Q&A For opp # 21260807090259.pdf

Request for Proposals Questions and Answers

DBHIDS Intranet Modernization SharePoint M365 Opportunity ID 21260807090259

Q1) Please confirm whether we need to provide a separate response file for Appendix B?

Response: Applicants should follow the current eContract Philly upload instructions, RFP volume structure, checklist, file-size limits, and required forms. Where the RFP does not prescribe a page limit or typography standard, Applicants should use a clear, readable, professionally organized format. Procurement should confirm platform-specific file, signature, attachment, hyperlink, and separate-upload requirements through the opportunity posting.

Q2) Please confirm where should we provide a response for section 3.2 Implementation Plan, Statement of Work, Project Schedule, and Milestone Payment Schedule under which section of Volume?

Response: Applicants should follow the current eContract Philly upload instructions, RFP volume structure, checklist, file-size limits, and required forms. Where the RFP does not prescribe a page limit or typography standard, Applicants should use a clear, readable, professionally organized format. Procurement should confirm platform-specific file, signature, attachment, hyperlink, and separate-upload requirements through the opportunity posting.

Q3) Could the City please post the Excel version of the Requirements Compliance Matrix to the opportunity, or provide it by email?

Response: Applicants should respond to every applicable requirement using the statuses identified in the

RFP, with explanatory comments for partial, dependent, customized, optional, not included, or not applicable items. If no City-issued editable matrix is posted, Applicants should provide a structured Excel matrix containing the required information and clearly identify proposal references, assumptions, dependencies, and additional costs.

Q4) If the Excel file will not be provided, may applicants submit the matrix in their own Excel format using the columns recommended in Appendix D (Requirement ID, Requirement Description, Compliance Status, Proposed Approach, Exception or Dependency, Custom Development or Third-Party Product Required, Additional Cost, Proposal Reference)?

Response: Applicants should respond to every applicable requirement using the statuses identified in the RFP, with explanatory comments for partial, dependent, customized, optional, not included, or not applicable items. If no City-issued editable matrix is posted, Applicants should provide a structured Excel matrix containing the required information and clearly identify proposal references, assumptions, dependencies, and additional costs.

Q5) Section 3.3.2 and Appendix D describe different sets of response values. Section 3.3.2 refers to fully satisfied, partially satisfied, or not satisfied, followed by explanatory values addressing software customization, a next planned release, or a requirement that will not be satisfied. Appendix D lists Fully

Satisfies, Partially Satisfies, Does Not Satisfy, and Not Applicable. Which set should applicants use? We note that the Section 3.3.2 values appear written for a licensed software product, whereas this procurement is for configuration services within the City's existing Microsoft 365 environment.

Response: Applicants should respond to every applicable requirement using the statuses identified in the RFP, with explanatory comments for partial, dependent, customized, optional, not included, or not applicable items. If no City-issued editable matrix is posted, Applicants should provide a structured Excel matrix containing the required information and clearly identify proposal references, assumptions, dependencies, and additional costs.

Q6) Should the matrix include a row for every numbered requirement in Appendix A only, or should applicants also include rows for the training requirements in Appendix E?

Response: Applicants should respond to every applicable requirement using the statuses identified in the

RFP, with explanatory comments for partial, dependent, customized, optional, not included, or not applicable items. If no City-issued editable matrix is posted, Applicants should provide a structured Excel matrix containing the required information and clearly identify proposal references, assumptions, dependencies, and additional costs.

Q7) Should the completed matrix be submitted as an Excel file, or converted to PDF, when it is uploaded with Volume 2?

Response: Applicants should follow the current eContract Philly upload instructions, RFP volume structure, checklist, file-size limits, and required forms. Where the RFP does not prescribe a page limit or typography standard, Applicants should use a clear, readable, professionally organized format. Procurement should confirm platform-specific file, signature, attachment, hyperlink, and separate-upload requirements through the opportunity posting.

Q8) For the Local Impact Certification, does 'will perform the work in the City' require that all or a majority of the work be performed within Philadelphia, or does it include applicants that will perform a defined portion of the work on site at DBHIDS offices (for example, discovery workshops, pilot demonstrations, training, and go-live support) with the remaining work performed remotely?"

Response: Applicants must follow the SBE/LBE, Local Impact, and participation requirements posted with the opportunity, including any Participation Range Memo or addendum. Procurement should confirm any applicable range, scoring treatment, or mandatory documentation through eContract Philly. Applicants should clearly document proposed local participation and commitments.

Q9) Is it acceptable to include references where we have provided these services as a Sub not as Prime?

Response: The requested detail will be validated during discovery with DBHIDS and OIT. Applicants should state reasonable fixed-price assumptions, identify dependencies and exclusions, favor native Microsoft 365 capabilities, and separately identify any premium licensing, custom development, third-party tools, or material optional scope.

Q10) Can we use our Subcontractors' Past Performances / References? is there any incumbent for this requirement?

