REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

Computer Science Articulated Lessons with Math and Science PreK-6 Solicitation #: AL26-015-RFP

This Request for Proposals (RFP), having been determined to be the appropriate procurement method to provide the best value to the Granite School District (“GSD” or “District”). The RFP is designed to provide interested offerors with sufficient basic information to submit proposals meeting minimum requirements but is not intended to limit a proposal's content or exclude any relevant or essential data. Offerors are at liberty and are encouraged to expand upon the specifications to evidence service capability under any agreement. GSD will not be liable for any cost’s proposers may incur in the preparation or presentation of this proposal.

No contact is to be had with any district employees or Board of Education members during the RFP process through contract award regarding the RFP. Contact is to be made through the Purchasing Department only.

This RFP is issued in accordance with State of Utah Procurement Code, Utah Code Annotated (UCA) Chapter 63G-6a, and applicable Rules found in the Utah Administrative Code (UAC). If any provision of this RFP conflicts with the UCA or UAC, the UCA or UAC will take precedence.

I. PURPOSE OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)

Granite School District (“District” or “GSD”) is soliciting proposals from qualified vendors to provide an elementary Computer Science (CS4All) instructional platform that delivers pre-created coding lessons aligned to the Utah Core and Utah Computer Science Standards for grades K-5.

The goal is to provide teachers and students with a comprehensive, developmentally appropriate coding curriculum that integrates with existing district physical computing devices (VEX Go, VEX 123, and Code & Go Mice) and supports high-quality implementation through robust analytics, training, and support.

II. BACKGROUND

Granite School District’s Computer Science for All (CS4All) initiative is designed to ensure that all students develop foundational computational thinking and digital literacy skills beginning in elementary grades.

Currently, 35 schools participate in the CS4All grant program. Each school has multiple trained teachers and technology coaches implementing hands-on coding projects and integrated lessons aligned to English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, Social Studies, and Digital Literacy.

The new contract will replace the expiring RFP JG22-25, with the potential to scale the initiative across all 54 elementary schools.

III. PRIVATE

ISSUING OFFICE AND RFP REFERENCE NUMBERtc \l 1 "ISSUING OFFICE AND RFP REFERENCE NUMBER" The District’s Purchasing Department is the issuing office for this document and all subsequent addenda relating to it, on behalf of the Granite School District Career & Technical Education Department. The reference number for the transaction is Solicitation #: AL26-015-RFP. This number must be referred to on all proposals, correspondence, and documentation relating to the RFP.

NOTICE: Wherever the term bid, bidder, bidding or quote appears in this solicitation or reference is made to a bid, bidder, bidding, or quote, it shall be interpreted to mean offeror, as defined in 63G-6a-103(30), RFP, or Request for Proposals, as defined in 63G-6a-103(72) and the procurement shall be conducted subject to the provisions of 63G-6a-Part 7.

IV. PRIVATE

LENGTH OF CONTRACTtc \l 1 "LENGTH OF CONTRACT" The resulting contract will be for a period of one (1) year, with the option to renew annually for up to four (4) additional years, contingent upon mutual agreement and the availability of funding.

All pricing must remain firm for the duration of the contract term, including any exercised renewal periods.

V. PRIVATE

STANDARD CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS

tc \l 2 "STANDARD CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS" Any contract resulting from this RFP will include but not be limited to the District’s Standard Terms and Conditions (see Attachment A) and the FERPA Student Level Data Protection Standard Terms and Conditions (see Attachment B). Exceptions and/or additions to the Terms and Conditions are strongly discouraged.

Exceptions and additions to the Standard Terms and Conditions must be submitted with the proposal response. Exceptions, additions, service level agreements, etc. submitted after the date and time for receipt of proposals will not be considered. Website URLs, or information on website URLs must not be requested in the RFP document and must not be submitted with a proposal. URLs provided with a proposal may result in that proposal being rejected as non-responsive. URLs are also prohibited from any language included in the final contract document.

The District retains the right to refuse to negotiate on exceptions should the exceptions be excessive, not in the best interest of the District, negotiations could result in excessive costs to the state, or could adversely impact existing time constraints.

If negotiations are required, contractor must provide all documents in MS Word format for redline editing. Contractor must provide the name, contact information, and access to the person(s) that will be directly involved in legal negotiations.

