Nevada State Purchasing Division Department of Administration 515 E Musser St Ste 300 Carson City, NV 89701 purchasing.nv.gov nevadaepro.com

Revised 2024-11 Page 1 of 10

Request for information

Date October 01, 2026

Solicitation number 30DOE-S4035

Single point of contact name Irene Ledezma

Single point of contact email ndecontracts@doe.nv.gov

Requesting agency Nevada Department of Education

Request for information title Nevada Early Childhood Data Systems Infrastructure & Support RFI

Response deadline date and time October 15, 2026, 2:00 PM Pacific

This request for information (RFI) is available at nevadaepro.com as a bid solicitation.

Table of Contents

1. Applicable regulations governing procurement

2. Project overview

3. Scope of work

4. Cost

5. Timeline

6. Submission checklist

7. Exhibits A-F https://purchasing.nv.gov/ https://nevadaepro.com/

Page 2 of 10 Request for information

1. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS GOVERNING PROCUREMENT

1.1. All applicable Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) and Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) documentation can be found at: www.leg.state.nv.us/law1.cfm.

1.1 Vendors are advised to review Nevada’s ethical standards requirements, including but not limited to NRS 281A, NRS 333.800, and NAC 333.155.

1.2. This solicitation is a request for information (RFI) only. It is not a solicitation for bids or proposals. No contract award will result from this RFI. Aggregate information from this RFI will be analyzed and may be used as budget justification or to develop a subsequent solicitation.

1.3. All information received in response to this solicitation is considered confidential business information by the

Administrator of the Nevada State Purchasing Division of the Department of Administration. This solicitation will not lead to evaluation or award pursuant to NRS 333.335(7), so responses remain confidential.

2. PROJECT OVERVIEW

2.1. The State of Nevada, through the Nevada Department of Education’s Office of Early Learning and Development (NDE-

OELD), is issuing this Request for Information (RFI) to explore market capabilities, technical architectures, and fair-market cost structures to support its response to and development of future funding requests and sustainability planning.

In the short-term, responses to this RFI will inform the development of the state’s proposal for the federal Preschool Development Grant Birth through Five (PDG B-5) Strategic Measurement, Analytics, and Results using Technology (SMART) grant, Option 1. This effort aims to strengthen NDE’s internal data pipelines within a compressed 10-month execution window, while continuing to build technical readiness for future statewide early childhood integrated data systems (ECIDS).

Further, NDE-OELD is seeking information from qualified vendors regarding the long-term transition and expansion of the Early Learning Data and Reporting System (ELDRS). Through previous PDG B-5 funding cycles, the State successfully deployed a functioning early learning data warehouse and launched key public-facing tools, including the Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) Program Rating report, a web application based family engagement survey (PEAKS), and a comprehensive Public Early Childhood Education (ECE) Dashboard. NDE-OELD aims to explore strategies to transition current technology infrastructure from grant-funded development into a permanent, highly scalable core IT maintenance framework. Without sustained technical support, the regular ingestion of monthly reporting data would stop, leaving state leaders without the up-to-date visualizations necessary to track growth trends and make meaningful evidence-based decisions. We seek vendor insights on how to finalize pending technological investments, complete active development on initiatives like the ECAC Nevada Early Systems Tracker (NEST), and implement critical backend upgrades to establish a self-sustaining, efficient data pipeline.

2.2. Requesting agency background

2.2.1. The Nevada Department of Education’s Office of Early Learning and Development (NDE-OELD) is the primary state agency responsible for overseeing and advancing early childhood education initiatives across Nevada. NDE-OELD operates under the shared statewide vision that all children from birth through age eight will be safe, healthy, and thriving. To achieve this, the office manages a comprehensive, mixed-delivery system of core early learning programs, including state-funded pre-kindergarten (Nevada Ready! Pre-K), the Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS), early literacy initiatives, and collaborative alignments with Head Start and private child care providers.

