Vendor Questions and Deparetment Responses.pdf

Vendor Questions & Department Responses RFI 25/26-122, ADA Remediation

Good afternoon:

Questions received timely and the Department responses are below:

1. Question: Is there a current vendor providing this service? If so, could you please provide the current contract documents/information?

Department Response: The purchase orders the Department currently has for these services are attached as a pdf.

2. Question: Does the department have an estimated total contract value for this solicitation?

Department Response:

Unknown at this time.

3. Question: If the department issues a solicitation, what would be the estimated timeframe for procurement?

4. Question: For the question below:

“Please identify any governmental contracts (e.g., state term contracts, alternate contract sources, General Services Administration (GSA), etc.) your company has for similar products and services.” Could the Department clarify whether this question is asking vendors to identify any governmental contracts for similar products or services, regardless of jurisdiction, including contracts with other states, municipalities, public colleges/universities, or federal agencies? Or is the Department specifically asking whether vendors are already registered, approved, or available through a Florida-specific purchasing vehicle, such as a Florida state term contract, alternate contract source, MyFloridaMarketPlace/vendor database, or another procurement mechanism available to Florida agencies?

Department Response: The Department is asking whether vendors are already registered, approved, and available through a Florida-specific purchasing vehicle, such as a Florida state term contract or alternate contract source, or if they currently have a contract with another state or governmental entity that may be used as an alternate contract source.

5. Question: We understand that, for Florida, compliance with Section 508 and ADA Title II addresses the applicable digital accessibility requirements in alignment with WCAG 2.2 Level AA. Could you please confirm whether there are any additional state-specific statutes, regulations, or accessibility requirements that the awarded vendor will be expected to comply with?

Department Response: To clarify, compliance with WCAG 2.1 is required. See RFI, Part II.

As to ADA accessibility, no other ADA accessibility compliance requirements are known at this time. Regardless, compliance with controlling law will be expected under a prospective contract.

6. Question: Our understanding is that we are required to provide client references, including the company name, contact person, email address, and a brief description (3–4 lines) of the services provided. Kindly confirm whether our understanding is correct.

Department Response: The RFI does not ask respondents to provide client references.

7. Question: Please clarify whether bidders may submit proposals only for the services in which they have the required capabilities and experience, or whether it is mandatory to provide responses for all the service offerings listed in the document.

Department Response: Please see the RFI for the information the Department is requesting.

However, please provide answers / information to the questions to which your organization can respond.

8. Question: While reviewing your website, we understand that the Department manages a variety of documents, including tax return forms, application forms, supporting application documents, internal memoranda, payment forms, business registration documents, and related materials. Could you please clarify the types of documents that the successful bidder will be expected to remediate? Additionally, please confirm whether the source files will primarily be provided in PDF format, Microsoft Word format, or a combination of both.

Department Response: Please see question 4. of the RFI for the formats / types of assets the Department is interested in being remediated.

9. Question: Our understanding is that the scope includes remediating digital assets created using Adobe applications, such as PDFs generated from Adobe Acrobat, InDesign documents, images (.eps/.tiff/.jpeg) created in Adobe Photoshop or Adobe Illustrator, and videos produced in Adobe Premiere Pro, to meet WCAG 2.2 Level AA requirements and applicable accessibility regulations, such as Section 508 and ADA Title II. Kindly confirm whether our understanding is correct or advise if the scope includes any additional content types or accessibility requirements.

Department Response: See responses to questions 5. and 8.

10. Question: Our understanding is that, for images, the scope includes authoring alternative text descriptions. Could you please clarify whether the scope also includes evaluating and remediating other image-related accessibility requirements, such as color contrast, text readability within images, line spacing, callout text, and other applicable WCAG 2.2 Level AA success criteria? If there are any additional accessibility requirements for images, kindly provide further details and confirm or correct our understanding.