VI. PRIVATE

DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK

The following requirements comprise the scope of work for this project (all requirements are addressed on the following page):

1. Implementation of a package that includes all elements found below under curricular requirements. Activities/lessons should align with district math and science pacing guides and should reinforce math and science standards where there is a natural relationship with Utah Computer Science Standards. The goal of these lessons/activities is to teach computer science concepts through application in other core content standards with an outcome of increasing student achievement in all areas of the core curriculum being targeted. Additional core areas outside of math and science are encouraged. Articulation of lessons with physical computing devices already available in the district is required. Applicants should clearly identify core alignment that is currently available within their online platform and the work that will be completed for alignment to district pacing guides and articulation of computer science lessons with math and science lessons.

2. Methodology to support equitable opportunities for the diverse student population in Granite School District.

3. Design and implementation of professional development through a train the trainer model to support teacher implementation including use of related tools and physical computing devices or methods already in place within the district to support trainers.

4. Ability to address all general technical requirements defined below.

A. Curricular and Platform Requirements:

1. Standards Alignment

· Minimum Requirements:

· At least 40 unique pre-created coding lessons for each grade level for grades K-5. Lessons must be tightly aligned to Utah Core and Utah Computer Science Standards.

· Additional lesson alignment and/or integration with content areas such as ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies, and Digital Literacy.

· Alignment maps showing standard connections by grade level.

2. Lesson Design and Structure

· Minimum Requirements:

· Self-guided, scaffolded lessons for students.

· Video-guided teacher lessons and customizable slide decks

1. (English and Spanish versions).

· Lessons structured around the Gradual Release of Responsibility (“I Do, We Do, You Do”).

· Lesson overview with objectives, prerequisites, materials, starter code, vocabulary, timing, differentiation options, extensions, and rubrics.

· Common challenges and solutions section.

3. Device Integration

· Minimum requirements:

· Coding lessons and resources must be compatible with the following devices:

1. VEX Go

2. VEX 123

3. Code & Go Mice

4. Teacher and Student Experience

· Teachers can toggle, assign, and customize lessons.

· Teachers can view and provide feedback on student work.

· Students access and complete coding activities within a single integrated platform.

1. No external logins or tools required unless embedded into the primary platform.

· Platform must support rostering, co-teachers, and class management.

· Admin dashboard with analytics on usage, lesson delivery, and completion data.

5. Assessment and Reporting

· Pre-built assessments

· Rubrics and mastery tracking.

· Reporting at teacher, school, and district level (lesson completion, engagement, usage metrics).

· Data export options for grant accountability reporting.

B. Technical Requirements

· Minimum Requirements:

· 100% web-based platform (no plug-ins required).

· Compatible with PC, Mac, and Chromebook.

· SIS integration (Canvas preferred; grade passback desirable).

· Student data protection compliant with FERPA and Utah Student Data Privacy Act.

· Secure login and rostering via Google or Clever SSO required.

C. Training and Support Requirements

1. Training Events (In-Person)

· Minimum Requirements:

i. Platform & Lesson Delivery (3 hours)

ii. Physical Computing Devices (3 hours)

iii. End-of-Year Showcase/Celebration (3 hours)

2. Support Expectations

i. Dedicated Client Success Manager or Account Manager for GSD.

ii. Teacher-facing online help resources and documentation.

iii. Train-the-Trainer model to build district-level expertise.

iv. Access to online or asynchronous PD modules.

3. District Capacity Building

· Minimum Requirements

i. Support for school technology coaches attending PD alongside teachers.

ii. Materials to sustain ongoing implementation without vendor-led training each year.

VII. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND COMPANY QUALIFICATIONS AND EXERIENCE

Proposals will be reviewed based on company expertise and previous implementation of articulated computer science standards with other core content in an elementary setting. Please provide a response to each of the following questions:

VIII. VENDOR QUALIFICATIONS

Offerors must demonstrate:

· Experience implementing K-5 computer science programs at scale.

· Expertise aligning coding curricula with state standards.

· Prior partnerships with districts of similar size and demographics.

· Capacity to provide both platform and professional development components.

A minimum of three (3) references from comparable school districts is required.

Company Qualifications and Experience

1. Provide the firm’s ability to provide the services as described in Section VII, Detailed Scope of Work. Provide a brief history of the company and its experience, qualifications and success in providing these services. Please include experience with articulation of computer science standards with other elementary core subjects.

2. Describe the experience of the individual(s) who would be responsible for providing the services to the district including resumes of those individuals who will be assigned to the project and their experience on similar projects.

3. State the firm’s references for comparable work in other districts that are similar in scope (where available) including the work completed, name, and telephone number of a contact person the District may call. References need to be able to talk about the articulation and integration of computer science into a minimum of math and science curriculum at the elementary level.

IX. PROPOSAL RESPONSE FORMAT

All proposals must include a technical proposal and cost proposal. Formats for both documents follow:

A. Technical Proposal Format

Hard copies are to be tabbed by section.

