BID ADDENDUM 05 - Answers to Questions.pdf

IMPORTANT BID ADDENDUM

August 26, 2026

FAILURE TO RETURN THIS BID ADDENDUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH INSTRUCTIONS

MAY SUBJECT YOUR BID TO REJECTION ON THE AFFECTED ITEM(S):

BID Number: RFP 115-6181 COMMODITY: Website Redesign ADDENDUM Number: 05 USING AGENCY: Pitt Community College PURCHASER: Jane Alligood OPENING DATE/TIME: September 2, 2026 @ 2:00 PM ET

INSTRUCTIONS:

Please make the following change(s) in the bid referenced above:

Reference Vendor Question PCC Response 1 Please describe any third-party integrations, plugins, forms, or tools that will need to be supported and maintained.

PCC’s current website utilizes a variety of third-party systems and tools, including Colleague, Element451, Modern Campus, FundFive, SharePoint/Microsoft Entra ID, Google Analytics, Google Search Console, SiteImprove, Gravity Forms, SearchWP, employee directory functionality, chatbot functionality, and event-management tools. Most institutional systems are linked to rather than directly integrated with the website. Vendors should identify any recommended integrations and include associated costs in their proposals.

2 Please describe page templates that will need to be included in redesign. (ex. Landing, faculty directory, news, etc.)

PCC anticipates templates for common page types, including landing pages, academic program pages, department/service pages, faculty and staff directories, news and announcements, events, and other content as identified during the discovery and design phases.

3 How many pages of content will need to be migrated as part of the implementation of the new site?

Will all pages be migrated by the

The 500-page migration cap was established as the anticipated scope for vendor-led migration.

PCC staff will be responsible for vendor or will work be split between the client and vendor?

migrating the remaining content identified for inclusion in the new website.

4 Intranet Please define all audiences that will utilize the Intranet.

Employees and Students are currently the audiences.

5 Intranet What issue(s) do you currently have that you feel an Intranet will solve?

Shifting to a modern low code/no code purpose intranet allows for flexibility in presentation of information based on role, is responsive, can be managed and supported by staff outside of IT.

Integrate with other applications such as M365.

6 Intranet What functions exactly will be included in the intranet?

The intranet would serve as a centralized location for internal communications, search, departmental content, resources, documents, forms, policies, announcements, calendars and other employee information. The final scope and functionality may be refined based on project needs.

7 Intranet Will the intranet need to be connected to Active Directory accounts to login?

The ability to use Microsoft Entra for Single Sign On is a requirement.

8 Will the intranet be available only to employees residing on the company's premises (i.e. in one network with the use of domain login)?

The Intranet should be hosted and available to users on and off premise. It will need to be behind an authentication mechanism.

There will not be a public component.

9 Intranet Should all users have access to the same information on the intranet or will it have to be divided into types of data (e.g. public, confidential, sensitive, access for selected groups - what?).

Data governance and information classification will be required.

There will need to be considerations made based on person type (employee vs student) and the role of the employee.

10 Intranet Do any kinds of documents will need to be secured (Excel, Word, PDF, PowerPoint)?

All document types will need to be secured.

11 Intranet Should users be able to personalize the screen and set widgets and shortcuts to the applications they need?

PCC is open to personalization features such as customizable widgets and shortcuts, depending on the capabilities and recommendations of the proposed solution.

12 Intranet Will integration with communication or collaboration tools be required?

It would be ideal and preferred that it did.

13 Intranet Will the intranet be integrated with other systems operating in the company? What and to what extent?

Microsoft 365 applications, Entra, Zoom, DocuSign, and Canvas.

14 Intranet Will it be required to introduce functionalities related to the HR and Finance departments (holiday requests, time of work record, settlements, etc.)?

That has not been determined at this time.

15 Search Components What is the number of content items PCC wants searchable?

PCC does not have an exact number at this time. Vendors should anticipate that the website’s public-facing content and relevant documents will need to be indexed and searchable, which could be around 5,000.

16 Search Components How many search queries per month?

PCC anticipates around 6,000 on-site search queries per month.

17 Search Components Is there a need for Generative AI? PCC does not have a specific requirement for Generative AI at this time. Vendors may propose AI capabilities where they believe they would provide value to the project.

18 Search Components What content sources outside from the website would PCC want indexed?

PCC does not currently have a defined list of external content sources that must be indexed.

Vendors should recommend appropriate sources based on their proposed search and content-discovery solution.

19 Search Components The search software side of things could be a year over year subscription cost, unless paid upfront. Is there a preferable method?

PCC does not have a preferred payment method for search software.

