You are hereHome › Blog
Recently our friends at have added close captioning to all of their videos and have been kind enough to share some of their findings with us. They cover the why, the how, and some best practices. For those of you using other services like Vimeo the process is similar, the only difference is instead of using the application built into YouTube you use one like Amara. It takes a couple extra steps but is a straightforward.
NTAP has just set our webinar calendar for 2016. Please save these dates. We will have full descriptions, web links and more information coming out in the following weeks. We have a great line up with webinars by Probon.net, Idealware, Rylander Consulting, Florida Justice Technology Center, and Transcend. If you want to share your TIG or recent tech project let us know we can add you schedule.
31st Considering the Potential ROI of an Innovative Technology Project - Idealware
12th: Using Google Analytics to Understand Your Web Traffic – Idealware
26th Privacy, encryption, and anonymity in the Civil Legal Aid Context - Florida Justice Technology Center
11th to 15th EJC I hope to see people there!
19th Ethics, Discretion, and Accountability in Designing the Data Interventions in the Civil Justice Context – Florida Justice Technology Center
25th Field Testing Legal Documents - Transcend
23rd Outlook 2016 – Rylander
14th: Introduction Business Process Mapping – Idealware
22nd 50 Tech Tips - PBN
Unified Communication - OKLaw
17th Recent Outcomes Evaluations of Legal Aid Tech Projects - PBN
14th Maintenance, Continuity and Succession Planning -
20th: Assessing Your Security and Creating a Practical Action Plan - Idealware
12th Great Features that are in all Microsoft Applications – Rylander
19th User Testing - PBN
9th Excel tables - Rylander
This post is based around TIG session ”What Every Executive Needs To Know About Information Technology Security” by Peter Campbell and the 2015 Verizon Data Breach Investigation Report.
To start off here are the slides from the TIG presentation, it’s in plain english and covers the topic in an easy to understand fashion.
And here is a link the the report
The Data Breach report is a hefty document but is extremely well written and accessible, it’s well worth spending an afternoon reading this document. I appreciate that this report is built on hard data and they include their methodology as well as some suggested courses of action.
Something Peter Campbell talked about but was not covered by the slides or the report is the importance of of having a data breach policy. Security incidents are unavoidable, having a plan in place ahead of time can reduce their frequency, help prevent them from becoming data breaches, and reduce the severity of breaches that do occur.
It’s a gross oversimplification but if you don’t have time to read through here are two things you can do to greatly reduce your chances of a data breach
Educate your staff
Keep your systems updated
The most security incidents are a direct cause of human error within your organization. Sometimes someone clicks on an attachment in a phishing email, others they leave their laptop unattended at a coffee shop, other times people add unsafe machines to the office network, however it happens good education and training can go a long way to mitigate it.
From the report
“We looked at organization demographics to see if one department or user group was more likely than another to fall victim to phishing attacks. Departments such as Communications, Legal, and Customer Service were far more likely to actually open an e-mail than all other departments. Then again, opening e-mail is a central, often mandatory component of their jobs.“
Keeping your systems updated can be a bit of a pain at times, however doing so will shield you from a lot. According to Risk I/0
“We found that 99.9% of the exploited vulnerabilities had been compromised more than a year after the associated CVE [Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures] was published”.
The bulk of hacking that happens can be likened to trawling, they aren’t looking for anything special, just machines. People who are not picky about which system they compromise will go after the easy targets of unpatched machines, why put in the effort to crack an updated machine when there are millions of other easier targets to be had. If someone is looking to compromise your network specifically then in addition to covering technical exploits you will need to watch out for people using social engineering, if you are in this position then you will need to spend a lot of time training everyone in your business.
At this Demo Day, the winning three teams will present their solutions and the progress they've made since the hackathon!
Hackathon sponsors, community partners and members of the Mayor's Office and Legal Counsel will be in attendance. We will begin our program with Opening Remarks from the event organizers and a recap of the Social Justice Hackathon. Following this portion, each of the three hackathon project winners report back on and demonstrate advances in their social justice tech innovations.
