Attachment_A_-_Purpose.pdf

Attachment A

OMES Central Purchasing | October 2025 Attachment A: Statewide Contract | Page 1 of 4

SOLICITATION NO. EV00000955

STATEWIDE

CONTRACT SW1075M

This solicitation is a contract document and is a request for proposal in connection with the contract awarded by the Office of Management and Enterprise Services as more particularly described below. Any defined term used herein but not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed in the General Terms or other contract document.

PURPOSE

The Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) Central Purchasing division is seeking responses from potential suppliers to provide a contract for the purchase of a statewide early literacy and mathematics screening system capable of identifying reading and math deficiencies, including characteristics of dyslexia and dyscalculia, and delivering valid, reliable, and actionable data for students in kindergarten through fifth grade. State agencies and affiliates may also utilize this contract on an as-needed basis.

The contract is awarded as a mandatory statewide contract on behalf of the State of Oklahoma’s Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES). State affiliates may avail themselves of this contract.

Introduction:

The statewide early literacy screening initiative and math screening initiative is established pursuant to amendments to the Strong Readers Act under SB 1778 and Oklahoma Math Achievement and Proficiency Act under SB 1360. The Oklahoma Office of Educational Quality and Accountability (OEQA), in collaboration with the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE), shall develop a process to identify three (3) reading and math screening instruments. The State Board of Education shall select one (1) screening instrument from the approved list, and the selected instrument shall be implemented statewide.

Bidders should be aware that OEQA will evaluate and rank up to three (3) screening instruments, which will then be approved by the Commission for Educational Quality and Accountability. As per state law, the State Board of Education will then select one (1) instrument from the approved list.

Bidders are therefore competing to be among up to three ranked and approved instruments, not solely to be the single selected instrument.

Contract Term and Renewal Options:

The initial contract term, which begins on the execution date of this service agreement through to 10/01/2027, may be extended for up to four one-year options to renew the contract, with the final agreement end date being 09/31/2031.

OMES Central Purchasing | October 2025 Attachment A: Statewide Contract | Page 2 of 4

Statewide contracts are moving to an annual autorenewal format, instead of manual renewals. No annual renewal notices will be supplied by the state. This does not change any substantive terms and conditions of the executed contract or any previously executed amendments. Should either party decline to renew the contract, a written termination notice shall be sent at least 30 days prior to the end of the contract term.

1) Contract Specifications. Certain contract requirements and terms are attached hereto as Exhibit 1 – Technical Response and incorporated herein.

2) Evaluation Criterion.

The bid will be evaluated using a best-value criterion, based on the following:

a) Price.

b) Past performance,

c) Product acceptability.

Evaluation Criteria:

Proposals will be evaluated based on the following weighted criteria. The State will award the contract to the vendor(s) whose proposal is determined to provide the best value based on these criteria.

1) Mandatory Pass/Fail Threshold (Not Scored): Bidders must demonstrate the ability to report student-level data directly to the State Department of Education and OEQA. Proposals that do not satisfy this requirement will be deemed non-responsive.

2) In addition, the proposal must describe the method by which authorized State personnel will access, extract, and analyze student-level data. Failure to demonstrate this capability will result in the proposal being deemed non-responsive. For example:

• secure web-based administrative portal;

• downloadable reports or data exports (e.g., CSV);

• application programming interface (API);

• secure automated file transfer; or

• another vendor-supported method acceptable to the State.

3) Assessment Quality, Validity, and Reliability – 30%

a) Evidence that screening instruments are valid and reliable for identifying students with reading deficiencies and characteristics of dyslexia as well as math deficiencies and characteristics of dyscalculia

b) Evidence that screener assessments have strong concurrent validity, with results that are strongly correlated with performance in Grade 3 on the Oklahoma State Testing Program.

Note. Preference is given to externally or independently produced evidence.

c) Strength of technical documentation, including norming and validation studies

d) Alignment to early literacy research

e) Evidence that the instrument assesses rapid automatized naming (RAN) as a discrete skill and is normed beyond elementary grades

4) Alignment to Literacy and Math Requirements and Instructional Usefulness – 20%

a) Alignment to foundational literacy skills and the Science of Reading

b) Ability to provide actionable data that supports identification of reading deficiencies

c) Usefulness of results for instructional planning and intervention within Multi-Tiered Systems

OMES Central Purchasing | October 2025 Attachment A: Statewide Contract | Page 3 of 4 of Support (MTSS)

d) Ability to identify students at risk for math deficiency and support integration into reading and math curriculum

5) System Functionality and Deliverables – 15%

a) Extent to which the proposed system meets all required deliverables outlined in Section 1.4

b) Quality of assessment administration, progress monitoring, diagnostic, and learning platform (if applicable) capabilities

c) Predictive and norm-referenced capabilities

d) Demonstrated ability to support state-configurable annual benchmark thresholds tied to

OSTP predictive performance

6) Data Management and Accessibility – 10%

a) Quality of data system and reporting tools

b) Ability for the State to securely access, extract, and analyze data directly from the vendor system

c) Compatibility with state and district data systems

d) Student profiles identify instructional point of need and reading achievement level as required by statute

e) Timeliness of reporting results to teachers, administrators, and parents and legal guardians

7) Implementation, Training, and Support – 10%

a) Quality and feasibility of implementation plan

b) Strength of training and professional development approach

c) Ongoing support and technical assistance

8) Vendor Qualifications and Experience – 5%

a) Relevant experience with K–3 literacy and math screening at scale

b) Organizational capacity and staffing

c) Past performance and references

9) Cost and Overall Value – 10%

a) Competitiveness and transparency of pricing

b) Demonstration of statewide or volume-based discounts

c) Overall value relative to services provided

Scope and description

1) The bid response must reflect for each requirement on Exhibit 1: Technical Response whether the requirement is met by an out-of-the-box solution or whether it necessitates customization to the bidder’s proposed solution.

2) The bid response shall show the ability of the bidder to meet or exceed the mandatory specifications in Exhibit #1.

Value-added products and/or services within scope of the acquisition are to be included in Exhibit 2: Pricing.

3) Pricing shall be proposed using Exhibit 2, titled “Pricing.”

4) Pricing shall be proposed as follows:

OMES Central Purchasing | October 2025 Attachment A: Statewide Contract | Page 4 of 4

Demonstrations and Presentations:

OMES reserves the right to require oral presentations, demonstrations, interviews, or product walkthroughs from Bidders selected as finalists during the evaluation process. Finalist Bidders may be asked to demonstrate system functionality, assessment administration processes, reporting capabilities, data access features, and overall implementation approach.

Funding and Budget Guidance:

1) The State reserves the right to negotiate final pricing and contract terms to achieve the best value for statewide implementation.

5) Pricing Requirements: Bidders must submit a detailed pricing proposal that includes:

a) Per-student pricing based on statewide implementation

b) Tiered pricing structures reflecting economies of scale (e.g., district size, statewide adoption)

c) Multi-year pricing options (minimum of three years) with clearly defined cost stability

d) All-inclusive pricing, including

e) Assessment access;

f) Data system access;

g) Training and professional development;

h) Technical support

i) Any optional add-on costs must be clearly identified and priced separately

6) Statewide Discount Expectations: Bidders must:

a) Provide pricing that reflects a statewide or near-statewide volume discount

b) Clearly describe how pricing is reduced based on: Number of students served; Number of participating districts;

c) Identify any price guarantees or caps for the duration of the contract

7) Value and Cost Effectiveness: Proposals will be evaluated on overall value, not cost alone. Bidders must demonstrate:

a) Cost-effectiveness relative to the scope of services provided

b) Sustainability of pricing over time

c) Efficiency of implementation at scale

The contract starts on the execution date and ends on 10/01/2027, with up to four one-year renewals possible, making the final end date 09/31/2031.