20 Search Components Who would own the search experience once implemented?

PCC staff will own and manage the search experience after implementation, with the selected vendor providing training and ongoing support as outlined in the

RFP.

21 RFP Section 4.1 / Attachment A, Pages 12 & 22–23

Has PCC established a target budget or anticipated funding range for the website redesign, content migration, employee-facing intranet, and first-year implementation?

PCC has established a budget for the project; however, the College will not disclose the specific amount.

22 RFP Section 5.2 – Content Management

For the migration of up to 500 combined pages, how does PCC

The selected Vendor will be responsible for content inventory, and Best Practices, Page 16; Section 5.3, anticipate dividing responsibilities between College staff and the selected vendor for content inventory, review, rewriting, editing, approval, and migration?

rewriting, editing, migration, and quality assurance for the approved 500-page migration scope. PCC staff will participate in content review and approval but will not be responsible for migrating those pages. PCC staff will migrate the remaining content identified for inclusion in the new website.

23 RFP Section 5.2 – Content Management and Best Practices, Page 16; Section 5.3, Approximately how many public website pages, documents, forms, and media assets exist today, and how much existing content is expected to remain public versus transition to the employee-facing intranet?

The current PCC website contains approximately 2,477 core content URLs, including 1,362 static pages and 1,115 news posts. The media library currently contains approximately 5,321 items which includes 2,112 documents. There are approximately 47 embedded web forms. PCC cannot estimate at this time how much content will remain public versus move to the employee intranet; PCC staff will manage this transition.

24 RFP Sections 1.2 & 5.1, Pages 5 & 14

What functionality does PCC envision for the employee-facing intranet/internal content solution beyond providing employees with organized access to internal content and resources?

Our goal is to establish a separate, secure and user-friendly intranet for faculty and staff, distinct from the college’s public-facing website.

The intranet would serve as a centralized location for internal communications, resources, documents, forms, policies, calendars, announcements and other employee information. We are open to the vendor’s recommendations regarding the best platform or approach to achieve this goal, including third-party solutions such as Interact.

25 RFP Section 5.2 – Functionality and Performance, Pages 16–17

Which existing platforms and systems should vendors anticipate integrating with the new website and/or intranet, including systems supporting admissions, student information, academic programs, forms, events, directories, giving, workforce engagement, or internal communications?

PCC’s current systems and platforms include Colleague, Element451, Modern Campus, FundFive, SharePoint/Microsoft Entra ID, and Moodle (soon to be Canvas). Most of these major systems are linked to rather than directly integrated. Vendors should identify any recommended integrations and include associated costs in their proposals.

26 RFP Section 5.2 – Functionality and

How are academic, continuing-education, and workforce

Academic program and course information is maintained through

Performance, Pages 16–17 program offerings currently maintained, and does PCC envision this information being managed directly within WordPress or integrated with another institutional system?

Modern Campus. Continuing-education and workforce development program information is maintained through FundFive, which also supports registration for those offerings. PCC envisions integrating with or linking to these institutional systems rather than managing this information directly in WordPress.

27 RFP Section 5.2 – ADA Compliance, Pages 15–16

Should vendors assume responsibility for remediating existing PDFs, documents, videos, and other legacy content for accessibility, or is the selected vendor’s remediation responsibility primarily focused on the new platform, templates, components, and migrated web content?

Vendors should include accessibility review and remediation for existing documents as part of their proposed scope and pricing. PCC would like to reduce the number of downloadable documents where possible by converting content into accessible web pages. Any documents that remain available for download should be made accessible in accordance with applicable accessibility requirements.

28 RFP Section 5.3 – Tasks/Deliverables, What level of stakeholder and user research should vendors anticipate during discovery, such as interviews, workshops, surveys, focus groups, or usability testing?

Vendors may propose interviews, workshops, surveys, focus groups, usability testing, or other research approaches they believe are appropriate. PCC will assist in identifying and connecting the selected vendor with representative stakeholder groups and key audiences.

29 RFP Sections 5.1 & 5.3, Pages 14 & 18

Following launch and the stated 30/60/90-day optimization period, what level of ongoing vendor support and maintenance does PCC anticipate versus support handled internally by College staff?

Following launch, PCC expects the selected Vendor to provide support through the 30/60/90-day optimization period, including monitoring, troubleshooting, refinement, and recommendations for ongoing improvements. PCC staff will then assume primary responsibility for day-to-day content management and administration, including search optimization and routine content updates. For Years 2–5, Vendors should propose recommended support and maintenance services, including hosting, security and software updates, technical support, accessibility monitoring, and associated costs. PCC has not established specific post-launch service levels and encourages Vendors to describe their recommended approach.

30 ATTACHMENT A:

PRICING

Has PCC established an anticipated budget or budget range for the initial redesign, implementation, content migration, and employee-facing intranet/internal content solution, exclusive of optional ongoing maintenance and support?

PCC has established a budget for the project; however, the College will not disclose the specific amount.

31 Section 5.2

SPECIFICATIONS

(Platform and Technology), Page 16

Please describe PCC’s current WordPress hosting and technical environment, including hosting provider, WordPress architecture, key plugins, custom functionality, and any infrastructure, security, or technology standards the selected vendor will be expected to retain or integrate with.

PCC’s current website is hosted by SiteGround and uses a single WordPress installation running WordPress version 7.1. The website uses the Classic Editor and Elementor for page creation. Major plugins include Elementor, Gravity Forms, Employee Directory, TablePress, WP Mail Logging, SearchWP, and Events. PCC is open to the selected Vendor’s recommendations regarding architecture and technology.

32 Section 1.2 PROJECT

OBJECTIVES, 5.1

GENERAL, and 5.3

TASKS/DELIVERABLES

(Phase 3 & 4), Pages 5, 14, and 18

For the employee-facing intranet/internal content solution, does PCC envision a WordPress-based authenticated experience, integration with an existing Microsoft 365/SharePoint or other internal platform, or is PCC open to vendor recommendations following discovery? If authentication is required, what identity provider or SSO solution does PCC currently use?

Our goal is to establish a separate, secure and user-friendly intranet for faculty and staff, distinct from the college’s public-facing website.

The intranet would serve as a centralized location for internal communications, resources, documents, forms, policies, announcements and other employee information. We are open to the vendor’s recommendations regarding the best platform or approach to achieve this goal, including third-party solutions such as Interact. We would like the proposed solution to be easy for both employees to use and for college staff to manage, while providing appropriate security, authentication, permissions and integration with our existing technology environment. PCC requires Single Sign-On (SSO) for the employee intranet using Microsoft Azure AD / Entra ID.

33 Section 5.2

SPECIFICATIONS

(Functionality and Performance - item h), Can PCC identify the principal systems, platforms, and third-party services expected to integrate or interface with the new website and/or intranet, such as admissions/application systems, SIS, CRM, ERP, course catalog, forms, events, directories, Foundation/giving platforms, or workforce systems? Where applicable, should vendors anticipate API/data integrations, embedded experiences, or primarily user-facing handoffs to these systems?

PCC’s current systems and platforms include Colleague, Element451, Modern Campus, FundFive, SharePoint/Microsoft Entra ID, and Moodle (soon to be Canvas). Most of these major systems are linked to rather than directly integrated. Vendors should identify any recommended integrations and include associated costs in their proposals.

34 Section 5.3

TASKS/DELIVERABLES

(Phase 4) and

ATTACHMENT A:

PRICING, Page 18 & 22

The RFP references migration of up to 500 combined pages. Does this limit include both public website and employee/intranet content? Can PCC also provide approximate counts of the current public pages, internal-facing pages, documents, forms, media, and other assets that may need to be reviewed, migrated, archived, or redirected?

The 500-page migration limit applies to public-facing website pages only. It does not include intranet content, PDFs/documents, forms, media assets, program records, news/events, or faculty/staff profiles. The current PCC website contains approximately 2,477 core content URLs, including 1,362 static pages and 1,115 news posts. The media library currently contains approximately 5,321 items. The RFP includes migration of up to 500 pages by the Vendor, with PCC staff responsible for migrating the remaining pages identified for inclusion in the new website.

35 Section 3.4

EVALUATION CRITERIA

(Content Strategy, Migration & Governance) and 5.2

SPECIFICATIONS

(Content Management and Best Practices - item g), Pages 11 & 16

To what extent does PCC expect the selected vendor to rewrite or substantially edit existing page content versus providing content strategy, information architecture, templates, editorial guidance, governance, and migration support while PCC staff author and approve final content?

PCC expects the selected Vendor to provide content strategy, information architecture, editorial guidance, governance recommendations, and hands-on content editing and rewriting.

Within the approved 500-page migration scope, the Vendor will assist with editing, restructuring, formatting, and migrating high-value content, with PCC staff providing review and final approval. PCC staff will migrate any remaining content identified for inclusion in the new website.

