8-TEA RFP 25-017 GEARUP ESBD.pdf

RFP 701-25-017, EVALUATION

OF THE TEXAS GEAR UP 2025

STATE GRANT

Summary

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) is seeking responses from qualified respondents to conduct a federally required statewide evaluation of the Texas Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) 2025 State Grant, authorized under Sections 404A — 404H of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as amended (20 U.S.C.

§§1070a-21—1070a-28).

Authorized by: Sections 404A — 404H of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as amended (20 U.S.C. §§1070a-21—1070a-28).

Proposals are due December 9, 2025 - 2:00 P.M. Central Time

TEA Contracts and Purchasing Division TEASolicitations@tea.texas.gov

Jamel Barnes mailto:TEASolicitations@tea.texas.gov

Table of Contents

1. Purpose, Background, and Scope of Work

1.1. Purpose

1.2. Background and Defined Terms

1.3. TEA Mission and Procurement Authority

1.4. Anticipated Schedule of Events

1.5. Contract Term

1.6. Budget

1.7. Scope of Work, Project Description, and Project Requirements

1.8. Project Deliverables and Milestones

1.9. Collaboration

1.10. Contract Monitoring and Dispute Resolution Procedures

2. Submission Process and Instructions

2.1. Proposal Format

2.2. Electronic Submission Process

2.3. Communication

2.4. Proposal Requirements

2.5. Conflict of Interest

3. Proposal Format and Content

3.1. Requested Information

3.2. Understanding of the Project, Methodology, and Technical Components

3.3. Management Plan, Experience, and Qualifications

3.4. Task, Activity, Deliverable, and Budget Plan

3.5. Contractors Financial Capability

4. Proposal Review and Evaluation

4.1. Proposal Review

4.2. Evaluation Criteria

5. Contractual Requirements

5.1. Incorporation and Order of Precedence

ATTACHMENT A: NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL

ATTACHMENT B: CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS, RESPONSE PREFERENCES, AND EXECUTION

OF OFFER

ATTACHMENT C: HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

ATTACHMENT D: PROPOSAL COVER PAGE AND CHECKLIST

ATTACHMENT E: TASK, ACTIVITY, DELIVERABLE, AND BUDGET PLAN

ATTACHMENT F: DELIVERABLE DESCRIPTIONS AND GENERAL ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

ATTACHMENT G: CONFLICT OF INTEREST ANALYSIS FORM

ATTACHMENT H: TEXAS GEAR UP LOGIC MODEL

ATTACHMENT I: PROJECT EVALUATION STUDENT AND FAMILY DATA SOURCES - TIMEFRAME AND

ANALYSIS TYPE

ATTACHMENT J: CERTIFICATE OF DATA DESTRUCTION

ATTACHMENT K: DELIVERABLE EXPECTATIONS

ATTACHMENT L: TEA DATA SOURCES

ATTACHMENT M: SAMPLE ANALYSIS PLAN MATRIX

1. Purpose, Background, and Scope of Work

1.1. Purpose

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) is seeking responses from qualified respondents to conduct a federally required statewide evaluation of the Texas Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) 2025 State Grant, authorized under Sections 404A — 404H of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as amended (20 U.S.C. §§1070a-21—1070a-28).

The Texas Gear UP 2025 State Grant program is designed to meet the goals set forth by the GEAR UP program:

• provide information regarding financial aid for postsecondary education for participating students;

• encourage student enrollment in rigorous or challenging curricula and coursework, to reduce the need for remedial coursework at the postsecondary level;

• increase the number of participating students who obtain a secondary school diploma and complete applications for, and enroll in, a program of postsecondary education;

• and provide GEAR UP scholarships.

In 2025, TEA expects to receive a $35 million GEAR UP grant, which will support approximately 15,000 students across twenty middle, junior high, and high schools within ten school districts:

• Tyler ISD: Tyler High School, Moore Middle School, and Boulter Middle School

• San Augustine ISD: San Augustine High School

• Marshall ISD: Marshall High School and Marshall Junior High

• Gladewater ISD: Gladewater High School and Gladewater Middle School

• Crockett ISD: Crockett High School and Crockett Junior High

• Huntsville ISD: Huntsville High School and Mance Park Middle School

• Shepherd ISD: Shepherd High School and Shepherd Middle School

• Navasota ISD: Navasota High School and Navasota Junior High

• Corsicana ISD: Corsicana High School and Corsicana Middle School

• McGregor ISD: McGregor High School and Isbill Junior High

The purpose of the evaluation is to assess the effectiveness of the Texas GEAR UP 2025 State Grant program (TX GEAR UP 2025 SG). This includes examining the implementation of key components, the impact on students, families, staff, and community partners involved with the grantees, the sustainability of GEAR UP components, and the expansion of the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG program at a statewide level. The evaluation will also identify promising evidence related to the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG. This will include a better understanding of the link between program implementation and program outcomes, and the impacts of the program on student achievement milestones for the program over time. The information resulting from this evaluation will aid TEA in ongoing monitoring and development of program guidelines, goals, and other important programming decisions.

