Response to Offeror Questions document.pdf

25RFP16292 – Web Design and Maintenance Responses to Offeror Questions

September 17, 2025

Response Summary The responses to questions received as of August 28, 2025, from offerors for 25RFP16292 are provided below in no particular order. All questions have been aggregated into a single document, with no vendors or offerors individually identified. While several questions are duplicates or similar to others, each has been answered consistently with the same content.

Project Scope, Submission, & Timeline

1. Current Site Analytics: Can you provide traffic analytics, popular pages, and user behavior data for the current dlr.sd.gov website to inform the redesign strategy? Yes.

2. User Research: Are there existing user research findings, content audits, or identified pain points with the current website that you can share? No.

3. Content Responsibility: Who will be responsible for content review, editing, and approval during the migration process? Vendor must provide redesign and restructure services. DLR’s communications team will be responsible for content review, editing, and approval.

4. Critical Dates: Are there any specific launch dates, events, or deadlines that could impact the project timeline? None known at this time.

5. Siteimprove Integration: Can you provide more details about the Siteimprove integration requirements mentioned in the scope of work? Must continue to support our services with https://www.siteimprove.com/.

6. What is the desired project timeline from contract award to go-live? December 2026.

7. Does the scope for the new website design include all of the child websites currently accessible through dlr.sd.gov? For example, we have noticed several external sites that users can access from the main domain. Would these also be included in the redesign as part of this opportunity?

No.

8. Are the timelines in the RFP finalized? See revisions in Addendum 2.

9. What is the ideal launch date? December 2026.

10. Can we submit the proposals via email? Proposals will only be accepted via email.

11. Can you please give us an extension of 1-2 weeks to submit our proposal? See revisions in Addendum 2.

12. Could you consider extending the submission deadline by one week, as the responses to offeror questions are scheduled very close to the due date? Additional time would allow us to align our https://www.siteimprove.com/ proposal more closely with the requirements and the provided answers. See revisions in Addendum 2.

13. Section 1.2, pg. 2: The schedule indicates that the State expects to post Q&A only one week before the proposals are due. Would the State consider an extension to allow vendors appropriate time to adjust proposals based on the State’s Q&A? See revisions in Addendum 2.

14. Section 2, pg. 6: This section indicates that the contract will consist of the State’s standard Information Technology (“IT”) contract terms listed in Appendix A. See revisions in Addendum 2.. It does not appear as though Appendix A contains any terms and conditions. There is, however, a questionnaire located within Appendix A. Would the state please clarify if our response to this questionnaire constitutes the terms and conditions? The State may require a technical review of the offeror based on the offeror’s proposal and response to the Security and Vendor Questionnaire.

15. Section 6.2.3, pg. 24: Background investigations is listed in 6.2.3 but not mentioned anywhere else in the RFP. Do bidders need to respond to this section? If so, what is expected? Proper background investigations of the vendor, or willingness to pass background checks.

16. Section 6.3, pg. 24: We are assuming that the Statement of Understanding and the Executive Summary are the same. Is this correct? If not, please clarify. Yes.

17. Section 6.4, pg. 25: This section states, “The offeror’s Deliverables section should address each evaluation requirement enumerated in Section 8.” Many of the evaluation requirements in Section 8 are required to be addressed in other sections of the proposal. Please clarify. Ensure all criteria in Section 8 are addressed in the proposal.

18. Section 6.11, pg. 27: The second to last bullet requires “Feedback on offeror’s Work by Client.” Is this bullet meant to be completed by the State when speaking to the reference? If not, please clarify how vendors should respond to this bullet. Yes.

19. Section 6.13, pg. 28: Should Cost be provided as a separate document? No.

20. Section 7.2, pg. 29: This section states, “The cost for additional work should be included in the offeror’s proposal.” To the extent that additional work is not part of the exclusions listed under Section 7.2, please confirm that the selected vendor will be given the opportunity to scope and price any additional work once the requirements of such tasks are defined. Yes, considering additional work still needs to be scoped.

21. Attachments A, B, and C: Are these forms to be submitted with the proposal? Yes.

22. What is the timeline for go-live for redesigned website launch? December 2026.

23. How many years of development and maintenance should be considered in estimate as part of this journey? 2 years.

24. What is your current release cycle? Could this new website be deployed in an incremental or big bang approach? Big Bang approach.

25. Is there a target launch date? December 2026. Is it tied to an event or deadline, like a fiscal year or contract expiration? No.

26. We are a US company with employees outside the US. Is there any limitation on their ability to work on the project? U.S.-based personnel are preferred.

27. The RFP references several model state websites. Should the new site replicate their specific functionality or only adopt a comparable design and user experience approach? Shouldn’t replicate, just general guidelines and aesthetics, professional, clean, modern.

28. Should vendors provide their cost proposal in a separate document, or is it acceptable to include it as part of a single file? No. It is acceptable to include in proposal.