Tab 1.

Executive Summary. The one- or two-page executive summary is to briefly describe the offeror's proposal. This summary should highlight the major features of the proposal. It must indicate any requirements that cannot be met by the offeror. The reader should be able to determine the essence of the proposal by reading the executive summary. Protected information requests should be identified in this section.

Tab 2.

Detailed Response. This section should constitute the major portion of the proposal and must contain at least the following information:

1. Detailed narrative response addressing each section of the Scope of Work

2. A specific point-by-point response, in the order listed, to each requirement in the RFP.

3. 30-minute or shorter product overview video link

4. Any requested exceptions or clarifications B. Cost Proposal (uploaded separately as “Cost Proposal”)

a. Pricing/license cost per site for one (1) year term, with the option to renew for additional years

b. Professional development costs (if not included)

c. Any volume discounts Do not include pricing in the technical proposal.

X. ANTICIPATED SOLICITATION TIMELINE

XI. QUESTIONS

All questions must be submitted through the Utah Public Procurement Place (“U3P/Bonfire”). Answers will be given via the U3P site.

Tab 3. Protected Information. All protected information must be included in this section of proposal response. Do not incorporate protected information throughout the proposal. Rather, provide a reference in the proposal response directing reader to the specific area of this Protected Information section.

The Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA), Utah Code Ann., Subsection 63G-2-305, provides in part that:

the following records are protected if properly classified by a government entity:

(1) trade secrets as defined in Section 13-24-2 if the person submitting the trade secret has provided the governmental entity with the information specified in Section 63G-2-309;

(2) commercial information or nonindividual financial information obtained from a person if:

(a) disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to result in unfair competitive injury to the person submitting the information or would impair the ability of the governmental entity to obtain necessary information in the future;

(b) the person submitting the information has a greater interest in prohibiting access than the public in obtaining access; and

(c) the person submitting the information has provided the governmental entity with the information specified in Section 63G-2-309;mmercial information or non-individual financial information obtained from a person if:

(6) records, the disclosure of which would impair governmental procurement proceedings or give an unfair advantage to any person proposing to enter into a contract or agreement with a governmental entity, except, subject to Subsections (1) and (2), that this Subsection (6) does not restrict the right of a person to have access to, after the contract or grant has been awarded and signed by all parties;… GRAMA provides that trade secrets, commercial information or non-individual financial information may be protected by submitting a Claim of Business Confidentiality.

To protect information under a Claim of Business Confidentiality, the offeror must: provide a written Claim of Business Confidentiality at the time the information (proposal) is provided to the district and include a concise statement of reasons supporting the claim of business confidentiality (Subsection 63-2-308(1)).

If you submit a proposal containing confidential information you must submit an electronic “redacted” (excluding protected information) copy of your proposal response. Copy must clearly be marked “Redacted Version.”

A Claim of Business Confidentiality may be appropriate for information such as client lists and non-public financial statements. Pricing and service elements may not be protected. An entire proposal may not be protected under a Claim of Business Confidentiality. The claim of business confidentiality must be submitted with your proposal on the form which may be accessed at:

https://purchasing.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/Claim-of-Business-Confidentiality-Updated.pdf An entire proposal cannot be identified as “PROTECTED”, “CONFIDENTIAL” or “PROPRIETARY” and may be considered non-responsive if marked as such.

To ensure the information is protected, you must include all protected information in Tab 3 of the proposal response. Any protected information incorporated in other sections of the proposal response may result in release of data at no fault of the District.

All materials submitted become the property of Granite School District. Materials may be evaluated by anyone designated by the District as part of the proposal evaluation committee. Materials submitted may be returned only at the District’s option.

C. Cost Proposal Format

The proposal must be set forth in such a way that it will allow the merits of the proposal to be evaluated in conjunction with applicable cost. Please review the Best and Final Offers section below to ensure you properly submit your cost proposal.

XII. PRIVATE

SUBMITTING YOUR PROPOSALtc \l 1 "SUBMITTING YOUR PROPOSAL" Proposals must be received by the posted due date and time. Proposals received after the deadline will be late and ineligible for consideration.

Proposals must be received electronically through U3P and/or in hard copy. For this RFP, one original and 5 (five) identical copies of your proposal must be received at Granite School District Purchasing Department, 2500 S. State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84115.

All submitted proposals will consist of a technical proposal and a cost proposal. For the electronic proposal submission you should attach two separate documents in U3P, a document titled “Technical Proposal” and a document titled “Cost Proposal”. For the hard copy these documents should be separated from each other. The cost proposal should be in a sealed envelope with the RFP number and the phase “Cost Proposal” clearly printed on the envelope.

