This opportunity is closed for applications

The deadline was Monday 29 June 2020
London Councils

London Councils - website accessibility audits and reports

10 Incomplete applications

7 SME, 3 large

25 Completed applications

22 SME, 3 large

Important dates

Published
Monday 15 June 2020
Deadline for asking questions
Monday 22 June 2020 at 11:59pm GMT
Closing date for applications
Monday 29 June 2020 at 11:59pm GMT

Overview

Summary of the work
1. Manual testing a sample of our most used content/content types/pages on the websites, recommending the best types of testing to reach the regulations

2. Producing reports identifying any accessibility issues and providing guidance and support for prioritising and fixing these issues.
Latest start date
Monday 13 July 2020
Expected contract length
Location
London
Organisation the work is for
London Councils
Budget range

About the work

Why the work is being done
Web accessibility audit of London Councils’ digital products to ensure compliance with WCAG 2.1 AA requirements, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.
Problem to be solved
Looking to appoint a contractor to carry out web accessibility audits of London Council’s digital products to work towards compliance with WCAG 2.1 AA requirements, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018. Whilst we aspire to WCAG 2.1 AAA compliance, the primary objective of the audit is to help us comply with the new accessibility regulations.

To ensure compliance with the regulations an external supplier is required to carry out accessibility audits:

• secure.freedompass.org
• londoncouncils.gov.uk
• londontribunals.gov.uk
• londontribunals.org.uk
• book.taxicardbooking.com
• lcspermits.com/lcsportal

The websites are built on different platforms by third parties, not developed in house.

Scope

1. Manual testing a sample of our most used content/content types/pages on the websites, recommending the best types of testing to reach the regulations

2. Producing reports identifying any accessibility issues and providing guidance and support for prioritising and fixing these issues.

We are suggesting a minimum of 5 pages per site across the sites to be tested, assessing against WCAG 2.1 AA criteria. We will discuss the particular needs on the number of pages and which ones to include with the appointed supplier so we can ensure comprehensive testing and auditing.
Who the users are and what they need to do
Needs:
As a sight impaired user: to use a screen magnifier; sufficient contrast between foreground/background colour combinations; to use a screenreader to navigate a webpage; text alternatives to images, controls, or other structural elements
As a user with physical/motor disabilities: to navigate a webpage without the use of a mouse or trackpad; sufficient time to complete a webform
As a deaf user: to read captions on a video
As a user with speech disabilities: to communicate without voice interaction
As a user with cognitive, learning, or neurological disabilities: navigation mechanisms and page layouts that are easy to understand and use.
Early market engagement
Any work that’s already been done
Inhouse automated testing on some parts of

londoncouncils.gov.uk

secure.freedompass.org
Existing team
The project manager is Oliver Hannan, Ecommunications Manager. The project team will include
• Ecommunications Officer
• Contract manager
• Team Manager
• Governance Support Officer
• Principal Project Officer
• Project Officer

Each website has an individual supplier that we will be sharing the reports with.
Current phase
Not started

Work setup

Address where the work will take place
We are based in London but remote working capability is neccessary
Working arrangements
We expect the work to be completed remotely.

We expect to have regular contact points during the duration of the contract
Security clearance

Additional information

Additional terms and conditions
Technical competence (60% ) under 200 words each point. Scores in this section will be given equal weight and multiplied by two. A maximum of 60 points is available for this section.

Cultural fit (20% ) under 200 words for each question. Scores in this section will be given equal weight and multiplied by 1.3. A maximum of 20 points is available for this section.

Pricing Schedule (20%). Scores in this section will be multiplied by 0.2. A maximum of 20 points is available for this section.

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
  • Recent (within the last 12 months) experience of auditing digital products for users with a range of disabilities against WCAG 2.1 to meet AA requirements
  • Experience of desk-based research to test digital products for accessibility issues for at least 2 clients
  • Experience of engaging with users with a range of disabilities to test digital products for accessibility issues.
  • Experience of delivering documentation to highlight areas of accessibility issues with expected outcomes.
  • Experience of working alongside additional suppliers and in-house teams to deliver accessibility improvements for digital products.
  • Experience of delivering value for money by working in partnership with public sector clients to scope and prioritise against business/user needs
Nice-to-have skills and experience

How suppliers will be evaluated

All suppliers will be asked to provide a written proposal.

