5-Vantage Learning Sole Source Justification Application V2.pdf

Sole Source Justification Application

Rev. 9/2025

C I T Y C O L L E G E S O F C H I C A G O

Sole Source Justification Application

Why are you requesting a Sole Source Waiver?

☐Only one known source that can provide the commodity or service. Procurement of public utility services.

☐Compatibility (e.g. CCC requires a specific piece of equipment to be compatible with an existing equipment system).

☐Public safety concerns.

☐Limited or proprietary systems (i.e. additional licenses, updates, specialized replacement parts, etc.).

☐A professional expert is requested.

☐Sales territories or product availability within limited geographic boundaries.

☐Other _______________________________________________________

If your request does not meet any of these criteria, STOP, consult with Procurement services to identify an alternative procurement method.

Name of requestor:

Department/School:

Project title:

Email address:

Contract or Board Report number:

Vendor:

Value of initial term, or if a renewal, value of this renewal $:

(Attach the proposal received)

Number of potential/remaining renewals:

Length of each renewal in months:

Value of all/remaining renewals:$

Actual Estimated

Choose one of the following:

New Sole Source Sole Source renewal Change Order or Amendment to an existing Sole Source

Provide a description of the supplies or services required

Laura Denly ldenly@ccc.edu

Enrollment Management 35142

COLLEGE PLACEMENT ENGLISH PLATFORM SERVICES Vantage Learning

94,5000

Provision of a proprietary, fully customized online platform to administer, manage, and score the City Colleges of Chicago RTW 2.0 English Placement Assessment, including assessment delivery, workflow management, and faculty-based essay scoring support.

Rev. 9/2025

C I T Y C O L L E G E S O F C H I C A G O

Select the type of funding to be used: Educational Funds Capital Funds Grant Funds

Other (Explain):

This purchase is economically only available from a single source because it is:

Art or Entertainment Services or Athletic Events Compatibility with existing/current equipment, accessories, replacement parts or service Critical changes to the existing contract are necessary and best accomplished by the original contract holder Federal/CCC Grant requires contract with specific vendor

(attach Grant Award Agreement) Item is copyrighted or patented and the item is only available from the holder

Copyright or Patent Number(s):

Items are needed for trial use or testing

Media for advertising

Organization memberships (Dues, fees, conference charges including mandated travel and related expenses)

Public utility regulated services

Radio and television broadcast rights software license/ upgrade/maintenance

Other (Explain):

Has CCC purchased these supplies/services in the past? Yes No

If yes, STARTING WITH THE MOST RECENT CONTRACT AND WORKING BACKWARD, for the entire relationship with this vendor for this supply or service, list each term, value, short description and type of procurement of each:

Term Term From: Term To: Value Description Vendor Selection

One Two

Three Four Five Six

Seven Eight Nine Ten

If more than 10 years, explain:

proprietary system

July 1, 2024 June 30, 2025 $360,000 McCann RFP

July 1, 2021 June 30, 2024 $360,000 McCann RFP

July 1, 2021 June 30, 2024 $360,000 McCann RFP

July 1, 2021 June 30, 2024 $360,000 McCann RFP

July 1, 2016 June 30, 2019 $375,000 McCann RFP

July 1, 2016 June 30, 2019 $375,000 McCann RFP

July 1, 2016 June 30, 2019 $125,000 McCann RFP

Rev. 9/2025

C I T Y C O L L E G E S O F C H I C A G O

Business Rationale

1. Provide a detailed explanation of the need for the supplies or services:

2. What are the unique features of the supplies or services that are not available in any other product or by any other vendor?

Provide specific, quantifiable factors/qualifications:

3. If professional services, what are the unique qualifications the vendor possess?

Provide specific. measureable factors/qualifications:

4. Were alternative supplies or services evaluated? Yes No

a. If yes, what were they and why were they unacceptable? If no, why were alternatives not evaluated? Please be specific with regard to features, characteristics, requirements, capabilities and compatibility:

5. What efforts were made to get the best possible price?

City Colleges of Chicago requires a comprehensive, reliable, and consistent English placement assessment system that accurately evaluates students’ reading and writing abilities to ensure proper course placement and support student success. The requested services provide a fully integrated, customized platform that enables CCC to deliver multiple assessment forms, manage testing workflows, collect student responses, and facilitate a rigorous faculty-driven scoring process using a CCC-specific rubric. This system supports key operational needs, including accommodations, secure test administration, automated form rotation, and structured scoring workflows with built-in quality control (e.g., dual faculty scoring and discrepancy resolution). Without this specialized, proprietary platform, CCC would be unable to administer its RTW 2.0 placement process at scale while maintaining consistency, faculty engagement, and alignment with institutional academic standards.

see attached n/a

No alternatives were evaluated because the required platform must support CCC’s fully customized RTW 2.0 assessment, including proprietary test forms, CCC-specific scoring rubrics, dual faculty scoring workflows, and integrated discrepancy resolution, all of which are uniquely configured and not compatible with other vendors’ systems.