Response: No incumbent vendor should be assumed to own this intranet modernization. The current WordPress environment is supported through a combination of DBHIDS and City resources. Eligibility is governed by the RFP; all Applicants will be evaluated under the published criteria.

Q11) Is this an open competition?

Response: The requested detail will be validated during discovery with DBHIDS and OIT. Applicants should state reasonable fixed-price assumptions, identify dependencies and exclusions, favor native Microsoft 365 capabilities, and separately identify any premium licensing, custom development, third-party tools, or material optional scope.

Q12) Is there any local preference for this requirement? Do we need to submit Resumes as a separate attachment for our key personnel?

Response: Applicants should provide qualified personnel and transparent phase-based allocations, estimated hours, availability, and role responsibilities. One person may perform multiple roles where qualified and where this does not create delivery or control risk. Any required resume format or page limit is governed by the RFP submission instructions.

Q13) Is it a Single Award or Multiple Award contract?

Response: The requested detail will be validated during discovery with DBHIDS and OIT. Applicants should state reasonable fixed-price assumptions, identify dependencies and exclusions, favor native Microsoft 365 capabilities, and separately identify any premium licensing, custom development, third-party tools, or material optional scope.

Q14) What is the current state of the DBHIDS intranet (e.g., classic SharePoint on-premises, SharePoint

Online, another CMS)? Please describe the existing platform, version, and hosting model.

Response: The current DBHIDS intranet is hosted on WordPress. This initiative will migrate and modernize the intranet in SharePoint Online within the City’s Microsoft 365 environment; it is not an upgrade of an existing SharePoint intranet. Available current-state documentation and access will be provided to the selected Applicant during discovery, subject to City security requirements.

Q15) What Microsoft 365 licensing (e.g., E3, E5, Power Automate premium connectors, Power BI

Pro/Premium, Copilot) is currently provisioned for DBHIDS staff, and will any additional licensing be procured by the City if required?

Response: The pilot is a required component of the base implementation and should be production-ready within the City’s approved Microsoft 365 environment. The pilot division, users, content, duration, feedback cycles, and approval authority will be confirmed during discovery. Applicants may recommend a representative scope and selection criteria and should include stakeholder review, UAT, accessibility validation, remediation, and readiness assessment.

Q16) Volume 2 Section 1(c)/Section 3 request hardware/network equipment specs, bandwidth, server storage, and disaster recovery details, while Section 1.1 states no hardware or network installation will be purchased under this RFP. Please clarify how these technical proposal elements apply to a SaaS/M365 engagement, or confirm they may be marked “Not Applicable.”

Response: Applicants should respond to every applicable requirement using the statuses identified in the

RFP, with explanatory comments for partial, dependent, customized, optional, not included, or not applicable items. If no City-issued editable matrix is posted, Applicants should provide a structured Excel matrix containing the required information and clearly identify proposal references, assumptions, dependencies, and additional costs.

Q17) Are there existing OIT-defined non-functional/performance standards (response time, availability, etc.)

Applicants should reference instead of proposing their own, given the solution runs on the City's existing M365 tenant?

Response: Applicants should propose clearly defined severity levels, business-hours coverage, after-hours escalation for critical incidents, response and restoration targets, reporting, and an appropriate post-go-live stabilization period. The current City support path is DBHIDS Help Desk, CBH Help Desk for PCL users, and OIT Help Desk, with an updated escalation process forthcoming. Vendor responsibilities for delivered components, warranty, hypercare, optional support, onsite service, and after-hours coverage must be clearly distinguished and will be finalized during contracting.

Q18) Is there an existing DBHIDS or City-wide SharePoint/M365 governance body, admin team, or support model the selected Applicant must coordinate with or transition support responsibilities to at project close?

Response: The requested detail will be validated during discovery with DBHIDS and OIT. Applicants should state reasonable fixed-price assumptions, identify dependencies and exclusions, favor native Microsoft 365 capabilities, and separately identify any premium licensing, custom development, third-party tools, or material optional scope.

Q19) Approximately how many DBHIDS staff/end users will use the intranet, and how many divisions/hubs are anticipated at initial launch?

Response: Approximately 1,700 users should be assumed for planning purposes. The current WordPress intranet contains approximately 1,716 registered accounts, including inactive or former employees. Final active-user, role, guest, and concurrency counts will be validated during discovery.

Q20) What is the approximate volume of existing content to be inventoried and migrated (pages, documents, sites, media assets)?

Response: The current inventory includes approximately 31 published pages, 28 draft or retired pages, 43

Commissioner messages, 803 announcements dating back to 2018, and at least 657 media files from 2025 and 2026. A complete document, storage, duplicate, version, form, link, and migration-ready inventory is not currently available and must be validated during discovery.

Q21) Is an existing brand/style guide, logo library, and accessibility-compliant design system available for the selected Applicant's use, or must this be developed as part of the engagement?

