Dr. Cheryl Baile), PhD Acting Executive Officer

TO:

AMENDMENT ISSUE DATE:

SUBJECT:

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DATE:

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS Administrative Services Division

Office: Gallery Place 6 16 H Street NW, 61h Floor

Washington, DC 20001 Mailing Address: 500 Indiana Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20001-2131

AMENDMENT NO. 1

ALL PROSPECTIVE OFFERORS

September 4, 2019

Page 1 of2

Louis W. Parker Admi111stra1we Officer

Solicitation No. DCSC-19-RFP-205 - Informational Video Project

Wednesday, September 11, 2019 by 2:00 pm, Eastern Standard Time

The subject solicitation is amended as follows :

1. Responses to written questions received from prospective offerors are included as Attachment A to this amendment.

Administrative Services Division Office of the Administrative Officer

Phone: 202.879.2874 Fax: 202.879.7575

E-mail: louis.parke!.@dcsc.gov

Page 2 of2

ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS REMAIN UNCHANGED

One (1) copy of this amendment is being sent to only those offerors who received a copy the solicitation. Offerors shall sign below and attach a signed copy of this amendment to each offer to be submitted to the Courts in response to the subject solicitation. Offers shall be mailed or delivered in accordance with the instructions provided in the original solicitation documents. Offerors shall submit their offers in sealed envelopes, identified on the outside by the solicitation number and submission date, in accordance the instructions provided in the original solicitation documents. This amendment, together with your offer must be received by the District of Columbia Courts no later than the date and time specified for offer submission. Revisions or price changes occasioned by this amendment must be received by the Courts no later than the date and time set for offer submission. Failure to acknowledge receipt of this amendment may be cause for rejection of any offers submitted in response to the subject solicitation.

Geoffrey A. Mack Contracting Officer

This amendment is acknowledged and is considered a part of the subject solicitation.

Signature of Authorized Representative Date

Title of Authorized Representative

Name of Firm

Solicitation No.: DCSC-19-RFP-205 Informational Video Project

Questions & Answers

Attachment A

1. The RFP includes a mailing address, a hand-delivery address, and an email address for delivery. Is electronic delivery of the proposal alone acceptable (meaning that no physical proposal copy would be delivered at all)?

A: No. electronic delivery alone is not acceptable, both electronic and physical proposals are required to be submitted. Please refer to section L.2.1 for more detailed instructions.

2. Must firms be located in Washington, D.C. to be eligible to bid on this project? Is there are preference for businesses located/registered in Washington, D.C.? Is there a preference for women- or minority-owned firms?

A: There is not a requirement that firms be located in Washington, D. C. There is no preference for this solicitation.

3. Attachment J.8 is for past performance. Must this be filled out from a past client within the District of Columbia government, or may any of our past clients fill out this form?

A: Any past clients may complete the form. Please refer to the table in section L.23.2.1 for more information on past performance and other evaluation criteria.

4. F.3.2. seems to imply that you would want a storyboard prior to a script. We typically draft the script before the storyboard , and therefore would change the order of the functions listed in the deliverable table. Would that be acceptable?

A: The table in F.3.2 is only an example, the schedule of deliverables should match your firm 's proposed process.

5. Who will be primarily responsible for scripting? How do you envision the scripting process working? If contractor is responsible for scripting, how will it get the information and guidance it needs to write effective scripts for the purposes of the project.

A: The vendor will be primarily responsible with substantive input from the Courts and point of contact. The Courts will provide, source materials, information, subject matter experts, outlines and answer questions during the discovery process to identify key points.

6. Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this (like, from India or Canada)?

A: A separate amendment will be issued to address this question. The contractor must have an active SAM.gov registration to submit a proposal for this solicitation.

7. Whether we need to come over there for meetings?

A: For day-to-day operations remote contact (phone, email, video-conference) is acceptable.

Page 1of4

Solicitation No.: DCSC-19-RFP-205 Inf ormational Video Project

Attachment A

8. Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside USA (like, from India or Canada)?

A: Where the tasks are performed is not relevant as long as the deliverables and terms of the solicitation are being met.

9. Can we submit the proposals via email?

A: No. electronic delivery alone is not acceptable, both electronic and physical proposals are required to be submitted. Please refer to section L.2.1 for more detailed instructions.

10. Can the Courts please provide examples of informational videos that have a tone or feel that they'd like conveyed in the explainer videos?

A: No, we cannot provide examples. Not many courts have produced explainer videos. But several jurisdictions have videos that may serve as a reference. The main characteristic is that the video explains the central elements and steps in a judicial process.

11. ls any live filming required/encouraged/allowed? If yes, are there any restrictions on courtroom footage?

A: Live filming is not required, but not ruled out if it adds value to the product. Any necessary scheduling and permissions for courtroom footage will be handled by the Courts.