How many suppliers to evaluate
3
Proposal criteria
  • Provide an example of when and how you have worked with a client to audit a digital product to and make recommendations to correct accessibility issues.
  • Provide an example of how you have worked with a client to re-assess a website for a second audit to ensure accessibility issues have been corrected satisfactorily
  • Provide a proposed timeline for completing the work detailed. The timeline should also include the number of days by role of each aspect of work.
  • Detail your understanding of the different and competing priorities we face as an organisation, particularly around web accessibility.
  • Outline an end-to-end website accessibility audit project you delivered, including methodology, engaged users, documentation, prioritisation, delivery, and any challenges you faced and an outline of benefit realisation.
  • Outline what you think makes a successful agency/client partnership, provide an example where you have achieved this (please include this client as one of your references).
Cultural fit criteria
  • Explain how you would work as a team with our organisation, giving examples.
  • Provide evidence of supporting an in-house team through stakeholder engagement to deliver work that meets both user and business needs, including value for money
  • Talk about how you have successfully worked with inhouse teams with limited technical expertise.
Payment approach
Fixed price
Additional assessment methods
  • Case study
  • Reference
Evaluation weighting

Technical competence

60%

Cultural fit

20%

Price

20%

Questions asked by suppliers

1. Please could you disclose your budget for this work?
£17k
2. Are you just looking for audits of each of the sites or are you looking for full, inclusive usability testing with users who have access needs (including sourcing participants)?
We are lookin for audits of each of the sites.

We had not accounted for full user testing as you describe but would be happy to see an estimate.
3. Hello – what is the budget for the project, please?
Hello - £17k
4. Is there a budget for the project?
Hi £17k
5. Please indicate your budget range
£17k
6. Please could you clarify the allocated budget range for this project?
£17k
7. In essential skills you call out you require suppliers with "Experience of engaging with users with a range of disabilities to test digital products for accessibility issues." Would you accept applications from suppliers that don't utilise disabled users but use test approaches that would illicit the same findings?
Thanks for this, good question.

We would accept just test approaches but experience of engaging with users with a range of disabilities in the past is preferred
8. Is this engagement just for a single round of testing for each system? Or does it include one or more rounds of retesting until full compliance is achieved?
Hi

We estimated two rounds of testing until compliance
9. Is any post-testing support required, such as conference calls to explain the non-compliances and discuss solutions? If so, are you able to quantify the level of support that will be required?
Hi

That's difficult to quanitify but we've stated "providing guidance and support for prioritising and fixing these issues" post testing.
10. How are we supposed to offer a fixed price for the testing if the number of pages to be tested isn't going to be decided until after contract award? A quick assessment of the websites suggests the figure of 5 pages per website doesn't look anywhere near enough – the application process for secure.freedompass.org alone is 7 pages.
Hi

Thanks for this.

We stated "We are suggesting a minimum of 5 pages per site across the sites to be tested". Based on our estimates this should be enough. These are estimates at this stage.

In relation the FP site we estimate (but, again we recognise it might require more) 4 pages need to be tested. This is because content types/templates/pages are reused.

The London Councils corporate site is very large, however content types/templates/pages are reused and we estimate 8 pages tested will be enough. Again, an estimate.
11. Do you currently have an incumbent that has provided this service for you?
Hi

We have support and maintenance in place for each site. We will be working with them after the audits to reach the required level.