Eligible proposers are nonprofit organizations, institutions of higher education, private companies, regional educational service centers, local education agencies (LEAs), departments of education, Education Research Centers, and individuals with extensive experience conducting education program evaluations.

Proposals should demonstrate the contractor’s ability to:

- Manage multi-year qualitative and quantitative evaluation research;

- Conduct rigorous quantitative analyses, including quasi-experimental analyses;

- Produce reports that are based on rigorous methods and that produce actionable recommendations; and

- Produce visually appealing reports with data visualizations and graphic design compliant with

508 and presented in layperson-friendly language.

1.2. Background and Defined Terms

The GEAR UP 2025 State Grant is a federal discretionary grant program authorized by the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as amended (20 U.S.C. §§1070a-21—1070a-28). Its primary aim is to increase the number of low-income students, including those with disabilities, who are prepared to enter and succeed in postsecondary education.

Through GEAR UP, the U.S. Department of Education provides six- or seven-year grants to states and partnerships to deliver services in high-poverty middle and high schools. GEAR UP grantees work with an entire cohort of students, starting no later than the seventh grade and continuing through high school. Additionally, GEAR UP funds are used to offer college scholarships to low-income students.

For each grantee, two student groups will receive the following services:

Texas GEAR UP Cohort (Class of 2031): The TX GEAR UP 2025 SG will follow a cohort model that targets a specific group of students beginning in Grade 7 (2025-26; Year 1 of the grant period) and continuing through their first year of postsecondary education (2031-32; Year 7). The Class of 2031 cohort will include all students enrolled in Grade 7 at a grantee district’s middle or junior high school in the fall of 2025-26, as well as any additional students who enter the cohort grades throughout the grant period at grantee campuses. This cohort will receive targeted services through their first year of postsecondary, which coincides with the final year of the grant.

Priority Students: Beginning in Year 3 of the grant period (2027-28) and continuing through Year 7 (2031-32), priority students will consist of junior and senior high school students at grantee districts.

These students will also receive direct GEAR UP services while in grades 11 and 12. Before Year 3, the grantee district’s high schools will be focused on evaluating their infrastructure, convening partners, and establishing robust advising systems.

As a state grant recipient, Texas seeks to achieve the goals of the GEAR UP grant program through a systemic approach of innovative strategies involving students, families, campus and district staff, as well as grant partners. The TX GEAR UP 2025 SG will partner with TEA-approved vendors to provide professional development opportunities to increase academic rigor at grantee districts and campuses. To build a sustainable college and career advising infrastructure, grantee districts will partner with an Effective Advising Framework (EAF) coach employed at the district’s regional Education Service Center (ESC) and trained by TEA. The TX GEAR UP 2025 SG will assist districts to provide support for students in the following areas: increasing pathways to advanced mathematics course completion, providing high-impact tutoring, integrating rigorous academics and career and technical education (CTE), and expanding dual credit opportunities. TX GEAR UP 2025 SG will also enhance two-way communication between advisors and families and partners with College Possible to provide college access support to students. Students in each Texas GEAR UP graduating class will qualify for a one-time $1,000 scholarship to an in-state institution of higher education.

To ensure that progress is made toward the GEAR UP program goals, the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG established the following grant project objectives:

• Objective 1: Increase academic performance and preparation for the postsecondary education of participating students:

o 1.1 The percentage of GEAR UP Cohort students who pass Algebra I by the end of 9th grade will increase by thirteen percentage points by grant year 3;

o 1.2 The percentage of GEAR Cohort students who pass Algebra I by the end of 8th grade will increase by eight percentage points by grant year 2;

o 1.3 The percentage of GEAR UP Cohort and Priority students who take at least one dual credit or AP course by the end of 12th grade will increase by fourteen percentage points by year 7; and o 1.4 The percentage of GEAR UP students who are considered college-ready in both Math and English without remediation through scores on TSIA, SAT, or ACT will increase by ten percentage points by grant years 6 and 7.

• Objective 2: Increase the rate of high school graduation and participation in postsecondary education of participating students:

o 2.1 The percentage of GEAR UP Cohort students who graduate from high school will increase by five percentage points over baseline by grant year 7;

o 2.2 The percentage of GEAR UP Cohort and Priority students and former GEAR UP students who are enrolled at an Institution of Higher Education (IHE) will increase ten percentage points by grant year 7; and o 2.3 The percentage of GEAR UP Cohort and Priority students and former GEAR UP students who enroll at an IHE and persist in the second year of postsecondary education will increase to a target of at least 75% by grant year 7.

• Objective 3: Increase education expectations for participating students and increase student and family knowledge of postsecondary education options, preparation, and financing:

o 3.1 The percentage of GEAR UP Cohort students who complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid will increase by fourteen percentage points to reach an annual target of 70%;

o 3.2 The percentage of GEAR UP Cohort and Priority students who receive at least one comprehensive, individualized college and career counseling session each year of high school will increase to a target of 75% by year 4 and be maintained through year 7;

o 3.3 The percentage of GEAR UP Cohort and Priority students who participate in college and career visits will increase to a target of 75% by grant year 5 and be maintained through year 7; and o 3.4 The percentage of GEAR UP Cohort and Priority students who participate in postsecondary readiness activities will reach an annual target of 90%.