This RFI aligns with and advances NDE Strategic Priorities as well as the Nevada Early Childhood Advisory Council 2026 – 2030 (Nevada ECAC) Strategic Plan. Formal cross-agency data sharing agreements are not currently in active development and vendors should focus their responses strictly on objectives outlined in Section 3, Scope of Work.

Technical oversight and data use-case priorities will be administered by NDE-OELD in collaboration with relevant early childhood agencies, data governance bodies, advisory entities, partners, etc.

3. SCOPE OF WORK

3.1. Goals and Objectives: The State is seeking information on how vendors would approach and achieve the following technical and strategic objectives. All estimated costs for the project must be entered on the tables in Attachment F.

http://www.leg.state.nv.us/law1.cfm https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-281A.html https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-333.html#NRS333Sec800 https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-333.html#NRS333Sec800 https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nac/nac-333.html#NAC333Sec155 https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-333.html#NRS333Sec335

Page 3 of 10 Request for information

Vendors are not required to respond to each objective, however, are encouraged to respond to as much as possible. .

Identify best practices being employed in similar state/district education agencies when possible. In addition, Vendors should complete Exhibits A, B, C, D, and E to share overarching information related to their organization, business model, data management practices, and project management practices.

3.1.1. Finalize Pending System Components: Describe strategies to move all OELD early childhood data and reports, technical documentation on the Docusaurus platform, and advanced Microsoft Fabric integrations from planning directly into full-scale production (Estimate costs under 1. Assessment, planning, and detailed requirements capture and 2. Acquisition of Technology on Attachment F).

3.1.2. Scale Data Architecture: Detail methodologies to dynamically ingest massive, real-time datasets, scale up data warehouses, and automate full-text search across multiple state agencies simultaneously (estimated costs can be entered under 4. System development, implementation, and technical deployment on Attachment F).

3.1.3. Resolve Technical Backlogs: Explain how your technical team would operate without work item caps to immediately resolve hundreds of backlogged reporting enhancements, data mapping requests, and pending ADA WCAG compliance updates across all platforms and the related costs (See Attachment F, 5. Deployment Assurance to estimate costs).

3.1.4. Expand the Family Engagement Survey (PEAKS): Provide technical approaches for scaling the PEAKS web application to include every child care program, private ECE setting, and public school district in Nevada.

3.1.5. Launch the ECAC Data Bank (NEST): Outline the steps required to transition NEST from user acceptance testing into a highly sophisticated, decentralized production environment featuring advanced user role matrices and dedicated external portals for state agencies and early childhood stakeholders.

3.1.6. Institutionalize Data Governance: Propose frameworks for establishing long-term data governance policies and automated multi-agency sharing protocols to sustain the cross-agency network and lower future development overhead.

3.1.7. Early Childhood Workforce Data Integration: Describe strategies to combine and analyze different workforce datasets across different agencies and organizations in order to generate comprehensive reports and analysis on Nevada’s early childhood workforce (See Attachment F, 5. Deployment Assurance to estimate costs).

3.1.8. Early Childhood Quality: Explain how your technical team will support NDE-OELD in developing and maintaining an integrated child care provider data system that tracks program participation and quality improvement progress, quality supports and services, coaching workloads, and the number of classrooms and children served in quality programs. Describe how the system will integrate or align with relevant state and local data sources to monitor child care licensing status and compliance, workforce information, and other key program data. Additionally, explain how your team will automate existing manual processes and workflows to reduce administrative burden, improve data accuracy and timeliness, increase operational efficiency, and maximize the use of existing staff and resources.

3.1.9. Needs Assessment Visualization: NDE-OELD and other partners have completed many needs assessments over the years to capture early learning landscapes across Nevada. Early Childhood needs assessments are now catalogued in one place, the Needs Assessment List, but still lack automated analysis or graphically visualized tools to show what has been assessed, when, what has changed since then, etc. Explain if and how your technical team could build and automate ingestion of common early childhood data from national/state datasets to streamline needs assessment data collection, and explain what tools would be required to build this.

