REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Number 2014-21
Web Redesign and Content Management System Addendum #1 Dated October 29, 2013
Addendum 1 itemizes all questions received related to this RFP and their answers.
Questions have been grouped based on the source of questions. References top specific companies have been deleted.
Group 1 –
Can you please help with following Questions.
(1) Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this ?? (From India or Canada) Answer: There are no such restrictions.
(2) Whether we need to come over there for meetings ??
Answer: Probably not, but CCSU cannot /will not rule out the possibility.
(3) Can we perform the tasks outside USA ?? (From India or Canada)
Answer: Theoretically, yes, but the responding company would need to demonstrate clearly how this would be done successfully, be able to provide a client list of other US institutions of higher education where this has been done successfully, and address to CCSU’s satisfaction issues such as questions of support (i.e. time difference) and questions of cyber security.
Group 2 –
Question: Is it a requirement to provide references from two similar sized higher education organizations? Would you accept a proposal from an organization that has similar experience with 1 higher education organization and relative experience that is not education-related?
Answer: CCSU prefers references from other higher education institutions for obvious reasons but will consider and evaluate references from other organizations.
Question: (a) Are you happy with your current CMS? (b) Have you looked at other CMS options that you like? (c) Can you let us know which CMS systems you like best?
Answer: (a) CCSU recognizes that the CMS industry and technology has changed dramatically over the past few years and this RFP has been let for that reason. (b) As part of our due diligence, we have looked at other CMS providers and find much that we like, but we would prefer to have a proposal based on the elements identified in the RFP and the particular features offered by the individual vendor. (c) No.
Group 3 –
1. What is the range of the budget ? Answer: There is no official budget.
2. We are in Silicon Valley. Do you prefer a local vendor in Connecticut ? Answer: There is no local (i.e. Connecticut) preference.
Group 4 –
1. Have you considered separating a proposal for the Discovery portion of the project from the Development project? In our years of experience, we have found that starting with a Solution Requirements and Information Architecture project first is the best way to lock down scope. This will not only allow us to provide more accurate development estimates but will allow you to get business stakeholder buy-in and better manage expectations around budget and scope.
Answer: Conducting such environmental scanning will be managed internally for this project.
2. The current ccsu.edu website has links to other systems including but not limited to online donations (giving.hosted.ccsu.edu), online applications (applyweb.com), net price calculator, and course offerings and course descriptions. Please clarify whether the new website will continue to link to these other sites or if CCSU’s intention is to build this functionality in the new CMS.
Answer: Web sites on different domains/(subdomains) as these referenced here will not be included in the
redesign. The scope of this development is limited to www.CCSU.edu and subfolders.
3. We are assuming that the scope of this project does not include the Athletics site www.ccsubluedevils.com Please confirm.
Answer: Confirmed
4. We are assuming that the scope of this project does not include the Elihu Burritt Library site http://library.ccsu.edu/. Please confirm.
Answer: Confirmed
5. Will the Learning Center be included in the redesign and CMS implementation? If so, will it continue to have a different look-and-feel and navigation?
Answer: Retaining the uniqueness of pages with moderate deviations from the primary format (such as the Learning Center) is not specifically required within the scope of this project.
Design is limited to the homepage and development of "a new layout for the general website, with accompanying layouts for implementation and with accompanying templates". We envision this as a collaborative process between CCSU and the vendor, but this would likely include one unique design/template for each: [1] HomePage [2] Academic Schools [3] Academic
Departments [4] Administrative Departments [5] A default (primarily blank) internal design. 6. For the approximate 75 sub-sites, will these sub-sites maintain a consistent look-and-feel and primary
navigation to the main site? If not, please explain.
Answer: Sub-sites within the current CMS (approximately 80% of all content) would be migrated into the new design. If a vendor-supported migration solution is viable (via a programmatic/automatic utility or manual migration assistance), this would be a deliverable.