In addition to providing targeted implementation of EAF in grantee districts, the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG will leverage TEA resources to support a statewide initiative to scale awareness of and access to TEA’s EAF, which was developed and piloted under Texas’s 2017–2024 GEAR UP grant. The EAF is deployed through regional ESCs, where staff are trained by TEA and provide EAF coaching services to districts through a grant program or as a fee-generating service. Currently, 12 of 20 ESCs in Texas offer EAF coaching to districts. TEA has identified three ESCs that serve TX GEAR UP 2025 SG grantee districts that currently do not offer EAF coaching. Through the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG, these three ESCs will participate in training to provide free EAF coaching to GEAR UP grantees, with the goal of ultimately expanding to fee-for-service coaching to non-grantee districts. The TX GEAR UP 2025 SG will also support TEA to explore new EAF coaching models for further expansion and access statewide.

As used in this solicitation, the following capitalized terms shall have the meaning as specified below:

Term Definition AP Advanced Placement

CMBL Centralized Master Bidders List Contractor and Vendor “Contractor and Vendor” refers to entities who desire to do business with TEA.

DIR Department of Information Resources EAF Effective Advising Framework ECDS Early Childhood Data System ED U.S. Department of Education ESBD Electronic State Business Daily ESC Education Service Center EO Evaluation Objective GEAR UP Texas Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate

Programs GPRA Government Performance and Results Act HSP Historically Underutilized Business Subcontracting Plan HUB Historically Underutilized Business as defined in Texas Government Code

§ 2161.001 IB International Baccalaureate

IHE Institution of Higher Education LEA Local Education Agency NIGP National Institute of Governmental Purchasing PAR Progress Assessment Report PEIMS Public Education Information Management System QAP Quality Assessment Plan Response “Response” refers to content submitted by Contractors to TEA in response to this solicitation.

SG State Grant STAAR State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness SBOE State Board of Education State or Texas State of Texas TAC Texas Administrative Code TAKS Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills TAPR Texas Academic Performance Reports TEA Texas Education Agency TEA Procurement Staff TEA procurement professional(s) responsible for leading the planning, solicitation, and contract formation processes.

TEA Project Manager, TEA Program Staff, or TEA Contract Manager

TEA staff members who are the subject matter experts concerning this solicitation, one or more of whom will manage the contract(s) resulting from this solicitation.

TEDS Texas Education Data Standards TGC Texas Government Code THECB Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board TPEIR Texas PK-16 Public Education Information Resource https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.2161.htm https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.2161.htm

TSDS Texas Student Data System TSIA Texas Success Initiative Assessment TWC Texas Workforce Commission VPTS Vendor Performance Tracking System

1.3. TEA Mission and Procurement Authority

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) is the state agency responsible for overseeing primary and secondary public education in Texas. TEA’s mission is to improve outcomes for all public-school students in the state by providing leadership, guidance, and support to school systems; every child, prepared for success in college, career, or the military.

TEA has adopted a strategic plan comprised of four strategic priorities built upon five key actions identified below. These may be updated in the future and can be found on the TEA website located here, https://tea.texas.gov/about-tea/welcome-and-overview/tea-strategic-plan:

• Strategic Priorities o Recruit, support and retain teachers and principals o Build a foundation for reading and math o Connect high school to career and college o Improve low-performing schools

• Key Actions (Continuous Improvement) o Supported Educators o Ready Students o Rigorous Engagement o Aligned Systems o Actionable Goal-setting https://tea.texas.gov/about-tea/welcome-and-overview/tea-strategic-plan

This procurement supports the Texas Education Agency's (TEA) strategic plan by aligning with Strategic Priority 3: connecting high school to career and college pathways.

This procurement is authorized by Sections 404A — 404H of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as amended (20 U.S.C. §§1070a-21—1070a-28).

Pursuant to Texas Government Code §§2151.004(d) and 2155.131, the Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts has delegated authority to TEA to conduct this solicitation and to award a contract for the purposes stated herein.

1.4. Anticipated Schedule of Events

DATE EVENT

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.2151.htm https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.2155.htm

October 27, 2025 Publication of solicitation in the Electronic State Business Daily (ESBD) at:

https://www.txsmartbuy.gov/esbd. Contractors must have a Euna Procurement (Bonfire) account to provide a submission to TEA. HUB-related questions must be directed to the HUB Office HUBOffice@tea.texas.gov

November 12, 2025 Last day to submit written questions about this solicitation no later than 2:00 P.M. Central Time. Submit questions via Vendor Discussion in the Bonfire portal

November 21, 2025 Final publication of questions and answers

December 9, 2025 TEA preferred date to receive Notice of Intent to submit a proposal December 9, 2025 Proposal(s) due no later than 2:00 P.M. Central Time December 2025

– January 2026

Proposal Check-In, Evaluations, and Oral Presentations (if required)

January 2026 – February 2026

Commencement of contract negotiations with selected contractor(s)

March 2026 Anticipated start date of contract

1.5. Contract Term

The contract term is for a total of seven state fiscal years commencing from contract execution or an agreed-upon contract start date. Any period starting at contract execution or the agreed-upon contract start date that is less than a state fiscal year will not count toward the total number of state fiscal years. Funding for this contract and renewal is contingent upon the appropriation of funds by ED for this project and is contingent upon satisfactory performance of the Contractor.