Response: The solution must align with applicable City and DBHIDS branding and accessibility standards.

Existing assets will be provided where available. The selected Applicant should refine and apply a consistent intranet visual system, page templates, reusable components, and governance rather than assume unrestricted creation of a separate brand.

Q22) Will DBHIDS designate specific content owners and stakeholder representatives for discovery prior to contract start, and can the City provide an estimate of stakeholder availability (e.g., hours per week) during discovery?

Response: DBHIDS-designated content owners will decide what to retain, recreate, remediate, consolidate, archive, or delete, including how much historical material should remain in the new intranet. DBHIDS can work with its current hosting provider to preserve a complete package of the legacy WordPress intranet. The selected Applicant will support inventory, assessment, migration mapping, remediation recommendations, formatting, metadata, archival planning, and migration execution. Substantial net-new content creation should be identified separately unless included in scope.

Q23) Please clarify the meaning of “AFQ” as referenced among discovery stakeholders.

Response: DBHIDS will designate an executive sponsor, project leadership, business and content representatives, and appropriate OIT/security/accessibility reviewers. Final roles, decision rights, availability, review periods, and escalation paths will be established at kickoff. Applicants should include a RACI, decision log, and reasonable review assumptions in the plan.

Q24) Can the City provide additional detail on the anticipated purpose, data sources, or platform (e.g., Power BI, SharePoint list-based, custom) for the dashboard referenced in Appendix A.8, to help Applicants scope the discovery effort and optional pricing?

Response: Power BI may be used for approved dashboards and data metrics within the Microsoft 365 ecosystem. Each division or business unit will help define its use cases and KPIs, and the selected

Applicant must coordinate with the DBHIDS BI team so data sources, governance, security, and reporting are aligned. Detailed audiences, refresh frequency, licensing, integration, gateway, row-level security, and data-preparation requirements will be refined during discovery. PHI should not be assumed without express authorization.

Q25) Appendix C (Cost Proposal Requirements/template) and the Appendix D Requirements Compliance

Matrix are referenced as available on eContract Philly. Can the City confirm both are currently posted, or provide the anticipated posting date?

Response: Applicants should respond to every applicable requirement using the statuses identified in the

RFP, with explanatory comments for partial, dependent, customized, optional, not included, or not applicable items. If no City-issued editable matrix is posted, Applicants should provide a structured Excel matrix containing the required information and clearly identify proposal references, assumptions, dependencies, and additional costs.

Q26) For the ongoing monthly content-management maintenance fee, can the City provide an estimated monthly volume or hours assumption (e.g., number of content updates, videos, or graphics per month) to support comparable pricing across Applicants?

Response: DBHIDS does not currently have a reliable monthly service-volume forecast. Historical activity includes approximately 803 announcements and 43 Commissioner messages since 2018, plus ongoing page and media updates. The future model is expected to allow division content curators to publish text, links, images, video, and embedded media, with volume likely increasing as adoption grows. Applicants may propose tiered service levels based on monthly hours or transaction volumes, response and turnaround commitments, included revisions, and rates for excess work.

Q27) Section 3.1's reference to performance/payment bonds is conditional (“if required under the RFP”).

Please confirm whether performance and/or payment bonds are required, and if so, the required amount or percentage.

Response: Applicants should rely on the bond requirements and completed values in the final solicitation and contract documents. If no percentage or amount is stated, Procurement must confirm applicability through eContract Philly. Applicants should not omit a clearly required bond but should identify any requested clarification or exception in the proposal.

Q28) Is there a target overall project duration or completion date the City is working toward, beyond the anticipated October 15, 2026 start date?

Response: The anticipated project start is November 1, 2026, with a target completion date of October 31, 2027. Applicants should propose a phased schedule covering discovery, design, pilot, migration, testing, training, production rollout, stabilization, and required City/OIT reviews.

Q29) Is a phased/multi-hub rollout acceptable, or does the City expect a single, simultaneous go-live across all divisions?

Response: A phased rollout by division, content area, or capability is acceptable and is preferred where it reduces risk and supports validation and adoption. Applicants should recommend a logical release plan, transition approach, and acceptance gates within the target completion date.

Q30) Will shortlisted Applicants be invited to give an in-person or virtual presentation/demonstration as contemplated in Section 2.11.4, or should Applicants assume no presentation opportunity will be offered?

Response: Applicants will be evaluated under the criteria and requirements published in the RFP and any formal addenda. No additional requirement should be inferred where none is stated. The City may request clarifications, presentations, or demonstrations as permitted by the RFP, but Applicants should submit a complete proposal without assuming a later opportunity to supplement it.

Q31) Is there a specific SBE/LBE participation range or goal established for this opportunity (referenced in the Appendix F Participation Range Memo), and can the City confirm that range?

