Solicitation+Amendment+1.docx

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

North Dakota Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (ND DOCR) 3100 Railroad Avenue PO Box 1898 Bismarck, ND 58502

SOLICITATION AMENDMENT #1

January 27th, 2026

Solicitation Number: 110.7-25-082 Title: ND DOCR Client Management System Deadline for Receipt of Proposals: February 11, 2026, by 12 PM CT Solicitation Issued: January 13, 2026

RFP #110.7-25-082 Section 1.8 established a Deadline for Submission of Questions and Requests for Clarification. The responses, including any necessary amendments, are as follows:

Questions related to Section: RFP Section 1.3 RFP Schedule

1. Question: ND DOCR is requesting a complex solution addressing the variety of requirements for both juvenile and adult justice. Included in the requirements are asks for county/state corrections, male/female, youth/adult, jails/prisons, institutions/community. This is a unique approach. Given the commensurate complexity, will ND DOCR please consider an extension until March 25, 2026 to allow time for complete and innovative approaches to be proposed?

Response: ND DOCR is willing to extend the proposal deadline by four weeks. RFP Section 1.3 RFP Schedule is amended and replaced with the below timeline.

Questions related to Section: RFP Section 2 Background

2. Question: Section 2.1 of the RFP Document states that the funds for the project are already appropriated. What are the appropriated Capital and Operational budgets?

Response: The funds for Phase One have been appropriated. Specific budget figures will not be disclosed. Vendors should propose competitive pricing aligned with the scope.

No amendment necessary.

3. Question: Could you please confirm whether the state has published, or is able to share, the estimated budget or anticipated spend associated with this procurement? If this information is not available, could you advise whether a range or historical spend data can be shared?

Response: We are not sharing any further information about the budget at this time. See answer to Question 2.

No amendment necessary.

4. Question: If future funding is not approved, does the vendor need to support an incomplete phased system?

Response: Yes. See RFP Section 3, Scope of Work.

No amendment necessary.

5. Question: What platform is currently utilized as the Client Management System for DOCR?

Response: The current system is a Java-based application with an Oracle databaseNo amendment necessary.

6. Question: Has DOCR, the State Information Technology Department, or the State of North Dakota completed any product reviews/demonstrations of potential new Client Management Systems?

Response: ND DOCR has conducted preliminary market research but has not selected a preferred vendor or solution.

No amendment necessary.

7. Question: Does the State of North Dakota, the State Information Technology Department, or the DOCR utilize OnBase or any other products from Hyland?

Response: No, ND DOC does not use Hyland or OnBase.

No amendment necessary.

8. Question: Please provide a high-level overview of the current workflow process for managing client documentation from intake to release.

Response: This will be provided upon award.

No amendment necessary.

9. Question: How many form templates are currently in use by the DOCR?

Response: Unknown.

No amendment necessary.

10. Question: Can ND DOCR provide estimated numbers of end users, supervisors, trainers, and administrators requiring training?

Response: Approximate number of users needing training would be 1,500–2,000. ND DOCR anticipates using a train-the-trainer method after initial implementation.

No amendment necessary.

Questions related to RFP Section 3 Scope of Work:

11. Question: Would ND DOCR consider proposals scoped specifically to Parole, Probation, and Pretrial (P&P&P) operations, provided the solution offers robust APIs and demonstrated ability to integrate with the Department’s existing or future Offender Management System (OMS) and other core systems?

Response: Parole, Probation and Pretrial (P&P&P) is an important component to the overall client management system. However, ND DOCR is looking for a solution that covers more than one functional area.

No amendment necessary.

12. Question: Should Offerors assume future phases are optional and unfunded, and therefore clearly separate pricing and scope accordingly?

Response: Yes. Future phases should be priced separately as “future workstreams” (see Section 4.5 and Attachment 2).

No amendment necessary.

13. Question: Section 3.0 of the SOW states “The initial phase will focus on replacing the existing CMS and its essential functions”. Where in the RFP documentation and attachments can we find a complete list of all the “essential functions” required for the first phase?

Response: All functional areas listed in Attachment 1 Scope of Work are important to ND DOCR. Please provide any areas that your solution does not have as a Value Add.