7. Will all Event details be entered into the CMS or is there an Events database that the new CMS must integrate with? What kind of Event Management is desired in the new CMS?
Answer: There are no plans to integrate with a separate event management system at this time. Events management need only be "Calendar Management", and include a centralized tool for posting information in an event-type format - (including start date/time & end date/time). Events should be posted dynamically and chronologically throughout the web site, and "expire" following the event date.
8. Will Event registration be handled by the new CMS or is there an external registration system that the new CMS must integrate with?
Answer: Registrations for events posted within the CMS will be handled only by the CMS’s
registration/forms system. There are no plans to integrate with an external registration system at this time.
9. For the Job opportunity data within the Website, will this data be managed within the new CMS or is there an external database or Jobs feed that the CMS must integrate with?
Answer: Job Opportunity related content in the CMS will not involve external systems.
10. We are assuming that the scope of this project does not include redesign and implementation for the interactive campus map and that the new website will continue to utilize the existing campus map. Please confirm.
Answer: Confirmed
11. Besides the Web browsers specified in the RFP, which other devices must the new Website support? iPad, iPhone, Kindle Fire, other? Please provide a list of devices.
Answer: It should work with (mobile) iOS, Android, and Windows systems.
Regarding design, the layout would be responsive - with 3 breakpoints providing 4 layouts as follows. > 1024px / 768px - 1024px / 480px - 768px / < 480
12. The RFP states that the CMS shall provide reporting on content age and ownership. Is the purpose of the content age report to help CCSU determine ‘old’ content that should be updated or replaced? If not, please explain.
Answer: Correct. That would be the sole purpose.
13. Please describe the use case or content type (such as photo gallery) where uploading multiple files simultaneously is required.
Answer: Photo Galleries & Document Libraries. These types of files need to mass uploaded several times a year.
14. Please describe the use case for unlimited version rollback by asset. Is this referring to version control of the Website content or pages (nodes) or is CCSU looking for version control on digital assets such as photos and documents?
Answer: This is primarily for page content and layout, not old images or documents.
15. The RFP mentions that the CMS must support a customizable workflow. Is this in reference to content creation, review and approval workflow? Please provide additional detail on the desired
workflow.
Answer: Yes. The solution would allow for content access/authoring/saving/publishing to be separated if needed. Also, multiple “super¬-users” other than a primary admin should be able to grant such permissions.
16. For direct publish workflow, does this mean there should be the option to publish content online, bypassing a review and approval workflow?
Answer: Yes
17. Please provide additional details on the requirements and use case for mass email utility with full editing functionality.
Answer: CMS users would have access (unique to their login/account) to email utility able to draft custom text or HTML email messages for (mass) direct emailing to specified lists. Lists should be managed within the system and allow for users to unsubscribe from future email campaigns. 18. Please provide additional details on the requirements and use case for payment processing. Do you
envision integration with existing payment processing system?
Answer: Payment processing is used primarily for online giving and payment for alumni events. This utility would allow for integration of payment processing as part of online forms created for our web site (such as for event registrations with a corresponding attendance fee). The solution should be compatible with our payment gateway Authorize.net & PCI compliant.
19. Please provide additional details on the requirements and use cases for the smart academic catalog solution.
Answer: CMS would be capable of accessing data in existing systems (ie. Banner ERP), & presenting data in a catalog type format.
20. Please provide additional details on “Publishing the content to multiple servers”.
Answer: The CMS would be able to publish to a live and backup server in the event of outages. 21. Are you considering integration with one of the 3rd party Accessibility Checker Tools? Answer: No
22. Newer browser versions are not included in the list provided in the RFP. Can you please confirm if you really want to support those old browser versions and not support newer ones? What about mobile browser support requirements?
Answer: IE 8+, Firefox 20+, Chrome 25+, Safari 5+, Android 4+, iOS 23. Is HTML5 compliant code desired?
Answer: Yes
24. What kind of data retrieval is desired from the Webform? Are you referring to various export formats? Answer: Content should be exportable in datasheet format (xls/csv), along with access to any content
posted via upload fields.