Response: Applicants must follow the SBE/LBE, Local Impact, and participation requirements posted with the opportunity, including any Participation Range Memo or addendum. Procurement should confirm any applicable range, scoring treatment, or mandatory documentation through eContract Philly. Applicants should clearly document proposed local participation and commitments.

Q32) Is there a page limit, font/margin standard, or other formatting requirement for Volume 1 and Volume 2, given none is stated in the RFP body?

Response: Applicants should follow the current eContract Philly upload instructions, RFP volume structure, checklist, file-size limits, and required forms. Where the RFP does not prescribe a page limit or typography standard, Applicants should use a clear, readable, professionally organized format. Procurement should confirm platform-specific file, signature, attachment, hyperlink, and separate-upload requirements through the opportunity posting.

Q33) What are the attachments that we need to submit as a part of response?

Response: Applicants should follow the current eContract Philly upload instructions, RFP volume structure, checklist, file-size limits, and required forms. Where the RFP does not prescribe a page limit or typography standard, Applicants should use a clear, readable, professionally organized format. Procurement should confirm platform-specific file, signature, attachment, hyperlink, and separate-upload requirements through the opportunity posting.

Q1) As there are currently only approximately two days between the anticipated release of responses to proposer questions and the proposal submission deadline. We kindly request DBHIDS to provide at least two weeks extension for submitting the proposal response post releasing the response to the questions submitted to DBHIDS so that vendor gets ample time to review and prepare the response to the RFP.

(Rationale - Responses to the clarification questions may impact on the proposed scope interpretation, technical approach, staffing, assumptions, and pricing. Additional time is therefore needed to evaluate the responses and appropriately incorporate any resulting changes into a complete and responsive proposal.)

Response: The proposal schedule and any extension will be determined and communicated by

Procurement through eContract Philly. Applicants should rely on the dates posted for the opportunity unless an addendum is issued.

Q2) Is DBHIDS open for using offshore resources in an Onshore-Offshore (Hybrid) delivery model with some work being done outside of the US on a need basis?

Response: The RFP does not establish a blanket prohibition on offshore or nearshore resources.

Applicants must disclose locations and responsibilities. Any access to City systems, City Data, or regulated information is subject to prior authorization, MFA, least privilege, logging, approved connectivity and devices, and DBHIDS/OIT security, privacy, contractual, and HIPAA review.

Q3) Is there any incumbent associated with this project? If so, please disclose the name.

Response: No incumbent vendor should be assumed to own this intranet modernization. The current WordPress environment is supported through a combination of DBHIDS and City resources. Eligibility is governed by the RFP; all Applicants will be evaluated under the published criteria.

Q4) Please provide the expected budget or not-to-exceed range for the base implementation and optional services.

Response: DBHIDS is not providing an additional budget or not-to-exceed amount through this Q&A.

Applicants should submit a competitive, fully itemized price based on the RFP requirements, stated assumptions, base implementation, and separately identified optional services.

Q5) Is there any specific date/month DBHIDS expects project to be completed (Project Timeline)?

Response: The anticipated project start is November 1, 2026, with a target completion date of October 31, 2027. Applicants should propose a phased schedule covering discovery, design, pilot, migration, testing, training, production rollout, stabilization, and required City/OIT reviews.

Q6) Could you please provide details on the number of internal and external users DBHIDS has?

Response: Approximately 1,700 users should be assumed for planning purposes. The current WordPress intranet contains approximately 1,716 registered accounts, including inactive or former employees. Final active-user, role, guest, and concurrency counts will be validated during discovery.

Q7) May supporting exhibits be uploaded as additional files beyond Volume 1 and Volume 2?

Response: Applicants should follow the current eContract Philly upload instructions, RFP volume structure, checklist, file-size limits, and required forms. Where the RFP does not prescribe a page limit or typography standard, Applicants should use a clear, readable, professionally organized format. Procurement should confirm platform-specific file, signature, attachment, hyperlink, and separate-upload requirements through the opportunity posting.

Q8) Please clarify whether the one-year warranty and one-year maintenance/support periods run concurrently.

Response: Warranty remediation should cover defects in the delivered solution, while maintenance and support address operational assistance and approved ongoing services. Microsoft service outages, City tenant changes, City-authored content, and post-acceptance changes outside the vendor’s control should be addressed through documented responsibilities and change management. Optional years two through five should be separately priced and clearly distinguished from base, warranty, and stabilization services.

Q9) Please help us with the contract duration of this project and when it is likely to start?

Response: The anticipated project start is November 1, 2026, with a target completion date of October 31, 2027. Applicants should propose a phased schedule covering discovery, design, pilot, migration, testing, training, production rollout, stabilization, and required City/OIT reviews.

Q10) Will the optional line items in Appendix C (support years two through five, additional warranty years, monthly content management services, and dashboard implementation) be included in the price comparison among Applicants, or evaluated separately from the base implementation price?