No amendment necessary.

Quesitons related to RFP Section 5 Proposal Evaluation

14. Question: By expressly de-obligating itself from any requirement to request best and final offers, is the State implying an intent to go directly from proposal submission to contract without further negotiation of contractual or legal terms?

Response: Section 5.9 allows the evaluation team to determine if a best and final offer is necessary.

No amendment necessary.

15. Question: In Section 5.8 of the RFP, it states "The STATE will accept certification of the Offeror’s solution (not the 3rd party hosting environment) via FedRAMP, HITRUST, or StateRAMP in lieu of completing the Third-Party Security Questionnaire (TPSQ)." Would you accept a SOC2 Type 2 (based on NIST 800-53) audit report to replace a FedRAMP certification?

Response: You will still be subject to the Third-Party Security Questionnaire (TPSQ) process. You can submit the SOC2 along with the TPSQ.

No amendment necessary.

Questions related to Attachment 1 Scope of Work: Tab 3.2

16. Question: Is ND DOCR expecting full historical data conversion, or a defined look-back period (e.g., last X years)?

Response: ND DOCR is expecting a full historical data conversion.

No amendment necessary.

17. Question: How does ND DOCR envision responsibility being split between STATE and CONTRACTOR for data cleansing activities?

Response: CONTRACTOR should propose data cleansing activities.

No amendment necessary.

18. Question: Are there external data sources (courts, law enforcement, health systems) that are expected to be converted or only integrated?

Response: Integrated only at this time.

No amendment necessary.

19. Question: Are there preferred API standards, middleware, or integration platforms currently used by ITD?

Response: Currently there is no preferred standard; however, NDIT is moving toward a more unified approach and management plane for integrations.

No amendment necessary.

20. Question: Does ND DOCR have a preference or tolerance threshold for customization versus configuration for core CMS functions?

Response: Preference is for configuration but STATE understands that sometimes customization needs to happen.

No amendment necessary.

21. Question: Are there expected timelines for STATE decisions and approvals to support the proposed project schedule?

Response: Yes, post award this will be determined during project planning.

No amendment necessary.

22. Question: What is the desired timeline for this project? Since this is taking a “phased” approach – what is the desired go-live month/year for a system with all the “essential functions” and what divisions would are expected to be online for the Go-Live?

Response: CONTRACTOR should propose a project schedule.

No amendment necessary.

23. Question: Are there any limitations relating to the timeline for this project (e.g. a required go-live date)?

Response: No limitations identified at this time.

No amendment necessary.

24. Question: In Attachment 1, Tab 3.2, question 81 asks if the solution supports biometric and information data capture, including barcode/ID assignment, fingerprinting, image capture, and printing of ID cards or wristbands.

Question: Is this functionality a requirement of the new Client Management System, or would integration with software that can support this functionality be acceptable?

Response: STATE would prefer it to be in the new CMS but would consider integration if it is not available.

No amendment necessary.

25. Question: In Attachment 1, Tab 3.2, question 151 asks if the solution supports integration with real-time location tracking technologies.

Question: How does DOCR envision using this integrated information within the new Client Management System

Response: For accountability and movement tracking within facilities.

No amendment necessary.

26. Question: In Attachment 1, Tab 3.2, question 289 asks if the solution supports remote identity verification features including fingerprint scans, facial recognition, or GPS-based check-ins.

Question 1: How does DOCR envision using these features within the new Client Management System?

Question 2: Are these features supported within the existing Client Management System?

Response: 1. CONTRACTOR should propose how these features would work within the Client Management System. 2. ND DOCR currently uses fingerprint scans and GPS on check-in, but they are not included in the existing CMS.

No amendment necessary.

27. Question: Section 3.2, Question #317 of the Scope of Work states "The STATE seeks professional services provided by the contractor to handle data migration from multiple applications into the new solution." Can the State give more specifications about the expected data migration process? For example, how much data is expected to be migrated?

Response: STATE expects full historical conversion. Amount of data is unknown at this time.

No amendment necessary.