12. What existing footage and/or photography can be shared with the contractor?

A: The Court seals. Some images may be available (see, for example, DC Courts website), but not much footage or images beyond a basic stock exist.

13. Will Court Officials/Subject Matter Experts be willing to be filmed for on-camera interviews?

A: This can be determined on a case by case basis.

14. C.3.3 states that "The contractor shall utilize an appropriate technique (such as whiteboard , motion graphic or character animation) to deliver the information." Is the expectation for the videos to be driven by the technique (in other words, do the Courts desire digital illustrations, as opposed to live subjects)?

A: Yes, digital illustrations and motion graphics are preferred.

15. If motion graphics or animation is preferred, will the Courts provide graphics that need to be animated or will the contractor be required to design the graphics?

A: The contractor will need to design the graphics. The Court can provide some basic images of buildings, courtrooms, etc.

16. C.3. 7 states that "legal terminology and jargon should be kept to a minimum." Will the Courts provide guidance on terminology to be avoided?

A: Yes, the Courts will provide guidance on appropriate terminology and language.

Page 2 of 4

Solicitation No.: DCSC-19-RFP-205 Informational Video Project

Attachment A

17. Does DC Courts have an incumbent vendor for these services, will they be bidding on the RFP?

A: No.

18. Does DC Courts have a budget range for each of these videos, or the combined 1 O?

A: Yes, the budget range for all ten videos, not including additional services, is estimated to be between $75,000.00 and $150,000.00.

19. Do all of the past performance references have to include work that conveys complex processes to a non-specialized audience?

A: Not necessarily, but the contractor should provide evidence of previous work that conveys complex processes to an unspecialized audience.

20. RE: C.1.1: Will DC Courts be providing the narrator or will the offeror be responsible for hiring the narrator? Does DC Courts require the narrator to be part of a Union?

A: The DC Courts may provide the narrator or the offeror may provide the narrator.

21. RE: C.3.1: Does DC Courts have any examples of an 'explainer video,' similar to what DC Courts is envisioning for these (10) videos?

A: No, we cannot provide examples. Not many courts have produced explainer videos. But several jurisdictions have videos that may serve as a reference. The main characteristic is that the video explains the central elements and steps in a judicial process.

22. RE: C.3.1: Will DC Courts be involved in scripting of the videos, or will scripts be sole responsibility of the offeror? Since the offeror is not familiar with the proceedings and procedures of the DC Courts, will the COTR provide the offeror with an outline of the information that needs to be included in each of the (10) videos?

A: The vendor will be primarily responsible with substantive input from the Courts and point of contact. The Courts will provide, source materials, information, subject matter experts, outlines and answer questions during the discovery process to identify key points.

23. RE: C.3.2: What is the targeted start date?

A: September 2019.

24. RE: C.3.2: Will all (10) videos be due simultaneously or can they be delivered as they are finished? Does DC Courts foresee multiple videos ever being produced concurrently? Or do they envision production schedules/videos occurring 'one at a · time'?

A: The timeline should be staggered, delivering videos as they are finished.

25. RE: C.3.5: What are the branding guidelines that are mentioned here?

A: Refer to the DC Courts website for branding guidelines - Court seals, images and color schemes.

Page 3 of 4

Solicitation No.: DCSC-1 9-RFP-205 Inf ormational Video Project

Attachment A

26. RE: C.3.13: Would the "approach to incorporate potential language translation (Spanish)" involve changing the videos visual text from English to Spanish? Would it involve redoing the narration into Spanish?

A: It would depend on the most cost-effective approach. It may involve redoing the narration in Spanish (Courts may provide narrator) or it may involve captioning the video.

27. RE: C.3.16: Is there a requirement for the offeror to utilize specific computer software for the editing of the videos?

A: No specific software is required. The source files, however, must be compatible for import into and supported by Final Cut Pro.

28. RE: C.4.1: How many rounds of reviews/approvals will be required?

A: Depending on the quality of the drafts, several rounds of review and feedback may be required before a final approval. The contractor should propose a review process in their technical approach.

29. RE: E.1.2: For this project to produce (10) videos, what would be the nature of the 'inspection system' that the offeror would be required to maintain?

A: The DC Courts expect the contractor to maintain an inspection system of their choosing, that ensures delivery of quality explainer videos.

30. RE: F.3.2: Is a separate Table of Deliverables due for each of the (10) videos?

A: No, the deliverables can follow a similar process across videos.

31. RE: G.3.1: Just one final invoice for the entire project should be submitted within 30 days after the 1-year contract period has expired?

A: Invoices should be submitted monthly for deliverables that have been accepted.

32. RE: L.2. 7: Is both a hard copy of the bid/proposal required (via mail or hand-delivery) as well as electronically mailed copy? Or is it one or the other?

A: No. electronic delivery alone is not acceptable, both electronic and physical proposals are required to be submitted. Please refer to section L.2.1 for more detailed instructions.

Page 4 of 4