The top three teams were, that are presenting at the Demo Day:
- Paid It! - A mobile app for clients facing eviction due to lack of evidence to present in legal cases
- Social Justice League - A mobile-responsive webpage for volunteer lawyers to send self-help resources to clients
- Court Whisperer - A mobile app enabling people to fill out court forms by speaking and producing a properly formatted court document
Wednesday, February 3, 2016 from 6:00 PM to 9:00 PM (PST) - Add to Calendar
Bertha Landes Room, Seattle City Hall - 600 4th Ave Seattle, WA 98104 - View Map
What is the Social Justice Hack a Thon?
Two students, with support from Seattle University School of Law’s Access to Justice Institute and led by Diana Singleton, put together a two-day hackathon focused specifically on addressing the legal needs of the poor. Last November, Daniel Sandoval (University of Washington, HCDE - Alum.) and Miguel Willis (Seattle University, School of Law - 2L) partnered with community organizations, such as the King County Bar Association and Columbia Legal Services, as well as lawyers and law faculty with deep expertise on access to justice issues, to ensure that solutions developed met real needs that the poor experience.
Our friends over at Legal Aid of Western Ohio are looking for a vender to create a series of video modules to help pro se litigants through the process of sealing a criminal record. If you or someone you know has experience in this area please submit a proposal. Full details in the document but entries are due no later than 5:00 pm EST February 5th 2016.
The full text version is here.
LEGAL AID OF WESTERN OHIO, INC.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)
Ohio Documents for Justice Project
The objective of this Request for Proposal (“RFP”) is to engage a qualified vendor to develop a series of instructional video modules as companion guidance to a set of automated forms and guided interviews that will help pro se litigants through the process of sealing a criminal record.
The instructional video modules will explain key complex terms and processes that pro se litigants may encounter when removing barriers to housing and/or employment by sealing a criminal record.
Through this RFP process Legal Aid of Western Ohio, Inc. (LAWO) is soliciting written proposals that identify capabilities, capacity, deliverables, and pricing for this video project.
1. PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION
1.1 Background and Overview:
LAWO is initiating this Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit responses from vendors interested in creating short video modules as part of the Legal Services Corporation Technology Initiative Grant funded Ohio Documents for Justice Project (“the Project”). The goal of the Project is to create an online resource center of automated court forms and interviews for low income pro se litigants, legal aid staff, and volunteers, and to pilot a virtual clinic by creating video instruction modules as companion guidance to a set of automated forms that will help remove barriers to housing and employment by sealing a criminal record.
1.2 Scope of the Project:
The project will pilot a virtual clinic by creating online step by step video instruction modules as companion guidance to an existing automated forms packet to remove barriers to employment and/or housing by sealing a criminal record. The automated forms packets will be uploaded to the Law Help Interactive (LHI) server and be available online as a link through the Ohio statewide website. The videos will be uploaded to YouTube (or similar format) and be available via a link on the Ohio statewide website. The statewide justice community members and courts will be able to access the forms and videos by linking to the statewide website.
Usability: The video must present materials in a manner that is user-friendly and explains this particular guided interview process in a simple conceptual style for low-literacy users.
Format: The video files must be delivered in a format or formats that are easily uploaded to YouTube and other video sharing sites.
Ownership: The video shall become the property of LAWO, including all rights to own, share, or publish to the web or in any other formats, and the right to reproduce. LAWO may authorize use and/or adaptation of the video by other legal services programs.
Completion date: The video must be fully completed by and submitted to LAWO no later than May 15, 2016. This timeline must include time for LAWO to test the video and request modifications in case of a problem.
1. Vendor will work with the Project’s Steering and Content Development committees to determine the scope and length of the video based on parameters of style and budget.
2. Vendor will present two or three “story board” concepts to the Project’s Steering and Content Development committees containing story lines and proposed visual concepts.