28. Question: What volume/storage of documents/data that is expected to be migrated into the new Client Management System?

Response: The amount of documents/data to be migrated is currently unknown. CONTRACTOR should propose costs based on data conversion fees the STATE will assess. To accommodate this uncertainty, please provide pricing for three tiers:

· Small volume (minimal data/documents)

· Medium volume (moderate amount of data/documents)

· Large volume (substantial amount of data/documents) This tiered approach will allow flexibility depending on the final scope of data conversion.

No amendment necessary.

29. Question: Regarding Attachment 1 “Scope of Work”, How are security patches, vulnerability remediation, and configuration changes managed for components processing Criminal Justice Information?

Response: CONTRACTOR should propose a management plan in Attachment 1 Tab 3.4 Section D.

No amendment necessary.

30. Question: Where is Criminal Justice Information stored and processed and how is United States data residency enforced across all CMS components?

Response: CJI is stored in the CMS. ND DOCR follows all Federal and State laws and regulations. See Attachment 3 Technology Contract Section 18, 22, and 35.

No amendment necessary.

31. Question: Attachment 1 Scope of Work (Row 707), section DD. Contract Deliverables and Estimated Schedule Requirements: Attachment states “The STATE has identified the following deliverables which are significant work products or milestones in the project. The STATE requests these deliverables be addressed in the Contract Schedule, as a minimum. The following deliverables may be modified based on contractor’s implementation strategy. “ Are vendors able to remove or change the deliverables provided by the STATE, or are vendors only allowed to add more deliverables? The statement indicates that the listed deliverables need to be addressed at a minimum but then goes on to say the deliverables may be modified.

Response: OFFEROR should propose deliverables based on their solution requirements. OFFERORs shall include all deliverables identified by the STATE as part of their proposed project schedule, as these represent the minimum requirements for this engagement. These deliverables cannot be removed; however, OFFERORs may modify them to align with their implementation strategy. Modifications may include adjustments to structure or sequencing provided the intent and scope remain intact. In addition, OFFERORs are encouraged to add additional deliverables necessary to support their proposed approach. All modifications and additions will be subject to review and agreement during contract negotiations to ensure compliance with the STATE’s expectations and acceptance criteria.

No amendment necessary.

Questions related to Attachment 1 Scope of Work: Tab 3.3 Enterprise Specs

32. Question: Would the Department consider an on-premises Client Management System solution over a cloud-based solution?

Response: DOCR is looking at all solutions.

No amendment necessary.

33. Question: Does DOCR have any preference between an On-Premise vs. Hosted Solution?

Response: STATE would prefer a cloud-based solution.

No amendment necessary.

34. Question: Please confirm whether ND DOCR prefers:

· ITD-hosted (Azure Commercial / Azure Government), or

· Vendor-hosted cloud solutions

· Or if both are acceptable with appropriate justification.

Response: Both are acceptable with appropriate justification.

No amendment necessary.

35. Question: If a vendor-hosted solution is proposed, are non-Azure cloud platforms acceptable provided the solution integrates fully with Azure AD, Azure B2C, and ITD security controls?

Response: Yes No amendment necessary.

36. Question: Will STATE or ITD provision development, test, UAT, and production environments, or is the CONTRACTOR expected to provision and manage these environments?

Response: This would be decided during contract negotiations. For cost provide a with or without scenario in your proposal.

No amendment necessary.

37. Question: For performance testing, will STATE provide infrastructure and tools, or should CONTRACTOR include tooling and environments in its proposal?

Response: Provide a with or without scenario in your proposal.

No amendment necessary.

38. Question: Please confirm whether the State permits Offerors to utilize technical resources located outside the United States solely for system design, configuration, development, and testing activities, provided that:

· Such resources have no access to State production, test, or data environments

· No State, client, resident, or victim data (including PII or PHI) is accessed, stored, or transmitted

· All activities are limited to synthetic, masked, or non-State data

· All deployment, data conversion, security, and operational activities are performed by U.S.-based resources in accordance with State and federal requirements If permitted, please advise whether any additional disclosures or approvals are required.

Response: That is permitted as long as the system and all data are housed in the United States. See Attachment 3 Technology Contract Section 18, 22, and 35.