29. Section 4.1 asks for the vendor to include a series of plans in their proposal that are of a type that would normally only be developed during the discovery and planning phase. Is it acceptable to provide examples of these plans, rather than to speculate about what they might contain at this stage? No.

30. Section 6.2.3 asks vendors to respond to a section called “Background Investigations”. What type of response is expected there? Proper background investigations of the vendor, or willingness to pass background checks.

31. In section 6.11 the state asks for the four most recently completed projects as references. As an alternative, would the state be willing to allow a vendor to provide the four most relevant completed projects, provided they have been completed in the past 3 years? Yes, the State will determine if they apply or not.

32. The document refers to Appendix A as the State’s standard IT contract terms, but this appendix is not included. Later, the Security and Vendor Questionnaire is also labeled as Appendix A, while in some sections it is referred to as Appendix B. Could you please confirm:

o Would you provide the State’s standard IT contract terms and conditions referenced as Appendix A in the RFP, and See revisions in Addendum 2.

o Whether the Security and Vendor Questionnaire should be considered Appendix A or Appendix B. See revisions in Addendum 2.

Evaluation & Award Process

33. BIT Approval Process: What is the typical timeline for Bureau of Information and Technology

(BIT) approval, and are there specific BIT requirements or preferences beyond those mentioned in the RFP? Determinations are normally made within 1-3 weeks upon completion of a technical review.

34. Presentations: Will there be opportunities for finalist presentations or product demonstrations as part of the evaluation process? Yes.

35. Local Preference: Is there any evaluation preference given to South Dakota-based vendors or those with regional experience? No preference.

36. Similar Projects: Are there any common challenges or lessons learned from similar state website projects that prospective vendors should be aware of? Unknown.

37. Could you please advise if there are any prerequisites such as a non-disclosure agreement, pre-qualification process, or other requirements that must be completed prior to submitting our proposal? None.

38. Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this? (like from India or Canada) U.S.-based companies are preferred.

39. Is this contract intended to be awarded to a single vendor or to multiple vendors? One single vendor.

40. Is there an incumbent currently performing this work/similar work? If so, could you please provide the incumbent's name, current contract number, duration, historical level of effort, and contract value? DLR is currently performing the work for dlr.sd.gov.

41. Is the incumbent eligible to submit a proposal under this RFP? N.A.

42. Is there an incumbent vendor currently providing website development and/or maintenance services for DLR? If yes, what was the contract value for the most recent award? DLR is currently performing the work for dlr.sd.gov.

43. Page 13 states that the offeror’s proposal must include a project management plan, risk management plan, communications plan etc. Is it the expectation that these are included as proposed deliverables in our proposal, or are you hoping vendors create and submit a communications plan, project management plan etc.? Plans for project management, risk management, and communications should be included in the offeror’s proposal.

44. Is a specific business license or business registration required to perform work under this RFP in the state of South Dakota? If so, may the selected vendor obtain and provide the required license and business registration after contract award, or must it be submitted as part of the proposal? No.

45. Is the selected vendor permitted to engage personnel located outside the United States (e.g., in India) to fulfill the project requirements? U.S.-based personnel are preferred.

46. Are there any requirements for in-person meetings either before or after the contract is awarded? If so, how frequently are these meetings expected to occur? Depends on the project outline. Meetings to keep information flowing are vital.

47. How will the winning vendor be selected? Is there a scoring matrix or something similar? The State has its own process.

48. Is there any preference for local or disadvantaged vendors? All relevant and qualified vendors will be considered equally.

49. Is there a certain type of background experience the Department finds most applicable? Work for other government entities would be beneficial.

50. Is it acceptable for the majority of work to be performed remotely? Please describe the Department’s expectations for any onsite work. Remote work is allowed, but preferred within the U.S.

Budget & Payment Structure

51. Budget Range: Can you provide the anticipated budget range for the initial development phase to help us tailor our proposal appropriately? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount.

Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of work outlined in the RFP.

52. Annual Maintenance Budget: What is the expected annual budget for ongoing maintenance and support services? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of work outlined in the RFP.

53. Payment Terms: Are there preferred payment structures or milestone-based payment schedules the State would like vendors to propose? No preference.

54. Additional Work: Regarding the "Additional Work" mentioned in Section 7, can you provide examples of the types of additional work that might be required? Or illustrations. This can be discussed with the selected offeror and DLR.

55. While the RFP mentions a cost proposal is required, are there any specific budget constraints or a maximum budget for this project? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of work outlined in the RFP.

56. To ensure we can provide the most appropriate recommendations and align with your expectations, is the DLR able to provide the anticipated/approximate budget for the project?

DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of work outlined in the RFP.

57. What is your anticipated/approximate budget for annual hosting/licensing? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of work outlined in the RFP.

