1-Part 8 Exceptions - Keys to Literacy -Keys to Writing Project.pdf

NOTICE OF INTENT TO AWARD A CONTRACT WITHOUT ENGAGING IN A STANDARD

PROCUREMENT PROCESS

The Utah State Board of Education (USBE) is publishing this notice in accordance with the Utah Procurement Code and intends to award a contract without engaging in a standard procurement process if it is determined by the procurement official, in writing, that:

1. There is only one source for the procurement item;

2. Transitional costs are a significant consideration in selecting a procurement item and the transitional costs are unreasonable or cost-prohibitive; or

3. The award of a contract is under circumstances, described in rules adopted by the board, that make awarding the contract through a standard procurement process impractical and not in the best interest of USBE.

USBE’s justification for awarding a contract without engaging in standard procurement process is set forth below.

Determination of Other Interested Vendors

The intent of this notice is to determine if there are any other interested and qualified vendors that meet the specifications included in this notice. Any such vendors wishing to challenge the proposed award of a contract must submit to the purchasing agent identified in this notice the following information:

• The name of the contesting person; and

• A detailed explanation of the challenge, including documentation showing that there are other competing sources for the procurement item.

In addition, a vendor should include, as applicable:

• Documentation that your firm can provide a comparable or better procurement item that meets or exceeds the specifications;

• Documentation that your firm can also provide the same proprietary procurement item or an equivalent procurement item; and

• If transitional costs are identified as the justification for this notice, a comparison of the transitional costs identified in this notice against your firm’s anticipated transitional costs.

Regardless of any prior communications with USBE, all vendors interested in responding to this notice must submit a response to this posting containing complete responses to all of the information requested above.

ALL CHALLENGES TO THE PROPOSED CONTRACT AWARD MUST BE SUBMITTED THROUGH THE UTAH PUBLIC PROCUREMENT PLACE SUPPLIER PORTAL, and any questions regarding this notice, including requests for additional information, must be submitted through the Supplier Portal during the public notice period. THIS NOTICE IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, INVITATION FOR BIDS, OR REQUEST FOR QUOTES. No action is required if you have no objections to the proposed award.

If, after the public notice period has passed, the procurement official determines that there are other interested and qualified vendors that meet the specifications of this notice, USBE will not award a contract pursuant to this notice;

otherwise, if no valid challenges are received, then USBE may award a contract to the identified vendor without engaging in a standard procurement process.

Please read the entire form very carefully before responding to this notice.

Scope of the Proposed Contract

It is anticipated that this procurement will result in a:

RESULT ACTION

USBE Contract The term of this contract (or extension) will be:

Renewal options:

USBE may not make the procurement until the solicitation process is completed and a contract is written and signed by the vendor, and USBE.

Purchase Order One-time purchase or ≤ 1 year USBE may not make the procurement until the solicitation process is completed, the purchase order is signed by USBE and delivered to the vendor.

Description of procurement item to be purchased:

Estimated value of the contract/purchase order/ increase:

Freight Cost (F.O.B.

Destination, Freight

Prepaid):

Vendor Name:

Detailed Description of Procurement Item (additional information included in attached Scope of Work):

Justification for Award (select ONE option):

Sole Source - There is only one source for the procurement item. Complete Section A Transitional Costs - Transitional costs are a significant consideration in selecting a procurement item and the results of a cost-benefit analysis demonstrate that transitional costs are unreasonable or cost-prohibitive, and that the award of a contract without engaging in a standard procurement process is in the best interest of the procurement unit.

Complete Section B

Impracticality - The award of a contract is under circumstances, described in rules adopted by the board, that make awarding the contract through a standard procurement process impractical and not in the best interest of USBE.

Complete Section C

Trial use contract for a new or innovative procurement item, or for a procurement item with a novel or unproven use or application.

Complete Section D

Extension of a contract without engaging in a standard procurement process. If extension will result in a request to increase the contract total, complete Section F below as well.

Complete Section E

Request to increase total contract amount. Complete Section F

SECTION A: ONLY ONE SOURCE

1. What is unique about this procurement item to justify an award of contract without engaging in a standard procurement process?