We have no specific contractor that has carried out audits before.
12. '2. Producing reports identifying any accessibility issues and providing guidance and support for prioritising and fixing these issues.'
Are you looking for the selected supplier to fix the issues for you, or more along the lines of providing you with the detailed specifications to fix the issue for you to solve yourself/with an IT partner?
Hi

The second option: providing us with the detailed specifications to fix the issue for you to solve yourself/with an IT partner.
13. On your overview you detail a word limit of 200 for some of your questions, however the limit on the Digital Marketplace framework is set to 100.
How should we provide you with answers over 100 words, or should we be guided by the 100 word limit set?
Apologies

100 words please
14. Hi Team,
1. What is the estimated budget for the program?
2. Can the program be delivered from offshore/ India?
Hi

Thanks for the questions

1. £17k

2. Our preference is the UK, any time difference would be challenge because of current working conditions. We are also unsure if testing can replicate conditions an actual user would experience when accessing the service.
15. One of the questions links value for money with prioritising business/user needs.
By this, please could explain the link between value for money and how this will link to business/user needs?
We asked for “Experience of delivering value for money by working in partnership with public sector clients to scope and prioritise against business/user needs”

We would expect that resources allocated here are sufficient and comparable scale to other similar work you have done. We want to be sure resources allocated meet our needs and provide us the information to improve our services for our users. So for example, if two bidders tendered the same price, but one was offering more suitably qualified person days than another bidder, this would be taken into account when making the award.
16. Do we have the complexity of the screen in High, Medium, Low
Hi

We expect to work withthe supplier to determine this on appointment
17. Which operating systems should be considered for testing (Windows7, Windows10 and Mac)?
This information covers the minimum of what to test

https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/technology/testing-with-assistive-technologies#what-to-test

and we would expect to work with the supplier to meet user needs and the standard required. We would be open to suggestions within budget
18. Can you confirm the mobile devices (Android-Phone, Android- Tablet, iPad-Phone and iPad-Tablet)?
This information covers the minimum of what to test

https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/technology/testing-with-assistive-technologies#what-to-test

and we would expect to work with the supplier to meet user needs and the standard required. We would be open to suggestions within budget
19. What are the browser requirements (IE, Chrome, Firefox, Safari, etc) and potentially the versions?
This information covers the minimum of what to test

https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/technology/testing-with-assistive-technologies#what-to-test

and we would expect to work with the supplier to meet user needs and the standard required. We would be open to suggestions within budget
20. Does testing on mobile devices fall within the scope of the engagement?
Yes, we would expect mobile devices.

This information covers the minimum of what to test

https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/technology/testing-with-assistive-technologies#what-to-test

and we would expect to work with the supplier to meet user needs and the standard required. We would be open to suggestions within budget
21. Which browsers should be included for testing (Chrome, Internet Explorer, Edge, Firefox and Safari)? Any specific version?
This information covers the minimum of what to test

https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/technology/testing-with-assistive-technologies#what-to-test

and we would expect to work with the supplier to meet user needs and the standard required. We would be open to suggestions within budget
22. Will London Councils invest in Accessibility Tool as part of this engagement or is this per engagement?
Hi

Can you clarify here?
23. What OS versions of the personas are deemed within scope?
As before, this information covers the minimum of what to test

https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/technology/testing-with-assistive-technologies#what-to-test

and we would expect to work with the supplier to meet user needs and the standard required. We would be open to suggestions within budget and based on suppliers knowledge
24. Please could you tell us how the budget has been calculated? GDS notes suggest £3,500 as a starting budget for a basic audit for a single website.
We recognise pricing this is challenging for all parties.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/make-your-website-or-app-accessible-and-publish-an-accessibility-statement

This GDS guidance states

"You could expect to pay a third party up to £1,300 a day. The number of days an audit will take depends on the complexity of your website. A small website with static pages might only take 1 to 3 days to audit. This means it could cost roughly £1,300 to £4,000."
25. How will each application answer be evaluated/scored?
We felt this is covered in 'Additional information'
26. Do we have to submit a separate written proposal for each question under "Proposal Criteria" & "Cultural Fit Criteria".
"Additional Information" section mentions that answers should be limited to 200 words each.
Or
Is it only required to Submit answers to questions under "Essential Skills & Experience" in digital market place.(& answers should be limited to 100 words each)
Kindly, confirm.
As with Q13, 100 words please.
27. Are you expecting this to be a 2-stage evaluation ? If so, how may suppliers do you intend to short-list from this first round ? Thanks
Hi

We will follow this guidance

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-to-shortlist-digital-outcomes-and-specialists-suppliers