No amendment necessary.

39. Question: Regarding Attachment 1 “Scope of Work”, how is Criminal Justice Information protected across system integrations and data exchanges, including access control and encryption requirements?

Response: All data exchanges utilize TLS 1.2 or higher encryption protocols to protect information during transmission between systems and across network boundaries No amendment necessary.

Questions related to Attachment 1 Scope of Work: Tab 3.4 Prod Support

40. Question: Does ND DOCR prefer virtual training, in-person training, or a hybrid approach?

Response: All training options are acceptable by DOCR.

No amendment necessary.

41. Question: Should Offerors include post-implementation refresher or onboarding training for new staff?

Response: Offeror should provide initial training and ongoing training programs. See attachment #1 Scope of Work Tab 3.4 number 7.

No amendment necessary.

42. Question: Please confirm whether ND DOCR expects CONTRACTOR to provide Level 1 support post-go-live, or if STATE intends to handle Level 1 internally.

Response: Offeror must describe post-go-live support. See attachment #1 Scope of Work tab 3.4 for details.

No amendment necessary.

43. Question: When does ND DOCR expect the formal transition from implementation to maintenance and operations to occur?

Response: Offeror must describe formal transition from implementation to maintenance and operations. See attachment #1 Scope of Work tab 3.4 for details.

No amendment necessary.

44. Question: Do you anticipate needing onsite presence for implementation/training or can the project be executed fully remote?

Response: No onsite presence is being requested at this time.

No amendment necessary.

Questions related to Attachment 1 Scope of Work: Tab 3.5 Exp. and Qual

45. Question: Can companies partner together to provide a single Offender Management Solution?

Response: Yes No amendment necessary.

Questions related to Attachment 2 Cost Proposal

46. Question: What is the current number of system users, and how are they distributed across roles (e.g., case workers, supervisors, clinicians, administrators)? Are there external users (e.g., partners, law enforcement, victim advocates) expected to access the system directly?

Response: 1,500-2,000 users. There are external users who would access the system directly. User roles Docstars Roles Internal Roles (internal to state gov’t)

1. DOCR Administrator

2. DOCR Officer

3. DOCR Pretrial Officer

4. Case Manager

5. FTR Administrator

6. FTR DHS Administrator

7. Intake Administrator

8. Intake User

9. Intake User Administrator

10. Intake Legal

11. Fiscal Officer External Roles (external to state gov’t)

1. FTR Provider

2. FTR Coordinator

3. Intake User

4. Intake User Admin

5. Intake County No amendment necessary.

47. Question: Is there any expectation to provide a cost per phase, or separate costs for “future workstreams”? The cost form is not setup to separate the costs this way.

Response: If the offeror is proposing additional phases of work the offeror should add those phases to the cost proposal in the Value Added Features section in a clearly marked “future workstream” section with phases described and priced.

No amendment necessary.

48. Question: Should Offerors submit pricing strictly by Phase One, with optional pricing for future phases?

Response: Yes No amendment necessary.

49. Question: The Cost Proposal Form, Attachment 2, provides a list of 26 deliverables. Do vendors need to provide prices for every deliverable, or can they provide pricing at a higher level? For example, rather than providing pricing for deliverables 1 through 3, can vendors provide a price for deliverable #3, that covers deliverables 1 through 3?

Response: Costs should be assessed per deliverable as presented in Attachment 2 Cost Proposal.

No amendment necessary.

50. Question: The cost proposal form, Attachment 2, has columns for quantity and price per unit, but this is a firm fixed fee proposal, and not time and materials. Can vendors provide a quality of “1” for each deliverable with a total price per deliverable, or does ND expected the number of hours and hourly rates for resources? Attachment 1 Scope of Work (Row 787) states that “Offeror must acknowledge that they have included all of the hourly rates applicable to any of the services in this section in their Cost Proposal. This includes any items that are optional.” Which seems to contradict a fixed fee pricing model. If the state expects hourly rates, is it assumed this is an average rate, as any deliverable would be provided by multiple resources with varying hourly rates.

