1 | P a g e

Administrative Office of the United States Courts

Department of Administrative Services

Request for Information (RFI)

Jury Management System (JMS)

Issue Date: March 20, 2026

2 | P a g e

Prospective Vendors, The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO) is conducting market research in anticipation of a future solicitation for a modernized Jury Management System (JMS). The purpose of this Request for Information (RFI) is to obtain industry feedback, capability details, and technical insights that will assist the AO in refining its requirements, acquisition strategy, and Statement of Objectives (SOO) for the forthcoming procurement.

The AO is preparing to replace its existing legacy JMS with a secure, scalable, cloud-based solution capable of supporting the full lifecycle of federal jury operations, including juror summonsing, qualification, check-in, management of juror information, and integration with court proceedings. The system must protect sensitive jurors personally identifiable information (PII), support high-volume operational workflows, and align with federal best practices for cloud security and identity management.

Through this RFI, the AO seeks information from qualified vendors regarding available commercial solutions, technical capabilities, hosting models, security compliance, integration approaches, data migration strategies, and implementation timelines. Responses will help the Judiciary assess market maturity, identify potential risks, and determine the feasibility of specific requirements under consideration.

This RFI is issued in accordance with the market research procedures outlined in Volume 14 of the AO Procurement Manual, § 210.60 Market Research, Solicitation Provision § 210.60.40. The judiciary does not intend to award a contract on the basis of this solicitation or to otherwise pay for the information solicited (2) This solicitation is issued for the purpose of market research for

JMS.

Responses to this RFI are voluntary and will not be returned. The AO will not reimburse any costs associated with responding to this notice. Information received in response to this RFI may be used by the AO in the development and refinement of the final solicitation.

Vendors are encouraged to provide detailed, thoughtful responses that address the questions and topics outlined in the attached RFI document. The AO welcomes input on industry best practices, innovative approaches, and any considerations that may enhance the effectiveness, security, or efficiency of the future JMS solution. An Excel for questions has been prepared by the AO and should be used by vendors to submit any questions related to this RFI.

The AO has prepared a set of general questions for market research purposes. Interested vendors should provide responses as part of a capabilities statement or via email. The general questions referenced in this section are located on pages 3–5 of this RFI.

3 | P a g e

Questions regarding this RFI may be directed to AJ Lee by email. Responses should be submitted electronically to Mr. AJ Lee at AJ_Lee@ao.uscourts.gov or Mrs. Vanessa Jackson at Vanessa_Jackson@ao.uscourts.gov no later than April 6, 2026, at 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

The Judiciary appreciates your interest and looks forward to reviewing your submission.

Questions:

1. Jury Lifecycle Support

1. Describe how your solution supports a typical full jury lifecycle from qualification through completion of service.

2. Identify the capabilities available to jurors for completing required forms and submitting postponement or excusal requests.

3. Describe the security controls that restrict access to authorized court personnel.

2. Operational Tools and Technology Integration

1. Describe the scanning capabilities your solution currently supports, including compatibility with common scanner technologies.

2. Identify the communication channels (e.g., IVR, SMS, email, mobile) supported by your solution.

3. Describe any proximity-based technologies your solution supports for juror check-in and related workflows.

3. Financial and Data Integration

1. Describe your experience in integrating with government financial management systems, including the ability to generate export files using defined column structures.

2. Explain how your solution supports transition to future financial systems.

3. Describe the mechanisms used to ensure accurate and timely financial and statistical calculations.

4. Cloud Hosting, Security, and Compliance

1. Identify the FedRAMP authorization impact level and deployment model that your solution is or could be hosted.

2. Describe your compliance with NIST RMF, Zero Trust Architecture, and other federal cybersecurity frameworks.

3. Identify the identity and access management services your solution supports (e.g., PIV, SSO, MFA, SCIM, SAML, OIDC).

4 | P a g e

4. Describe your approach to continuous monitoring, vulnerability management, and incident response.

5. Interoperability and Open Standards

1. Describe your solution’s API framework, including support for REST/JSON.

2. Identify the data export formats your solution supports (e.g., JSON, CSV, XML).

3. Describe how your solution avoids vendor lock-in and supports long-term portability.

6. User Experience

1. Describe the user interface design principles used for both court personnel and jurors.

2. Identify the accessibility standards your solution meets, including Section 508 compliance.

3. Describe how your solution supports workflow documentation and process adoption.

7. Reporting, Analytics, and EDW Integration

1. Describe your reporting and analytics capabilities, including support for operational and national-level reporting.

2. Explain how your solution supports automated data ingestion into an enterprise data warehouse.

3. Describe your approach to maintaining data models, glossaries, and metadata.

8. System Performance and Reliability

1. Describe your system’s performance benchmarks, including availability and response times.

2. Explain how your solution scales to meet peak demand.

3. Describe your backup, redundancy, and disaster recovery capabilities.

9. Transition and Data Migration

1. Describe your experience migrating legacy systems to SaaS platforms at scale.

2. Explain your approach to data profiling, cleansing, validation, and reconciliation.

3. Describe your strategy for parallel operations, cutover, and rollback.

10. Training and Support

1. Describe your training approach for role-based users across a nationwide deployment.

2. Identify the support model you provide for Tier I, II, and III operations.

5 | P a g e

3. Describe how you prepare users and support teams for new releases.

11. Deployment and Nationwide Rollout

1. Describe your experience deploying SaaS solutions across geographically distributed sites.

2. Explain your approach to minimizing operational disruption during deployment.

3. Describe how your solution supports OCONUS locations.

12. General Questions

1. Is your solution currently hosted in a FedRAMP-authorized environment?

If yes, specify the impact level (Moderate or High) and the Cloud Service Provider. If not, why?

2. Is your company capable of delivering a nationwide, cloud-based SaaS solution that aligns with the objectives in the attached Statement of Objectives (SOO)?

If yes, provide a brief description of relevant capabilities. If not, why?

3. Does your company currently hold any federal, state, or local government contracts for similar services of similar size and scope?

If yes, list up to 3 agencies and contract types.

4. How many years of experience does your company have providing jury management, case management, or similar large-scale operational systems?

5. Does your solution support integration with government identity and access management services (e.g., PIV, SSO, MFA, SAML, OIDC, SCIM)?

6. Does your company have prior experience migrating legacy government systems to SaaS platforms?

If yes, provide a brief summary. If not, why?

7. Does your solution support open data formats (e.g., JSON, CSV, XML) and non-proprietary APIs? If not, why?

8. Does your company maintain a cybersecurity program aligned with NIST RMF and Zero Trust principles? If not, why?

13. Additional Information

Please provide any additional information, capabilities, or considerations that would assist the AO in assessing market maturity and alignment with the objectives outlined in this RFI.