Department Response: Under a prospective contract we would expect a contractor to satisfy the requirements of WCAG 2.1 Level AA concerning visual elements.

11. Question: Our understanding is that the scope includes authoring alternative text for images, adding captions and transcripts for videos, and evaluating color contrast to support compliance with WCAG 2.2 Level AA requirements. Kindly confirm whether our understanding is correct. If the scope includes any additional accessibility requirements or remediation activities, please provide further details so that we can accurately understand the expected deliverables.

Department Response: Correct regarding compliance with WCAG 2.1 Level AA requirements.

12. Question: Our understanding is that bidders are required to submit the process workflow, a description of the methodology, quality assurance and quality control checkpoints, and relevant case studies for the services in which they intend to participate under this RFI. Kindly confirm whether our understanding is correct. If any additional information or supporting documentation is required as part of the response, please let us know.

Department Response: Please see the RFI for the information the Department is requesting (not requiring). However, please provide answers / information to the questions to which your organization can respond. As stated in question 4. of the RFI other supplemental information may be provided by vendors.

13. Question: Metadata Remediation Markers - Our understanding is that the scope of metadata remediation includes reviewing and updating PDF document properties such as the document title, primary language, author, subject, keywords, initial view settings, tagged PDF status, reading order, bookmarks, document properties, and file naming conventions to support accessibility requirements. Kindly confirm whether our understanding is correct. If the scope includes any additional metadata remediation requirements or differs from our understanding, please provide further details.

Department Response: The Department is requesting pricing models for remediation of all metadata covered by WCAG 2.1 level AA requirements. See question 5.

14. Question: Training - Our understanding is that the successful bidder will be required to provide accessibility training to the Florida Department of Revenue staff. Kindly confirm whether our understanding is correct. If so, could you please provide additional details regarding the training scope, including the target audience, topics to be covered, expected duration, delivery format (virtual or onsite), frequency, and any required training materials or deliverables.

Department Response: The Department will not be contracting with a vendor pursuant to this RFI; rather, we are gathering information from the vendor community to better understand vendor capabilities. However, pursuant to questions 5. and 6. of the RFI, at this time we are interested in understanding what training your organization provides to support the ADA remediation products / solutions offered by your organization.

15. Question: Please advise on the estimated volume of documents and pages expected under this engagement based on historical data, if available. Additionally, we request a high-level breakdown of the anticipated distribution of work across the various accessibility remediation services, such as PDF remediation, Microsoft Office document remediation, web accessibility remediation, Adobe InDesign remediation, and multimedia accessibility (images, audio, and video), along with any other applicable service categories. This information will help us accurately estimate the effort and pricing, and to prepare a comprehensive response.

Department Response: This is a request for information, not a competitive solicitation.

However, at this time DOR has approximately 19,000 items to be made compliant with the WCAG 2.1 AA standards. These items are of different sizes and complexity.

• Web Pages 320

• Electronic Documents (PDF / Word) 17,301

• Forms (PDF) 431

• Mixed Media (Excel / etc.) 457

Webpages are created using SharePoint Designer and other XML tools. Electronic documents are created using Microsoft Office, Photoshop, Adobe InDesign, and other tools.

16. Question: Our understanding is that, for these two services, the bidder is expected to perform accessibility auditing (testing and re-testing) and provide the corresponding Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) and Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT). Kindly confirm whether our understanding is correct.

Department Response: In your response to the RFI, question 10., please describe how your organization confirms ADA remediation compliance has been completed.

17. Question: If the scope also includes remediation, please clarify whether the successful bidder will be provided with the necessary source code, application or website access credentials, supporting assets, and technical documentation required to remediate the identified accessibility issues.

Department Response: As stated above, this is a request for information, not a competitive solicitation. Your response may be helpful with regard to any prospective solicitation.

18. Question: Please advise whether bidders may provide detailed responses as annexures or appendices (where applicable) in support of the questions included in the RFI, or whether all responses must be provided directly within the designated response sections. If responses are required to be included within the questionnaire itself, kindly confirm whether there is a word count or page limit applicable to each response.