58. Could the DLR provide additional details on the requirement for “budget tracking with a monthly status spreadsheet”? Specifically, what format or level of detail is expected? General information, what part of the Software Development Life Cycle the project is in, cost for each phase.

59. While no budget is stated, is there an internal target or ceiling we should be aware of for solution design and ongoing maintenance? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of

60. Is there any specific pricing format required for submission? No. Can we submit pricing in Excel?

Yes.

61. To ensure that our proposal is aligned with the State’s expectations, could you please confirm whether a budget range has been established for this project? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of work outlined in the RFP.

62. Can you please share the budget or budget range for this project? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal

63. If this is a new Contract, what is the annual Budget for this? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal

64. What is the budget for the Design and Development? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal

65. What is your current spending on annual hosting? N.A.

66. Does the State have an established budget range for this project, and if so, can that information be shared to help vendors propose realistic and cost-effective solutions? DLR is not sharing a

67. Does the State have an established budget range for this project, and if so, can that information be shared to help vendors propose realistic and cost-effective solutions? DLR is not sharing a

68. We see similar RFPS with budgets ranging from $100K to well into six figures. Where in that range are you expecting to fall? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of

69. What is your current annual spend on hosting and support for the site? Current information is not available to be shared.

70. Is there a budget range allocated for this project that vendors should align their proposals to? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of work outlined in the RFP.

71. Regarding the potential for variables in the deliverables, is there a not-to-exceed budget for the entire project? If an exact figure is not available, would it be more or less than $350K? DLR is not sharing a specific budget amount. Offerors are encouraged to submit a comprehensive and competitive proposal reflecting the full scope of work outlined in the RFP.

72. Under “Analytics and Reporting,” the RFP mentions “Budget tracking with a monthly status spreadsheet.” Are we okay to assume this is related to the project budget itself, as presented by the chosen vendor’s project management team, and not an ongoing report tied to DLR’s internal operating budget? Yes.

Contract History

73. What was the annual spend for the previous year on this Project? This is a new project.

74. Is there an incumbent for the work? No.

75. Can the State confirm if there is a current incumbent vendor providing website development and maintenance services for dlr.sd.gov? If there is an incumbent, will that vendor be eligible to compete for this RFP, and will they be involved in any transition activities? N.A.

76. Can the State confirm if there is a current incumbent vendor providing website development and maintenance services for dlr.sd.gov? If there is an incumbent, will that vendor be eligible to compete for this RFP, and will they be involved in any transition activities? N.A.

77. Who maintains the existing site, an internal team or agency partner? If a partner, who? DLR.

78. Where is the site currently hosted? Information can be found by offeror.

79. How long has the current website been in maintenance mode, and who has been responsible for maintaining it? Not applicable due to security considerations.

80. What is the current annual spend on website maintenance and hosting? N.A.

81. Are there incumbent vendors participating in this RFP? No.

Technical/Operational Requirements & Infrastructure

82. Hosting Options: Will the State accept a vendor-hosted solution, or must the new website be hosted on state infrastructure? State infrastructure. If vendor-hosted solutions are acceptable, are there additional security requirements beyond those outlined in the Security and Vendor Questionnaire? N.A.

83. If a state-hosted solution is proposed, what are the specific virtualized environment requirements and what standard hardware and software are in use that we should be aware of?

See Section 4.3 State Hosted Solutions.

84. Is there any hosting preference? Are you open for hosting platforms such as Acquia? See Section

4.3 State Hosted Solutions.

http://dlr.sd.gov/

85. Will the State require hosting services from the selected vendor, or will hosting be provided by the State? State.

86. Integration Requirements: What specific third-party systems, databases, or APIs does the new website need to integrate with beyond those mentioned in the RFP? This can be discussed with the selected offeror and DLR.

87. Are there any additional integrations (beyond Siteimprove, social media, and analytics) that the State anticipates for the new website? Not currently.

88. Single Sign-On (SSO): Are there requirements for SSO integration with existing state systems or authentication protocols? Yes.

89. Can you provide more information or documentation on the state's standard identity management service for single sign-on (SSO) and the OAuth 2.0 protocol? Further information regarding authentication methods can be found in the state’s BIT Contractor version of ITSP:

https://www.sd.gov/bit?id=kb_article_view&sysparm_article=KB0010792.

90. Load Balancing: Per Section 4.1.3, can you provide more details about the load balancing requirements and the specific technical specifications for operating within the State's computing environment? Load balancing will be discussed during the BIT Technical Review.

91. Disaster Recovery: What are the specific Recovery Time Objective (RTO) and Recovery Point Objective (RPO) requirements for the disaster recovery plan mentioned in Section 6?

RTO – 4-24 hours required. RPO – Every 1-2 hours.

92. The RFP mentions several types of testing (Regression, Integration, Functional, Performance, Load, and UAT). Are there any specific testing scenarios or success criteria that the DLR has in mind for these tests? The site must pass a proper cybersecurity assessment by BIT.