Response: All prices are firm fixed per deliverable and if the CONTRACTOR proposes any additional work at an hourly rate that could be added in the Value Added section.

No amendment necessary.

Questions related to Attachment 3 Technology Contract:

51. Question: Section 4.d Technology Contract: The State has indicated it “shall make payment under this Contract within forty-five (45) calendar days after receipt of an approved invoice.” By whom is the invoice approved, and how long does the approval process take from the date of invoice receipt?

Response: The State Project Manager gives approval and collaborates closely with the internal State team to ensure all contractual obligations are met and the approval process moves forward efficiently.

No amendment necessary.

52. Question: Section 17: Considering the scope of this project and the industry standard in the technology sector to limit a Contractor’s liability for all claims to the amount paid during the twelve months preceding the claim, the Offeror respectfully requests that the State of North Dakota consider revising Section 17 to include a limitation of liability provision. Specifically, the Offeror proposes capping its total liability under the agreement to an amount equivalent to twelve (12) months of fees paid to Contractor. This addition would help ensure a balanced allocation of risk between the parties.

Response: The State of North Dakota cannot agree to a limitation of liability beyond what is permitted under N.D.C.C. § 32-12.2-15. Any limitation must comply with state law and be negotiated during contract finalization.

No amendment necessary.

53. Question: Section 17: The Offeror agrees to indemnify the State of North Dakota for all third-party claims related to intellectual property. However, the Offeror respectfully request the removal of all other indemnity obligations set out in Section 17. For any other matters, the Offeror believes such issues should be resolved through the appropriate legal process in a court of law.

Response: The State cannot remove indemnity obligations beyond intellectual property claims. Indemnification provisions are governed by state law and risk management standards and are non-negotiable except as allowed by statute.

No amendment necessary.

54. Question: Section 20: Commercial General Liability. The State of North Dakota has requested a minimum insurance coverage amount of $2 million per occurrence. The Offeror agrees to maintain this level of coverage; however, the Offeror respectfully requests that the requirement be clarified to specify limits of $2 million per occurrence and $2 million in the aggregate.

Response: The standard requirement is $2 million per occurrence and $2 million aggregate for Commercial General Liability coverage. This may be negotiated after award.

No amendment necessary.

55. Question: Section 20: The Offeror respectfully requests that the automobile liability insurance requirement be removed, as this coverage is not applicable to the scope of work contemplated under this contract.

Response: Automobile liability insurance is required only if the contractor or subcontractors will operate vehicles in the performance of this contract. If not applicable, the State may consider a waiver during negotiations.

No amendment necessary.

56. Question: Section 21: Cyber Liability and Security Insurance. The State of North Dakota has requested a minimum insurance coverage amount of $5 million and first party limits of not less than $1,000,000. The Offeror respectfully requests that this requirement be adjusted to provide for coverage limits of $1 million per occurrence and $1 million in the aggregate.

Response: The State requires $5 million coverage and $1 million first-party limits to protect Criminal Justice Information and sensitive data. These limits are based on state risk management standards and cannot be reduced without formal approval.

No amendment necessary.

57. Question: Please confirm whether the 20% retainage is released only at Final Acceptance or proportionally across milestones.

Response: At final acceptance.

No amendment necessary.

58. Question: Regarding Attachment 3 “Technology Contract”, What is the process for detecting, reporting, and responding to security incidents involving Criminal Justice Information, including notification to the STATE?

Response: Technology Contract - Section 14 Data Breach explains the process for security incidents.

No amendment necessary.

Questions related to Attachment 4 Statement of Work:

59. Question: Please confirm the approval process and governance required for customizations identified during the Gap Analysis.

Response: Customizations identified during Gap Analysis require ND DOCR review and approval through the formal change control process outlined in the program plan.

No amendment necessary.

60. Question: Please confirm whether STATE alone determines acceptance of deliverables or if joint acceptance is expected.

Response: Acceptance is determined jointly by ND DOCR and the State Project Manager based on predefined deliverable acceptance criteria.

No amendment necessary.

61. Question: Will ND DOCR provide predefined severity and priority definitions for defects, or should Offerors propose these in the Testing Management Plan?

