Addendum No. 2.pdf

July 16, 2026

ADDENDUM NO. 2

Title: Universal Literacy Screeners PK-12

RFI #R00B6600212 eMMA Reference No. BPM057727

General Information

This Addendum serves as notification of the following:

1. The deadline for questions has passed.

2. Questions and Responses are listed below.

3. Adding Questions and Responses to Q21 -Q24

Questions and Responses

Q1. We were approved for the K-3 Universal Screener, so should we submit only for PreK and grades 4-12, or do we need to resubmit for K-3 as well?

A1. If you were approved for the K-3 Universal Screener, you only need to submit for the additional grade bands for which you would like to be considered (Pre-K, 4-12).

Q2. Appendix A refers to responses by TAB, but the RFI does not reference this. Should we just respond as per the RFI under the Technical Requirements e.g. 9, 10, 11, 12?

A2. Yes, follow the RFI. No updates should be made to the Appendix A.

Q3. Page 7, Section IV, RFI Submission Information:

The Bidder must submit a letter of interest, a resume that demonstrates the required qualifications for the services requested and the signed bid form Exhibit A (include ALL final costs for completing the project) to provide the service detailed in the Scope of Work.

Topic: Requirement to include a resume

Question: Can you please clarify this requirement? Does the state seek a single resume from a single person that would describe our corporate experience?

A3. Exhibit A is not required. Please submit a letter of interest and a resume as required per the RFI that represents the vendor qualifications.

Q4. Page 7, Section V, Submission Due Date:

Interested individuals must submit a letter of interest, the completed technical reports, administration guide, scoring guide, teacher‘s guide, sample test items for grade level assessment measures, and visuals of digital platform (Teacher and student facing) by 5 pm on July 22, 2026.

Topic: Sample test items

Question: Does the state seek a complete test item review as part of this RFI process?

What would be the appropriate quantity of sample test items to submit for each grade level? Does the state intend to review sample test items for every grade level?

A4. Yes, MSDE will review the sample test items submitted. At least one test item representing each required skill per grade level will suffice.

Q5. RFI p. 3, 2. Technical Adequacy, 5). Please clarify what is meant by risk levels and at-risk for reading difficulties. What are the risk levels, and what is considered at-risk?

A5. MSDE will review the cut-scores presented by each vendor, based on their research findings of what score accurately predicts a reading difficulty (at-risk). Vendors may use different terms to categorize scores/risk levels.

Q6. Does MSDE plan to share which vendors submitted a response?

A6. Yes, all vendors who submitted a response will be listed in the updated Universal

Screener report, whether they are approved or not.

Q7. Would you accept NCII as a "peer-reviewed validation study"?

A7. Yes, NCII review information may be submitted in place of the peer-reviewed validation study for consideration.

Q8. For grades 4-12, does vocabulary have to be a separate measure/subtest from reading comprehension? Or can they be assessed holistically with the same measure?

A8. Vocabulary does not have to be a separate measure/subtest from reading comprehension; however, there must, at minimum, be test items which cover vocabulary within the reading comprehension measure.

Q9. Are you expecting cut scores for each component? i.e. cut scores for reading comprehension and cut scores for vocabulary in grades 6-12.

A9. If vocabulary is holistically included with reading comprehension, then there would not be expected cut scores separately for vocabulary.

Q10. Are you accepting Computer-Adaptive-tests (CATs) or only static forms? If you are accepting CATs, does the offline administration option have to have full parity with the digital administration?

A10. We are accepting both forms of assessment. The offline administration would not be expected to fully match the digital version of the assessment. Both versions would need to assess the same skills and ensure students’ scores would be comparable whether taking the CAT or offline assessment.

Q11. The time requirement for PK is the only one shared. Can you share the preferred timing for grades 4-12?

A11. In determining which assessments to approve for use by LEAs, MSDE shall consider the time required to administer and score the assessment, with the intention of minimizing the impact on instructional time. Generally, the screener should not take more than one class period to administer.