Contractors must not perform work before both parties have signed a contract. TEA will not pay for services the contractor performs for TEA prior to contract execution.

1.6. Budget

One fixed-price contract will be awarded as a result of this RFP. The funding for the contract will not exceed $200,000 in each fiscal year during the first 5 years of the evaluation and $250,000 in the final two-year renewal period, bringing the total potential contract amount to $1,500,000, including the renewal periods.

Proposals must include a detailed Task, Activity, Deliverable, and Budget Plan as described in Section

3.4 of this solicitation (see Attachment E). Separate indirect cost rate calculations are not permitted https://www.txsmartbuy.gov/esbd mailto:HUBOffice@tea.texas.gov in this procurement. The proposed budget and payments to a vendor must be based on satisfactory completion of deliverables.

The Proposer must include a projected Task, Activity, Deliverable, and Budget Plan through August 31, 2032. The Task, Activity, Deliverable, and Budget Plan must clearly identify costs related to all proposed tasks, subtasks and corresponding subtask deliverables for the initial contract period and all optional renewal periods.

Payment will be made upon satisfactory performance of services, receipt of specified deliverables, and receipt of properly prepared invoices and supporting documentation. TEA will establish monthly invoicing procedures for the awarded fixed price contract(s) aligned to completion and acceptance of the deliverables named in the Task, Activity, Deliverable, and Budget Plan.

1.7. Scope of Work, Project Description, and Project Requirements

The overall evaluation of the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG must use a longitudinal mixed-methods design that employs both extant data provided to the contractor and new data collected for the evaluation.

The evaluation will be guided by the Texas GEAR UP Logic Model (Attachment H), which outlines the project strategies aimed at achieving successful short-term, mid-term, and long-term outcomes. The contracted evaluator will report on formative, interim, and summative evidence using quantitative and qualitative data as appropriate throughout the seven-year grant program and the duration of the contract.

All evaluation objectives (EO) must be addressed as specified; however, to meet evolving program needs, TEA will collaborate with the selected contractor to identify specific focus areas for evaluation design and reporting each year. Additionally, the evaluation plan is expected to accommodate any changes made by TEA or ED to the GEAR UP program implementation guidelines over time.

A. EO 1: Examine the Implementation of the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG The awarded contractor will outline the implementation of the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG program at each of the grantee districts and campuses. The implementation report will detail activities related to reaching the milestones tied to the grant objectives specified in Section 1.2, Background, as well as the extent to which grantees implement other key components of the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG program.

To evaluate the program's effectiveness, the implementation evaluation objective should also identify effective practices and strategies for replication; pinpoint challenges encountered during implementation; and report on progress related to strategies, participation in activities, and short- or mid-term goals as appropriate throughout the grant period.

Implementation activities for both the Class of 2031 and priority students will be evaluated using existing data from TEA and new data collected through qualitative methods, such as focus groups, interviews, and surveys. The report must include statistical analyses that examine variations in implementation across different grantees and campuses. Data must be gathered from key groups involved in grant implementation and participation, including but not limited to students, families, staff, and community partners of the grantee districts and campuses.

Throughout the evaluation contract, the data collection and analysis for this EO must provide greater detail on, but not limited to, the topics below:

• strategies implemented to meet and/or achieve GEAR UP program goals at the campus and/or district level;

• progress towards Algebra I course completion;

• progress towards dual credit course completion;

• progress towards graduation;

• progress towards enrollment in a postsecondary program of education;

• completion and awareness of the FAFSA;

• comprehensive, individualized college and career advising;

• participation in GEAR UP program activities such as career and college visits or postsecondary readiness activities;

• professional development opportunities for staff;

• community partnerships;

• plans for sustainability;

• perceptions of the GEAR UP program from students, families, and staff;

• perceptions of the GEAR UP program from TEA partners; and

• other programmatic topics of interest as discussed with TEA.

Data collection and reporting for this EO will annually focus on relevant topics for GEAR UP students as they move from middle school to high school and on to postsecondary education. Each year, the awarded contractor will work with the TEA to identify and plan additional topics of interest prior to the annual data collection. A detailed set of student and family data available or expected to be collected by the vendor, as well as expected reporting timeframes, has been provided in Attachment I, Project Evaluation Student and Family Data Sources. Attachment I does not include other collections that will occur at the organizational or personnel/staff level.