3.1.10. Partnerships: Describe your organization’s experience and capabilities in establishing technical and strategic partnerships with statewide partners and stakeholders, national early childhood technical assistance (TA) or data entities. Detail how your proposed solution leverages existing data frameworks, standardized data models, or external TA resources to accelerate state-level technology infrastructure development, lower technical risk, and support long-term system sustainability and buy-in. Reference any studies or reports that support your recommended approach. Where appropriate, include URLs for online documentation.

Page 4 of 10 Request for information

3.1.11. Language Access & User Adoption: Describe how your proposed software architecture natively supports dynamic, multi-language localization across administrative and public-facing portals, web applications, and survey tools. Explain your quality control protocols and verification methodologies for ensuring translated content is authentic and contextualized for Nevada’s communities.

4. COST

4.1. Vendors must complete Exhibit F to provide comparative market pricing or efficiency metrics demonstrating why your proposed cost structure represents fair market value and long-term cost-effectiveness for a state agency.

5. TIMELINE

5.1. All questions shall be submitted using the bid Q&A feature in nevadaepro.com by the deadline below.

5.2. The following represents the proposed timeline for this project.

5.2.1. All times stated are Pacific Time (PT).

5.2.2. These dates represent a tentative schedule of events.

5.2.3. The State reserves the right to modify these dates at any time.

A. Deadline for questions ............................................................................ No later than 4:00 pm on 10/08/2026 B. Answers posted ........................................................................................................... On or about 10/12/2026 C. Submission deadline ............................................................................... No later than 2:00 pm on 10/15/2026

6. SUBMISSION CHECKLIST

6.1. This section identifies the information requested and how to respond.

6.1.1. Information should be submitted as a quote through nevadaepro.com.

6.1.2. Technical information and cost information should not be included in the same attachment.

6.1.3. All attachments should be flagged as confidential in nevadaepro.com.

6.1.4. Additional attachments may be included.

Page 5 of 10 Request for information

7. EXHIBITS A-F

EXHIBIT A – VENDOR INFORMATION FORM

Vendor Information Vendor Name Vendor Address, City, Zip Vendor Point of Contact (POC) Name Vendor POC Title Vendor POC e-mail address Vendor POC phone number

EXHIBIT B – VENDOR NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

This Exhibit captures three parts: 1) Vendor Primary Specialty; 2) Vendor Narrative Description; and 3) Vendor Technical Narrative and Capabilities.

Part 1: Vendor Primary Specialty

To assist the State of Nevada in categorizing respondents, please select the one primary category that best describes your organization’s core business specialty, followed by any secondary categories that apply:

Primary Specialty (Check only one):

☐Technology & Data Solutions ☐Early Childhood Technical Assistance (TA) & Systems Building Organization ☐Early Childhood Data Subject Matter Expert (SME) ☐Policy, Evaluation, & Research Institute ☐Specialized EdTech or Software Vendor

Secondary Specialties (Check all that apply):

☐Technology & Data Solutions ☐Early Childhood Technical Assistance (TA) & Systems Building Organization ☐Data Governance ☐Early Childhood Data Subject Matter Expert (SME) ☐Evaluation, & Research Institute ☐Specialized EdTech or Software Vendor ☐Other: ___________________________

Part 2: Vendor Narrative Description

Please provide answers to the following questions

1. Provide a clear identification and description of your organization.

2. Provide a clear and concise summary of your organization’s background, qualifications and relevant experiences in state-level early childhood data systems and technology infrastructure as it relates to this Request for Information.

Page 6 of 10 Request for information

3. Provide a brief explanation of your interest in grant funded Early Childhood Integrated Data Systems and Nevada’s Early Learning Data and Reporting System (ELDRS).

Part 3: Vendor Technical Approach

Please provide answers to the following questions:

1. What specific technical criteria and testing milestones does your company use to determine system launch readiness in a compressed, 10-month time window?

2. Describe your company’s risk mitigation strategy for multi-agency data integrations. How will your company ensure that data sharing and pipeline builds are completed within a strict 10-month period despite potential interagency delays?