Cost will be evaluated independently from the technical proposal, and as such, it is to be submitted separately from the technical proposal. Failure to submit costs separately may result in your proposal being determined non-responsive. Inclusion of any cost or pricing data within the technical proposal may also result in your proposal being determined non-responsive. If more than one system is part of the cost proposal, each needs to be costed out separately.

When submitting a proposal electronically through U3P Bonfire, please allow sufficient time to complete the online forms and upload documents. The solicitation will end at the closing time listed in the RFP. If you are in the middle of uploading your proposal at closing time, the system will stop the process, and your proposal will not be received by the system.

Electronic proposals may require uploading of electronic attachments. U3P’s site will accept a wide variety of document types as attachments. However, the District is unable to view certain documents. Therefore, you MAY NOT submit documents that are embedded (zip files), movies, wmp, and mp3 files. All documents must be attached as separate files.

NOTICE: By submitting a proposal in response to this RFP, offeror is acknowledging that the requirements, scope of work, and the evaluation process, outlined in the RFP are fair, equitable, not unduly restrictive, understood and agreed to. Any exceptions to the content of the RFP must be protested to the purchasing agent prior to the closing date and time for submission of the proposal.

XIII. PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

A committee will evaluate proposals against the following weighted criteria. Each area of the evaluation criteria must be addressed in detail in proposal. All proposals in response to this RFP will be evaluated in a manner consistent with the Utah Procurement Code, rules, policies and the evaluation criteria established in the RFP.

WEIGHT

EVALUATION CRITERIA

15% Cost

35% Curricular Requirements 15% Articulation methods to other core subjects

5% Development if needed to meet scope (Development needs to be incidental. If no development is needed a proposal will receive full points. Scoring will decrease as volume of development increases.)

5% Professional Development

5% General Technical Requirements

20% Proposal Requirements and Company Qualifications Understandability and comprehensiveness of information supplied in this RFP will affect the evaluation of the above criteria. The District may invite shortlisted vendors for presentations or demonstrations before award.

XIV. DISCUSSIONS WITH OFFERORS (ORAL PRESENTATION)

An oral presentation by an offeror to clarify a proposal may be required at the sole discretion of the District. However, the District may award a contract based on the initial proposals received without discussion with the Offeror. If oral presentations are required, they will be scheduled after the submission of proposals. Oral presentations will be made at the offerors’ expense.

XV. SHORTLIST

Unless there is a successful offeror based on the initial review of the responses, the evaluation committee will develop a shortlist of the highest scoring offerors based on the stated criteria. To be included on the short list an offeror must have a total score of no less than a three (3) in any of the stated criteria. Development listed in the proposal will be evaluated as part of this scoring. Vendors with a score lower than a three (3) will not be considered further in the evaluation. The shortlist of offerors may be asked to prepare a presentation and/or provide additional information prior to the final selection.

XVI. BEST AND FINAL OFFERS

Vendors should offer their best offer in the original technical and cost proposals. The use of a Best and Final Offer process is regulated by Utah Code 63G-6a-707.5 and will only be used if:

a. no single proposal addresses all the specifications stated in the RFP;

b. all or a significant number of the proposals are ambiguous on a material point and the evaluation committee requires further clarification in order to conduct a fair evaluation of proposals;

c. the evaluation committee needs additional information from all offerors to complete the evaluation of proposals;

d. the differences between proposals in one or more material aspects are too slight to allow the evaluation committee to distinguish between proposals;

e. all cost proposals are too high or over budget; or

f. another reason exists supporting a request for best and final offers, as provided in rules established by the applicable rulemaking authority

It is important to understand this so as not to anticipate that a best and final process will allow for a vendor to “sharpen their pencil” in a subsequent phase.

XVII. AWARD OF CONTRACT

Award shall be made to the offeror whose proposal is the most advantageous to the District taking into consideration price and the other evaluation factors set forth in this request for proposals.

The District reserves the right to award the contract(s) to a technically qualified lower cost offeror(s) in the event the high scoring offer is determined to not be the best value offered to the District, based on a cost benefit analysis.

COST PROPOSAL FORM

COSTS:

· Cost per site

$_______________ /year

· Initial 1-year professional development costs $_______________ (if not included)

· Professional development costs must include training for 330 participants, delivered over 3 days, with each session lasting 3 hours.

Professional development costs will be included as an optional component and may be incorporated into the cost evaluation if deemed necessary.

List all materials included in basic package costs, as well as any discounts related to the number of sites purchased.

Amendment 1: Additional costs not specifically called out by the District with description