used by the Proposers, including automated testing, manual accessibility evaluation, keyboard testing, assistive-technology testing, and workflow-based validation.

· Disclose known accessibility limitations, partially supported criteria, planned remediation activities, and anticipated remediation timelines.

· Demonstrate prior experience delivering accessible public-facing technology solutions for government entities, courts, healthcare organizations, educational institutions, or similarly regulated environments

1.10 Key Staff Qualifications and Skills

Key staff may include, but are not limited to, the Project Manager, Solution Architect, Technical Lead, Integration Specialist, Trainer, and Support Lead. All designated staff must possess the appropriate experience and qualifications necessary to successfully perform assigned tasks and meet all project requirements.

Any proposed replacement of key staff must be made with individuals of equal or higher qualifications. Contact information for the replacement personnel must be provided to the Judicial Council prior to finalizing the substitution.

1.11 Tasks & Deliverables

The Proposer shall perform the following tasks during the court onboarding and ongoing maintenance:

· Project Initiation & Planning (Day 0–14)

· Provide the complete plan of the solution within 14 days of contract execution with the individual court.

· Within 10 business days from contract start:

· Deliver detailed implementation plan

· Provide solution architecture design documentation

· Provide launch schedule

· Requirements Validation (Week 2–4)

· Review Requirements Attachment (Attachment M) within 5 business days after receipt.

· Deliver document configuration approach within 10 business days after requirements review.

· Provide data/integration assumptions within 10 business days after requirements review.

· Deliver Configuration Workbook within 15 business days after requirements review.

· Environment Setup & Configuration (Week 3–6)

· Configure administrative access and system parameters of the initial environment within 5 business days after approval of the requirements.

· Implement logging, audit trails, authentication within 10 business days after environment access is granted.

· Provide required software/hardware specifications within 5 business days of project initiation.

· Assist with environment setup within 10 business days after environment readiness.

· Configure security, privacy, accessibility, retention, and compliance requirements within 15 business days after environment setup.

· Testing & Staging (Week 6–10)

· Support functional, integration, performance, and user acceptance testing throughout the testing window.

· Execute deployment to staging/court environment within 5 business days after testing approval.

· Troubleshoot deployment issues within 3 business days of issue reporting.

· Validate translation and transcription accuracy during the testing cycle.

· Validate accessibility, effective communication, and assistive technology support for representative translation and transcription workflows.

· Validate accessibility of tablet and kiosk devices where provided.

· Support accessibility testing performed by the Judicial Branch or its designated representatives.

· Preparation for Deployment (Week 9–11)

· Provide administrative training at least 5 business days before go‑live.

· Provide court staff training at least 5 business days before go‑live.

· Deliver training materials and user guides at least 7 business days before go‑live.

· Maintain regular communication with the court and Judicial Council throughout deployment preparation.

· Provide Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR/VPAT) reflecting the delivered solution.

· Provide accessibility administration guidance and configuration recommendations.

· Provide accessible training materials and user documentation.

· Deployment (Go‑Live Week)

· Provide go-live support on the deployment date and for 5 business days following.

· Test in-production configuration, settings, performance, and functionality within 2 business days after go‑live.

· Provide post-deployment stabilization, maintenance, and support services for 30 days after go‑live.

· Support & Maintenance (Ongoing After Stabilization Period)

· Provide technical support for all Proposers-provided software and hardware according to agreed SLAs.

· Maintain Service Level Agreements continuously throughout the contract.

· Provide usage data reports monthly (or as otherwise defined).

· Deliver periodic updates, patches, and enhancements as released.

· Notify users at least 5–10 business days in advance of any upgrades, enhancements, maintenance activities, or releases that may impact the solution.

· Maintain accessibility and effective communication functionality throughout the contract term.

· Remediate accessibility defects identified by the Judicial Branch in accordance with applicable service-level requirements.

· Notify the Judicial Branch of any accessibility-impacting changes associated with releases, upgrades, patches, or hardware changes.