Department Response: Additional information and supporting documents may be submitted as attachments. See last sentence of question 4. to the RFI.

19. Question: Please advise whether the documents to be remediated will be provided exclusively in English or whether they may also include content in other languages (e.g., French, German, Danish, or other foreign languages). If multilingual documents are expected, kindly provide the major languages anticipated, along with the estimated percentage distribution of each language and their expected contribution to the overall document volume.

This information will help us accurately assess the required linguistic resources and effort.

Department Response: Alt text translations for Spanish and Haitian Creole would likely be required under a prospective solicitation. Other language remediation needs are unknown at this time.

20. Question: Our understanding is that, as part of the accessibility remediation process, the successful bidder may be required to author alternative text (alt text) for meaningful images.

Kindly confirm whether the bidder is expected to author the alternative text or whether it will be provided by the Florida Department of Revenue.

Department Response: See response to question 11.

21. Question: If the bidder is responsible for authoring alternative text, we would appreciate clarification on the following:

a) Should the bidder follow industry-standard best practices for authoring alternative text (e.g., WCAG guidance), or does the Department have specific alternative text authoring guidelines, style guides, or conventions that must be followed? If so, please provide the applicable guidance. Additionally, please advise whether the successful bidder will be provided with a preferred terminology guide, glossary, or style guide for financial and tax-related terms to ensure consistency and accuracy when authoring alternative text.

Department Response:

Applicable requirements, including glossaries and style guide, may be identified in a prospective competitive solicitation (if any).

b) Are there any word or character limits for alternative text, particularly for complex images such as charts, graphs, diagrams, flowcharts, maps, or infographics?

Additionally, please advise whether long descriptions are required for complex visual content.

Department Response:

Unknown at this time. However, please advise if your solution has character limitations.

c) For documents in languages other than English, is the bidder expected to use qualified native-language or certified language resources to author alternative text, or is machine translation acceptable? If specific language quality requirements apply, please provide the details.

Department Response:

Unknown at this time. However, see response to question 19. above.

d) We are capable of authoring alternative text using either a fully human-authored approach or an AI-assisted approach with mandatory human review and quality assurance. Please advise whether the Department has a preferred approach or any policies governing the use of AI in the creation of accessibility content.

22. Question: Our team currently has DHS Trusted Tester-certified resources. However, our

CPACC certifications are not currently active—one team member's certification has expired and is being renewed, while a few others are preparing for the exam and are expected to be certified in November or December. Could you please advise whether we should mention the ongoing CPACC preparation in the RFI response, or limit the submission to our current certifications and provide an update on CPACC certification during the project award or contracting stage?

Department Response: Please provide information your organization believes may be beneficial for the Department to know.

23. Question: We understand that there are no restrictions preventing offshore vendors from participating in this RFI. Could you please confirm this? Additionally, please advise whether there are any registration requirements or prerequisites that an offshore vendor must complete to participate in the RFI process.

Department Response: There are no known restrictions preventing vendors from responding to this RFI; however, providing services or storing Department data (i.e., “offshore”) may be limited or prohibited as specified in a future procurement or contract (if any). E.g., see s.287.135, Florida Statutes.

24. Question: Could you please confirm whether this solicitation is intended for individual contractors, agencies, or both are also eligible to submit a response?

Department Response: Both are also eligible to submit a response.

25. Question: Is this request for a specific document, or are you looking to establish a long-term relationship for translating Department of Revenue documents?

Department Response: At this time the Department is requesting market information pursuant to this RFI. The terms and conditions applicable to a future contract may be included in a future solicitation (if any).

26. Question: Do you anticipate releasing a bid for these services?

Department Response: Unknown at this time.

27. Question: Will the documents requiring remediation be in PDF format? Or what other formats?

Department Response: Please see Part III., Question 4. regarding the information the Department is seeking in response to the RFI. Also see responses to Questions 15. and 25.