Response: Offerors should propose those definitions, see attachment #1 Scope of Work Tab 3.4 for details.

No amendment necessary.

62. Question: Regarding Attachment 4 “Statement of Work”, What security responsibilities related to Criminal Justice Information are assigned to the contractor versus the STATE during implementation and steady state operations?

Response: CONTRACTOR and STATE are required to follow all State and Federal CJIS law and regulations.

No amendment necessary.

63. Question: Are there specific documentation or knowledge-transfer standards required beyond those listed in Attachment #4?

Response: ND DOCR follows State ITD documentation standards. Additional knowledge-transfer requirements may be defined during planning.

No amendment necessary.

64. Question: Will ND DOCR provide a formal change request template and approval process post-contract award?

Response: Yes No amendment necessary.

65. Question: Regarding Attachment 4 “Statement of Work”, What training is provided to ensure users and administrators understand their responsibilities when accessing or managing Criminal Justice Information?

Response: ND DOCR will provide CJIS compliance training for staff. Contractors must include system-specific security training in their implementation plan.

No amendment necessary.

66. Question: Which legacy systems are considered systems of record for migration?

Response: ELITE (Syscon), DocStars(STATE, ITD), FileNet (IBM), Victim Case Management System.are the main systems that may or may not be migrated based on the proposed solution. See attachment #5 for a list of other potential systems for migration.

No amendment necessary.

67. Question: What level of data cleansing or validation does the STATE expect the contractor to perform?

Response: The STATE requires the contractor to take a comprehensive and proactive role in ensuring data quality during the migration process. Specifically: Develop a Data Conversion Plan, Lead the Data Cleansing Effort, Collaborate with the STATE, and Full Historical Conversion (The STATE expects all historical data from multiple applications to be migrated into the new system).

No amendment necessary.

68. Question: Are there legal or retention requirements that dictate how much historical data must be migrated?

Response: ND DOCR is expecting a full historical data conversion.

No amendment necessary.

69. Question: What level of STATE staff availability can be assumed for workshops, reviews, and testing?

Response: ND DOCR will provide staff for workshops, reviews, and testing as outlined in the project schedule. Availability will be confirmed during planning.

No amendment necessary.

Questions related to Attachment 5 ND DOCR System Inventory:

70. Question: Does the State have an idea of how many integrations will be required for this project? If possible, please list the specific applications to be integrated.

Response: See Attachment #5 Interface for details.

No amendment necessary.

71. Question: Please confirm which systems listed in Attachment 5 are definitively in scope for data conversion as part of Phase One.

Response: Attachment 5 is a list of interfaces. DOCR would only be looking at data conversion if the solution being proposed can replace a system listed.

No amendment necessary.

72. Question: Who is responsible for third‑party coordination and testing (STATE vs. Contractor)?

Response: Coordination of testing will be determined during contract negotiations.

No amendment necessary.

73. Quesiton: Will the STATE provide API specifications, message schemas, or test endpoints for external systems?

Response: Yes No amendment necessary.

Questions related to Attachment 6 ND DOCR Functional Areas:

74. Question: Does ND DOCR expect both institutional custody and community supervision functionality to be included in the initial CMS replacement, or may community supervision be implemented in a subsequent phase?

Response: Ideally ND DOCR would like both functionalities, however if your solution does not have both please provide the area that your solution does not have as a Value Add.

No amendment necessary.

75. Question: Is Phase One expected to include full EHR functionality, or is integration with existing medical systems acceptable initially?

Response: ND DOCR would like to integrate with the current EHR system.

No amendment necessary.

76. Question: Should geospatial visualization and location-based monitoring be delivered in Phase One, or treated as a future enhancement?

Response: Future enhancement, not required for Phase One.

No amendment necessary.

77. Question: What are the assessments and clinical evaluations that are used for residents during the intake process? Please provide a list and if there are internal or validated 3rd party assessment tools.