25. Is there any integration with existing university system for Faculty/Staff Directory required? Answer: No
Group 5 –
• Our websites are Section 508 compliant. Are you asking if our administrative interface is also
Section 508 compliant? Is Section 508 compliance adequate or do you require ADA compliance? Answer: The administrative interface does not need to meet these standards. These requirements are
only referring to the public web site and only require 508 compliance.
• Our CMS provides for two approaches for the administrator, a back end screen for the tech savvy
user and a site preview screen, which enables the viewing of changes the way they appear within your actual website. Could you explain with more detail what is meant by an alternate interface
for file management in the CMS? If you could be more specific about what a different interface would be alternate to that would prove useful.
Answer: The “alternative interface” in this case refers primarily to file management.
• The appearance of the content within the editor is customizable and is generally customized to
look like the content will look on their website. We can also add classes to the “Apply CSS class” dropdown, but the overall appearance of the toolbars and borders is not customizable. Could you describe what you would like to be customizable?
Answer: Customizable toolbars refers to the ability to include/exclude various functions from editors’ WYSIWYG interface. For example, a web editor assigned the most basic level of editing rights (without the ability to style text) would be presented with an editor without these functions present (as opposed to having them displayed, but non-functional).
• Within our system three versions of a page can be Saved and Archived – the page can be rolled
back to these versions. If a page has been edited but not yet published, it can be rolled back to the Published version. Is this adequate or do you need for rollbacks to extend beyond.
Answer: This would be adequate.
• We use HTML5 which does not require XHTML markup. It is our intent to always publish valid
HTML5 code but due to integration with WYSIWYG editors and other third party tools, we cannot guarantee that every page and every view will have strictly compliant HTML. Would this be okay?
Answer: Yes
• Could you supply more detail about the unlimited number of templates you are interested in. By
templates do you mean page templates, design templates or possibly something else altogether? Answer: This refers to our ability (from our end) to have the level of access required to create custom
templates within the CMS without additional assistance from the vendor.
• We do support the management of multiple websites per installation, but they are subsites with
their own inherent costs. They are not included in the basic package. Would you mind taking a moment to describe your meaning of multiple templates as it relates to the stipulation below as well?
Answer: The additional “websites” in this case refers to subdomains within the CCU.edu web site. A current example would be www.music.ccsu.edu which uses a subdomain as well as a different template/layout from the rest of the web site. This does not refer to a totally separate TLD. Group 6 –
1) The RFP states: "As an option for this request for proposals, Marketing & Communications is interested in purchasing the web vendor’s web design services."
Would website design include the incorporation of the University's existing branding, or would a more comprehensive re-branding be an initial step in the design process?
Answer: The design would include a new rebranding in terms of design/layout/interface/dimensions, etc. Other than keeping the logo and integrating the university colors to some extent, we are seeking
considerably changes in order to give our web site an appearance more consistent with current aesthetic standards & trends.
2) The RFP states: "The CMS would operate as the main public site as well as sub sites operated by the academic schools and departments."
Will the sub sites need their own design templates or will they operate within the main public site's design? In general, is a sub site simply a subdomain within the main public website, or are they organized in a different manner?
Answer: Apart from the homepage design, we anticipate needing 4 additional designs/templates – each to be applied to different types of areas/divisions within the university (such as Academic Schools, Academic Departments & Administrative Departments).
Overall, the design deliverables would result in 5 such templates. [1] HomePage [2] Academic Schools [3] Academic Departments [4] Administrative Departments [5] A default (primarily blank) internal design.
3) The RFP states: The new CMS "will work seamlessly with our current vendor-supplied online application system, our online giving programs, and intranet systems, our ERP, Banner, and other data-driven
content; will feae an online academic catalog with project workflow management and a variety of output; and feature utilities for form building, mass email communications; and faculty/staff directory."
