26MACISMB2 Scorecard - Spanish - Final.docx

DOCX document 117 KB Posted

Attached to
26MACISMB5 | Early Literacy Screening Assessments in Languages other than English
Solicitation number
BD-26-1026-DOE02-DOE01-127668
Issued by
Massachusetts

About this file

Written by GovTribe AI ·

This is an evaluation scorecard used by the Massachusetts Department of Education to assess bidder responses for a state contract (Document #: BD-26-1026-DOE02-DOE01-127668, Alternate ID: 26MACISMB5) related to early literacy assessment tools. The solicitation requires bidders to submit assessments designed to measure reading and language skills in kindergarten through third grade. The assessment must measure specific constructs including alphabetic knowledge, phonological awareness, word reading, reading comprehension, and oral language proficiency across defined grade levels. The evaluation process uses a seven-point required qualifications checklist that all bidders must satisfy to advance in the selection process, with criteria covering assessment construct measurement, classification accuracy metrics, reporting capabilities, technical documentation, administration frequency, and professional development support.

The scorecard establishes a 100-point evaluation framework divided into required qualifications (binary pass/fail criteria) and additional evaluation criteria weighted with multipliers ranging from one to five times their base point values. Additional evaluation categories include optional features such as Rapid Automatized Naming measures, spelling and segmentation tools, and reliability and validity evidence, with total possible points allocated as follows: classification accuracy (25 points), reliability (15 points), validity (15 points), bias analysis (10 points), progress monitoring tools (5 points), supportive resources (5 points), cost-effectiveness (10 points), administration clarity (5 points), and preferred optional measures (10 points combined). The evaluation uses a five-point scale ranging from non-responsive (0 points) to outstanding (5 points) based on the completeness and quality of supporting documentation provided by bidders.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
26MACISMB2 Evidence Form - Spanish - Final.docx DOCX document
26MACISMB5 Scorecard -FRENCH - Final.docx DOCX document
26MACISMB5 Evidence Form - Portuguese FINAL.docx DOCX document
FY26 State Forms - April 2026.pdf PDF
RFR - Required Specifications from OSD 10.1.21.docx DOCX document
IP Language.docx DOCX document
IT RFR Required Specifications.doc DOC document
26MACISMB5 Scorecard -Portuguese - Final~1.docx DOCX document
26MACISMB5 - Attachment A - Final.docx DOCX document
26MACISMB5 - Bid - Final.docx DOCX document
DESE Required Language 10-2025.docx DOCX document
Attachment B - Contact Form~1.docx DOCX document
26MACISMB5 Evidence Form - French FINAL.docx DOCX document
Show all 13

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

135 Santilli Highway, Everett, MA 02148 | Main Telephone: (781) 338-3000 | TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370

EVALUATION CRITERIA SCORECARD

Agency Staff use only (This document will be used to evaluate all responses submitted to this Solicitation)

Name of Bidder:
Name of Reviewer(s):
Date Reviewed:

Required Qualifications Criteria (Bidder must receive a “yes” on all the following criteria to move on to the next evaluation section)

1
The constructs measured at each assessment period include, at a minimum, the following constructs in the corresponding grades:

1. Alphabetic Knowledge and Phonological Awareness: Must measure at least one of the following skills for each grade listed:

a. Letter Sound Knowledge (grades K; grade 1 beginning of the year)

b. Letter Combination or syllable sounds (grades K, 1)

c. Blending (grades K,1)

d. Segmenting (grades K, 1)

2. Word Reading: Must measure both of the skills listed:

a. Word Reading (grade 1, beginning of the year)

b. Passage Reading (grade 1, middle of the year; grades 2 and 3)

3. Reading Comprehension (grades 2 and 3)

4. Oral Language Proficiency: Must measure at least one of the following skills for each grade listed:

a. Receptive Vocabulary (grades K-3)

b. Expressive Vocabulary (grades K-3)

c. Listening Comprehension (grades K, 1)