3. How does your company track quantitative performance indicators (e.g., number of automated feeds active, data match accuracy percentage, reduction in processing hours for providers) and how frequently does this occur?

4. Which components of a data strategy does your company provide assistance with development, implementation, and which does your company prefer to be developed by NDE?

5. How useful will data flow diagrams and data business process maps be in the development of your company’s response to a future RFP? Can these be included in your company’s solution as part of the scope of work?

Page 7 of 10 Request for information

6. Does your company’s recommended data architecture leverage the use of existing databases, data warehouses, or data lakes; or are those often replaced as part of the solution? Please explain if your company offers a hybrid approach as an alternative.

7. Through the processes of data integration and data migration, explain your company’s approach to eliminating redundancies and identifying sources of truth for master data management?

Part 3.1: Technical Objectives Capability Matrix

Please review the detailed scope requirements for each objective in Section 3 (Scope of Work) of this RFI before completing this matrix. For each numbered objective below, indicate whether your organization can fulfill the requirement in-house, via partner or subcontractor, or if this capability is not offered. If partnered, please identify potential partner types or national entities (as applicable)

Section 3: Scope/Technical Objective Area Completed In-House

Requires Partner / Subcontractor

Capability Not Offered

Potential Partner Type / National Entity (as applicable)

3.1.1 Finalize Pending System Components ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3.1.2 Scale Data Architecture ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3.1.3 Resolve Technical Backlogs ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3.1.4 Expand the Family Engagement Survey

(PEAKS)

3.1.5 Launch the ECAC Data Bank (NEST) ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3.1.6 Institutionalize Data Governance ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3.1.7 Early Childhood Workforce Data Integration ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3.1.8 Early Childhood Quality ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3.1.9 Needs Assessment Visualization ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3.1.10 Partnerships ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3.1.11 Language Access & User Adoption ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 8 of 10 Request for information

EXHIBIT C – ARCHITECTURAL APPROACH

Please list and describe tools and techniques you would recommend.

1. What alternatives among tools and technologies can your company implement and support for ELDRS based on previous project successes?

2. What alternatives among tools and technologies can your company implement and support for data collection and validation efforts to supplant the use of Excel spreadsheets, Google forms, Sharepoint, etc?

List Tools – include the name of the software and hardware (Add rows as necessary)

Describe Tool Functions Provide Technical Specs

Page 9 of 10 Request for information

EXHIBIT D – DATA QUALITY CONTROLS

Please list and describe the tools and techniques you would recommend to ensure high quality data.

1. Define the scope of activities for data standardization.

2. Define the scope of activities for data cleansing.

Please list tools and techniques for data cleansing and quality control:

EXHIBIT E – PRIVACY AND ACCESS CONTROL

1. As of March 2026, all active cloud vendors in the State of Nevada must comply with GovRAMP verification. How does your company plan to comply and meet GovRAMP requirements?

Please list and describe the tools and techniques you would recommend to ensure that state and federal privacy laws are strictly enforced in systems for accessing data.

https://govramp.org/news/nevada-partners-with-govramp-to-standardize-cloud-security-across-executive-branch-agencies

Page 10 of 10 Request for information

EXHIBIT F – COST PROJECTION

Please indicate your order of magnitude cost projections for the PDG B-5 SMART Grant project implementation using the tools and techniques you have recommended.

Assessment, Planning and Detailed Requirements Capture

Time (months):

Hardware Costs: n/a Software Costs:

Labor Costs:

Acquisition of Technology

Time (months):

Hardware Costs: n/a

System and data architecture and design

Hardware Costs: n/a

System development, implementation and technical deployment

Hardware Costs: n/a

Deployment Assurance: Communications, business process re-engineering, hands-on training, etc.

Hardware Costs: n/a

10-month Operations & Maintenance

Hardware Costs: n/a

Subsequent Operations & Maintenance

Hardware Costs: n/a

In addition, describe the method you would use to determine the cost of carrying out each phase of the grant using hourly benchmarks for key technical roles: