Awarded to Torchbox Ltd

Start date: Tuesday 1 November 2016
Value: £200,000
Company size: SME
Youth Sport Trust

Planning and building a new website for the School Games

0 Incomplete applications

81 Completed applications

74 SME, 7 large

Important dates

Published
Wednesday 5 October 2016
Deadline for asking questions
Wednesday 12 October 2016 at 11:59pm GMT
Closing date for applications
Wednesday 19 October 2016 at 11:59pm GMT

Overview

Summary of the work
We wish to change our web platform from Zend Framework to something more suitable. Drupal has previously been suggested, although we are open to other recommendations based on our requirements. The new website should be mobile compatible and support a complicated user system with multiple logins.
Latest start date
31/11/2016
Expected contract length
Initially until 31/08/17, but with the option to extend to 2 years.
Location
London
Organisation the work is for
Youth Sport Trust
Budget range
We have a maximum spend of £200,000 (exclusive of VAT) and will not consider quotes of any higher value.

About the work

Why the work is being done
We wish to change our web platform from Zend Framework to something more suitable. Drupal has previously been suggested, although we are open to other recommendations based on our requirements brief - which is available on request from glen.harrington@youthsporttrust.org. The new website should be mobile compatible and support a complicated user system with multiple logins. We also require several new features to be added to what is available on our current system - found at www.yourschoolgames.com. Login details for our current staging server are available on request.
Problem to be solved
The current website does not function to the standards required.
Who the users are and what they need to do
The School Games website has a wide target audience and a wide range of visitors – general visitors, young people (primary / secondary), parents, teachers, schools, School Games Organisers (SGOs), Local Organising Committees (LOCs) and Youth Sport Trust staff (YST), including both Development Managers / Coaches (DMs / DCs) and administrative staff. All of these different types of users require different levels of access. Each level of account will effectively manage the level below it, with YST retaining overall control.
Early market engagement
We approached our SGO consultation group for recommendations and these are included within the full requirements document - available via request as stated above.
Any work that’s already been done
We have agreed internally on recommendations for the new website. We now must consider what is possible within our budget and time constraints.
Existing team
Whilst the Youth Sport Trust holds the development and delivery rights for the School Games at present, there will be a competitive tender for this status in 2017 for the period after 31.08.17. On this basis whilst the developers may have the opportunity for an ongoing maintenance and development role in the new website beyond this date, this will be confirmed along with their client in 2017.
Current phase
Discovery

Work setup

Address where the work will take place
The Youth Sport Trust's London office is based at Whittington House, 19-30 Alfred Pl, London WC1E 7EA. The project lead is currently based here. Our head office is based in Lougborough - SportPark, 3 Oakwood Dr, Loughborough LE11 3QF - and interviews will take place here.
Working arrangements
Constant contact and updates will be required and the School Games Communications Officer, who will be leading the project, wishes to be heavily involved in planning and development to ensure the ideal end result. Face to face meetings will be welcomed on a regular basis.
Security clearance

Additional information

Additional terms and conditions

Skills and experience

Buyers will use the essential and nice-to-have skills and experience to help them evaluate suppliers’ technical competence.

Essential skills and experience
  • Be able to offer a suitable technical solution
  • Have strong experience and a proven track record of success
  • Have the proven skills needed to meet the full requirements
  • Be able to meet our required start date and project cost
  • Be flexible on requirements and particular website elements
Nice-to-have skills and experience

How suppliers will be evaluated

How many suppliers to evaluate
5
Proposal criteria
  • Technical solution
  • Approach and methodology
  • How the approach or solution meets user needs
  • Estimated timeframes for the work
  • How they’ve identified risks and dependencies and offered approaches to manage them
  • Team structure
  • Value for money
Cultural fit criteria
  • Work as a team with our organisation
  • Be transparent and collaborative when making decisions
  • Take responsibility for their work
  • Can work with clients with low technical expertise
Payment approach
Fixed price
Assessment methods
  • Written proposal
  • Presentation
Evaluation weighting

Technical competence

60%

Cultural fit

15%

Price

25%

Questions asked by suppliers

1. Can you elaborate further on your preferences/drivers for moving away from Zend, and towards Drupal. It would be helpful to understand any specifics you have on either of these.
The reason for moving away from Zend is primarily our dissatisfaction with the way the current system operates and it is my understanding that moving will allow us to choose a more flexible system that allows for a more hands-on approach from administrators. The Youth Sport Trust's website has recently moved to Drupal and has been successful - and there are many elements of this that inspired the brief for the School Games website. However, we are keeping are options open and the winning supplier would be expected to advise accordingly in this matter.
2. Can you please outline what work has been done in the current Discovery phase. What do you envisage as being the output from this to guide the next phase.
We have undertaken a full internal review of the current system. This has extended to also approaching our funders, Sport England, and our network via the School Games Organiser consultation group. All of this feedback was incorporated into the full brief and, as such, we believe we have a very clear idea of the direction we wish to move in. This should help guide the planning and early development stages of the new website and ensure the suppliers that choose to apply have a clear idea of what they will be doing.
3. Which is the correct end date for asking questions – 12th Oct (digital marketplace) or 18th Oct (req brief doc)?
Apologies for the confusion. The deadline for queries is 12.10.16 via the Digital Marketplace. The deadline for us to respond is the 18.10.16.
4. Are you following the GDS livecycle for this Discovery>Alpha>Beta>Live? If so have you done any user research as part of this project to be inline with the GDS service manual, which leads to a user story backlog?
We are not following this at this stage, but we would wish to follow a similar structure as advised by our winning supplier. In terms of discovery thus far, we have undertaken a full internal review of the current system. This has extended to also approaching our funders, Sport England, and our network via the School Games Organiser consultation group. All of this feedback was incorporated into the full brief and, as such, we believe we have a very clear idea of the direction we wish to move in.
5. Your briefing document states: 19.10.16: The deadline for an expression of interest from suppliers. Which tallies with your DOS dates. We have submitted our expression of interest via DOS. Do you need no more from us at this stage and are just using the DOS information to create shortlist of 5? If we are only informed of the shortlisting on Friday the 21st and are presenting on Wed the 26th it only gives us 2 working days to prepare a quotation and a presentation!
We are looking to appoint a supplier as quickly as possible due to the nature of the project's deadline. When applications close on 19 October we will shortlist all those applications which meet our requirements. If there are five or less applicants that do this, then the timeline will proceed as planned. If there are more than five applicants, we will be writing to each shortlisted organisation to request further evidence. As per the Digital Marketplace terms and conditions, you will have five working days for this. Should this be the case, interviews will take place on Monday 7th November.
6. From a review of the staging site your existing site is a custom web application. From reviewing the current functionality some elements are pretty custom to the way your organisation works. Would you be open to a hybrid approach where a CMS platform such as Drupal is used for the general site and content management, and a custom application is developed as a Drupal 8 module to provide the elements that need to fit your exact business requirements? We have seen issues where more complex business logic is forced into a CMS when a custom system would work better.
We are open to any potential approach that would best meet our requirements. It will be up to the suppliers who reach the evaluation stage to pitch potential methods such as this and explain why they could deliver them to a higher standard than anyone else within the time and budget constraints documented.
7. Can you confirm full migration of data, content and user accounts will be required for the new website.
Yes, this will be required.
8. Please clarify on the Latest starting date...it's given as 31/11/2016. Is it 30 Nov' or 31 Oct', 2016
Apologies, this is clearly an error. We would wish for our supplier to start within seven days of the contract being awarded, but the latest the supplier should be able to start is 21 November 2016.
9. You mentioned that you’d like to follow the GDS manual with your successful supplier’s approach, which is effectively agile delivery. Parts of the information you’ve provided such as “fixed price” and “this project will create a new website that delivers the required level of functionality for our users, as outlined in the document below” suggest you’re looking for the project to be delivered via a waterfall approach - often fixed in price and scope. How flexible are the scope and budget to allow the project to be delivered in an agile way? For a project this complex we recommend agile.
The budget is not flexible, i.e. we cannot go over the maximum amount stated. However, the scope itself is more flexible and we will be looking for our supplier to guide us as to what is and isn't possible within the restraints that we have. The full brief indicates which items are viewed as higher importance.
10. Please can you advise if there will be another opportunity for Q&A following EOI submissions closing - for all selected suppliers to ask any further questions prior to presentation stage?
There is no Q&A session planned at this stage. However, we will review this following the shortlisting stage of the Digital Marketplace process.
11. We have completed the online questions - its there anything else you require at this stage - ie a written proposal?
Not at this stage. As per the Digital Marketplace requirements, we will be shortlisting applicants after the closing date has passed. In the event that we have more applicants than we are willing to take to the evaluation stage (5) - we will be asking suppliers to provide further evidence as per the Digital Marketplace template which is provided. Suppliers will receive five working days to complete this and the adjusted interview dates will be communicated via email.
12. Which version of Drupal is the Youth Sport Trust's site on please?
Drupal Version 7
13. To understand what Salesforce API level is currently available to the School Games website, are you able to tell us which edition of Salesforce you have and which license type?
Salesforce enterprise edition, Full Salesforce License
14. Given that the Youth Sport Trust's website has recently moved to Drupal and has been successful - and there are many elements of this that inspired the brief for the School Games website..... what specifically will convince you that an alternative to Drupal would be genuinely viable?
As the expert in the field, it would be the supplier's job to convince us that there suggested platform was the right one to use. We have been impressed with the Youth Sport Trust's website. However, equally, there are aspects that could be improved. The two website's are also very different and while Drupal may look good to the untrained eye, it might not be what is best suited for this project. Our knowledge is limited, so it is up to the potential supplier to convince us that there option is better. We are open to all options.
15. You mentioned a Level 4 bespoke site. Are you able to point us in the direction of this and let us know whether there's any scope for integration?
This can be found at www.2016schoolgames.com. In terms of integration, this is potentially difficult as there are two different sets of funding and we have an existing contract with a supplier. We are keen to bring the two entities closer together - as they are under the same programme as the School Games - and we would consider this at a later date. However, it won't be part of this project and will likely be the subject of its own tender.
16. What is the main KPI and value that you see from people needing to sign up to access content. Has there been any user testing undertaken for this, and as a wider question, are you looking for the successful agency to conduct in depth UX research and testing to validate your requirements?
Our ultimate aim is to become a one stop shop for school sport and competition. We already have 85% of schools in England signed up and a funded support network is in place. The data for these accounts will need to be migrated to the new website and, therefore, the need to to drive further sign up is minimal. What we wish to improve is the user experience and the interaction time with the website. We have already done some research on this front, so the number of actions for a supplier in this area is limited.
17. Apologies if this is a duplication of question 11 - but we have completed the 5 yes / no questions on your portal. Do we need to take no futher action at this time until a short list is developed, or should we be submitting a written proposal also now?
As per the answer to question 11, the answer is not at this stage. As per the Digital Marketplace requirements, we will be shortlisting applicants after the closing date has passed. In the event that we have more applicants than we are willing to take to the evaluation stage (5) - we will be asking suppliers to provide further evidence as per the Digital Marketplace template which is provided. Suppliers will receive five working days to complete this and the adjusted interview dates will be communicated via email.
18. 1. Which version of Zend are you currently using? 2. What is the total visits per month and page views per month? 3. Which do you value more: ultimate flexibility and user experience (admin / clients) or less flexibility and more features as standard? 4. In section 5 you mention access to staging server - At what point in the process will Staging Server access details be made available? 5. You've stated a preference for an Agile / MVP approach, but how open are you to 'continuous delivery' as a methodology? This would be safest way to deliver the project.
1. Zend version 1.11
2. In the 2015/16 academic year we had 360,000 website sessions from 230,000 unique users. Month to month numbers vary greatly.
3. Not clear on the question. We are flexible on what is / isn't included in the new website and the ultimate aim is for a better user experience - but certain elements we require as standard.
4. You can request this now via email, as per the brief.
5. We are open to any approach. It's up to the supplier to convince us their method is the right one for us to choose.
19. Do you have qualitative data from usability testing (for example research gathered from testing usability of the site with young people)? Have you researched where users may be becoming stuck or having trouble on the site? Have you conducted focus groups to understand the problems faced by your stakeholders? Do you have findings from / analytics for each user-type you can share with us? Do you have additional unseen organisational requirements that may impact on the final solution? Can you provide more detail on what the impacts of the 2016 comprehensive review will have on how you operate?
No testing has been done with young people, as they don't currently have access to the website. This is something we wish to introduce as we have a KPI around engaging more young people. We are fully aware of the most difficult to use areas of the website through our project support team, however we have no specific analytics. Everything the organisation currently wishes to have is included within the full brief - although minor changes to this should be expected. In terms of the review, we have taken this into consideration with the brief's objectives.
20. Is the incumbent supplier, of the Zend system, bidding? In any event, if you choose a new supplier what access will they have to the current site's data? Have your current suppliers agreed to support the migration in any way?
We are not legally permitted to discuss the identities of any suppliers - regardless of their involvement in this process. However, we contractually own the data and would be able to support with migration.
21. Is the supplier of the Youth Sport Trust's Drupal site bidding?
We are not legally permitted to discuss the identities of any suppliers - regardless of their involvement in this process.
22. Can you supply a list of the must have fatures (we can then infer the like-to-have)? There are a great many features and it would be useful to have a list of your relevant KPIs when considering what might / might not be included
The priority is to make the website mobile accessible and to ensure that the current features are relevant and useful - particularly around the revamp of the competition calendar and the restructure of the login system. Everything else is ultimately something we would like, rather than something we require, although as indicated by the brief there are a large number of additional items that we are keen to include. Our KPIs are primarily around delivering the website, improving the user experience, and reducing the number of issues and the amount of staff time put in to solving them.
23. - can a good portion of functionality of the website (schools and users) be driven by Salesforce by downloading information from it? Is it going to be used through the life time of the new site? - Are you planning on using any other data sources other than Salesforce? - Should everything on the site be driven completely by the school calendar year (i.e. all things of the features website reset automatically at the start of a new school year / term when appropriate)?
In answer to the first question, a large amount of information is driven by our CRM and information for schools and other users is stored here. I can't imagine that this is likely to change soon, as our Salesforce links to other elements of the organisation. The only other data source is Edubase, which manually feeds a list of schools into Salesforce and updates our records. For the second question, that is exactly right - although we like to keep records of past data rather than it resetting and being gone.
24. How much information would you be looking to display within the ‘mega menu’, would you consider alternative design options? - Data around the filtering section – is this a pre-determined list? Or will it change depending on the information inputted by SGO/LOCs? - Will the form system need to be personalised per level of user? Or will it be generic?
This will only be for the front-facing elements of the website, so does not need to be unique to the user. We are open to suggestions on how exactly this works - and I would not envisage it being large due to the small amount of content - but I know there have been a number of instances where schools have not found certain content because they don't know it's there - and I would seek to remedy this. There is still a lot of important and relevant information here that needs to be made more accessible.
25. Are you aiming to achieve compliance with accessibility standards, if so please confirm which level?
I was not personally aware that there were specific levels of accessibility. We would be keen to make the website as accessible as possible - but it ultimately depends on the budget involved in doing so.
26. What sort of feed do you receive from Edubase? can it be filtered? - the school search is returning a lot of institutions that look educational but don't appear to be schools - eg the LSE
This is a very good point. Our CRM takes a full copy of Edubase, i.e. all institutions with a URN. The CRM then defines these as primary, secondary, higher education etc. Ideally, we would be able to filter out those which aren't eligible for the School Games, but I don't believe any such system is currently in place.
27. How is an SGO's area / list of schools defined?
SGO areas were originally based off school sport partnerships and basic location. If a new school opens we assign them to the closest host site by road within the same local authority. Any schools that have closed and reopened are kept in the same SGO area.