Can you please elaborate further on how the CMS will specifically integrate with these systems? In which cases would the website simply link to an external service, and in which cases would a deeper integration be necessary? Can you provide additional information on the specific tools the University currently uses for its application system, giving programs, etc.?
Answer: The CMS solution should allow for integration of information (whether through ODBC connections, Form action posting/writing, API availability, etc.) In the case of online giving, the successful form solutions should be able to integrate with our Authorize.net merchant gateway account.
Group 7 –
1. Section 2.3 of the RFP states there will be no more than 100 web editors after launch. 2.4 #4 states 20 content editors are needed. 2.5 #3 states there will be no limit on concurrent users. Just to be clear, how many users will be authoring content? How many will be reviewing content?
Answer: We expect to have no more than 100 editor accounts (total) following the launch of the new CMS. Of these 100 users, there should be no limit on the number of users able to concurrently be logged into the system simultaneously – up to the number of existing (100) accounts.
The 20 content editors referenced in 2.4 #4 references the number of administrators who would need direct training from vendor. Approximately 20 of the 100 accounts will need such training as their role will involve advanced editing and/or future internal training of others.
2. 2.5 #26 states: "Provides mass email utility w/full editing functionality." Can you be more specific to how robust this functionality needs to be?
Answer: This functionality should allow for mass emailing of text and/or HTML emails.
The system should be able to manage unsubscribes – automatically removing unsubscribed addresses from any given mailing list.
Multiple mailing lists should maintainable in the system and uniquely accessible to “owners” of each list. Ideally, custom fields would be available - allowing for additional fields in the mailing list (name, address, etc.) to be merged into the content of the email.
It is also preferable that detailed statistics of opens, clickthroughs, unsubscribes be accessible with each mailing. 3. The target date is defined as August 15, 2014. Is there an estimated start date preferred?
Answer: No. We would like to begin as soon as possible.
4. Explain the expectation on the integration with the online application system, online giving programs and intranet systems, ERP, Banner and other data-driven content in the context of the RFP’s scope of work.
Answer: The CMS solution should allow for integration of information (whether through ODBC connections, Form action posting/writing, API availability, etc.) The successful solution should not be a “closed” system. In the case of online giving, the successful form solutions should be able to integrate with our Authorize.net merchant gateway account.
5. Does CCSU have a current partner that they use for mass email communications?
Answer: Yes. The incumbent, FinalSite, provides this functionality as a module within our current solution. 6. Please share the exact browser versions you expect the authoring and end user (Visitor)
interfaces to support.
Answer: IE 8+, Firefox 20+, Chrome 25+, Safari 5+ -- Android 4+, iOS
7. Regarding the training requirements, can you define what a “designer” is? Is this role focused on CSS/HTML/Javascript or more backend Java developers?
Answer: Yes. The “designers” would need training related these items (CSS/HTML/Javascript), as well as any other advanced training (beyond content editing) – specifically, any that would be required to actually create new layouts and templates within the new CMS.
8. Regarding Support, (#6 on page 8), what is the expected duration and can you define scope scope of the technical support? Is it system support and/or developer support, etc?
Answer: The degree and duration of technical support would be limited to training and training materials related to the CMS as referenced in section 2.4 #4, as well as email and phone support during this development time. Vendors providing a hosted CMS solution would be expected to provide similar support for the duration of the hosting.
9. Should we include the effort and costs to migrate all of the content in the legacy sites to the new content management system? If so, can you provide more details on the legacy content management system such as how content is stored, is the content stored separately from the presentation assets (i.e. HTML/CSS/Javascript, etc.)?
Answer: Yes, vendors have the option to propose the inclusion of content migration in the scope of the project. Currently, content is not stored separately from the presentation assets in any way which we are able to access this information in its raw (database) form.
10. Are you open to hosting the new content management system off premise such as on a public cloud provider (i.e. AWS)?
Answer: Yes.