CCC has maintained a long-standing relationship with the vendor since 2016, during which the vendor has consistently honored a stable rate of $1.50 per unit. Pricing has been further enhanced through the addition of online browser lockdown services at an annual cost of $12,000, providing added value by strengthening test security without significantly impacting overall costs.

Rev. 9/2025

C I T Y C O L L E G E S O F C H I C A G O

6. Will this purchase obligate the CCC to this vendor for future purchases such as maintenance, licensing or continuing needs? Yes No If yes, please provide details regarding future obligations and/or needs:

7. Why is the price for this purchase considered to be fair and reasonable?

8. If this is a renewal, describe why circumstances are such that competitive selection is still not an alternative since awarding the original contract:

9. What will be the financial or other impact to CCC if this sole source is not approved and a competitive solicitation is required?

Department/College Representative Signature Required I know and understand the contents of this Sole Source /Bid Waiver Justification and attest that all statements are true and correct.

Department/College Representative Signature Printed Name Date

Department/College Representative Signature Printed Name Date

VC/ College President Signature

Procurement Approval and Signature

Printed Name Date

Printed Name Date no

CCC will release a RFP to announce the need for a Math Placement Platform outlining our needs, inviting potential vendors to submit bids see attached

This is a renewal of a long-standing agreement, and competitive selection is not feasible because the platform has been fully customized to support CCC’s RTW 2.0 English Placement Assessment since its initial implementation in 2016. The system’s proprietary configuration—including CCC-specific assessment forms, scoring rubrics, faculty scoring workflows, and administrative processes—cannot be replicated or supported by another vendor. Transitioning to a different provider would require redevelopment of the entire assessment model, resulting in significant operational disruption, loss of continuity, and additional costs, making continued use of the current vendor the only viable option.

Laura Denly 5/28/2026 see attached

5/28/2026 | 5:27:21 PM CDTWillie Barefield

Nicholas Gibb 6/1/2026 | 2:36:25 PM CDT

Sole Source Justification Application, Enrollment Management

Vantage Learning Answers for questions 2, 7 and 9

2. What are the unique features of the supplies or services that are not available in any other productor by any other vendor?

Provide specific, quantifiable factors/qualifications:

• Proprietary, CCC-specific platform configuration: The system is uniquely built and configured to meet the exact requirements of the RTW 2.0 English Placement Assessment at CCC, including customized assessment forms, scoring rubrics, and workflows that are not transferable or replicable by other vendors.

• Customized assessment delivery with controlled rotation: Six (6) standard assessment forms and twelve (12) accommodation-specific forms are programmed to rotate automatically based on a CCC-defined schedule, ensuring test security and consistency at scale.

• Dual faculty scoring workflow with automated resolution: Each assessment is independently scored by two CCC faculty members using a Chicago-specific rubric, with the platform automatically identifying discrepancies and routing them to a Chief Scorer for final determination—providing built-in quality control not commonly available in standard systems.

• Integrated faculty-driven essay evaluation: Unlike typical assessment tools that rely on automated scoring, the platform supports structured manual grading by CCC faculty, preserving academic oversight and instructional alignment.

• Comprehensive role-based access and administration: The system supports multiple distinct user roles (e.g., Site Administrators, Proctors, Faculty Scorers, Chief Scorers, Reporters, Institution Administrators), each with defined permissions, enabling precise operational control across the district.

• End-to-end assessment management: The platform manages the full lifecycle of placement testing, including student background questions, test delivery, workflow management, scoring, accommodations, and centralized reporting.

• Exclusive compatibility with CCC’s RTW 2.0 implementation: Due to the proprietary nature of the platform— covering assessment content, scoring processes, workflow logic, rubric integration, and accommodations—no other vendor can provide a solution that is fully aligned or compatible with CCC’s existing English placement model.

7. Why is the price for this purchase considered to be fair and reasonable?

The price is considered fair and reasonable due to the vendor’s long-standing relationship with CCC since 2016, during which they have consistently maintained a stable and competitive rate of $1.50 per assessment unit.

Additionally, the vendor has enhanced the value of the service by introducing online browser lockdown functionality for $12,000 annually, strengthening test security without significantly increasing overall costs. This combination of consistent pricing, proven performance, and added functionality supports the cost-effectiveness of the purchase.

9. What will be the financial or other impact to CCC if this sole source is not approved and a competitive solicitation is required?

If this sole source is not approved and a competitive solicitation is required, CCC would face significant operational disruption, delays in maintaining an established placement platform for the English Placement Assessment, and additional costs related to procuring and implementing a new system. A new vendor would not be able to support the existing customized assessment forms, scoring rubrics, and workflows without full redevelopment. This would require extensive retraining and system transition, potentially interrupting placement testing, delaying student enrollment, and affecting CCC’s ability to accurately place students into appropriate English courses, ultimately impacting student success and enrollment operations.

Sole Source Justification Application attachment.pdf