Response: Applicants should follow Appendix C and the current eContract Philly instructions and provide a clear, itemized cost proposal for the base scope and separately priced optional services, licensing, tools, travel, assumptions, dependencies, rates, and milestones. Whether an additional City-issued template or pricing constraint will be provided must be confirmed by Procurement through the opportunity posting.

Q11) Is the vendor allowed to take any exceptions on the given contract/ The Philadelphia Tax and Regulatory Status and Clearance Statement and to provide that in the proposal response?

Response: Applicants should submit proposals based on the issued RFP and applicable City contract documents. Any requested contractual exceptions must be clearly identified in the proposal and will be subject to Procurement and Law Department review; Applicants should not assume that an exception will be accepted.

Q12) How many comparable project references should be provided?

Response: Applicants should provide three relevant references, consistent with the RFP. Comparable public-sector, healthcare, behavioral-health, SharePoint/Microsoft 365, accessibility, and content-migration experience is preferred, but the evaluation will consider relevance, scale, complexity, and the experience of proposed personnel.

Q13) Is it mandatory to show SBE/LBE participation? Is there any weightage or preference associated to it?

Response: Applicants must follow the SBE/LBE, Local Impact, and participation requirements posted with the opportunity, including any Participation Range Memo or addendum. Procurement should confirm any applicable range, scoring treatment, or mandatory documentation through eContract Philly. Applicants should clearly document proposed local participation and commitments.

Q14) What SBE/LBE participation ranges apply to this RFP?

Response: Applicants must follow the SBE/LBE, Local Impact, and participation requirements posted with the opportunity, including any Participation Range Memo or addendum. Procurement should confirm any applicable range, scoring treatment, or mandatory documentation through eContract Philly. Applicants should clearly document proposed local participation and commitments.

Q15) How will Local Impact be evaluated for a non-local prime using local subcontractors or local hiring?

Response: Applicants must follow the SBE/LBE, Local Impact, and participation requirements posted with the opportunity, including any Participation Range Memo or addendum. Procurement should confirm any applicable range, scoring treatment, or mandatory documentation through eContract Philly. Applicants should clearly document proposed local participation and commitments.

Q16) Can we provide the financial statement during the award process?

Response: Applicants should submit the financial-capacity information required by the RFP by the stated deadline. Any confidentiality designation must be made in accordance with the RFP and applicable

Pennsylvania law; the City cannot guarantee that submitted material will be exempt from disclosure.

Procurement should be consulted regarding permitted redactions or separate confidential submission.

Q17) Are performance and payment bonds required? If yes, please provide the required percentage because the agreement fields are blank and when are these required with response to the RFP or after an award?

Response: Applicants should rely on the bond requirements and completed values in the final solicitation and contract documents. If no percentage or amount is stated, Procurement must confirm applicability through eContract Philly. Applicants should not omit a clearly required bond but should identify any requested clarification or exception in the proposal.

Q18) Section 15.4 Performance Bond, section 15.5 Labor and Materialmen’s Bond, and Section 15.6

Fidelity Bond - are these bonds mandatory to the vendor to provide, will the vendor be disqualified or viewed negatively if we don’t provide such bonds. Could you please help with percent or amount required for all the bonds given in section 15 of the RFP.

Response: Applicants should rely on the bond requirements and completed values in the final solicitation and contract documents. If no percentage or amount is stated, Procurement must confirm applicability through eContract Philly. Applicants should not omit a clearly required bond but should identify any requested clarification or exception in the proposal.

Q19) Please identify the current DBHIDS intranet platform, including whether it is SharePoint Online, SharePoint Server on-premises, or another platform, and provide the version if applicable.

Response: The current DBHIDS intranet is hosted on WordPress. This initiative will migrate and modernize the intranet in SharePoint Online within the City’s Microsoft 365 environment; it is not an upgrade of an existing SharePoint intranet. Available current-state documentation and access will be provided to the selected Applicant during discovery, subject to City security requirements.

Q20) Who currently supports the DBHIDS intranet: DBHIDS staff, OIT staff, an external vendor, or a combination of these groups?

Response: The requested detail will be validated during discovery with DBHIDS and OIT. Applicants should state reasonable fixed-price assumptions, identify dependencies and exclusions, favor native Microsoft 365 capabilities, and separately identify any premium licensing, custom development, third-party tools, or material optional scope.

Q21) Does DBHIDS have existing brand standards, page templates, or a design system that the modernized intranet should follow, or should the selected Applicant create them?

Response: The selected Applicant should assess existing standards and design the future information architecture, navigation, taxonomy, metadata, content types, and reusable page templates with DBHIDS and

OIT. The final quantities and reuse model will be established during discovery and should favor governed, reusable components over unnecessary site-specific variation.

Q22) Approximately how many existing intranet pages are in scope for inventory, cleanup, and migration:

under 250, 250 to 1,000, 1,000 to 3,000, or more than 3,000?

Response: The current inventory includes approximately 31 published pages, 28 draft or retired pages, 43 Commissioner messages, 803 announcements dating back to 2018, and at least 657 media files from 2025 and 2026. A complete document, storage, duplicate, version, form, link, and migration-ready inventory is not currently available and must be validated during discovery.

Q23) Approximately what is the total storage volume of documents and files in scope: under 25 GB, 25 to

100 GB, 100 to 500 GB, or more than 500 GB?

Response: The current inventory includes approximately 31 published pages, 28 draft or retired pages, 43

Commissioner messages, 803 announcements dating back to 2018, and at least 657 media files from 2025 and 2026. A complete document, storage, duplicate, version, form, link, and migration-ready inventory is not currently available and must be validated during discovery.

Q24) Approximately how many videos and other media items are in scope for migration: under 25, 25 to 100, or more than 100?

Response: The requested detail will be validated during discovery with DBHIDS and OIT. Applicants should state reasonable fixed-price assumptions, identify dependencies and exclusions, favor native Microsoft 365 capabilities, and separately identify any premium licensing, custom development, third-party tools, or material optional scope.

Q25) How many distinct source sites or repositories hold the content in scope: one, two to five, or more than five?

Response: The requested detail will be validated during discovery with DBHIDS and OIT. Applicants should state reasonable fixed-price assumptions, identify dependencies and exclusions, favor native Microsoft 365 capabilities, and separately identify any premium licensing, custom development, third-party tools, or material optional scope.

Q26) What proportion of existing content does DBHIDS expect to retain and migrate: under 25 percent, 25 to 60 percent, or more than 60 percent?

Response: DBHIDS-designated content owners will decide what to retain, recreate, remediate, consolidate, archive, or delete, including how much historical material should remain in the new intranet. DBHIDS can work with its current hosting provider to preserve a complete package of the legacy WordPress intranet. The selected Applicant will support inventory, assessment, migration mapping, remediation recommendations, formatting, metadata, archival planning, and migration execution. Substantial net-new content creation should be identified separately unless included in scope.

Q27) Will DBHIDS content owners decide which content to retain, update, archive, consolidate, or remove, or should the selected Applicant facilitate those decisions?

Response: DBHIDS-designated content owners will decide what to retain, recreate, remediate, consolidate, archive, or delete, including how much historical material should remain in the new intranet. DBHIDS can work with its current hosting provider to preserve a complete package of the legacy WordPress intranet. The selected Applicant will support inventory, assessment, migration mapping, remediation recommendations, formatting, metadata, archival planning, and migration execution. Substantial net-new content creation should be identified separately unless included in scope.

Q28) Approximately how many DBHIDS staff will use the modernized intranet: under 500, 500 to 2,000, or more than 2,000?

Response: The requested detail will be validated during discovery with DBHIDS and OIT. Applicants should state reasonable fixed-price assumptions, identify dependencies and exclusions, favor native Microsoft 365 capabilities, and separately identify any premium licensing, custom development, third-party tools, or material optional scope.

Q29) Approximately how many administrators, content owners, publishers, approvers, and IT support staff require role-based training: under 25, 25 to 75, or more than 75?

Response: DBHIDS-designated content owners will decide what to retain, recreate, remediate, consolidate, archive, or delete, including how much historical material should remain in the new intranet. DBHIDS can work with its current hosting provider to preserve a complete package of the legacy WordPress intranet. The selected Applicant will support inventory, assessment, migration mapping, remediation recommendations, formatting, metadata, archival planning, and migration execution. Substantial net-new content creation should be identified separately unless included in scope.

Q30) Is end-user training expected for all staff, or does DBHIDS prefer a train-the-trainer model?

Response: Applicants should propose a scalable train-the-trainer model supplemented by role-based live sessions, recorded training, reusable job aids, and administrative documentation. Current counts include approximately 7 administrators, 2 editors, and about 1,708 view-only users, but future content-owner, publisher, approver, and support roles will be finalized during governance discovery. Delivery may be remote or hybrid as agreed during planning.

Q31) Please provide the expected number of training sessions, delivery format, session duration, typical audience size, required recordings and editable materials, and any expected refresher or follow-up knowledge-transfer sessions.

Response: Applicants should propose a scalable train-the-trainer model supplemented by role-based live sessions, recorded training, reusable job aids, and administrative documentation. Current counts include approximately 7 administrators, 2 editors, and about 1,708 view-only users, but future content-owner, publisher, approver, and support roles will be finalized during governance discovery. Delivery may be remote or hybrid as agreed during planning.

Q32) How many DBHIDS divisions require a dedicated hub under Appendix A.3: fewer than five, five to ten, or more than ten?

Response: DBHIDS currently has six divisions. The anticipated model includes a department-wide homepage for featured news and announcements, division content feeds, and division landing pages for resources and news. At least one content curator per division should be assumed, with additional curators based on content volume and usage. Final hubs, sites, templates, navigation, and pilot scope will be established during discovery and information-architecture planning.