· Additional or Unanticipated Tasks

1.12 Service Level Agreements (SLAs)

The Proposers shall provide incident response and resolution services in accordance with the severity levels defined below. The examples listed within each severity level are illustrative and not intended to be exhaustive.

· Critical Severity (P1)

· Total system outage

· Total loss of translation functionality

· Major operational disruption with no workaround

· Confirmed or high‑risk security incident

· Data loss or corruption

· Major Severity (P2)

· High‑impact degradation, but not a full outage

· Major operational disruption with workaround

· Issues affecting a subset of courts or core workflows

· Significant performance decline or accuracy issues

· Minor Severity (P3)

· Partial degradation of non‑core features

· Issues that impact translation functionality with workaround

· Issues that do not materially impact translation functionality

· Intermittent or cosmetic issues

· Standard Requests (P4)

· Feature requests

· New account creation

· Other requests

The Proposers shall meet the service level requirements described in Attachment M.

1.12.1 Accessibility and Effective Communication Defects.

Accessibility and effective-communication defects are incidents under this Service Level Agreement and are classified under the same severity levels (P1, P2, P3) and response requirements defined above. Severity for these defects is determined by user impact, not solely by whether the system remains operable for the general population.

A defect that prevents an individual with a disability, or an individual with limited English proficiency, from completing a core task – including understanding translated or transcribed content, completing a transaction, or obtaining effective communication – is classified as Critical Severity (P1), even where the system remains available to other users. A defect that significantly impairs access or effective communication for such an individual, but for which a limited or difficult workaround exists, is classified as Major Severity (P2). A defect that degrades the accessibility or effective-communication experience without blocking a core task, and for which a reasonable workaround exists, is classified as Minor Severity (P3).

Where the Proposers cannot resolve an accessibility or effective-communication defect within the applicable service level, the Proposers shall provide an accessible interim alternate-access method that allows the affected individual to obtain information, transaction, or communication until the defect is resolved. Persistent failure to meet accessibility-related service levels is a material breach. Detailed accessibility maintenance and remediation requirements are set forth in Attachment N.

1.13 Reporting

The Proposers shall provide monthly data reports that enable the courts to review SLA performance reports and security incident notifications as requested by the Judicial Branch.

Upon request, the Proposers shall also provide the Judicial Council staff with a consolidated usage summary report reflecting service utilization across all courts.

1.14 Unanticipated Tasks

The Proposers shall, at the request of the Judicial Branch, perform reasonable unanticipated tasks that are necessary to ensure the successful delivery, operation, or support of the Next-Generation Voice Translation Solution. Any such tasks must fall within the general scope of this SOW and shall not proceed without prior written approval from the Judicial Council.

TIMELINE FOR THIS RFP

1.15 Schedule of Events. The Judicial Council has developed the following list of key events and dates related to this RFP (“Schedule of Events”). All dates are subject to change at the discretion of Judicial Council.

Email to: Solicitations@jud.ca.gov September 2, 2026 @ 2:00 PM

Email Non-Cost Proposal to: Solicitations@jud.ca.gov Email Cost Proposal to: IT-2026-212-RB-COST@jud.ca.gov September 22, 2026 @ 2:00PM

RFP ATTACHMENTS AND LINKS

The following attachments and links are included as part of this RFP:

Additionally, if necessary, the Payee Data Record Supplement (STD 205) is required (i) if Proposer’s remittance address information is different than the mailing address on the Payee Data Record (STD 204); (ii) for multiple remittance addresses, and (iii) for additional Authorized Representatives of the Payee not identified on the Payee Data Record (STD 204). The Payee Data Record Supplement (STD 205) is available at the following link: https://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/fmc/pdf/std205.pdf.

PAYMENT INFORMATION

1.16 Payment terms will be specified in the contract document that will be executed as a result of an award made under this RFP; however, prospective Contractors are hereby advised that Judicial Council payments are made by the State of California, and the State does not make any advance payment for services.