B. EO 2: Interim analysis of short- to mid-term outcomes using qualitative and quantitative data The interim analysis will use existing data to descriptively evaluate the progress of GEAR UP students on key performance metrics. This evaluation aims to understand how well students are progressing toward these metrics, including the completion of essential courses such as Algebra I, on-time promotion, and performance on relevant state assessments. It is expected that student outcome data be compared to statewide outcomes as well as against campus baseline performance.

Whenever possible, statistical tests will be conducted to determine the significance of these measures. The findings for activities under this task must be described annually in the report as outlined in Section 1.8 and Deliverable Expectations (Attachment K).

C. EO 3: Examine the impact on key student short-term, mid-term, and long-term outcomes The awarded contractor will analyze the impact of the program on key student short-term, mid-term, and long-term outcomes. At a minimum, the following three analyses must be performed:

1) Analyses of the Class of 2031 compared to matched comparison groups of non-grantee students on key outcomes.

2) Analyses of the Class of 2031, which includes program participation and length of time in the

GEAR UP campus(es) on key outcomes.

3) Additionally, the evaluation must include an analysis of program participation among priority students and college persistence as the design (timing of direct services to priority students) of the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG presents an opportunity to look further into persistence into the second year of postsecondary and sustained benefits of the program with these priority students.

Where applicable, the awarded contractor must use quasi-experimental study designs that include a treatment group and one or more comparison groups of students. Matching techniques, such as propensity score matching (PSM), have to ensure baseline equivalence with the GEAR UP cohorts included in the analyses.

The comparison groups for the Class of 2031 will be selected from a pool of non-grantee students in similar districts that did not receive the grant. TEA will provide all relevant data for the evaluation of both the participating and comparison students, as well as information from the campuses and districts, covering multiple baseline years leading up to the 2025–2026 school year and continuing for each program year thereafter.

The analyses must follow the Class of 2031 cohort and the matched sample through their first year of postsecondary education. Additionally, the matched sample should be re-evaluated at key transition points, such as the shift from middle school to high school.

Quantitative measures and achievements that may be included in the impact analysis are below:

• improved or sustained high student attendance;

• on-time promotion;

• completion of a career exploration and/or interest inventory in middle school;

• completion of Algebra I and Algebra II courses by benchmark grades;

• participation in targeted academic tutoring among students struggling with coursework;

• performance on the state standardized tests;

• participation in college or career visit activities by key benchmark grades;

• completion of English or mathematics dual credit courses or successfully passing AP examinations;

• completion of a CTE program of study and attainment of industry-based certifications (IBCs) or a Level I or II certificate;

• participation in individual advising sessions and completion of an Individual Career Academic

Plan (ICAP) at benchmark grades;

• completion of comprehensive college and career counseling sessions;

• qualification for Mathematics or English without the need for remediation through scores on the SAT, ACT, TSIA, or an approved college preparation course;

• attainment of a College Readiness indicator and a Career Readiness indicator;

• completion of the FAFSA or TASFA by benchmark grades;

• increases in parent satisfaction scores on financial aid workshops;

• application and enrollment at a postsecondary institution;

• increases in knowledge of available postsecondary pathways and programs of study, postsecondary options, preparation, and financing, and high-demand careers available to students;

• increases in educational expectations for and awareness about postsecondary options as measured by college visit participation, and knowledge of financial aid programs by students and family; and

• other measures of interest as discussed with TEA.

D. EO 4: Examine the sustainability efforts of the TX GEAR UP 2025 grantees.

A key component of the grant program is that grantees will develop and implement plans to sustain GEAR UP practices both during the grant period and after it concludes. The awarded contractor must examine the efforts of the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG grantees to sustain the activities promoted by the GEAR UP program and determine whether there is a longer-term impact on the program.

Sustainability will be measured using new data collected through evaluation activities such as focus groups, interviews, and surveys. Data must be collected and analyzed to describe district and campus plans for continuing GEAR UP activities and strategies after the Class of 2031 transitions to the next school level and beyond the life of the grant. This may include efforts by school districts to continue implementing GEAR UP activities and strategies focused on college and career readiness initiatives, as well as securing local and external funding to develop lasting resources after the grant concludes.

Additionally, data may be collected regarding staff perceptions and the feasibility of sustaining the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG practices.

E. EO 5: Examine the expansion of and access to the TXGEAR UP program Effective Advising Framework (EAF) statewide initiative

The awarded contractor must examine the extent to which the TX GEAR UP 2025 SG supported the awareness of, access to, and expansion of the EAF among ESCs across Texas. The awarded contractor must analyze data to measure how Texas GEAR UP 2025 State Grant grantee and non-grantee districts utilized resources related to the EAF and the perceived impact and effectiveness of the resources and EAF program. Topics of interest related to the EAF statewide initiative may include, but are not limited to:

• District (grantee and non-grantee) perceptions of the EAF and EAF coaching

• ESC perceptions of the EAF and EAF coaching

• Utility of resources related to the EAF

• Perceptions of TEA support and/or training for EAF coaching

• EAF coaching participation levels from districts and/or campuses

• Perceptions of the effectiveness of EAF coaching models

• Other measures of interest as discussed with TEA

Data shall be collected through new data collection (e.g., surveys, interviews, focus groups) or through extant data available at TEA. TEA will work with the selected vendor to identify these resources as well as the best time to address and report the findings on this task.

