Request for Proposal (Rfp) 16-0033

TENNESSEE BOARD OF REGENTS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) 16-0033 DOCUMENT CONVERSION SERVICES FOR ACCESSIBILITY COMPLIANCE PRE-PROPOSAL QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES DATE: 06/29/2016

Vendors In Attendance: AMAC Accessibility Solutions & Research Center Onix Networking Corp GH, LLC Smooth Solutions

RFP Corrections:

Correction #1:

The Proposal Due date of 07/13/16 as presented on the RFP Coversheet is incorrect. The correct Proposal Due date is 07/19/16 as indicated in the RFP Schedule of Events on page 6.

General Items:

TBR would like to remind proposers to familiarize themselves with the dates identified in Section 2, Schedule of Events, and remind Proposers that all Proposals must be submitted no later than 2:00pm CT on 7/19/2016 in order to be considered. Late Proposals cannot be accepted and shall be rejected as non-responsive.

TBR would also like to remind Proposers to closely review Attachment 6.13, Vendor Checklist for Prevention of Common RFP Mistakes that Lead to Proposal Rejection. Failure to provide/meet the mandatory requirements in the format as specified in the RFP, will be cause for proposal rejection by the TBR System Office (hereinafter TBR). Notice: No pricing (including required or optional pricing) information shall be included in the Technical Proposal. Inclusion of Cost Proposal amounts including notations that items are “free of charge” or are “at no additional cost” in the Technical Proposal will make the proposal non-responsive, and the Institution shall reject it.

Proposer Questions :

Question #1: Can companies from outside the USA submit a proposal?

Response: Yes

Question #2: Will the proposer need to come to TBR for meetings?

Response: Yes, meetings with the Institution System Office to monitor contract activities and records is a mandatory requirement. In addition to monitoring meetings, it is TBR’s expectation that the successful proposer will be present at a minimum, during implementation and regional training. Question #3: Can the proposer perform the tasks (related to the RFP) outside USA?

Response: Yes

Question #4: Can Proposers submit the proposals via email?

Response: No, Section 3 of the RFP “Proposal Requirements” covers how, when and where to submit proposals.

Question #5: Are the 7am-7pm CT customer service (and requested after hours availability) firm?

Response: Attachment 6.4, in Section C.1, Customer Service/Billing Requirements, and paragraph 2 is hereby deleted from the RFP, so that the 7am-7pm CT customer service hours is not a mandatory pass/fail requirement. However, the 7am-7pm CT customer service hours is TBR’s preference and as such will be graded accordingly by the Evaluation Team in Section C.2.

Question #6: What types of inquiries will be made via customer support, and what after-hours questions could be asked that would need immediate attention?

Response: It is anticipated that customer service questions will include, but not be limited to web/software user interface (UI) support in general.

Question #7: When it says the "output" is HTML, does this mean a file or a webpage?

Response: This means a “file”.

Question #8: What is the estimated volume of work for each type of output to be considered?

Response: TBR does not have any estimate on volume of work at this time. ______Question #9: Is there an estimated volume of work per institution, and is there an estimated number of TENN BOR institutions that would be included?

Response: See Response to Question #8 above.

Question #10: Are the "training" sessions designed for staff intended to assist them in placing requests for services, or are the training sessions designed to show them how to make content itself accessible?

Response: The “training” sessions are primarily designed to instruct staff on how to send the documents to the successful proposer as well as how to retrieve the documents from the successful proposer once the services had been performed. ______Question #11: Will the requests for services be for student services (such as making textbooks, etc. accessible), or for administrative content, or both?

Response: Both

Question #12: Can the training sessions be provided remotely via the Internet, or must the training be done in-person?

Response: The TBR preference and expectation is that Proposer training plans should include three (3) collective initial trainings (4 hours per day), to be held in person regionally within the State of Tennessee.

Question #13: Do TBR institutions have a need for assistive technology software, such as screen readers for students or staff?

Response: Assistive technology software is not within the scope of this RFP.

Question #14: Is this a batch process to convert PDFs that already exist?

Response: No Question #15: Is this a one off process where the client makes a PDF and the Proposer needs to convert it on the fly to an HTML?

Response: No

Question #16: How will the request to convert a PDF be done?

Response: TBR would like each Proposer to explain to TBR how the Proposer receives requests.

Question #17: Are these only documents or are there forms as well?

Response: TBR is asking each Proposer to fully explain the Proposer’s capabilities.

Question #18: What is the projected annual dollar expenditure?

Response: TBR does not have a projected annual dollar amount.

Question #19: If a Proposer is not a Minority vendor, nor a Tennessee corporation, how would that Proposer’s evaluation be affected? Response: The fact that a Proposer is not a Minority vendor, nor a Tennessee Corporation, will not prevent the Proposer from having a fair and equal opportunity in this procurement.

Question #20: Will conversions be performed at the vendor’s location or at the locations shown in Attachment 6.7?

Response: Conversions will be performed at the Successful Proposer’s location.

Question #21: Can TBR provide an estimate of the anticipated number of documents per year that will need to be converted?

Question #22: Can TBR provide a sample of a simple PDF, complex PDF, and a PDF with MathML?

