The Municipal Website
RFP Template.
A clear, vendor-neutral template for scoping a government website project, with the new ADA accessibility requirements built in, so you attract the right partners and get comparable bids.
Get the template emailed to you
We’ll send a copy you can adapt, plus a one-page checklist for evaluating bids. No spam, no sales sequence, just the resource and a real person if you want one.
Who we are & what we’re asking for
[Entity name] is seeking a qualified vendor to [design and build / redesign / remediate] its public website. Our goals are to improve resident access to services, meet current accessibility law, and give staff a site they can maintain. This document describes the scope, requirements, timeline, and how proposals will be evaluated.
What the project includes
- Discovery & information architecture (sitemap, resident task flows)
- Design of templates for the key page types [home, department, service, news, document/agenda, contact]
- Development on a maintainable CMS that non-technical staff can update
- Migration of existing content [approx. ___ pages / ___ documents]
- Training for staff editors and documentation/handover
- Post-launch support & warranty [period]
ADA Title II & WCAG 2.1 AA conformance
The delivered website must conform to WCAG 2.1 Level AA, consistent with the U.S. Department of Justice’s 2024 rule under Title II of the ADA (compliance deadlines: April 26, 2027 for entities serving 50,000+; April 26, 2028 for smaller communities and special districts). Vendors must:
- Build all templates and components to WCAG 2.1 AA and provide written conformance documentation at launch;
- Ensure uploaded documents (PDFs, agendas) meet accessibility requirements, or provide a documented remediation process;
- Describe how accessibility will be tested (automated and manual/assistive-technology testing);
- Provide guidance so staff can keep new content accessible after launch.
Tip: ask each vendor to submit a short accessibility statement and one example of prior WCAG documentation. It separates the teams who do this from the teams who say they do.
Platform, security & performance
- Content management system & hosting approach (state preferences or leave open)
- Security: HTTPS, backups, update/patching plan, and any data-handling requirements
- Performance and mobile responsiveness standards
- Integrations [payments, agendas/minutes, GIS, notifications, translation, etc.]
- Ownership: all code, content, and accounts are owned by [Entity] with no vendor lock-in
What moves, and who does it
Describe the current site size, what content will be migrated vs. archived vs. rewritten, and who is responsible for each. Note any records-retention or public-notice requirements the site must support.
Key dates
- RFP issued: [date] · Questions due: [date] · Proposals due: [date]
- Selection / interviews: [date] · Anticipated start: [date]
- Target launch: [date], note any deadline tied to accessibility compliance or a funding cycle
What to say (and what not to)
Either state a not-to-exceed budget or a range, or ask vendors to propose fixed pricing by deliverable. Requesting a line-item breakdown (design, build, migration, training, ongoing care) makes bids comparable and protects you at audit.
What to require
- Relevant experience (government or mission-driven organizations preferred)
- 2–3 references and links to comparable live sites
- Named team and their roles; subcontractor disclosure
- Accessibility approach and sample conformance documentation
- Insurance / certifications as required by [Entity]
A simple, defensible scoring rubric
- Relevant experience & references, 25%
- Understanding of our needs & proposed approach, 25%
- Accessibility capability & documentation, 20%
- Maintainability, ownership & support, 15%
- Cost & value, 15%
Weighting cost at 15–20% (not 50%) is what gets you a site that lasts instead of the cheapest bid that doesn’t.
How to respond
State the format, page limit, contact for questions, submission method and deadline, and any required forms. Include a note that incomplete or late submissions will not be considered.
Not sure you even need an RFP?
Many municipalities can move faster under a small-purchase threshold, and some sites need remediation, not a rebuild. Start with a Clarity Assessment and we’ll tell you the smartest, safest path, in writing, before you spend a dollar.
Start a Clarity Assessment ↗