(Explain in detail why the service or product is only available from a single supplier.)

2. Could the procurement item be reasonably modified to allow for competition? (Explain why or why not.)

3. Detailed description of the market research performed to identify similar or alternate procurement items. List term(s) and results used in searching the Internet and other research conducted to complete market search.

4. Is the requested procurement item available on an existing state cooperative contract? List search term(s) and results of a state cooperative contract search (https://statecontracts.utah.gov/Home/Search).

5. If there is only one source for the procurement item, list the names of other similar vendors contacted, contact person, and a summary of their response.

SECTION B: SIGNIFICANT TRANSITIONAL COSTS

1. Describe the existing equipment, technology, software, accessories, replacement parts, or service, hereafter referred to as equipment; include the original purchase price and date of purchase for the existing equipment.

Method of procuring the existing procurement item:

Solicitation number: Existing contract number:

Original purchase date: Original purchase price:

2. Attach the cost-benefit analysis, as required by Utah Code Section 63G-6a-802, that demonstrates that transitional costs are unreasonable or cost-prohibitive.

SECTION C: STANDARD PROCUREMENT PROCESS IMPRACTICAL

1. Circumstances that make awarding a contract through a standard procurement process impractical and not in the best interest of USBE. Choose ONE that best describes the circumstances:

A contract award to a specific supplier, service provider, or contractor is a condition of a donation or grant that will fund the full cost of the supply, service, or construction item Public utility services, when only one public utility service is available in an area An item where compatibility is the overriding consideration A used procurement item that presents a unique, specialized, or time-limited buying opportunity Other circumstances determined by the procurement official to make awarding a contract through a standard procurement process impractical and not in the best interest of USBE

2. Review R33-8-101c and provide supporting justification why awarding the contract through a standard procurement process is impractical and not in the best interest of USBE under the circumstances; including any supporting documentation.

3. Supply the following, if applicable:

Method of procuring the existing procurement item:

Solicitation number: Existing contract number:

Original purchase date: Original purchase price:

SECTION D: TRIAL USE CONTRACT

1. Describe how this trial use contract for the new or novel procurement item will benefit USBE.

2. Describe how the procurement item is new or innovative, or how the procurement item has a proposed use/application that is novel or unproven.

3. Describe why a trial use contract exception is necessary for this procurement item at this time as opposed to conducting a standard procurement process to procure the procurement item.

4. What research have you conducted to ensure the requested procurement item is not available on an existing state cooperative contract?

5. How long does the agency need to test the procurement item and what quantities of the procurement item (if applicable) will be necessary to test this procurement item? Note trial use contracts generally cannot exceed a period of 24 months.

SECTION E: EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITHOUT ENGAGING IN A STANDARD PROCUREMENT

PROCESS

The procurement official may extend a contract up to 120 days. For extensions beyond 120 days, the procurement official may extend the contract after consulting with legal counsel.

Contract Start Date: Current End Date:

Proposed End Date: Contract Number:

1. Has this contract previously been extended?

No

Yes, this contract was previously extended for days.

2. Is this request for a contract extension the result of a protest, appeal, or court action? If yes, items 3-5 below do not need to be completed. Provide the solicitation number that resulted in a protest and date of the protest, appeal, or court action.

3. Is USBE currently engaged in a standard procurement process for the procurement item that is the subject of the contract extension request?

Yes

No, USBE is letting the contract expire and will not be re-soliciting for a procurement item that is the subject of the contract extension request.

4. Describe why extending this contract without engaging in a standard procurement process is necessary to avoid a lapse in a critical government service, OR to mitigate a circumstance that is likely to have a negative impact on public health, safety, welfare, or property.

5. Justification for Extension (check all that apply):

The standard procurement process is delayed due to an unintentional error.

A change in an industry standard requires one or more significant changes to specifications for the procurement item.

To prevent the loss of federal funds

To mitigate the effects of a delay of a state or federal appropriation.

To enable the procurement unit to continue to receive a procurement item during a delay in the implementation of a contract awarded pursuant to a procurement that has already been conducted.