Q33) Please provide the anticipated number or range of pages, page templates, content types, taxonomy terms, and navigation structures to be designed or reconfigured under the base implementation.

Response: The selected Applicant should assess existing standards and design the future information architecture, navigation, taxonomy, metadata, content types, and reusable page templates with DBHIDS and

OIT. The final quantities and reuse model will be established during discovery and should favor governed, reusable components over unnecessary site-specific variation.

Q34) Please provide the approximate number of document libraries, lists, metadata fields, unique permission models, Microsoft 365 security groups, restricted content areas, workflows, custom forms, and file types that must be migrated, created, redesigned, remediated, or validated.

Response: The final number and types of workflows will be established with the individual DBHIDS divisions and business units during discovery. Applicants should include representative native Microsoft 365 publishing, review, approval, notification, expiration/recertification, access-request, and update-request workflows in their approach, identify fixed-price assumptions, and separately identify premium connectors or custom development.

Q35) How many distinct content review and approval workflows does DBHIDS expect under Appendix A.5:

one to three, four to eight, or more than eight?

Response: The final number and types of workflows will be established with the individual DBHIDS divisions and business units during discovery. Applicants should include representative native Microsoft 365 publishing, review, approval, notification, expiration/recertification, access-request, and update-request workflows in their approach, identify fixed-price assumptions, and separately identify premium connectors or custom development.

Q36) Does the WCAG 2.1 Level AA requirement in Appendix A.9 apply to newly created pages and templates only, retained and migrated content, or all content including archived material?

Response: DBHIDS-designated content owners will decide what to retain, recreate, remediate, consolidate, archive, or delete, including how much historical material should remain in the new intranet. DBHIDS can work with its current hosting provider to preserve a complete package of the legacy WordPress intranet. The selected Applicant will support inventory, assessment, migration mapping, remediation recommendations, formatting, metadata, archival planning, and migration execution. Substantial net-new content creation should be identified separately unless included in scope.

Q37) Are there defined success measures for search, such as findability, relevance, or user satisfaction?

Response: Applicants should address search relevance, findability, metadata, navigation, promoted content, governance, analytics, and failed-search improvement using City-approved Microsoft 365 capabilities. Existing search configuration and high-priority scenarios will be assessed during discovery.

External indexing or Graph connectors require separate architecture, security, licensing, and data-owner approval.

Q38) Which dashboards or reports are expected, and what business outcomes should they support?

Response: Power BI may be used for approved dashboards and data metrics within the Microsoft 365 ecosystem. Each division or business unit will help define its use cases and KPIs, and the selected

Applicant must coordinate with the DBHIDS BI team so data sources, governance, security, and reporting are aligned. Detailed audiences, refresh frequency, licensing, integration, gateway, row-level security, and data-preparation requirements will be refined during discovery. PHI should not be assumed without express authorization.

Q39) Should Power BI be included in the proposed reporting approach?

Response: Power BI may be used for approved dashboards and data metrics within the Microsoft 365 ecosystem. Each division or business unit will help define its use cases and KPIs, and the selected

Applicant must coordinate with the DBHIDS BI team so data sources, governance, security, and reporting are aligned. Detailed audiences, refresh frequency, licensing, integration, gateway, row-level security, and data-preparation requirements will be refined during discovery. PHI should not be assumed without express authorization.

Q40) For the dashboard work in Appendix A.8, should Applicants price discovery only, or discovery plus implementation as an optional item?

Response: Power BI may be used for approved dashboards and data metrics within the Microsoft 365 ecosystem. Each division or business unit will help define its use cases and KPIs, and the selected

Applicant must coordinate with the DBHIDS BI team so data sources, governance, security, and reporting are aligned. Detailed audiences, refresh frequency, licensing, integration, gateway, row-level security, and data-preparation requirements will be refined during discovery. PHI should not be assumed without express authorization.

Q41) What systems are expected to serve as dashboard data sources?

Response: Power BI may be used for approved dashboards and data metrics within the Microsoft 365 ecosystem. Each division or business unit will help define its use cases and KPIs, and the selected Applicant must coordinate with the DBHIDS BI team so data sources, governance, security, and reporting are aligned. Detailed audiences, refresh frequency, licensing, integration, gateway, row-level security, and data-preparation requirements will be refined during discovery. PHI should not be assumed without express authorization.

Q42) Please identify all required integrations beyond standard Microsoft 365 capabilities, including source and target systems, data exchanged, authentication method, API or connector availability, data owner, expected transaction or refresh frequency, and any third-party licensing or access dependencies.

Response: SharePoint Online is the approved target platform within the City’s Microsoft 365 environment.

DBHIDS employees currently have OIT-managed Microsoft 365 G3 or F3 licenses. Access for the selected implementation team and any external guest users will require OIT coordination and approval. Availability of

Power BI, Power Platform, premium connectors, Purview, Copilot, storage, and other premium capabilities must be validated with OIT; Applicants should separately identify and price any incremental licensing.