Q12. Will MSDE use the responses to this RFI to create a list of vetted and approved universal screeners for SY2026-2027? If not, could MSDE share its planned process for developing the approved screener list?

A12.The approved list from this RFI is slated for release in January-February 2027.

School districts have a grace period for the 2026-2027 school year to continue using any current K-3 screener that was not on the previously published list. If one of those screeners is approved as a result of the current review process, that district may continue to use it moving forward. Pre-K, additional K-3, and grades 4-12 approved screeners may be used by districts upon publication of the updated list. The screening expansion timeline, stating which grade levels need to be screened in each year, will be in the upcoming PreK-12 Comprehensive Literacy Policy once it is adopted.

Q13. Will the district accept electronic signatures (ie. DocuSign)?

A13. Yes, MSDE will accept electronic signatures for submissions.

Q14. Does MSDE intend to use this RFI to replace the current universal screening list posted at https://marylandpublicschools.org/programs/documents/ela/universal-reading-screener-report-a.pdf or will the existing list remain in effect for grades K-3 with additional screeners added for PreK and grades 4-12?

A14.The K-3 Universal Screener Report list will remain in effect through the current RFI process. The K-3 Universal Screener Report will be updated to include additional information from the current RFI process to create a PreK-12 Universal Screener Report.

Q15 Upon logging into the eMMA portal, we can view the solicitation details and documents;

however, we are unable to identify where to submit our response or upload required attachments. Please advise on the proper procedure for submitting our RFI response.

A15. Responses must be submitted via eMMA under Round 3.

Q16. Should vendors provide responses to each item in Appendix A (IT Supplemental), or is this document intended only to outline expectations and requirements for approved vendors regarding security and accessibility?

A16. Yes, it is intended only to outline expectations and requirements for approved vendors regarding security and accessibility. Acknowledgement of the requirements within the IT Supplemental Requirements section will suffice.

Q17. Page 7 (include ALL final costs for completing the project) to provide the service detailed in the Scope of Work Is there a format in which the state would prefer to see costs? Does the “Scope of Work” refer to Section III: Technical

Requirements/Specifications?

A17. The cost associated with the scope of work is not required for this RFI.

Q18. To ensure our proposal is properly formatted, should our submission be broken up by grade band or submitted as a single K-8 package? (We are only submitting for the K-8).

A18. Please submit one proposal per assessment product, outlining the differences in the sub-tests by grade level within the submission, as required in the RFI. If the assessment is made for K-5 use, for example, you may submit once for that tool, and it will be considered for grades K-3 and 4-5.

Q19. Can you please provide further direction on how vendors should approach the IT

Supplemental section? Is there a specific section or deliverable table (the one on p. 12-

13) for which we should provide information? Or are you looking for more of a general acknowledgement of the requirements in this section (to be further discussed upon award)? We want to make sure we are providing what is expected for the purposes of this

RFI.

A19. Acknowledgement of the requirements within the IT Supplemental Requirements section will suffice.

Q20. Our organization offers multiple literacy assessment solutions that align to different grade spans, and each assessment has a different set of measures and set of technical adequacy information.

Could you please advise whether you would like vendors to submit separate RFI responses for each assessment solution, or a single RFI response that includes all applicable assessments?

A20. Each assessment solution should be submitted as a separate RFI given they have different sets of measures and technical information.

Q21. In the RFI’s “III. Technical Requirements/Specifications” section, Item 12 (Security), Criterion A: What format of evidence does MSDE expect vendors to provide to demonstrate evidence of compliance since the RFI is not intended to result in the

Contract referenced via the terminology in the MSDE IT Supplemental document

(Appendix A)? Would a statement suffice that affirms the vendor’s compliance with the relevant terms stated in the MSDE IT Supplemental document (Appendix A)?

A21. A statement describing the vendor's ability to comply with the applicable security and privacy requirements outlined in the MSDE IT Supplemental document is sufficient for purposes of this RFI. Vendors are encouraged to include a brief description of their information security program and any relevant certifications, assessments, or security documentation (e.g., SOC 2 Type II, ISO/IEC 27001, FedRAMP authorization, or similar) if available, as this information will assist MSDE in understanding the vendor's security capabilities.

Q22. In the RFI’s “III. Technical Requirements/Specifications” section, Item 12 (Security), Criterion B: Regarding the referenced State of Maryland Information Technology

Security Manual, a) Is the PDF found at this link the manual referenced:

https://doit.maryland.gov/policies/ci/Documents/Maryland-IT-Security-Manual-v1-

2.pdf ? And b) Would a statement affirming the vendor’s compliance with the relevant expectations stated in the Manual suffice as evidence for MSDE’s purposes for this RFI?

If not, what evidence would MSDE expect a vendor to provide?

A22. Yes. The referenced PDF is the current State of Maryland Information Technology

Security Manual. For purposes of this RFI, a statement affirming compliance alone would not provide sufficient detail to demonstrate the vendor's security posture. Vendors should describe how their information security program complies with the applicable requirements of the State of Maryland Information Technology Security Manual and the

MSDE IT Supplemental. Vendors are encouraged to provide supporting documentation, where available, such as a Security Plan, SOC 2 Type II report, ISO/IEC 27001 certification, FedRAMP authorization (if applicable), independent security assessments, penetration test summaries, or other documentation that demonstrates the vendor's administrative, technical, and physical security controls.

Q23. In the RFI’s “III. Technical Requirements/Specifications” section, Item 12 (Security), Criterion C: Would MSDE please provide the location for the “K-12CVAT: K-12

Community Vendor Assessment Tool Lite-V4.1” which vendors are directed to complete? The tool or file is not listed with the solicitation’s attachments.

A23. https://www.cosn.org/tools-and-resources/resource/k-12cvat/

Q24. In the RFI’s “IV. RFI Submission Information” it states, “The Bidder must submit a letter of interest, a resume that demonstrates the required qualifications for the services requested and the signed bid form Exhibit A (include ALL final costs for completing the project) to provide the service detailed in the Scope of Work.” However, in the RFI’s “V.

Submission Due Date” it states, “Interested individuals must submit a letter of interest, the completed technical reports, administration guide, scoring guide, teacher‘s guide, sample test items for grade level assessment measures, and visuals of digital platform

(Teacher and student facing).” Would MSDE please clarify a) If both sets of information/evidence are required, b) If providing a criterion-by-criterion response would https://doit.maryland.gov/policies/ci/Documents/Maryland-IT-Security-Manual-v1-2.pdf https://doit.maryland.gov/policies/ci/Documents/Maryland-IT-Security-Manual-v1-2.pdf https://www.cosn.org/tools-and-resources/resource/k-12cvat/ constitute the “resume that demonstrates the required qualifications”, and c) What is meant by “completed technical reports”?

A24. (a) Please ensure you submit a letter of interest, resume that demonstrates the vendor qualifications, the completed technical reports, administration guide, scoring guide, teacher‘s guide, sample test items for grade level assessment measures, and visuals of digital platform (teacher and student facing). (b) Criterion-by-criterion response is to provide more detailed technical information on reliability, accuracy, and validity. It would not be in place of a resume that showcases the general overview information about the vendor’s qualifications.(c) Please submit a technical report that establishes the assessment's psychometric validity, reliability, and classification accuracy to verify that the screening tool correctly identifies students at risk for reading difficulties or dyslexia without generating excessive false positives.

YOU MUST ACKNOWLEDGE THE ADDENDUM WITH YOUR PROPOSAL

All communication must be routed through the Procurement Officer. Thank you for your time and attention.

Received By______________________________________________________ (Printed Name)

Signature___________________________________ Date__________________

Vendor__________________________________________________________

Telephone No._ __________________ ___ Email: __________________________________