1.8. Project Deliverables and Milestones

A. Reporting & Format

This evaluation must provide clear and usable program information for organization leaders and stakeholders. While the evaluation needs to be well-designed and methodologically rigorous, the deliverables must be straightforward, free of jargon, and written in plain English. Strong data visualizations should enhance readability. All project deliverables and sub-task deliverables are subject to a review process.

The contractor awarded must respond to multiple rounds of feedback while maintaining the integrity of all reported findings. Drafts of reports must be submitted by specified due dates and should be accessible to a general audience, with technical details in the appendices. Reports of 20 pages or more must include an executive summary (2–6 pages) summarizing the program and evaluation purpose, along with key findings and participant information.

Format must follow the American Psychological Association’s (APA) formatting style. Published deliverables must be compliant with all state and federal regulations for web accessibility (i.e., compliance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973). For each required report, the draft must come first as a SINGLE Microsoft Word document that can be edited using track changes. The final publishable version of each report must come with both a Word version and PDF files of the full report and the executive summary as a standalone file. All PDFs must be web accessible.

At a minimum, TEA requires the following reporting deliverables:

1. Annual Site Visit Briefs: Due annually in years 1 through 7 of the contract.

2. Annual Implementation Spotlight Reports: Due annually in years 1 through 6 of the contract.

3. Annual Project Outcomes Brief: Due annually in years 2 through 7 of the contract.

4. Biennial Impact Reports: Due in years 3, 5, and 7 of the contract.

5. Statewide Initiative Report: Due in year 6 of the contract.

6. Comprehensive Implementation Report: Due in year 7 of the contract.

Details on each reporting deliverable, including draft and final due dates, relevant evaluation objectives, expected data sources, anticipated page length, the purpose and usage of each report, and whether the reports will be published, are available in Deliverable Expectations (Attachment K).

Other required project deliverables subject to review and approval by TEA include the following:

1. Detailed analysis plans linking analysis to evaluation objectives, including all strategies for coding data and creating variables from the data, all planned statistical analysis methodology, and all variables to be used in the analysis. All to be submitted, discussed, and approved prior to analyzing data for EACH report specified in Attachment K;

2. All survey instruments or data collection instruments used for the project;

3. Project updates as requested by TEA, including interim report draft excerpts and interim analyses;

4. Ongoing copies of analysis code and output as requested by TEA;

5. Presentations of findings, if requested, prior to the submission of published reports. The presentation, if requested, will be held during the review period of the report to allow sufficient time afterwards for the integration of TEA feedback into the report;

6. Progress reports detailing the subtasks accomplished during the prior invoicing period, including percentage of subtask completion, and subtask work planned for the next invoicing period, to be submitted in conjunction with the invoice;

7. Annual documentation of analytic datasets created each year of the project. This documentation serves to facilitate the end-of-project inventory, data delivery, and destruction.

8. All data created for the project, including datasets used for analysis, to be provided to TEA in a format designated by TEA at the end of the contract.

B. Availability of Statewide Data and New Data Collection

Available Data

The awarded contractor will have access to all non-confidential campus-, district-, and state-level data collected and maintained by TEA as needed to complete the study as well as non-confidential program-related data such as relevant grant applications. TEA will provide the “Access to Confidential Information: TEA Agent Agreement” form to the awarded contractor as applicable. Once TEA’s requirements for access to confidential data have been met, the awarded contractor will also have access to necessary confidential campus-, district-, student-, and staff-level data. To answer some evaluation objectives, the awarded contractor must manipulate and analyze TEA-provided datasets, as well as propose collecting additional, supplemental data where necessary. All data sent from TEA will contain a unique identifier created for the project for each case (student or teacher) in the database. TEA will not release confidential data such as social security numbers to the awarded contractor. At the end of the project and prior to the end of the contract period, the awarded contractor will destroy all data and provide a certification to TEA that all data has been destroyed.

Reference Certificate of Data Destruction (Template) - (Attachment J) to complete this action.

A table outlining examples of when TEA data are typically available is attached under TEA Data Sources (Attachment L). Proposers should carefully review the availability of certain data to appropriately plan data analyses.

New Data Collection

All instruments (e.g., interview protocols, surveys, etc.) developed by the awarded Contractor shall be finalized in collaboration with TEA staff at least one month prior to data collection to allow time for review and approval. All instruments that involve data collection from district or campus personnel and/or students shall be submitted to TEA’s Data Governance Board (DGB), which meets once a month. Instruments must be reviewed and approved by the DGB to ensure that data are not already being collected by TEA and the collection does not cause an undue burden. The awarded contractor may need to submit additional documentation to a district or school based on local policy prior to collecting any data within the district/school. At the end of the project and prior to the completion of the contract period, the awarded contractor will provide all newly collected data for the study to TEA in a format designated by the agency. Upon approval by TEA, the awarded contractor will destroy all newly collected data and provide a certification to TEA that all data have been destroyed (see Attachment J).