1.16.1 Payments will be made in accordance with Attachment B, Appendix B, Pricing and Payment.

1.17 Judicial Council will endeavor to pay invoices within sixty (60) days after receipt of a correct, itemized invoice. In no event shall Judicial Council be liable for interest or late charges for any late payments.

QUESTIONS

1.18 Written Questions. Proposers may submit written questions and requests for information with respect to this RFP. All questions and requests must be submitted using the Proposers’ Submission of Questions form in Attachment C and must be submitted by the deadline indicated in this RFP’s Schedule of Events. The Proposers’ questions must be submitted by email to Solicitations@jud.ca.gov with the RFP number and title in the subject line. The Judicial Council will post any answers to Proposers’ properly submitted questions and requests for information as indicated in the Schedule of Events. The Judicial Council may make updates or other changes to this RFP in response to submitted questions if Judicial Council deems such necessary in its discretion and will post updated documents or other addendum to this RFP on the Judicial Council website publishing this RFP prior to the due date for Proposals.

RESPONDING TO THIS RFP

1.19 Responsiveness. Responsive Proposals will provide straightforward, concise information that fully satisfies this RFP’s specified requirements. Proposers should only submit documentation required and requested by this RFP. In responding to this RFP, Proposers should place emphasis on brevity, conformity to instructions, specified requirements, and clarity of content. Any materials submitted with Proposals that are outside of this RFP’s specifications will not be considered.

1.20 Proposal Format. The Judicial Council will only accept Proposals in an electronic format. Proposers must submit their Proposals with all required contents in two parts: the Proposers’ non-cost portion of the proposal (“Non-Cost Proposal”) and the Proposers’ Cost Proposal (“Cost Proposal”).

1.21 Proposal Submission Requirements.

1.21.1 Electronic Submission. The Judicial Council will only accept electronically submitted Proposals. Non-Cost Proposal and Cost Proposal files must be emailed to the separate email addresses indicated in the Schedule of Events. Proposers must not combine the Non-Cost Proposal and Cost Proposal at any time during the solicitation and evaluation process.

1.21.2 Non-Cost Proposal Submission.

1.21.2.1 Proposers must submit one (1) electronic file of the Non-Cost Proposal using PDF or Word format. The Non-Cost Proposal must be submitted to Judicial Council separate from the Cost Proposal.

1.21.2.2 Proposers must include the RFP number and the name of the Proposers’ firm in the subject line of the email for the Non-Cost Proposal. Proposers must include the RFP number and ‘Non-Cost Proposal’ in the name of the electronic file of the Non-Cost Proposal.

1.21.3 Cost Proposal Submission.

1.21.3.1 Proposers must submit one (1) electronic file of the Cost Proposal using the same file format as Attachment L which is attached hereto. The Cost Proposal must be submitted to Judicial Council separate from the Non-Cost Proposal; the Cost Proposal must not be combined or incorporated in any way with the Non-Cost Proposal.

1.21.3.2 Proposers must include the RFP number and the name of the Proposers’ firm in the subject line of the email for the Cost Proposal. Proposers must include the RFP number and ‘Cost’ in the name of the electronic file of the Cost Proposal.

1.21.4 File Size Limitations. The Judicial Council may not be able to receive electronic submissions with files equal to or greater than 30MB in size (individually or in total). Proposers must make an effort to compress all files so that submissions are less than 30MB in size. If a file cannot be reduced to below 30MB, then Proposers must divide the file into increments of less than 30MB sent via multiple emails. If multiple emails with incremental documents are required, Proposers must also reference the portion of the Proposal and file being submitted in the subject line of each email (e.g., “Non-Cost Proposal: Part 1 of 3,” etc.). The Judicial Council is not responsible for any submissions exceeding 30MB which are systematically rejected due to excessive file size or otherwise.

1.22 Submission Timelines.

1.22.1 Proposals must be delivered by the date and time listed in the Schedule of Events. Late proposals will not be accepted.