To enable the procurement unit to continue to receive a procurement item during a period of time during which negotiations with a vendor under a new contract for the procurement item are being conducted.

6. For the selection(s) above, provide any additional details regarding the circumstances justifying a contract extension.

SECTION F: REQUEST TO INCREASE TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT

If the original solicitation type was an ACWESPP (e.g., sole source) and the additional amount will make the contract total go above $50,000, then a public notice is required to increase the contract total. This public notice is not necessary if the procurement official waives the public notice requirement in accordance with R33-8-101e.

Contractor Name: Contract Number:

Original Contract Total: Current Contract Total:

Proposed Contract Total: % Increase from Original:

Solicitation Number: Solicitation Type:

Product or Service Description:

1. Why is the contract total being increased? Check all that apply.

The term of the contract is being extended (also complete Section E above if extending).

The quantity of products or services needed has increased.

The price, rate, or fee for a product or service has increased.

A new or upgraded product or service is needed.

2. Provide details for the answer that was selected in the previous question that justify an increase in the total contract amount.

245 educator licenses for Keys to Early Writing- asynchronous course registration with book 10 FREE COURSES DONATED BY KTL - USBE to determine either KEW or KCW

A key component of this initiative is the integration of synchronous coaching, which is designed to be delivered by our state-trained facilitators who are already certified in the Keys to Early and Content Writing frameworks. This approach ensures consistency, fidelity, and cost-efficiency by leveraging existing expertise within the state.

No other vendor offers a solution that aligns with our established structure, pedagogy, and coaching protocols, which are supported by our state-trained facilitators. Utilizing an alternative vendor would necessitate significant retraining and redesign, compromising consistency, cost-efficiency, and instructional alignment across our statewide writing initiatives.

Text Field 37: The Keys to Writing program is uniquely positioned for sole source procurement due to its seamless integration with the Keys to Early Writing and Keys to Content Writing frameworks, which are already in use across the state. The Utah State Board of Education has invested in training a cadre of state facilitators in these foundational programs. These facilitators are not only deeply familiar with the instructional design and pedagogical approach of the Keys suite, but they are also specifically equipped to deliver the coaching supports required for the virtual implementation of Keys to Writing.

This alignment allows the state to:

Leverage existing expertise without incurring additional training costs or delays.

Maintain instructional consistency across all writing professional development initiatives.

Ensure fidelity of implementation by using facilitators who are already certified and experienced in the Keys methodology.

Furthermore, the asynchronous online courses that accompany Keys to Writing are designed to be supported by synchronous coaching sessions. These sessions are structured around the same instructional principles and coaching protocols used in the Early and Content Writing programs. No other vendor offers a product that is pedagogically and operationally compatible with the existing Keys infrastructure, nor one that can be implemented using the current facilitator network without significant retraining or redesign.

Awarding this contract through a standard procurement process would introduce unnecessary costs, delay implementation, and risk misalignment with the state’s established literacy framework. Therefore, this procurement meets the criteria for a sole source award under the Utah Procurement Code.

Asynchronous online writing professional development aligned to state literacy standards.

Integrated coaching support that could be delivered by existing state-trained facilitators.

Instructional continuity with the Keys to Early Writing and Keys to Content Writing frameworks already in use statewide.

Internal Research and Documentation A prior Request for Statement of Qualifications (RFSQ) was issued under ID USBE-JB25138-PS, which closed on November 11, 2024. Seven vendor responses were received and evaluated for qualifications, proposals, and pricing. Keys to Writing was chosen as the selected vendor based on the criteria.

Web-Based Market Research Search terms used:

“asynchronous writing professional development K-3” “literacy coaching programs for state-trained facilitators” “alternatives to Keys to Literacy writing programs” Findings:

Keys to Literacy offers a unique combination of asynchronous courses and synchronous coaching, with a structure designed to be delivered by trained facilitators. Their offerings include Keys to Content Writing, Keys to Beginning Reading, and Keys to Early Writing, all of which align with Utah’s existing training investments.

The Educator Collaborative and Idaho’s SMART Project offer literacy consulting and cohort-based PD, but neither provides a turnkey solution that integrates with Utah’s current Keys-trained facilitator model.