3. Vendor will work with the Project’s Steering and Content Development committees to finalize the script. The proposed module scripts can be found in this Google Drive.
4. Video content may utilize any variety of production methods Vendor proposes based on the vendor’s expertise and skill utilizing still photography, graphics, animation, or other creative means of explaining or conveying the process and concepts to users.
5. Vendor will work with the Project’s Steering and Content Development committees on any narration or music selections, as appropriate.
6. Vendor will be responsible for completing the project on time and within budget, and submit the final video in the appropriate format to LAWO on or before May 15, 2016.
1.5 Vendors’ Minimum Desired Qualifications
1. Knowledge and practical similar experience in the video production industry.
2. Ability to have virtual meetings with the Project’s Steering and Content Development committees in a meaningful way to facilitate the project development and evaluation.
3. The ability to deliver projects on time and within budget.
4. Familiarity with the non-profit legal services sector or non-profit community outreach projects.
5. Experience using resources effectively and efficiently.
Payment will be made in monthly installments or per completed video module depending on the progress made on the project.
2. RFP ADMINISTRATION AND INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS
RFP Coordinator: Upon release of this RFP, all vendor communications must be directed to the RFP Coordinator listed below. Any oral communications will be considered unofficial and nonbinding on LAWO. Only written statements issued by the RFP Coordinator may be relied upon.
Debra M. Jennings, Managing Attorney
Legal Aid of Western Ohio, Inc.
525 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 400
Toledo, OH 43604
Telephone: (419) 930-2536
2.1 RFP Schedule
RFP released: January 22, 2016
Proposals due not later than 5 p.m. EST, February 5, 2016
Evaluation Period: February 8, 2016 – February 10, 2016
Successful vendor announced: February 11, 2016
Contract signed and work commences: February 22, 2016
2.2 Vendor Questions: Vendors may contact the RFP Coordinator at the address and/or number listed above with any questions concerning this RFP. All questions must be received prior to the response due date and time listed above. Written questions are preferred and should be submitted by email to ensure receipt and timely response.
2.3 Response Format: The proposal must be sent electronically via email in Microsoft Word 2007 or newer version, RTF, or Adobe PDF format to the RFP Coordinator designated in this RFP. The email subject should be clearly marked “Ohio Documents for Justice TIG RFP”.
The proposal must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on February 5, 2016.
Vendors should allow enough electronic delivery time to ensure timely receipt of their proposals by the RFP Coordinator. Vendors assume the risk for any email delay problems. Late proposals will not be accepted and will be automatically disqualified from further consideration. Vendors assume the risk of the method of dispatch chosen. LAWO assumes no responsibility for delays caused by a third party or communication device.
2.4 Response Requirements and Content: Vendors must respond to each question/requirement contained in Exhibit A, Vendor Response. In preparing their proposal, vendors should restate each requirement and then give their response to that requirement.
2.5 Costs of Preparing Responses: LAWO will not pay any vendor costs associated with preparing proposals submitted in response to this RFP.
2.6 Responses Property of LAWO: All proposals, accompanying documentation, and other materials submitted in response to this RFP shall become the property of LAWO and will not be returned.
2.7 Proprietary Information/Public Disclosure: All proposals received shall remain confidential until the evaluation is completed and the vendor is selected and approved. Thereafter proposals shall be deemed public records.
2.8 RFP Amendments/Cancellation/Reissue/Reopen: LAWO reserves the right to change the RFP Schedule or issue amendments to this RFP at any time. LAWO also reserves the right to cancel or reissue the RFP.
2.9 Minor Administrative Irregularities: LAWO reserves the right to waive minor administrative irregularities contained in any proposal.
2.10 Inability to Enter Contract: LAWO reserves the right to eliminate from further consideration any vendor that LAWO, because of legal or other considerations, is unable to contract with at the time proposals are due in accordance with the schedule contained in Subsection 2.1 above.