1.22.2 Submission acceptance will be based on the date and time the emails are received by Judicial Council. Due to the potential for email transmission delays, which may cause late receipt and non-acceptance of proposals, it is recommended that Proposers email their proposals well in advance of the due date and time. It is the Proposers’ responsibility to verify their submission was received. Proposers should confirm that their Proposal was successfully emailed and received by checking their junk folders for “Undeliverable” emails.

1.22.3 Proposers assume all risk for ensuring Judicial Council’s receipt of Proposals no later than the date and time specified in the Schedule of Events.

PROPOSAL CONTENTS

1.23 Non-Cost Proposal. The following information must be included in the Non-Cost Proposal. Any Non-Cost Proposal lacking any of the following information may be deemed non-responsive. The Non-Cost Proposal is to be inclusive of resumes, forms, and pictures, and organized according to the numbering system reflected below.

1.23.1 Cover Letter. A cover letter, signed by an authorized representative of Proposers’ organization, that provides the exact business name under which the Proposers propose to conduct business with Judicial Council. The cover letter must also indicate the following:

1.23.1.1 Proposer’s address, telephone, email address, and federal tax identification number.

1.23.1.2 Name, title, address, telephone number, and email address of the individual who will act as the Proposer’s designated representative for purposes of this RFP.

1.23.2 IT Services.

1.23.2.1 Provide Work Plan to complete the work based on the description of Tasks and Deliverables as defined in Section 2, Description of Services

1.23.2.2 Submit a completed copy of Attachment M – Business and Technical Requirement. Provide details explaining how the proposed application meets or addresses each of the business and technical requirements.

1.23.2.2.1 If goods are used, provide the Product names, version(s), system and hosting requirements, or other description of the product the Proposers propose to supply to the Judicial Council, including update and support information.

1.23.3 Conflicts of Interest. If applicable, provide a statement of any recent, current, or anticipated contractual obligations that relate in any way to similar work, the goods or services, or Judicial Council that may have potential to conflict with the Proposers’ ability to provide the goods or services described herein to Judicial Council. Proposers cannot have any pre-existing or obtain any new economic interests (e.g., submit, propose, bid, contract, sub-contract, consult, etc. on any work that would or have potential to be a conflict) for goods or services in which the Proposers may be requested to provide under a contract awarded pursuant to this RFP.

1.23.4 Acceptance of the Terms and Conditions.

1.23.4.1 On the Bidder’s Acceptance of Terms and Conditions https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-acceptance-terms-and-conditions.pdf, the Proposers must check the appropriate box and sign the form. If the Proposers mark the second box, it must provide the required additional materials. An “exception” includes any addition, deletion, or other modification.

1.23.4.2 If exceptions are identified, the Proposer must also submit (a) a red-lined version of the Terms and Conditions that implements all proposed changes, and (b) a written explanation or rationale for each exception and/or proposed change.

4. Note: A material exception (addition, deletion, or other modification) to a Minimum Term will render a proposal non-responsive. The Judicial Council, in its sole discretion, will determine what constitutes a material exception.

1.23.5 Certifications, Attachments, and Other Required Materials. Complete, sign, and submit each of the following Certifications and attachments with the Proposer’s Non-Cost Proposal:

1.23.5.1 General Certifications Form (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-general-certifications.pdf)

1.23.5.2 Darfur Contracting Act Certification (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-darfur-certification.pdf)

1.23.5.3 Unruh Civil Rights Act and California Fair Employment and Housing Act Certification (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-unruh-feha-certification.pdf)

1.23.5.4 Iran Contracting Act Certification (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-iran-certification.pdf)

1.23.5.5 Payee Data Record (STD 204), which must be completed in the exact name of the business entity under which the Proposer proposes to do business with Judicial Council. The Payee Data Record (STD 204) is available at the following link: https://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/fmc/pdf/std204.pdf.