Q43) Of the Microsoft 365 services named in Appendix A.3, are any intended to be phased in after the initial go-live?

Response: A phased rollout by division, content area, or capability is acceptable and is preferred where it reduces risk and supports validation and adoption. Applicants should recommend a logical release plan, transition approach, and acceptance gates within the target completion date.

Q44) What are the desired go-live dates for the modernized intranet and related Microsoft 365 services?

Response: The anticipated project start is November 1, 2026, with a target completion date of October 31, 2027. Applicants should propose a phased schedule covering discovery, design, pilot, migration, testing, training, production rollout, stabilization, and required City/OIT reviews.

Q45) Are phased deployments acceptable by division, content area, or capability?

Response: A phased rollout by division, content area, or capability is acceptable and is preferred where it reduces risk and supports validation and adoption. Applicants should recommend a logical release plan, transition approach, and acceptance gates within the target completion date.

Q46) Please confirm that DBHIDS or OIT will provide required development, test/UAT, and production environments; Microsoft 365 licensing; administrative access; and applicable security, privacy, accessibility, architecture, and change-control reviews. Please also provide expected review and approval turnaround times.

Response: Following OIT approval, DBHIDS will request creation of the required SharePoint site within the

City tenant. Initial access should be restricted to the implementation and designated content-development teams until the solution is approved for broader rollout. Applicants should propose a secure configuration, test/UAT, and release approach that fits SharePoint Online and City change-control standards and clearly identify required tenant access, service accounts, and dependencies.

Q47) Please identify the division or content area expected for the pilot.

Response: The pilot is a required component of the base implementation and should be production-ready within the City’s approved Microsoft 365 environment. The pilot division, users, content, duration, feedback cycles, and approval authority will be confirmed during discovery. Applicants may recommend a representative scope and selection criteria and should include stakeholder review, UAT, accessibility validation, remediation, and readiness assessment.

Q48) Please identify the stakeholders authorized to approve pilot and production deliverables, the expected number of UAT and remediation cycles, and the expected turnaround time for City review and written acceptance.

Response: The pilot is a required component of the base implementation and should be production-ready within the City’s approved Microsoft 365 environment. The pilot division, users, content, duration, feedback cycles, and approval authority will be confirmed during discovery. Applicants may recommend a representative scope and selection criteria and should include stakeholder review, UAT, accessibility validation, remediation, and readiness assessment.

Q49) Please provide required support coverage hours, severity definitions, response and resolution targets, escalation requirements, service channels, reporting requirements, and on-site support expectations for the included warranty, maintenance, stabilization period, and optional support years.

Response: Applicants should propose clearly defined severity levels, business-hours coverage, after-hours escalation for critical incidents, response and restoration targets, reporting, and an appropriate post-go-live stabilization period. The current City support path is DBHIDS Help Desk, CBH Help Desk for PCL users, and

OIT Help Desk, with an updated escalation process forthcoming. Vendor responsibilities for delivered components, warranty, hypercare, optional support, onsite service, and after-hours coverage must be clearly distinguished and will be finalized during contracting.

Q50) For the intranet content management services in Section 2.4.1, what monthly volume should Applicants assume: under 10 items, 10 to 30 items, or more than 30 items?

Response: DBHIDS does not currently have a reliable monthly service-volume forecast. Historical activity includes approximately 803 announcements and 43 Commissioner messages since 2018, plus ongoing page and media updates. The future model is expected to allow division content curators to publish text, links, images, video, and embedded media, with volume likely increasing as adoption grows. Applicants may propose tiered service levels based on monthly hours or transaction volumes, response and turnaround commitments, included revisions, and rates for excess work.

Q51) Please identify the expected mix of videos, graphics, accessible documents, page updates, and editorial requests; whether DBHIDS will provide ready-to-publish source materials; and the expected approval turnaround time.

Response: DBHIDS does not currently have a reliable monthly service-volume forecast. Historical activity includes approximately 803 announcements and 43 Commissioner messages since 2018, plus ongoing page and media updates. The future model is expected to allow division content curators to publish text, links, images, video, and embedded media, with volume likely increasing as adoption grows. Applicants may propose tiered service levels based on monthly hours or transaction volumes, response and turnaround commitments, included revisions, and rates for excess work.

Q1) Who is the incumbent vendor currently providing similar services?

Response: No incumbent vendor should be assumed to own this intranet modernization. The current

WordPress environment is supported through a combination of DBHIDS and City resources. Eligibility is governed by the RFP; all Applicants will be evaluated under the published criteria.

Q2) Is the incumbent vendor allowed to participate in this RFP?

Response: No incumbent vendor should be assumed to own this intranet modernization. The current

WordPress environment is supported through a combination of DBHIDS and City resources. Eligibility is governed by the RFP; all Applicants will be evaluated under the published criteria.

Q3) Could the City…