2.11 No Obligation to Enter a Contract:
2.11.1 The release of this RFP does not compel LAWO to enter into any contract.
2.11.2 LAWO reserves the right to refrain from contracting with any vendor that has responded to this RFP whether or not the vendor's proposal has been evaluated and whether or not the vendor has been determined to be qualified. Exercise of this reserved right does not affect LAWO’s right to contract with any other vendor.
2.11.3 LAWO reserves the right to request an interview with any vendor and/or a demonstration from any vendor prior to entering a contract with that vendor.
If a vendor declines the request for an interview or demonstration for any reason, the vendor may be eliminated from further consideration.
2.12 Multiple Contracts: LAWO reserves the right to enter contracts with more than one vendor as a result of this RFP.
2.13 Non-Endorsement: The selection of a vendor pursuant to this RFP does not constitute an endorsement of the vendor's services. The vendor agrees to make no reference to LAWO in any literature, promotional material, brochures, sales presentations, or the like without the express written consent of LAWO.
2.14 Contract Payment Limitations: Vendors should anticipate payment at the end rather than the beginning of the invoice period in which they provide services or after they submit any deliverable for which a payment is due.
3. RFP Evaluations
An Evaluation Team (Team) of no less than two and as many as four (4) persons will evaluate the proposals submitted in response to this RFP. The Team may consist of the Project’s Steering Committee and additional LAWO staff. The Team may also consider past contract performance and check references beyond those listed in the vendor’s proposal.
As part of the evaluation process, at the discretion of the Team, vendors may be asked to clarify specific points in their proposal. However, under no circumstances will the vendor be allowed to make changes to the proposal.
4. Post Evaluation
4.1. Notification of Selection of Apparently Successful Vendor: Vendors whose proposals have not been selected for further negotiations or award will be notified via email.
4.2. Contract Award/General Terms and Conditions: The successful Vendor(s) will be expected to enter into a contract with LAWO.
LEGAL AID OF WESTERN OHIO, INC. (LAWO)
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Ohio Documents for Justice Project
EXHIBIT A: Vendor Response
Proposals must contain the following information in the following format. Please number your responses to correspond with the information requested here.
1. Vendor’s name, address, federal tax identification number or Social Security Number (SSN), Uniform Business Identifier (UBI) number, and a description of the vendor’s legal status, e.g., corporation, sole proprietor, etc.
2. Vendor contact’s name, telephone number, fax number, and email.
3. A statement that guarantees that the proposal constitutes a firm offer valid for sixty (60) days following receipt and that LAWO may accept any time within the 60 day period.
4. A statement on whether the vendor or any employee of the vendor is related by blood or marriage to an LAWO employee or board member or resides with an LAWO employee or board member. If there are such relationships, list the names and relationships of said parties. Include the position and responsibilities within the vendor's organization of such vendor employees.
5. State whether the vendor has been a party to any litigation during the past five (5) years; all such incidents except employment related cases must be described, including the other parties' name, address, and telephone number. Present the vendor's position on the matter.
6. A statement that all videos will involve content scripts as drafted by the statewide content development committee under the guidance of the Project’s Steering Committee, and delivered by LAWO and that the completed videos must be delivered in a format or formats that are easily uploaded to YouTube and other video sharing sites.
7. Provide two (2) references from programs/organizations for which you have completed video projects. Please include a telephone number or email address of the referenced individual so he/she may be contacted.
8. Describe in detail the timeline to complete the project.
9. Propose the cost to produce the video instruction modules in a format that is easily uploaded to YouTube and other video sharing sites. (video budget limited to $10,000).
Knowledge and practical similar experience in the video production industry. Include links to examples of similar work, describe expertise with different forms of presentations including animation or similar style choices;
Ability to have virtual meetings with the Project’s Steering and Content Development Committees;
Ability to deliver projects on time and within budget; and
Familiarity with the non-profit legal services sector or non-profit community outreach projects .