TEA requires that all non-agency instruments collecting data on students be reviewed by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). Therefore, the awarded Contractor must determine and allocate costs for an internal or external IRB. Please note that DGB is not an IRB. In addition, the awarded Contractor must follow ethical research and evaluation principles (for guidelines, see www.apa.org, http://www.apa.org/ www.aera.net, www.eval.org), especially with minor students (for guidelines, see https://www.srcd.org/about-us/ethical-principles-and-standards-developmental-scientists). This includes obtaining informed consent, as well as parental and student consent/assent for minor students.

As required by the Contract Terms and Conditions, the awarded contractor must provide assurances to TEA that all its employees and subcontractor employees have complied with the fingerprinting requirements for every individual who will or potentially may have direct contact with students on school property or at another location where students are regularly present in conducting the evaluation activities. TEA requires that fingerprinting and criminal background checks be conducted through the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) or their designated vendor. The awarded contractor must plan ahead and allow sufficient time for this process before conducting any school visits.

Should the awarded contractor determine that interviews, focus groups, or other methods requiring audio or video recordings are an appropriate research methodology to employ for the purposes of these projects, TEA will have no access to identified audio or video recordings or to crosswalks that link de-identified recordings to identified individuals. Upon completion of the contract period, all recordings, as well as any related transcripts or crosswalks to these recordings must be destroyed.

Only de-identified transcripts, documents, or coded data sets resulting from the recordings will be the property of TEA at any time during or after the contract period.

1.9. Collaboration

The awarded contractor(s) will collaborate closely with TEA staff for this project. These responsibilities include, for example:

Awarded Contractor Responsibilities:

- Engaging in ongoing, responsive communication about the project(s);

- Participation in weekly, bi-weekly, or otherwise scheduled project meetings, as needed;

- Continuous, uninterrupted workflow of the project and project management, including during summer months;

- Adhering to the Task, Activity, Deliverable, and Budget Plan, or other schedules for deliverables as specified by TEA after consultation with the awarded contractor, including proposed deadlines for draft work products;

- Notifying TEA within 48 hours of project-related issues that negatively impact timelines;

- Obtaining advance written approval from TEA prior to any staffing changes or additions, especially changes to key staff members assigned to this project;

http://www.aera.net/ http://www.eval.org/ https://www.srcd.org/about-us/ethical-principles-and-standards-developmental-scientists

- Producing high-quality drafts of all submitted work products, reports, evaluation plans, analysis plans, and instruments, etc. with minimal typos and in alignment with applicable guidelines (branding, accessibility, reading level, etc.);

- Responding within the agreed-upon number of business days to all requests for feedback on evaluation plans, methodology, analysis plans, instruments, data manipulation, analysis results, reports, etc.;

- Responding within 48 hours to inquiries regarding invoice and document requests (as in the case of an audit);

- Adhering to policies and procedures regarding use of confidential data and data collection procedures;

- Adhering to policies and procedures regarding fingerprinting and criminal background checks prior to conducting any school visits, as applicable; and

- Adhering to all terms and conditions of the contract with TEA, for example, following the change management process for contract revisions; informing TEA of changes in ownership, key staff, or subcontractors; and immediately reporting actual or potential conflicts of interest to TEA.

TEA Responsibilities:

- Providing awarded contractor(s) and any subcontractors information on changes in legislation, reporting needs, or any other activities that may impact on the project(s);

- Collaborating with the awarded contractor to address unforeseen developments, identify issues, and propose solutions;

- Coordinating support and resources for the project;

- Facilitating procedures to obtain access to TEAs confidential administrative data;

- Providing necessary data and documentation;

- Reviewing and approving the contractor’s evaluation and analysis plans, including all qualitative and quantitative methodologies and data analyses;

- Reviewing use of data, data sources, data manipulation, data processing business rules, and analytic results;

- Monitoring the awarded contractor’s progress, as outlined in contractor-submitted monthly progress reports to ensure compliance with contract terms;

- Reviewing and approving monthly invoices (including disputing invoices as necessary and working with contractors to resolve disputes);

- Providing and coordinating feedback on all submitted reports;

- Monitoring the awarded contractor’s performance and compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract, including following the change management policy for all amendments and budget revisions;

- Coordinating presentations of findings prior to the submission of major deliverables; and

- Monitoring proper transmission and destruction of data.

1.10. Contract Monitoring and Dispute Resolution Procedures

TEA monitors its contracts to ensure contractors adhere to the terms and conditions of their TEA contracts and to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. TEA Contract Managers carefully review invoices to verify the following:

- Goods and/or services provided are included in the contract;

- Charges match the contract budget, and pricing clearly ties to the task plan;

- Invoice charges are within scope, allowable, and reasonable;

- Invoice amounts are tied to specific contract tasks with enough supporting documentation to show that goods and/or services were received and were of acceptable quality; and

- Each invoice shows the contract number, purchase order number, dates of service, tasks, and pricing.