Response:

This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

78. Question: Please provide more information on how sentences are calculated and the tools & methods used. Specifically:

1. What portion of the sentence calculations are manual (i.e., sentence date, effective date, Min & Max dates?

2. What legacy tools are used?

3. What are the ‘policy interpretations’?

4. Are sentences calculated at the count/charge or case level?

5. Do sentence calculations also include aggregate sentences?

6. Does the DOCR have sentencing calculation policies for early terminations?

Response: The entry of the sentence is manual and the system calculates several dates based on sentence length and credits. North Dakota Century Code (N.D.C.C.) determines business practices. Sentences are calculated at the count/charge level. Yes, the system includes aggregate sentences. Yes, there are policies for early terminations.

No amendment necessary.

79. Question: What is the classification tool that is used by ND DOCR to determine both internal and external custody levels?

Response: ND DOCR uses a classification manual to determine custody levels. While also using the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) for males and probation and parole clientele, and the Women’s Risk/Needs Assessment (WRNA), for incarcerated women, to provide risk levels for residents. The COMPAS assessment provides risk levels for juveniles under ND DOCR.

No amendment necessary.

80. Question: Is there a unified function or feature in the current/legacy system that allows resident and client case planning? For example, something that identifies criminogenic needs along with the goals and objectives to complete track and complete them.

Response: Tracking is currently within external systems.

No amendment necessary.

81. Question: How are residents currently tracked as they go in and out of the facilities individually and as groups?

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

82. Question: How are associations between residents, staff, visitors and family members and volunteers currently tracked?

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

83. Question: How is date regarding searches and UA results currently tracked for Residents and Clients?

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery No amendment necessary.

84. Question: How are Security Threat Group affiliations currently documented and tracked?

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

85. Question: Does the DOCR have a documented decision matrix for prosocial and negative behavior sanctions & rewards? If so, can you please provide it?

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

86. Question: How does the current system/CMS allow for real-time verification of resident location if most of the process is guided and managed manually?

Response: The information will be provided post-award during discovery No amendment necessary.

87. Question: What is the EHR system that DOCR is currently using?

Response: myAvatar (Netsmart) is the EHR system being used.

No amendment necessary.

88. Question: What are the specific tools and/or assessments that are used for each of the items below and can you provide examples of them?

1. Health Assessments

2. Criminogenic needs evaluations

3. Educational testing

4. Vocational interviews

Response: This information will be provided post award during the discovery period.

No amendment necessary.

89. Question: It is stated that the current STG process and information is managed in a “separate database from the primary resident management system.” Is this a commercial of-the-shelf (COTS) system or an internally created database system? If so, please provide additional details in the number of users that have access to it.

Response: There is not a separate system. STG is currently recorded in the primary system. Additional information will be provided post award.

No amendment necessary.

90. Question: Is the current financial system managed inside the ‘primary resident management system’ or is it a separate COTS or internal database? Please provide additional details regarding the system and back-end financial database.

Response: Yes, the current system handles most financial transactions and is an internal database. Our current system can generate juvenile billing based on location/status. The adult system does not generate billings.

Our current system handles multiple account types (trust, savings, restitution, child support, release aid). The current system also handles postings for deposits.

Other financial transactions:

· Configurable business rules (spending limits, mandatory deductions, holds)

· Commissary purchase integrations

· Medical co-pays, court ordered deductions, child support, and victim compensation payments

· External disbursements (checks only),

· Configurable priority order for deductions.

· Processes payroll but does not have any yearly tax reporting tools.

· Needs to integrate with PeopleSoft on the backend.

No amendment necessary.

91. Question: Is the current RRI system managed inside the ‘primary resident management system’ or is it a separate COTS or internal database? Please provide additional details regarding the system and back-end financial database.

Response: Yes, the current RRI commissary module is managed inside the primary resident management system. Any additional details will be provided post-award.

No amendment necessary.

92. Question: Is the current visitation process managed inside the ‘primary resident management system’ or is it a separate COTS or internal database? Please provide additional details regarding the system and back-end database.

Response: There is not a separate system. The process is currently recorded in the primary system. Additional information will be provided post award.

No amendment necessary.

93. Question: How are visiting individuals identified and their relationships verified and is this information stored in the primary resident management system so that a user can easily see verified individuals related to the resident?