Additionally, if necessary, the Payee Data Record Supplement (STD 205) is required (i) if Proposer’s remittance address information is different than the mailing address on the Payee Data Record (STD 204); (ii) for multiple remittance addresses, and (iii) for additional Authorized Representatives of the Payee not identified on the Payee Data Record (STD 204). The Payee Data Record Supplement (STD 205) is available at the following link:

https://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/fmc/pdf/std205.pdf.

1.23.5.6 Small Business Declaration. If Bidder wishes to seek the small business preference, Bidder must complete and submit with its bid the Small Business Declaration (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-small-business-declaration.pdf). Bidder must submit with the Small Business Declaration all materials required in the Small Business Declaration.

1.23.5.7 DVBE Certification. If Bidder wishes to seek the DVBE incentive, Bidder must complete and submit with its bid the Bidder Declaration (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-dvbe-bidder-declaration.pdf). Bidder must submit with the Bidder Declaration all materials required in the Bidder Declaration. Bidder must submit with its bid a DVBE Declaration (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-dvbe-declaration.pdf) completed and signed by each DVBE that will provide goods and/or services in connection with the contract. If Bidder is itself a DVBE, it must complete and sign the DVBE Declaration. If Bidder will use DVBE subcontractors, each DVBE subcontractor must complete and sign a DVBE Declaration. NOTE: The DVBE Declaration is not required if Bidder will qualify for the DVBE incentive using a BUP on file with DGS.

1.23.5.8 If the Proposer is a California corporation, limited liability company (“LLC”), limited partnership (“LP”), or limited liability partnership (“LLP”), proof that the Proposer is in good standing in California. If the Proposer is a foreign corporation, LLC, LP, or LLP, and the Proposer conducts or will conduct (if awarded a contract) intrastate business in California, proof that the Proposer is qualified to do business and in good standing in California. If the Proposer is a foreign corporation, LLC, LP, or LLP, and the Proposer does not (and will not if awarded a contract) conduct intrastate business in California, proof that the Proposer is in good standing in its home jurisdiction.

1.23.5.9 Copies of Proposer’s (and any subcontractors’) current business licenses.

1.24 Cost Proposal.

1.24.1 For the Proposer’s Cost Proposal, the Proposer is required to complete the Cost Proposal form in Attachment L, as follows:

1.24.1.1 IT Services: Proposer must provide firm fixed pricing for all pricing entered on the Pricing Sheet. The winning Proposer will be paid only on a firm fixed price basis per the pricing the Proposer submits on the Pricing sheet. The following information must be included in the cost portion of the proposal.

1.24.1.1.1 All anticipated charges, including, but not limited to cost of materials and product, implementation, training, all applicable taxes, overhead, profit and cost of providing insurance.

1.24.1.1.2 The amount that will be charged for annual license and support costs for the duration of the Master Agreement as well as the option years. This RFP does not allow any travel costs or other expenses from the Proposer.

1.24.1.1.3 All taxes. Tax must be included as a separate line item on all invoices submitted by the winning proposer.

1.24.1.1.4 How the annual license and support costs might change in each year of the Master Agreement, how future price increases will be minimized and capped, and how both increases and decreases will be passed on to the Judicial Council and members of the Purchasing Group if the Master Agreement is renewed after the initial term.

1.24.2 Do not change or edit the form of Attachment D.

1.24.3 Attachment D must be signed by an authorized representative of the Proposer’s organization.

NOTE: It is unlawful for any person engaged in business within this state to sell or use any article or product as a “loss leader” as defined in Section 17030 of the Business and Professions Code.

SELECTION PROCESS

1.25 Non-Cost Proposals. The evaluation team will complete its evaluation of non-cost criteria for all Proposals using the methods specified in this RFP.

