RFI 010 2600000015 reads like a market survey, but it carries a full scope of work, contract terms, and a report due date. We read it for what it is: a statutorily mandated, competitively selected engagement to reset how Kentucky pays the third branch of its government.
In the 2026 Regular Session the General Assembly passed HB 503, directing the Legislative Research Commission to contract with an external consultant for a comprehensive salary and compensation study of the Judicial Branch — elected and non-elected personnel alike.
That statutory footing shapes everything. The findings are headed for the Interim Joint Committee on Appropriations & Revenue, where they will inform real budget decisions ahead of the 2028 Regular Session. The work has to survive legislative scrutiny, so the method has to be transparent, the data has to be sourced, and every recommendation has to trace back to evidence.
The Judicial Branch runs on roughly 3,700 people in all 120 counties. Analyzing their pay means solving two separate problems at once — and being honest that they are not the same problem.
Seven Supreme Court justices, the Court of Appeals, the circuit and district trial benches, and a Circuit Court Clerk in each of the 120 counties. Their pay is set through the legislative and constitutional process, not a classification plan — so the analysis here is fundamentally about external market position and the cost of closing the gap, framed for policymakers.
The Administrative Office of the Courts and county court staff — deputy clerks, court administrators, court reporters, pretrial and court-designated workers, and central administrative roles. This population is a classic classification-and-compensation problem: job descriptions, internal equity, grade structure, and defensible pay ranges.
Define where the Judicial Branch wants to sit in its market — lead, lag, or match around the market median — developed with the LRC team and Judicial Branch representatives.
Review each position and its job description, confirm the description reflects the work, and place positions correctly within the compensation plan based on duties, skills, knowledge, and abilities.
Benchmark positions against an adequate set of public- and private-market comparators — staff, management, and elected roles — with cost-of-living adjustments for regional differences.
Recommend pay ranges with a minimum, midpoint, and maximum for benchmarked positions; establish policies, procedures, experience ratings, and hiring guidelines.
Cost the recommended changes and produce budget recommendations for the Interim Joint Committee on Appropriations & Revenue.
The RFI invites a phased approach responsive to the convening of the 2028 Regular Session. We structure the work so Phase 1 findings are usable early and Phase 2 lands with the budget.
Compensation philosophy, job-description review, position placement, internal-equity findings, and current-practice recommendations.
Market analysis and benchmarking, pay-range design, administration policy, and the full cost analysis with budget recommendations.
Monthly written progress reports throughout; a draft report by June 1, 2027 and the final report by June 30, 2027.