93. Are there any specific security certifications (e.g., StateRAMP, FedRAMP, or HITRUST) that the DLR expects the agency or solution to have? StateRamp will be considered; however, not mandatory, as long as a proper security assessment is passed, and a plan is provided to keep the site up to date security-wise.

94. How do you currently handle SEO? DLR webmaster. Do you need support with optimizing content, keyword research, or technical SEO? Yes.

95. Does your website integrate with other systems (i.e., email marketing, HubSpot)? If so, which systems? No.

96. Is there a hosting plan in place? No.

97. Support Response Times: What are your expectations for response times to different types of support requests (emergency, routine, enhancement)? Critical, High Priority, High, Medium, and Low. Times can be defined in the contract.

https://www.sd.gov/bit?id=kb_article_view&sysparm_article=KB0010792

98. Maintenance Windows: Are there any blackout periods when website updates or maintenance cannot be performed? During working hours, 6 a.m. to 9 p.m.

99. Communication Preferences: What is your preferred communication method and frequency for project management and ongoing support? Microsoft Teams meetings as needed during development; monthly for ongoing support.

100. Is live support (real-time assistance for site users) required post-launch, or is the expectation limited to technical maintenance and content support? Limited to technical maintenance and content support.

101. Are there any wish list functionalities that you don't have on the site today, but would like to see on the new website? Backend solution for large amounts of data, contact system, and calendar with search/filter function.

102. Other than SSO, are there any integrations needed with third-party platforms? If so, which ones? This can be discussed with the selected offeror and DLR.

103. Does SD DLR already have established user and security testing standards or will those be developed in this project? Yes, established by BIT.

104. Are there any other integrations with 3rd party platforms (API, plugin, or other) that must persist, be added, or be extended in the site redesign? Not at this time.

105. Does SD DLR maintain their own hosted (GitLab) or cloud account (GitHub) VCS or does the Offeror set up and manage the code versioning and CI/CD solution? If SD DLR hosts their own solution to be used by the Offeror, does it have the ability to integrate automated testing and deployment? No.

106. Hosting & Disaster Recovery – Are there specific hosting or data residency requirements (e.g., data must remain within the U.S. or South Dakota)? Are there defined disaster recovery/continuity standards to be met beyond general best practices? U.S. or hosted within the State infrastructure.

107. Integrations – Could you provide a list of confirmed integrations (e.g., authentication systems, job boards, payment gateways)? Will APIs be provided for these integrations, or should vendors assume custom connectors? This can be discussed with the selected offeror and DLR.

108. Should vulnerability scans be performed quarterly, annually, or only at launch? Launch, and if maintenance is agreed upon, annually.

109. Does your current hosting provide DR services? Yes.

110. Does your current hosting own by agency? Question cannot be interpreted.

111. From section 4, 4.3.6 - Does agency offer State Hosting platform? If so, what is the technology platform? Can you share more detailed insight on it, if offeror leverage the state hosting platform - does it suffice the requirement you Microsoft-based technology hosted within the

State is preferred.

112. For state hosted - if vulnerability scans are performed by states, does offeror still need to propose the scanning tools and associated cost? Security scanning tools are a given during development lifecycle. There must not be any extra cost for them.

113. If state will perform vulnerability scan, does offeror responsible for performing remediation?

Yes.

114. The RFP references both state-hosted and vendor-hosted solutions. Can the State clarify which option is preferred, or whether both must be priced and presented? State-hosted preferred.

115. Does the current site’s Microservices use both XML and JSON or one specific format. Both.

116. Will the current web site’s code base be opened up for logical and design flow. What are the existing rules/config that needs to be carried forward during redesign? No.

117. Are we allowed to build website using modern tech stack like React, Node Js, Python fast API, managed database (sql/nosql)? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

118. Are we allowed to build Python fast API or node js based api based interfaces for exposing business needs? No.

119. Can the website be deployed on any public cloud (Azure/AWS/GCP)?. No.

120. How many environments do we have currently? How many more environments we may need to scale from existing platform SDLC, dev, test, prod.

121. Email Domain Name Requirement - Could you elaborate more with examples See current site.

122. Are we going to keep the existing backend system or need to build a new one? For existing backend system if applicable share the tech stack including language, frameworks, database, infrastructure Build new.

123. The RFP references both state-hosted and vendor-hosted solutions. Can the State clarify which option is preferred, or whether both must be priced and presented? State-hosted preferred.

124. Are there any existing security compliance frameworks (e.g., NIST, SOC 2, HIPAA) the website must align with? StateRamp will be considered; however, not mandatory, as long as a proper security assessment is passed, and a plan is provided to keep the site up to date security-wise.

125. Will penetration testing be conducted by DLR or should it be part of the vendor’s scope?

Vendor must scan their solution during the SDLC and be ready to pass a security scan by the State.

126. Are there preferred SEO tools or guidelines to be followed during optimization? No.

127. What is the retention policy for site backups and security logs? 6 months / 90 days.

128. Is there a preferred technology stack (PHP, WordPress, or another framework) for development? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

129. How should test environments be set up, and who will provide hosting during development?

Vendor provided, unless agreed upon with the State to provide the instances.

130. What is the expected volume of concurrent users and system performance benchmarks?

Unknown.

131. What hosting provider(s) or infrastructure standards should be used? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

132. Should the hosting environment be cloud-based, on-premises, or hybrid? Cloud-based or State BIT standards.

133. Are there any data residency or compliance requirements (e.g., within the U.S.)? All must be within the U.S.

134. How frequently will data updates or dashboard refreshes be needed for platforms like Power BI or Tableau? All data must be updated immediately, unless previously agreed upon.

135. Are there existing identity providers (IdP) that the SSO solution must integrate with? No.

136. Should SSO extend to third-party tools integrated with the website? Possibly.

137. What is the expected number of users requiring SSO access? Unknown.

138. Is there a need for audit logging of user login/logout and session activities? Through the SSO method, if needed.

139. What is the default inactive session timeout period? To be determined.

140. How should users be notified of session expiration — email, on-screen alert, or both? To be determined.

141. Should sessions persist across devices or browsers? No.

142. What is the expected onboarding workflow — manual approval, bulk import, or automated API-based processes? Depends on proposed solution.

143. Should the system support role-based provisioning and de-provisioning? No.

144. Are there specific data retention, audit, or compliance policies that the system must adhere to? Yes.

145. Please describe all third-party systems that integrate with the website via an API or an automated data import/export.Please describe all third-party systems that integrate with the website via an API or an automated data import/export. SSO and others can be discussed with the selected offeror.

146. Do you need 2FA implemented with the SSO? If required by State standards.

147. What are the data storage requirements (files, database, etc) for the site? Latest Microsoft

148. Please describe any CDN or WAF in your current hosting setup. N.A.

149. For vendor-hosted solutions, does the State have a preferred cloud provider (e.g., AWS, Azure, Google Cloud)? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

150. For state-hosted solutions, can the State provide details on hosting environment specifications (server OS, database versions, etc.)? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

151. Will the State provide test environments and API documentation for Single Sign-On (SSO) integration during development? Yes.

152. For Vulnerability Scans, will the State accept scans performed by a vendor’s qualified third-party security partner, or must all scans be conducted directly by the State? Contingent on BIT accepting the report.

153. Are there specific cybersecurity standards or certifications the system must comply with (e.g., NIST, SOC2, FedRAMP)? StateRamp will be considered; however, not mandatory, as long as a proper security assessment is passed, and a plan is provided to keep the site up to date security-wise.

154. What specific data protection practices (e.g., encryption, retention, access controls) must be followed?

StateRamp will be considered; however, not mandatory, as long as a proper security assessment is passed, and a plan is provided to keep the site up to date security-wise.

155. For disaster recovery planning under vendor-hosted solutions, are there defined Recovery Point Objective (RPO) and Recovery Time Objective (RTO) requirements? RTO – 4-24 hours required.

RPO – Every 1-2 hours.

156. Does the Department have any preference for a vendor hosted solution vs a state hosted solution? State-hosted solution preferred.

157. Under the “Development and Implementation” section of the Scope of Work, it references that the selected partner should “Facilitate user testing in partnership with DLR and South Dakota’s IT agency.” Is this to be interpreted that the user testing is done by people of the community as third-party testing or is it meant as dedicated time for testing by DLR and BIT?

Dedicated time by DLR and BIT.

158. State Hosted vs External – does DLR or BIT have a strong preference one way or the other?

State-hosted solution preferred.

Accessibility & Compliance

159. Accessibility Testing: Do you have existing accessibility testing tools or methodologies that the selected vendor should integrate with or use? Yes, Siteimprove.

160. Compliance Reporting: How frequently do you expect accessibility compliance reporting, and in what format? Quarterly.

161. Current Compliance Status: Has the existing dlr.sd.gov website undergone recent accessibility auditing that could inform the redesign process? Only reports generated by Siteimprove.

162. Accessibility & Compliance – Beyond WCAG 2.1 AA, are there additional state or federal accessibility/security standards required? Will the Department accept third-party accessibility testing vendors for compliance verification? No.

163. WCAG 2.1 AA compliance is required, are there additional ADA or Section 508 standards DLR wants enforced? No.

164. Is there a need for multiple languages? Yes.

165. What languages should the translation widget support beyond English? See current site.

166. Is there an existing mobile app that needs to be reused or do we need to build a new mobile app similar to a new website? No existing mobile app.

167. What type of device support is needed for the new site? Site must display properly on desktops, laptops, notebooks, and mobile devices.