Yes |_|
No |_|
2
Classification Accuracy: provides affirmation that the level "significantly below" or its equivalent for grades K-3 meets the following criteria:

a. Sensitivity: greater than or equal to 0.70

b. Specificity: greater than or equal to 0.70

c. Area under the Curve (AUC): greater than or equal to 0.70

Yes |_|
No |_|
3
Assessment results in a composite percentile rank for each student and a "risk level" is identified for each student (e.g. risk/requires intervention) as part of the reported score.
Yes |_|
No |_|
4
Evidence of a user-friendly report of student results for families.
Yes |_|
No |_|
5
Technical Manual is included in accordance with specifics listed in Attachment A and the Evidence Form
Yes |_|
No |_|
6
Assessment is designed to be administered at least twice per school year year in kindergarten and at least three times per school year in grades 1, 2, and 3.
Yes |_|
No |_|
7
Offers professional development, technical support, and customer service to public school educators using the assessment
Yes |_|
No |_|

Scoring rubric:

Non-Responsive
Qualifications is not applicable to request; elements missing / non-responsive to request
Unsatisfactory:
Little evidence of qualification. Many required elements are missing.
Below Average:
Evidence of expertise or qualification in some areas is unclear or unsubstantiated by supporting documentation. Some required elements are missing.
Average:
Application materials are complete and suggest adequate qualifications, providing clear evidence of expertise.
Above Average:
Application materials are complete and suggest solid qualifications, providing clear and well-documented evidence of expertise.
Outstanding:
Application materials is complete, suggesting exemplary qualifications, providing compelling, clear, and well-documented evidence of expertise.

Alternate ID: 26MACISMB5 - SPANISH COMMBUYS Document #: BD-26-1026-DOE02-DOE01-127668 Non-Responsive 0 pts.

Unsatisfactory 1 pt.

Below Average 2 pts.

Average 3 pts.

Above Average 4 pts.

Outstanding 5 pts.

Multiplier
Maximum

Points Available (5 x Multiplier) Points Awarded (0 – 5 x Multiplier)

Additional Evaluation Criteria:

1
Preferred: Evidence that the assessment includes a measure of Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN). If RAN is measured as a part of a subtest such as letter naming fluency, evidence demonstrates the validity of this as a measure of RAN OR RAN, if included as a standalone measure, features

a. Timed Administration

b. A set of at least 36 familiar objects or letters (stimuli) presented serially and pseudorandomized

c. Five or six token items (stimuli)

d. Requires student to read continuously from left to right, and engage in a "return to sweep" to read on the next line

e. Norming sample identified and criterion referenced scoring based on total naming time.

(x1)
5
2
Preferred: Evidence that the assessment includes a measure of at least one of the following: Encoding/Spelling at any grade K-3; Blending (grades K, 1); Segmenting (Grades K, 1)
(x1)
5
3
B1: Classification Accuracy: Evidence of meeting the criteria for classification accuracy listed on the Evidence Form: numbers 10- 14.
(x5)
25
4
B2: Reliability: Evidence of meeting the criteria listed on the Evidence Form: numbers 15-18.
(x3)
15
5
B3: Validity: Evidence of meeting the criteria listed on the Evidence Form: numbers 19-22.
(x3)
15
6
B4: Bias Analysis: Evidence of meeting the criteria listed on the Evidence Form: numbers 23-25.
(x2)
10
7
Evidence that the assessment is brief with clear directions for administration. Evidence Form: number 26
(x1)
5
8
Evidence of including Progress Monitoring Tools to quantify student's rate of improvement or responsiveness to instruction, and to evaluate instruction. For each progress monitoring tool, provides information pertaining to administration frequency and minimum data points for a stable slope that can be use to make instructional decisions. Evidence Form: number 27.
(x1)
5
9
Evidence of supportive resources to guide school based administrators and educators in effective data assessment administration, data access, and data based instructional decision-making. Evidence Form: number 28
(x1)
5
10.
Cost: The assessment and support materials are affordable and cost effective for schools.
(x2)
10
Total:
100

Comments:

image1.jpeg image2.gif

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .