ESBD_503599_1776267284352_Q&A.pdf

737-26- Retention and Student Success Solutions

Questions & Answers

1. To ensure respondents can provide the most thoughtful, thorough, and accurate proposal possible, we respectfully request a one-week extension of the proposal submission deadline to Friday, April 24, 2026. As the current schedule provides only three business days between the question deadline and the final proposal submission, we are concerned that there may not be sufficient time to fully incorporate the university's formal responses and any necessary technical clarifications into our final solution design and pricing model. An extension would allow us to better align our proposal with ASU’s specific needs and ensure a higher quality response for your review.

At this time, we will not be extending.

2. While the RFP outlines a need for a comprehensive analytics and strategy solution, could you clarify the specific institutional challenges or gaps in current student success workflows that this new initiative is intended to address?

We are looking for a solution that helps identify the gaps in the current student retention and success opportunities. Key areas around retention, online vs face-to-face and pathways that tend to struggle.

3. Regarding the historical data from the Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI), NSSE, and other records, where does this data currently reside (e.g., a specific SIS, data warehouse, or standalone files)?

Stand alone files. If additional data is needed that is in the ERP, it can be pulled to help with further analysis.

4. How do you envision this solution interacting with your existing Student Information

System (SIS) and current student success platforms? Is the goal to consolidate data into a new central dashboard or to feed predictive scores back into existing staff workflows?

It can be both. We are not sold on either, but want an easily accessible solution that gives leaders and operational staff the information related to students, gaps, and

‘targets’ to successfully create solutions and help with the success initiatives.

5. Does the University intend to license a new, dedicated Data Reporting and Analytics suite as part of this scope, or is the expectation that all predictive visualizations be developed within ASU’s existing infrastructure (e.g., Tableau, PowerBI)?

If the product or solution has one that exists, then we are open to accessing it. ASU does use PowerBI, so it can be in this solution and part of our current framework.

6. To ensure the accuracy of the predictive modeling, what is the current state and accessibility of the historical data sources mentioned (SSI, NSSE, etc.) over the last

3-5 years?

NSSE and SSI data are examples. NSSE is conducted on odd years and SSI has been conducted on even years for the last 5 years. Additional data sets that are in the ERP system can be pulled as the solution identifies.

7. How many years of historical data does ASU intend to provide for the development and validation of the initial predictive models?

5-6 years of data. This gets outside of anomalies such as covid.

8. Does the university intend to migrate this historical data into the new solution’s environment, or should the new platform integrate with existing systems to analyze the data where it currently resides today

It can be either, with the recommendation from the solution.

9. For any existing student success or advising platforms currently in use, does ASU intend to continue using them alongside the new solution? If so, how does the university envision staff will engage with both platforms (e.g., will the new solution feed risk scores directly into the existing platform)?

ASU does not have an existing platform for student success measures that is currently being utilized. ASU does have EAB Navigate which could be used if helpful.

10. The RFP mentions dashboards for various campus units; do you have a target number of staff users, and are there specific third-party systems where these insights must be surfaced for front-line advisors?

There are not a number of targeted users until the solution helps identify the strategy, gaps, and potential solutions.

11. For the required integrations, does ASU prefer a specific method for data transfer

(e.g., API-based real-time integration or scheduled batch uploads via SFTP)?

ASU has the ability to accommodate either approach for data transfer. Typically, we select the approach that aligns with the frequency of data needs.

12. Does ASU utilize a preferred enterprise integration platform or middleware (e.g., MuleSoft, Dell Boomi) for data exchange between your Student Information System and external solutions, or is the respondent expected to recommend and provide the integration framework?

ASU does not have a preferred integration platform.

13. Based on the RFP's focus on staff decision-support and intervention prioritization, could you confirm that there is no requirement for a student-facing portal or direct student access to the system at this time?

At this time, it is not for student access.

14. To help us design the most cost-effective licensing model, could you provide an estimated headcount of staff users across the various departments (Executive

Leadership, Enrollment Management, Academic Affairs, etc.)? Additionally, can you clarify which of these roles will need 'full' administrative and editing capabilities versus those who may only require 'view-only' access to interactive dashboards?

Full Access – 7

View Only – Everyone else (again depending on solution and strategy)

Executive Leadership – 15

Enrollment Management – 5

Academic Affairs/Student Affairs – potentially 55 depending on the solutions on identification of strategy, gaps, and potential solutions.

15. Does ASU have a specific target 'go-live' date for the implementation of the predictive models and dashboards? Specifically, is the university aiming to have the solution fully operational in time for the start of the Fall 2026 academic term, or is there an alternative phased rollout schedule preferred?

A rollout schedule works and can be listed in the RFP submission.

16. Does the scope of the Retention and Student Success Solutions encompass the entire ASU student body, including all graduate and doctoral students across all six academic colleges, or is the university primarily focusing this initiative on the undergraduate population?

The initial population is undergraduate; however, feel free to scope graduate in additional services. If both, 80% undergraduate and 20% graduate

17. Does ASU have an existing student success strategic plan, enrollment management plan, or prior retention studies that the selected vendor should align with or build upon?

These plans exist; however, we would value seeing a fresh perspective on opportunities and strategies.

18. Regarding the project lifecycle, does ASU anticipate a high-intensity Year 1 focused on strategic plan development and technical data integration, followed by a transition to an ongoing technology subscription and execution support in Years 2 and 3? Specifically, how does the university envision the balance between one-time strategic consulting versus an ongoing service and platform model?

It depends on the solution and strategies identified.

19. Can ASU share its current first-year retention rate, 6-year graduation rate, and approximate size of any identified at-risk student populations? This baseline data is essential for scoping the analytical and strategic work.

First year retention 73%

6-year graduation rate 45%

This RFP is being done to help further identify these at-risk populations.

20. Is ASU currently using any vendors today for student success analytics, persistence modeling, or retention consulting? If so, is this RFP intended to replace that existing solution, and if so, when does any existing contract expire? (Critical for understanding the competitive landscape and integration complexity.)

There are not currently student success analytics, persistence or retention consulting.

21. Section 3.2 of the RFP contains what appears to be a blank bullet point under Data

Integration. Could ASU confirm what additional data sources beyond SSI and NSSE are intended to be included in scope?

Data from the ERP is available as requested, excluding PII.

22. Section 6.33.10 indicates ASU prefers SSO using SAML. Can ASU confirm its identity provider (e.g., Azure AD, Okta) and whether SAML-based SSO will be required from day one of implementation?

Azure

23. Which office or individual will serve as the primary internal project champion and point of contact for the selected vendor, and what governance structure (steering committee, working groups, etc.) does ASU anticipate for this engagement?

After agreement is executed this information will be provided.

24. Could you please confirm whether biographies of key personnel would be acceptable in place of full resumes?

Biographies are acceptable.

25. Would it be possible to honor our respectful request for an extension of the submittal due date for this rfp to April 30th to allow for a comprehensive response including the answers to questions?

At this time, we will not be extending.

26. Will product demonstrations be part of this RFP process?

No. It is acceptable to use screen shots in the RFP.

27. Does Angelo State currently have a solution for Retention and Student Success and if so, what solution?

No solution.

28. Is this RFP a requirement for renewal of a current solution?

No. This is new.

29. Does Angelo State plan to include both Undergraduate and Graduate students in the target population for this solution? Will one or the other be the initial target? If both, what would be the estimated % split between the two groups?

The initial population is undergraduate; however, feel free to scope graduate in additional services. If both, 80% undergraduate and 20% graduate.