Response: Proposers should detail the types of PDF documents it can provide services for within the requirements of this RFP.

Question #23: The title of the requirements for services is to convert PDF to HTML. Will TBR accept a solution that does not output to RTF or Doc or would this eliminate a Proposer if the Proposer’s solution does not provide these outputs?

Response: HTML is the focus, but TBR would like Proposers to fully explain all output types that the Proposer can provide.

Question #24: It is understood that the training is to be done onsite, can the conversion work be completed remotely or is that work required to be completed onsite as well?

Response: See response to Question 20 above.”

Question #25a: What kind of content will be converted?

Response: It is anticipated that the kind of content that will be converted will be a cross between administrative documents and educational materials.

Question #25b: Is it limited to textbook and class materials, or will there be administrative documents as well?

Response: There will be administrative documents as well.

Question #25c: Will there be documents created by instructors, like homework or project guides? Response: Yes

Question #26: What is the expected volume of documents of each type (non-STEM and STEM) per year?

Question #27: What is the expected turnaround time for HTML production after the successful Proposer is provided with a PDF?

Response: TBR would like the Proposer to provide Proposer’s current delivery options.

Question #28a: Are there variable turnaround times (for example, high-priority documents, low- priority documents, etc.)?

Response: Proposal shall provide this data in its RFP response.

Question #28b: If so, what is the expected proportion of each type of document?

Response: Proposal shall provide this data in its RFP response.

Question #29a: General Requirement 5 requires the Proposer to take a provided PDF, convert it to accessible HTML5, and then convert it back to PDF. Does that second PDF output need to be accessible PDF?

Response: Yes it needs to be accessible.

Question #29b: Converting from accessible HTML5 to an accessible PDF (as opposed to standard PDF) is possible, but highly labor intensive. Would it be possible to have a separate cost proposal item specific to accessible PDF output?

Response: No, Proposers shall complete the Cost Proposal exactly as shown on Attachment 6.6.

Question #30: On page 31, several letters from banks, vendors, etc. are required. Do the letters have to be originals, or are scans permissible?

Response: Scans are permissible for the banks and vendor letters.

Question #31: The RFP notice letter included mailing envelopes for the technical and cost proposal. Are those just example items, or are Proposers required to use those envelopes? The envelopes seem small for the required volume of paper. Response: The mailing envelopes are for identification purposes. If Proposer uses a larger envelope or box, Proposer may tape the smaller mailing envelope onto the larger envelope or box or may clearly mark the larger envelope or box to read “Contains separately sealed Technical and Cost Proposal for RFP 16-0033”. Additionally, the Technical Proposal must be marked with “Technical Proposal in Response to RFP 16-0033 – Do Not Open” and the Cost Proposal must be marked with ”Cost Proposal in Response to RFP 16-0033 – Do Not Open.”

Question #32: For General Requirement 4, does the interface only need to allow review and edit of the initial PDF and HTML5 output, or are editing functions for other output formats needed?

Response: A UI with editing capabilities that works for all output types is desired.

Question #33: Will Proposers be required to host and store the output files, or will Proposers be using TBR resources?

Response: TBR’s preference will be for the Successful Proposer to have the ability to auto send converted files to TBR; however, that is not a requirement. While this is not a requirement, the Evaluation Committee will score more favorably those proposals that include an auto send function for converted files.

Question #35: If Proposer using file storage resources for each individual institution, is there a standardized data transfer and storage scheme used across all the institution, or does each institution have a different means of sending, receiving, and storing files?

Response: The Proposer is not being asked to use file storage resources. Question #36: If Proposer are required to host the output files, what is the expected uptime and access load?

Response: The Proposer is not required to host the output files. Question #37: The conversion from a rich PDF to HTML loses a lot of information, like layout, fonts, and arrangements of complex tables (e.g., with multiple merged-cell rows and columns). These can be approximated in the HTML conversion, but the RFP also requires converting the HTML back to an accessible PDF, which would result in a PDF that doesn't contain information present in the original PDF. Will we be able to simply convert the original PDF to accessible PDF, or is it necessary to adhere to the RFP's requirement of PDF-to-HTML-to-PDF?

Response: Converting the original PDF to accessible PDF is acceptable. Question #38: Alternatively, with the output formats, does TBR intend for each format to be provided in an HTML wrapper? For example, a PDF can be converted to be accessible, and then placed in an HTML wrapper and delivered online. (The RFP language is vague as to the specific type and extent of the HTML conversion that is required.) Response: HTML File. Question #39: If the original PDFs include images, will image descriptions and alt-text from the PDF creators be provided, or will we need to write new descriptions for all images, including specialized subject matter (e.g., complex engineering diagrams, campus maps, etc.)?

Response: TBR wants to know what the Proposer’s current process is. Question #40: Are the original PDFs flat, such that we will need to manually mark-up PDF elements for accessibility when converting to HTML or accessible PDF?

Response: Both. Question #41: Will there be languages other than English or Spanish in the original PDFs?

Response: While TBR assumes that the majority of the languages will be English or Spanish, there is no way to estimate the volume of other languages, if any, which might be included.