28. Question: What is the volume of work?

Department Response: The total volume of work under a possible future contract is unknown at this time. However, see response to Question 15.

29. Question: Will there be a need for website remediation?

Department Response: Possibly under a possible future contract. However, the Department is interested in knowing what website remediation services your organization provides. Please provide this information in response to Questions 4. and / or 5. of the RFI as applicable.

30. Question: Data Security and Legal Compliance: Given that this is government work handling highly sensitive taxpayer data, what specific state data privacy laws, legal compliance frameworks, or IT security certifications (e.g., SOC2 Type II) will the vendor be legally required to maintain?

Department Response: Applicable requirements will be identified in any future solicitation.

However, at this time remediation services are anticipated to only apply to publicly available content and will not include sensitive or confidential data.

31. Question: Onshore vs. Offshore Requirements: Is there a requirement for these remediation services to be performed entirely onshore, or is the Department open to vendors utilizing secure offshore production facilities?

Department Response: See answer to Question 23.

32. Question: Estimated Scope & Backlog Volume: Can the Department provide an estimate of the current inventory of documents and digital assets requiring remediation? To help us construct accurate pricing models, a general idea of the scope and what kind of documents mainly make up this backlog would be very helpful.

Department Response: See answer to Question 15.

33. Question: Anticipated Ongoing Volume: What is the anticipated ongoing volume of new documents that will require remediation after the initial effort? How often do these documents typically change, and what are your expectations for maintaining that compliance moving forward?

Department Response: See answer to Question 28.

34. Question: Current Challenges & Remediation Needs: Could you please describe the current challenges or remediation needs that you expect the vendor solution to address?

Department Response: Please see RFI Question 4. regarding the types of content to be remediated. Known challenges include timing, staging / priority, compliance with controlling Federal standards. See also response to question 15. above.

35. Question: Current Systems and Environment: What document management systems, content repositories, or platforms are currently used to manage these digital assets? To better understand your workflow, is there a particular centralized system that everybody is required to work within, or is it more decentralized where departments are working independently?

Department Response: Most of the documents requiring remediation are currently stored in a SharePoint environment. Also, as stated in response to Question 15. webpages are created using SharePoint Designer and other XML tools. Most videos are maintained on YouTube, and the Department may also require some social media content to be remediated. Workflows will differ based on Department program area.

36. Question: Alternate Formats and Translation Needs: Beyond technical WCAG 2.1 AA tagging, does the Department anticipate a need for these digital documents to be converted into alternate formats, such as Spanish/Creole translation, Large Print, or Audio?

Department Response: Unknown at this time if the Department will need this service.

However, alt text conversion may be required for documents in Spanish and / or Creole.

37. Question: Baseline Audits and Discovery: Has the Department already conducted a baseline accessibility audit to understand current compliance levels, or will the vendor be expected to perform this initial discovery and audit right out of the box?

Department Response: The Department has only conducted a document inventory, not a document audit. It is anticipated that the Department will require discovery and remediation services as part of a future contract (if any).

38. Question: Intake Workflow: Will remediation requests and legacy documents be submitted to the vendor through a single, centralized department, or will the vendor be required to intake and manage requests from multiple decentralized divisions across the Department of Revenue?

Department Response: The Department anticipates that requests would be submitted through a designated point of contact within each Program/Division.

39. Question: Allocated Budget: What is the Department's established budget or anticipated funding range for this initiative?

Department Response: See response to question 2. above.

Thank you for your interest in doing business with the Florida Department of Revenue.

Sincerely:

Ed Valla, FCCN, FCCM, FCPM, CPPB

Purchasing Analyst EXE Program/Office of Financial Management/Purchasing Florida Department of Revenue

(850) 717-7567 edwin.valla@floridarevenue.com mailto:edwin.valla@floridarevenue.com