168. What are the primary languages to be supported? See current site.

169. Should accessibility testing include specific tools (e.g., Axe, Wave) to validate WCAG 2.1 AA compliance? Preferred.

170. Should downloadable resources (Excel, PDF) require user authentication or remain publicly accessible? Content dependent.

171. Are there specific accessibility testing scenarios required for interactive components? No.

172. What third-party tools, if any, are used to manage accessibility? If none, are you interested in an add-on that will monitor and report on accessibility and site errors? Open to offeror proposals.

173. Have you dealt with any security issues or malicious traffic on your sites like DDoS attacks, SQL injections, etc? If so, what was the impact? N.A.

174. Are there any AI related policies that we should be aware of? All must comply with State policies.

175. Is a specific translation tool desired? What languages will need to be supported? (or at least provide an estimated quantity of languages, such as 3 languages). Would there be interest in using some AI driven tools to provide base translations that can be adjusted as needed? ?

Open to offeror proposals.

Content Management & User Requirements

176. CMS Users: Beyond the five team members mentioned for training, approximately how many total users will need access to the content management system? Five total users.

177. User Roles: What are the specific role-based permission requirements for different user types (editors, approvers, administrators, etc.)? Administrator, Editor, Approver.

178. Content Workflow: Do you have existing content approval workflows that need to be incorporated into the new CMS? No.

179. Content Volume: Approximately how many pages from the current dlr.sd.gov site need to be migrated to the new website? Currently, there are 1,200 pages, but this will be reduced before migration.

180. Is the DLR able to provide the approximate number of pages that will need to be migrated?

Currently, there are 1,200 pages, but this will be reduced before migration.

181. Will content migration include only technical migration, or will content rewriting/restructuring also be part of the vendor’s scope? Content rewriting and restructuring must be included.

182. Are there any specific pain points or limitations with the existing Content Management System (CMS)? DLR does not have an existing CMS; website is maintained in Adobe Dreamweaver.

183. Is there any preference for CMS? Are you open for CMS such as Drupal? Latest Microsoft

184. May we propose WordPress as the CMS solution for this project? Yes.

185. Can you share examples of how your staff currently updates content, and what specific pain points they encounter with the existing CMS? DLR does not have an existing CMS; website is maintained in Adobe Dreamweaver.

186. What CMS and tech stack does SD DLR's website currently use? DLR does not have an existing CMS; website is maintained in Adobe Dreamweaver.

187. CMS Requirements – Is there a preferred CMS platform (e.g., WordPress, Drupal), or should vendors propose one? Should the CMS support multi-site configurations for future expansion?

Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

188. What level of customization is expected for the CMS—strictly WordPress/PHP or is the vendor free to propose alternatives Like Drupal? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

189. How many internal staff will need training on analytics dashboards and CMS editing? Five total users.

190. Beyond the required five CMS-trained staff, how many additional end users may need training (e.g., content editors across departments)? Unknown.

191. Can the State confirm which CMS the current dlr.sd.gov website is running on, and whether the State has a preference for the CMS platform moving forward (e.g., WordPress, Drupal, or other)? DLR does not have an existing CMS; website is maintained in Adobe Dreamweaver.

192. Are we migrating all the existing CMS ? Would there be new contents to be added/maintained into the new CMS? DLR does not have an existing CMS; website is

193. Is there a preferred CMS product to be used? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

194. How many system integrators and products do we need to integrate it? This can be discussed with the selected offeror and DLR.

195. Is there an existing mobile app that needs to be reused or do we need to build a new mobile app similar to a new website? No existing mobile app.

196. What is the volume of CMS data to be migrated ? What type of CMS is involved? Currently, there are 1,200 pages, but this will be reduced before migration. DLR does not have an existing CMS; website is maintained in Adobe Dreamweaver.

197. Can the State confirm which CMS the current dlr.sd.gov website is running on, and whether the State has a preference for the CMS platform moving forward (e.g., WordPress, Drupal, or other)? Currently, there are 1,200 pages, but this will be reduced before migration. Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

198. Which CMS platforms are preferred or currently in use, if any? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

199. Should the CMS support role-based access control for content editing and publishing? Yes.

200. Are there any restrictions or approval workflows required for publishing content? No.

201. What volume of content (number of pages, documents, or datasets) will need to be migrated?

Currently, there are 1,200 pages, but this will be reduced before migration.

202. What is the expected process for email subscription and list management? Open to offeror

203. What format should training materials and user guides follow? Open to offeror proposals.

204. What is the preferred format for CMS training (in-person, virtual, recorded sessions)? Mix of all may be acceptable. Must be agreed upon with the offeror and DLR.

205. How many staff members will require advanced technical training? Five total users.

206. What is the expected level and duration of post-launch support? Must be agreed upon with the offeror and DLR.

207. Is there an organizational preference for open source vs. a proprietary CMS? Latest Microsoft

208. Is there a preference for any specific CMS? If yes, is that preference driven by familiarity, budget, perceived technical superiority or ease of use, or some other factor? Latest Microsoft

209. What is the current CMS? What shortcomings of the current CMS do you hope to remedy with this effort? DLR does not have an existing CMS; website is maintained in Adobe Dreamweaver.