1.25.1 Interviews. The Judicial Council may, at its discretion, conduct interviews with Proposers to clarify aspects set forth in their proposals or to assist in finalizing the ranking of top-ranked proposals. The interview process may require a demonstration. The interview may also require a demonstration of equivalence if a brand name is included in the specifications. The Proposers will be notified of their interview date and time and any requirements therefor. Notifications will be sent to the email address provided as the Proposers’ contact information. Interviews will be held remotely via video conference.

1.25.2 After the interviews, if any, the adjusted results of the completed Non-Cost Proposal evaluation will be published on the website publishing this RFP, excluding the small business preference and DVBE incentive.

1.26 Cost Proposals. The Cost Proposal will be publicly opened at the date and time and using the method noted in the Schedule of Events. The evaluation team will evaluate the opened Cost Proposals.

1.27 Award. The top three (3) highest-scoring Proposers, after applying any small business preference, DVBE incentive, or discounts will be contacted regarding contract award and execution. If contracts are awarded under this RFP, Judicial Council will post a Notice of Intent to Award on the website publishing this RFP that lists the name of the selected Proposer.

1.28 Verification. At any time, Judicial Council may contact previous clients and owners to verify the experience and performance of the prospective Proposers, their key personnel, and their sub-Proposers.

EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

1.29 Required Contents. At the time Proposals are opened, each Proposal will be reviewed for minimum requirements of this RFP and the presence or absence of all required contents.

1.30 Proposal Evaluation. The Judicial Council will evaluate responsive Proposals on a 100-point scale according to the following criteria (“Proposal Evaluation”):

NON-COST PROPOSALS

Attachments M and N Ability to meet requirements presented in Attachment M and N.

Timing Requirements Ability to meet timing requirements to complete the project.

Work Plan Quality of work plan submitted.

DVBE Incentive Proposer will receive a DVBE incentive if, in Judicial Council’s sole determination, Proposer has met all applicable requirements.

COST PROPOSALS

Cost Proposal Proposer’s cost for the services provided in Attachment L pursuant to the indicated instructions and scoring methodology.

CONFIDENTIAL OR PROPRIETARY INFORMATION

1.31 PROPOSALS ARE SUBJECT TO DISCLOSURE TO THIRD PARTIES AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC PURSUANT TO APPLICABLE LAWS, INCLUDING PUBLIC DISCLOSURE PURSUANT TO RULE 10.500 OF THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT. Except as required by law, Judicial Council will not disclose (i) social security numbers, or (ii) balance sheets or income statements submitted by Proposers that is not a publicly traded corporation. All other information in proposals may be disclosed in response to applicable public records requests, or as otherwise required by law. Such disclosure may be made regardless of whether the proposal (or portions thereof) is marked “confidential,” “proprietary,” “copyright ©,” or otherwise, and regardless of any statement in the proposal (a) purporting to limit Judicial Council’s right to disclose information in the proposal, or (b) requiring Judicial Council to inform or obtain the consent of the Proposers prior to the disclosure of the proposal (or portions thereof). Any proposal that is password protected, or contains portions that are password protected, may be rejected. Submission of any proposal pursuant to this RFP constitutes acknowledgment and consent by the Proposers to the potential public disclosure of its proposal content, as set forth in this RFP. Proposers are accordingly cautioned not to include confidential, proprietary, or privileged information in proposals.

CONTRACT TERMS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

1.32 Irrevocable Offer. All submitted Proposals shall constitute and be an irrevocable offer by the Proposers that is valid for ninety (90) days following the Proposal due date. In the event a final contract has not been awarded within this ninety (90) day period, Judicial Council reserves the right to negotiate extensions to this period with Proposers. The Judicial Council may release all offers not selected under this RFP upon issuance of a Notice of Intent to Award.

1.33 Award and Execution of Agreement. If a satisfactory agreement has not been signed within thirty (30) calendar days of Judicial Council’s request for the Proposers to execute a contract, Judicial Council reserves the right to terminate the award.

1.34 Future Requests. The three Proposers selected under this RFP will not be precluded from consideration nor given special status in any future solicitations issued by Judicial Council.