11. Can you provide details on expected scope of the web design services? Does it include a brand refresh or just new and improved web design that supports mobile, but leverages the existing brand?
Answer: The design would include an entire new rebranding in terms of design/layout/interface/dimensions, etc. (There would be no change to the logo)
Group 8 –
1. Number 28 of section 2.5 in the RFP requires “News module/utility/functionality.” Could you elaborate
on this requirement? How does it differ from number 27, “RSS module/functionality”?
Answer: These are largely one in the same. The news “module” refers in this case to the interface through which our CMS users are able to enter news items and post/schedule content. The RSS functionality addresses the syndication ability of the news feed generated from this module (vs being contained to news lists within the CMS’ generated content).
2. What specific “web authoring” features would CCSU like to have (see page 7 section 2.2)
Answer: Web authoring features should include a full array of editing options such as those included in standard WYSIWYG interfaces such as “classic tinymce” or “ckeditor”.
3. Is there a set budget for this project?
Answer: There is no official budget at this time. Group 9 –
1. Section 2.3 of the RFP states that roughly 20% of the current web assets are hosted on University servers.
Please provide more detail on the assets hosted by the university and how they are shared, if at all, with the current CMS solution.
Answer: With the exception of several media files hosted locally and integrated into the CMS content, there is no sharing between the two.
2. Please provide more detail on the academic catalog workflow management and output requirement.
Answer: We are seeking a solution that will be able to integrate with other systems (such as our ERP or other vendors’ databases) for the purpose of delivering catalog information through to the presentation provided by the CMS. The CMS does not specifically need to manage the content beyond the ability to present the information provided by other systems’ databases. The software for this specific catalog review & editing management itself is not within the scope of the CMS solution.
Group 10 –
- Is there an incumbent for the work?
Answer: Yes there is, FinalSite.
- Does CCSU have existing relationships with any of the potential vendors?
Answer: Aside from FinalSite in their role as incumbent, no.
- We understand the selected vendor will be working with the AVP, DIS, and ADIS. However, who will be
the primary point of contact, and who has final decision making authority during the course of this project?
Answer: The primary point of contact during the development will be the DIS. The final decision making authority will be the AVP – The decision will be guided primarily by a web direction advisory group – (representing all areas & interests of the university and convened specifically for this redevelopment).
- On page 13 you detail the Evaluation Criteria. What is the weight of each of the evaluation criteria by
which the vendors are being scored?
Answer: The weights are not made available at this time.
- What is your budget range for this project?
Answer: There is no official budget
- Could you describe what you mean by “Unlimited version rollback by asset”? Are you referring to
content created in the CMS, or files uploaded to the CMS?
Answer: This refers to the optional feature of providing the ability to refresh/revive previously published content on the CMS which had otherwise been archived. “Unlimited” more specifically refers to a preference of the greatest number of possible archived versions being accessible.
- Regarding the requirement “Publishes strictly compliant XHTML code,” are you willing to consider HTML5-compliant code instead of XHTML?
Answer: Yes
- Regarding the requirement “Provides mass email utility w/full editing functionality,” would it be
acceptable for the system to have direct integration with a third-party e-mail marketing system, such as MailChimp, Emma, eROI, or Constant Contact?
Answer: If the connection was an elegant integration which did not result in a cumbersome user experience – yes.
- Regarding the requirement, “Includes payment processing functionality/utility/solution,” although our
solution provides various options for this, they would have to be configured. Depending on what you specifically want to do with the payment processing functionality, the estimate for the time required for implementation could vary significantly. Could you provide us with more detail about what you need to do in terms of payment processing?
Answer: Online payments on CCSU.edu are fairly simple. We require the ability to accept payment via Credit Card & eCheck via online payment forms on our web site. Payment forms should be customizable, allowing the end user to indicate various selections/products which would determine the online payment/cost. The solution should integrate with our Authorize.net merchant gateway account, and should be certified PCI compliant.
All other terms, conditions and specifications in the RFP remain the same.