210. How many staff will need editorial access to the CMS? Five total users.

211. Do you experience frequent surges of traffic that impact performance at critical times? No.

212. Please describe how content is stored in the current CMS. Is content structured in a database with distinct fields in each content type, or is all the content essentially in a "content" field?

Can be determined during the discovery process.

213. Are you interested in website tools that will enhance the user experience (search, chatbots, etc) using AI? Open to offeror proposals.

214. What is the current CMS and hosting solution used for dlr.sd.gov? DLR does not have an existing CMS;

website is maintained in Adobe Dreamweaver.

215. The RFP specifies PHP and WordPress version requirements. Is the State open to other CMS platforms (e.g., Drupal, Umbraco) if they better align with long-term needs? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

216. How often are CMS plugins, themes, and components currently updated under the existing setup? N.A.

217. The RFP makes reference to requirements “If using PHP or WordPress” - does this imply that the Department wants to use WordPress only, or is it open to any established CMS that meets the business requirements? Latest Microsoft Technologies is preferred.

218. What is the CMS used on the current site? DLR does not have an existing CMS; website is

Design, Branding, & Content

219. Are there any example websites that align with your design goals or visual preferences? Yes, refer to Section 3 Scope of Work.

220. Besides the examples provided (like Washington State Employment Security Department), are there any other websites or design styles that DLR would like to emulate? Yes, refer to Section 3 Scope of Work.

221. What are the specific branding guidelines that need to be followed? Open to offeror

222. When was the last website refresh, and what’s driving the new website redesign? 2016. DLR is seeking a visual refresh, a better customer experience, clearer and more concise content, and compliance with new WCAG requirements.

223. Is there a style-guide or brand guidelines document? Yes, but open to offeror proposals.

224. Should the redesign align with current branding, or are you open to a complete brand refresh?

Open to offeror proposals.

225. What are the top 3 results you would like to achieve with this project? DLR is seeking a visual refresh, a better customer experience, and clearer and more concise content.

226. Do you need support editing or writing site content? Yes.

227. Do you have a library of photos (or an account for stock photography) that we can use? Or will you need assistance with creating/curating photos and graphics? No. Assistance is needed.

228. Do you already have an approved, updated photography library for the site redesign? No.

229. Are there specific visual elements or features for the website re design you want to prioritize?

More imagery in general, hero images, homepage slider.

230. What types of content updates are most frequent, and what are the current challenges the internal team faces when performing these updates? Public meeting documents. For LMIC, the most frequent updates are data-based; the ability to post data in a table format is paramount.

231. Will the website be in both dark as well as light mode? Open to offeror proposals.

232. Who are the primary audiences visiting the website? Job seekers, workers, businesses, professional licensees, DLR staff, and partner agencies.

233. Would this be a redesign of the current website using the same tech stack or is SD DLR looking for a new build on a different tech stack? DLR does not have an existing CMS. Latest Microsoft

234. Is there an existing email list and platform that we need to integrate into the new site or will we be starting this email list from scratch? Is there a preferred platform you would like to use?

To be determined with selected offeror.

235. Will site content be provided by SD DLR or will that need to be extracted from the current site? Will content be reviewed during migration? Content to be reviewed during content evaluation.

236. Will document files be provided by SD DLR or will that need to be extracted from the current site? Content to be reviewed during content evaluation.

237. Is there a specific calendar platform already used? Does it have an API, plugin, or other method of integration available? https://calendar.sd.gov/ is hosted by BIT.

238. Data Migration – Is there an inventory of content, data, and assets to be migrated from the current website? Should vendors scope migration as a full turnkey activity, or will DLR provide resources for content entry/QA? No such inventory exists. Offeror must catalogue the data and structure.

239. What is the estimated number of pages and content volume on the existing site that must be migrated? Currently, there are 1,200 pages, but this will be reduced before migration.

240. Will DLR provide all content (text, images, videos, documents), or should the vendor plan to generate or rewrite content? No such inventory exists. Offeror must catalogue the data and structure and assist with rewriting content.

241. Are there any third-party integrations (job portals, databases, external APIs, forms) that must be supported or carried over from the current site? Links, news feed, and forms, if needed, must be recreated on the new site.

242. Does DLR have branding guidelines (colors, fonts, style guide, logos) to be followed, or is the vendor expected to create them? Yes, but open to offeror proposals.

243. Should existing systems (such as unemployment insurance portals or training portals) be integrated into the new website? Links to other sites must be included, and proper HTML, CSS, and PSD files must be provided back to DLR for creation and integration of DLR other services.