Response: Relationships are stored in the primary system. Additional information will be provided post award.

No amendment necessary.

94. Question: Since a client can be on Parole, Probation and Pretrial release all at once, is there a single case manager or can there be multiple case managers depending on the release type (i.e., if a client is on Probation and Pretrial at the same time).

Response: There can be multiple case managers depending on the release type.

No amendment necessary.

95. Question: How are all the reentry requirements tracked for detainees awaiting and those already paroled into the community? For example, residents awaiting or preparing for release have needs assessments and case planning, employment, and housing placement and those in the community need housing assistance, vouchers, and transportation.

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

96. Question: How is the current Parole Board Process managed in the primary resident management system? It states for “For Parole Board review, an individual’s record must include criminal history, risk assessments, attitude and orientation, medical and mental health information, treatment history, institutional behavior, victim-related considerations, and a release plan that outlines proposed residence, employment, and transportation. This information must be available for Board review in advance of any decision.” But how does the Parole Board get/and review all of this information currently to mark their decisions and how are they made aware of who and when residents will be eligible for hearings and their dates? Also, how are the Parole Board decisions document and communicated back to the DOCR staff?

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

97. Question: What risk assessment tools are used in conjunction with Supervision of individuals under community supervision?

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

98. Question: Does the DOCCR Field Services also manage juveniles under community supervision in addition to Adults?

Response: No, there is adult Probation, Parole and Pre-trail Services and the Division of Juvenile Services (DJS), who oversee the supervision of juveniles under DOCR custody, up to age 20. DJS and P&P have teamed together, in that DJS does sometimes provide supervision to those considered young adults from the age of 18-24.

No amendment necessary.

99. Question: How are clients under Pretrial Supervision relayed/assigned to DOCCR Probation division? Are they all being referred from County Court systems and is it paper or electronic (or both).

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

100. Question: How are documents stored currently as they relate to community supervision? Are they stored electronically in the primary case management/resident system or is there a separate document management system (DMS) that is used?

Response: All documents are stored in FileNet.

No amendment necessary.

101. Question: Is the community supervision/Field Services system part of the primary resident management system or is it a separate COTS or internal database? Please provide additional details if it is a separate system.

Response: It is a separate internal customized system. Any additional details will be provided post-award.

No amendment necessary.

102. Question: Is the current Victim Services system managed inside the ‘primary resident management system’ or is it a separate COTS or internal database? Please provide additional details regarding the system and back-end financial database.

Response: Victim Services currently uses a database driven case management system. Financial database is not tied to the Victim Services system.

No amendment necessary.

103. Question: How does the Victim Services unit currently track and communicate important notifications with Victims? How are these documented? What happens today if Victim Services is unable to reach the Victim (i.e., disconnected phone number) – do they reach out to an alternative contact of the victim or some other method of communication?

Response: If a phone number is disconnected or no phone number has been provided letters are generated and mailed to the victim. Any additional information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

104. Question: Which CMS functional areas process Criminal Justice Information and how are system boundaries defined and enforced across in-scope modules and integrations?

Response: This information will be provided post-award during discovery.

No amendment necessary.

105. Question: Regarding Attachment 6 “Functional Areas,” is the ND DOCR wanting the contractor to replace the existing EHR module with an entirely new system or integrate with the existing system? If integrating with an existing system, who is the current EHR vendor?

Response: The current EHR system is myAvatar (Netsmart). DOCR would like to integrate with that system.

No amendment necessary.

Bidders are instructed to acknowledge receipt of and compliance with this amendment by signing below and returning the Solicitation Amendment Acknowledgement page with your solicitation response.

Questions regarding this amendment must be submitted in writing to the Procurement Officer.

Sara Bilden IT State Procurement Officer E-mail: sbilden@nd.gov Telephone: 701-328-0819 TTY Users call: 7-1-1

AMENDMENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Solicitation Number: 110.7-25-082 Title: ND DOCR Client Management System Solicitation Amendment Number: 1

By my signature below, I hereby acknowledge receipt of and compliance with this amendment.

COMPANY NAME

SIGNATURE

PRINTED NAME

TITLE

DATE