All pricing provided in the proposal should include a specific deliverable or a set of deliverables that demonstrate successful completion of activities. All activities must have documentation to support their completion. TEA reserves the right to reject goods or services that do not address the deliverables stated in the contract and do not meet TEA quality review.

In addition to carefully reviewing invoices prior to authorizing payment, TEA Contract Managers conduct ongoing contract monitoring activities depending on the nature and risk factors associated with the contract. Examples of standard contract monitoring activities include:

- Monitoring the contractor’s progress and performance to ensure goods and services conform to the contract requirements;

- Managing, approving, and documenting any changes to the contract through the change management process authorized by the terms of the contract;

- Maintaining documentation verifying that goods and/or services were reviewed and accepted;

- Monitoring the contract budget to ensure sufficient funds are available throughout the term of the contract;

- Identifying and resolving disputes with the contractor promptly;

- Exercising legal remedies, as appropriate, when a contractor’s performance is deficient; and

- Confirming all goods and/or services have been delivered and delivery is completed prior to the expiration date of the contract.

TEA will determine whether a contract should be subject to enhanced monitoring, an increased level of monitoring. For example, a contractor who has access to sensitive data or contact with students may be subject to enhanced monitoring. In addition to the responsibilities that come with standard contract monitoring, Contract Managers may implement any of the following examples of enhanced monitoring measures:

- Developing a Quality Assessment Plan (QAP) to document contract monitoring activities;

- Conducting site visits to a contractor’s facility;

- Holding regular project management meetings with contractors to ensure the project is meeting established milestones and deadlines;

- Reviewing contractor-prepared progress reports;

- Reviewing satisfaction surveys from training attendees or other quality assurance reports;

- Implementing a corrective action plan if contractor is not meeting contract performance expectations;

- Monitoring contractor performance and invoking applicable remedies for contract breaches

(for example, liquidated damages assessed for service level agreement breaches); and

- Monitoring contractor’s access to sensitive data and ensuring data is handled properly and returned or destroyed at the end of the contract, as appropriate.

TEA expects contractors to support these monitoring efforts, including responding promptly to requests for documentation and working together in good faith to resolve disputes.

In the event of a dispute, TEA will make every effort to resolve the issue(s) with the contractor’s project staff before escalating to executive-level management. Throughout the dispute resolution process, the parties should make a good faith effort to work together toward a mutually beneficial resolution. Resolution may include corrective action plans, substitutions, liquidated damages, or other remedies, as appropriate.

2. Submission Process and Instructions

2.1. Proposal Format

Contractors must submit a complete proposal and follow all instructions contained within this solicitation. Proposals with conditional clauses, alterations, or irregularities are subject to rejection by TEA at its sole discretion. Contractors must submit proposals electronically through the Bonfire portal and ensure TEA receives them no later than the deadline stated in the Anticipated Schedule of Events. TEA will not accept late proposals.

Proposal Format and Requirements:

- Contractor must download all files under Public Files to prepare your submission.

- Complete and upload all required documents listed under the Requested Information section in Bonfire.

- The file name should be short but descriptive and avoid special characters. Use capital letters, hyphens, or underscores instead of spaces or periods. (i.e., 2X-0XX_CompanyName_Proposal).

- Contractors must ensure an authorized representative sign all required forms and those signatures are included in the electronic file (digital signatures or scanned ink signatures are both acceptable).

- The contractor must sign the Execution of Offer contained within Attachment B. By signing the Execution of Offer, the contractor affirms that all statements within the proposal are true and correct. Discovery of any false statement in the proposal may void the submitted proposal or any resulting contracts.

- Contractors must submit proposals electronically via Bonfire.

2.2. Electronic Submission Process

Submission via Bonfire aka EUNA

TEA will only accept proposals using the Bonfire electronic bidding portal as a secure electronic submission method. Please upload your submission at Texas Education Agency Euna Procurement (Bonfire) Portal. Proposals will not be accepted by email or facsimile.

Once uploaded, the Bonfire platform will notify TEA of the upload. The file(s) will be date and time-stamped upon upload and the system will provide a confirmation number to the contractor’s email address. Contractors are advised to plan accordingly to ensure TEA receives the proposal ahead of the deadline. Once the close date has passed, you will not have an opportunity to change any of the submitted documents.

***Please note the location, type, and requirements of these forms. Failure to submit required documents will result in a contractor’s disqualification from consideration for this procurement. Forms must be submitted in the specified location in Bonfire.***

Intent to Submit Proposal

TEA requests contractors notify TEA as soon as possible of their intent to submit a proposal on the Bonfire platform. Toggle the “Intent to Bid” checkbox in Bonfire to confirm the intent to submit a https://tea.bonfirehub.com/portal/?tab=openOpportunities https://tea.bonfirehub.com/portal/?tab=openOpportunities proposal. Notifying TEA of an intent to submit a proposal in no way obliges the filer to submit a proposal. You will not be able to prepare a submission unless you submit 'Yes.

2.3. Communication

To protect the integrity of the procurement process, contractors must adhere to the…