244. Will the calendar of events need to integrate with Microsoft Outlook, Google Calendar, or another scheduling system? No.

245. For social media integration—should it be read-only feeds or include publishing capabilities?

Direct integrations from social media, native capabilities only.

246. How much data is part of migration; can you share size and type of current database in use?

There is no db. The content is XTML , CSS, and JS.

https://calendar.sd.gov/

247. Section 3, pg. 11: Of the 1000+ pages on the site, how many are in each of these categories?

• Pages currently being used to apply for, inform, access, or participate in SD DOL programs and services Unknown, will be discovered during the assessment of the site.

• Pages that may represent archival information or information that will not need to be migrated to the new site Unknown, will be discovered during the assessment of the site.

248. Section 3, pg. 11: Of the 1200 electronic documents, how many are in each of these categories?

• Documents currently being used to apply for, access, or participate in SD DOL programs and services Unknown, will be discovered during the assessment of the site.

• Documents posted for reference that (1) will not be updated in the future and (2) are not used to apply for, access, or participate in SD DOL programs and services Unknown, will be discovered during the assessment of the site.

249. Section 3, pg. 11: Do any of the external sites or subdomains referenced across the SD DLR site capture data that is utilized somewhere on the SD DLR site? No.

250. Section 3, pg. 11: Are any services currently linked to separate subdomains/websites going to be migrated into the new redesigned site. Unknown, will be discovered during the assessment of the site.

251. Section 3, pg. 12 What is the anticipated monthly traffic for the website? Unknown, will be discovered during the assessment of the site.

252. Section 3, pg. 12: What data does the state anticipate needing to import/export from the website? Unknown, will be discovered during the assessment of the site.

253. Section 3, pg. 12: Will any dynamic forms that can be submitted digitally need to be moved to a new hosting/storage environment once the site is migrated? Forms should have the same functionality as they do now.

254. Can the State confirm whether all existing content on dlr.sd.gov will be migrated by the vendor, or will State staff assist with content migration? Vendor will migrate.

255. Do we need to migrate data from an existing database to a new database? If yes, how many years of data to be migrated No.

256. When using Social sharing tools for content distribution, what email /login would be used to share? Integration steps by the vendor must be identified and placeholders put in place, to be replaced by DLR with the live accounts.

257. There are a lot of forms in the current website available to download. How are users uploading these forms currently like email/ mail or direct website uploading? Adobe Sign -direct to SharePoint or email address; Adobe fillable - fill, print, mail, or email (user account, not automated); a few Word and Excel documents - fill, print, mail, or email.

258. Can the State confirm whether all existing content on dlr.sd.gov will be migrated by the vendor, or will State staff assist with content migration? Vendor will migrate.

259. Can you provide specific brand guidelines, such as fonts, color palettes, and logo usage, to ensure design alignment with the DLR brand? Yes, but open to offeror proposals.

260. Are there any mandatory design elements or layout requirements beyond the examples provided? More imagery in general, hero images, homepage slider.

261. Are there preferred plugins or APIs for social media integration? No.

262. What social platforms are critical for live feed embedding (e.g., Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube)?

Facebook, X, LinkedIn, YouTube.

263. Is the email subscription for press releases and updates currently powered by a SaaS app such as mailChimp? If not, how is it managed? To be discussed with the offeror and DLR.

264. Google has 10.300 URLs indexed on the South Dakota Department of Labor and Regulation.

Please quantify (# of pages, files, etc.) the existing site content. No such inventory exists.

Offeror must catalogue the data and structure and assist with rewriting content.

265. Does the site search need to index the contents of pdf / Doc files? Yes.

266. Do you expect copywriting or editing services as part of engagement? Yes.

267. Do you need us to conduct an extensive discovery process that includes extensive research into user persona development - or a more streamlined discovery based on the web team's input and best practices? Streamlined would be advisable, but open to discussion.

268. Please confirm that one design theme will carry across the entire site. If we need sub-themes of any type, please specify. Open to offeror proposals.

269. Can you provide the approximate number of pages on the current website? Currently, there are 1,200 pages, but this will be reduced before migration.

270. Are there any subsites or subdomains that must be redesigned or integrated? No.

271. Does the State expect vendors to migrate all content from dlr.sd.gov, or will some content be archived/excluded? Vendor will migrate.

272. Is there an existing archive of historical content that also needs to be migrated or preserved separately? No.

273. Can you provide a complete list of third-party platforms that must be integrated (e.g., portals, APIs, GIS, payment gateways)? No.

274. Are there specific requirements for the internal search functionality (e.g., filtering by department, indexing PDFs, or connecting to external data sources)? No.

275. Will brand guidelines be provided to assure the designs align with DLR brand? Yes, but open to offeror proposals.

276. Will the vendor be able to access current website analytics data from Google or another source on the current site or partner sites? Basic statistical information can be provided with the selected offeror.

277. How many pages are estimated for the scope of…