36 Section 3.4

EVALUATION CRITERIA

(Accessibility Approach) and 5.2

SPECIFICATIONS (ADA

Compliance), Pages 10 & 15

Should vendors include remediation of existing PDFs, Office documents, multimedia, and other legacy assets within the base project scope, or should proposals primarily address accessible templates/components, migrated web content, testing, and accessibility guidance and training for PCC content contributors?

Vendors should include accessibility review and remediation of existing PDFs, Office documents, multimedia, forms, and other legacy assets that are identified for retention and migration as part of their proposed scope and pricing. PCC would like to reduce the number of downloadable documents on the website where possible by transitioning information into accessible web content. In addition, Vendors should provide accessible templates, components, migrated web content, testing, validation, and guidance to support ongoing accessibility compliance.

37 Section: 5.3

TASKS/DELIVERABLES

and 5.4 PROJECT ORGANIZATION, Page 18 & 19

What PCC personnel or functional teams are expected to participate in discovery, stakeholder/user research, content review and creation, migration, technical integration, design approvals, and acceptance testing? Will the selected vendor also have access to representative prospective students, current students, faculty/staff, and other key audiences for interviews, workshops, and usability testing?

PCC anticipates that members of the Marketing team, appropriate subject-matter experts, and IT staff will participate throughout the project. The specific participants and stakeholder groups will be determined during the Discovery phase based on project needs and content areas. Yes, PCC expects the selected Vendor to conduct stakeholder and user discovery activities and will provide access to appropriate representatives from key audiences.

38 §4.1 Pricing, p. 12 / Attachment A: Pricing,

p. 22

Has the College established a budget, target price range, or not-to-exceed amount for this engagement — for both the one-time implementation and the annual recurring costs (Years 2– 5)? If a specific figure cannot be shared, can the College provide an approximate range to help vendors scale the proposed solution appropriately?

PCC has established a budget for the project; however, the College will not disclose the specific amount.

39 Scope of Work — Employee-Facing Intranet (and Attachment A, p. 22)

Is the employee-facing intranet expected to run on the same CMS/platform as the public website, or may it be a separately integrated solution accessed via single sign-on? Please also confirm the identity provider/SSO it must

The employee-facing intranet does not need to use the same CMS or platform as the public website. PCC is open to a separately integrated solution accessed through Single Sign-On (SSO) and is open to vendor recommendations integrate with and the approximate number of authenticated staff users, as this affects licensing and pricing.

regarding the best platform or approach. The intranet will integrate with Microsoft Entra ID.

PCC anticipates approximately 1,200 authenticated employee users.

40 Attachment A: Pricing

— “Content Migration (up to 500 combined pages),” p. 22

Does the 500-page figure cover the public website and the intranet combined? Can the College share the current actual page count, and should pages beyond 500 be quoted as an optional per-page rate in Attachment A?

The 500-page migration limit applies to the public-facing website only and does not include intranet content. The current PCC website contains approximately 2,477 core content URLs, including 1,362 static pages and 1,115 news posts.

PCC staff will be responsible for migrating any remaining content identified for inclusion in the new website. Vendors are welcome to quote an optional per-page rate in Attachment A.

41 Can you please provide details on the intranet requirements? What features need to exist?

Our goal is to establish a separate, secure and user-friendly intranet for faculty and staff, distinct from the college’s public-facing website.

The intranet would serve as a centralized location for internal communications, resources, documents, forms, policies, announcements and other employee information. We are open to the vendor’s recommendations regarding the best platform or approach to achieve this goal, including third-party solutions such as Interact. We would like the proposed solution to be easy for both employees to use and for college staff to manage, while providing appropriate security, authentication, permissions and integration with our existing technology environment.

42 Is the intranet currently built on WordPress or another platform? If the intranet is built on WordPress, is it the same instance as the main website, or a completely separate one?

PCC’s current intranet platform is SharePoint.

43 What authentication system should be used for the employee

PCC uses Microsoft Entra ID for employee authentication and intranet (e.g., Microsoft Entra ID/Azure AD, Google Workspace, another identity provider), and is SSO required? Are there specific user groups, departments, or roles that will require differentiated access to intranet content?

would like the proposed intranet to integrate with the College’s existing Single Sign-On (SSO) solution.

Specific user groups, departments, roles, and differentiated access requirements have not been determined at this time and will be established based on project needs.

44 The RFP calls for migration of up to 500 combined pages and references inventorying, cleaning, rewriting, prioritizing, and validating content. Can PCC clarify the expected division of responsibility between PCC and the selected vendor for writing and rewriting page content?

Should vendors assume they will actively rewrite content, provide editorial guidance/templates for PCC staff to rewrite it, or some combination of the two?