1.35 No Guarantee. The Judicial Council does not guarantee any amount or duration of work under a Master Agreement, nor does Judicial Council guarantee that any subsequent projects will be assigned to the Proposers regardless of being awarded a Master Agreement.

1.36 Provision of the Work. Proposers will provide all Services in accordance with the Work Orders to be issued by Judicial Council under the Master Agreement. Proposers will provide all Services in compliance with the provisions of the Master Agreement along with any additional provisions specified in a Work Order such as schedule, key personnel, and sub-Proposer requirements.

SMALL BUSINESS PREFERENCE

1.37 Eligibility for and application of the small business preference are governed by Judicial Council’s Small Business Preference Procedures for the Procurement of Information Technology Goods and Services. The Proposers will receive a small business preference if, in Judicial Council’s sole determination, the Proposers have met all applicable requirements. If the Proposers receive the small business preference, the score assigned to its proposal will be increased by an amount equal to 5% of the points assigned to the highest scored proposal. If a DVBE incentive is also offered in connection with this solicitation, additional rules regarding the interaction between the small business preference and the DVBE incentive apply.

1.38 Small business participation is not mandatory. Failure to qualify for the small business preference will not render a proposal non-responsive.

1.39 To receive the small business preference, the Proposers must be either (i) a Department of General Services (“DGS”) certified small business or microbusiness performing a commercially useful function, or (ii) a DGS-certified small business nonprofit veteran service agency.

1.40 If the Proposers wish to seek the small business preference, the Proposers must complete and submit with its proposal the Small Business Declaration (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-small-business-declaration.pdf). The Proposers must submit with the Small Business Declaration all materials required in the Small Business Declaration.

1.41 Failure to complete and submit the Small Business Declaration as required will result in the Proposers not receiving the small business preference. In addition, Judicial Council may request additional written clarifying information. Failure to provide this information as requested will result in the Proposers not receiving the small business preference.

1.42 If the Proposers receive the small business preference, (i) the Proposers will be required to complete a post-contract report; and (ii) failure to meet the small business commitment set forth in its proposal will constitute a breach of contract.

FRAUDULENT MISREPREPRETATION IN CONNECTION WITH THE SMALL BUSINESS PREFERNCE IS UNLAWFUL AND IS PUNISHABLE BY CIVIL PENALTIES. SEE GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 14842.5.

DISABLED VETERAN BUSINESS ENTERPRISE INCENTIVE

1.43 The Judicial Council has a Disabled Veterans Business Enterprise (DVBE) program with a total participation goal of three percent (3%). Qualification for the DVBE incentive is not mandatory. Failure to qualify for the DVBE incentive will not render a Proposers’ Proposal non-responsive.

1.44 Eligibility for and application of the DVBE incentive is governed by Judicial Council’s DVBE Rules and Procedures. Proposers will receive a DVBE incentive if, in Judicial Council’s sole determination, Proposers have met all applicable requirements. If Proposers receive the DVBE incentive, a number of points will be added to the score assigned to Proposers’ proposals. The number of points that will be added is specified in section 10.0 above.

1.45 To receive the DVBE incentive, at least 3% of the contract goods and/or services must be provided by a DVBE performing a commercially useful function. Or, for solicitations of non-IT goods and IT goods and services, Proposers may have an approved Business Utilization Plan (“BUP”) on file with the California Department of General Services (“DGS”).

1.46 If Proposers wish to seek the DVBE incentive:

1.46.1 Bidder must complete and submit with its Non-Cost Bid the Bidder Declaration (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-dvbe-bidder-declaration.pdf). Bidder must submit with the Bidder Declaration all materials required in the Bidder Declaration.

1.46.2 Bidder must submit with its bid a DVBE Declaration (https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/jbcm-dvbe-declaration.pdf) completed and signed by each DVBE that will provide goods and/or services in connection with the contract. If Bidder is itself a DVBE, it must complete and sign the DVBE Declaration.