PCC expects a combination of both approaches. The selected Vendor should provide content strategy, information architecture, editorial guidance, governance recommendations, and migration support, while also performing hands-on content editing and rewriting within the approved 500-page migration scope as needed.

PCC anticipates that the migration will include a combination of content migration, editing, rewriting, reorganization, and formatting using existing content.

PCC staff will participate in content review and provide final approval.

45 The project specifies migration of "up to 500 combined pages." Does this include both the public website and intranet?

The 500-page migration limit applies to public-facing website pages.

46 The RFP asks vendors to recommend and implement integrations supporting enrollment, student services, marketing, workforce engagement, Foundation communications, and internal communications. Can PCC provide an inventory of the existing systems and third-party platforms expected to integrate with the new site—for example SIS, CRM, application/enrollment systems, course catalog, directory, events, giving, marketing automation, emergency alerts, authentication, or other platforms—and identify which integrations are expected to be included in the base project scope?

PCC’s current systems and platforms include: Colleague (SIS and faculty/staff information), Element451 (CRM, forms, and events), CFNC (admissions and applications), Modern Campus (academic catalog and program data), FundFive (continuing-education and workforce programs, and enrollment), SharePoint/Microsoft Entra ID (employee intranet and SSO), and a separate Foundation website for donations. Emergency communications are managed through PCC’s existing communication systems. The selected Vendor should anticipate linking to or integrating with these systems as appropriate.

47 Approximately how many forms are currently hosted on or connected to the website, and which forms does PCC expect the selected vendor to rebuild, migrate, integrate, or replace? Are any forms connected to downstream systems or workflows that the vendor will be responsible for preserving?

PCC currently has approximately 45 Gravity Forms. PCC will conduct an inventory to determine which forms are actively in use and require migration. PCC staff will migrate the forms to the new platform based on guidance and requirements provided by the selected vendor. Any existing integrations or workflows will be identified as part of the form inventory.

48 The RFP references installation within the "agreed-upon PCC technical environment" and asks vendors to document hosting/server assumptions. Does PCC intend to retain its existing WordPress hosting environment, or should vendors propose hosting as part of their solution? If PCC expects the existing environment to be used, can PCC provide details regarding the current hosting provider, architecture, environments, deployment workflow, WordPress configuration, and any infrastructure/security constraints?

PCC expects the selected Vendor to propose and manage hosting as part of the solution. The current WordPress website is hosted through SiteGround and managed by the current website vendor.

Vendors should include their recommended hosting approach and associated costs in their proposals. Hosting must be US based.

49 For the stakeholder and user discovery identified in Phase 2, does PCC have an anticipated number or range of stakeholder interviews, workshops, student/user interviews, surveys, or usability research activities that vendors should include in their pricing? If not, may vendors propose an appropriate research methodology and level of effort?

PCC has not established a specific number or range of stakeholder interviews, workshops, surveys, focus groups, or usability-testing activities. Vendors should propose the research methodology and level of effort they believe are appropriate to support the Discovery phase and project objectives. PCC will assist the selected Vendor with identifying and connecting with representative stakeholder groups and key audiences as appropriate.

50 PCC requires WCAG 2.1 AA or above across templates, content, forms, documents, and multimedia. Should the selected vendor's scope include remediation of existing

The selected Vendor’s scope should include accessibility remediation of existing PDFs, documents, videos, and other migrated content that will be retained in the new website.

The Vendor should also ensure that

PDFs/documents, videos, and migrated content, or is the vendor responsible for ensuring the platform/components are accessible and identifying existing content that PCC must remediate?

the website platform, templates, components, forms, and content meet WCAG 2.1 Level AA accessibility requirements.

51 Can PCC describe the internal team that will be assigned to the project—including marketing/content, IT, accessibility, and executive stakeholders—and the level of effort PCC expects to contribute to content decisions, content creation/rewrite, migration QA, integration coordination, approvals, user acceptance testing, and launch preparation?

The RFP asks vendors to define PCC's responsibilities, but understanding the resources PCC actually has available is critical to estimating the work.

PCC will assign appropriate representatives from marketing/content, IT, accessibility, and executive leadership to support the project. PCC staff will participate in content decisions, review and approval, migration QA, integration coordination, user acceptance testing, and launch preparation. The specific team assignments and level of effort cannot be determined at this time and will be established during the Discovery phase based on project needs.

Execute Addendum:

BIDDER: ____________________________________________________________________

ADDRESS (CITY & STATE): _____________________________________________________

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: __________________________________ DATE: ____________

NAME and TITLE (Print): ________________________________________________________