The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Nebraska Department of Education Response to vendor Questions
NDERFP250826
| Would NDE consider an extension of the deadline to Thursday, November 6th at 2pm central time? |
| At this time, NDE will not consider an extension. |
| The RFP states: “The contract will include all statewide evaluation services including the capacity to hold external observations of approximately 60 sites per year, which will be billed to grantees, survey administration and data utilization including the annual Continuous Improvement Process Data Snapshots.” Could NDE clarify what is meant by billing to the grantees in this context? Does this mean that the contractor would need to set up individual agreements with 60 sites per year? |
| Yes, should the intial evauatlion review find the external observations are a valuable piece to support quality 21st CCLC programs; the contractor would set up individual agreements with the 60 sites/per. |
| Is there a budget ceiling that bidders should respect? |
| Refer to previous contracts for similar work. We anticipate additional costs in year one for evaluation of current process and potential build of a data base. |
| Is there an anticipated level of effort for this work? |
| Please refer to section V of the RFP. |
| The RFP states: “Responsible for designing, maintaining, and providing technical assistance for the 21st CCLC online databases operated by each grantee and assisting grantees in collecting and cleaning their data.” Could NDE clarify how many grantees and how many unique databases this refers to? |
| The evaluator would need to have their own database that grantees can submit their data to each semester and summer session or contract out with a vendor who can manage a database. |
In the '25-26 school year we have 120 sites operating a 21st CCLC program.
| 1. Can NDE confirm the total number of grantee sites (21st CCLC and ELO) expected to participate in the evaluation during the first contract year? |
| In the '25-26 school year we have 120 sites operating a 21st CCLC program. In the '25-26 school year we have 105 ELO sites |
| 2. Will the awarded vendor be responsible for data collection from both federal (21st CCLC) and state-funded (ELO) grantees, or only federal? |
| Both |
| 3. How does NDE currently manage site-level reporting? Is there an existing data system or vendor platform the new contractor must integrate with or replace? |
| The evaluator would need to have their own database that grantees can submit their data to each semester and summer session or contract out with a vendor who can manage a data system/platform. |
4. Are there any other data collection process workflows?
| a. Attendance and demographic database |
| Current evaluator manages database for attendance and demographics |
| b. Attendance Forms |
| evaluator cleans data and provides to NDE |
| c. Continuous Improvement Process (CIP) Summary Form |
| This is a form used with grantees to aid in the improvement process |
| d. External Observation |
| External Observations use Nebraska Quality Framework (https://www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc/quality-framework/) -- Current workflow uses specific checklists during observation. |
| e. Federal APR |
| 21APR is the system used; they provide training |
| f. Self-Assessment |
| This has been administered through qualtrics |
| g. Summer Fiscal Form |
| Not all grantees have summer programming; this form help with organizing evauation for summer programs. |
| h. Surveys |
| Surveys have been administered through qualtrics, but do not have to remain in qualitrics. |
| 5. How frequently does NDE expect statewide evaluation reports—annual only, or interim updates (quarterly, biannual)? |
| NDE will expect data back after each semester/summer and yearly over-arching data. |
| 1. What are the technical or security requirements for the web-based data collection and reporting system? |
| NIST 800-53 and SOC 2 Type II, as well as encryption and secure communication protocols including TLS 1.2, TLS 1.3, AES-128, AES-256, HTTPS, and SSH. |
| 2. Will the system need to interface with any federal or state data platforms? |
| 45768 |
| 3. Should the vendor migrate any historical data from prior evaluation systems? The original application process for the grant? This could be leveraged for location profiles and related teacher and student data reporting. |
| The vendor will need to merge data as the contract will start January 2, 2026 and federal reporting is Summer 2025 - May 2026. |
| 4. Will user support/help desk services be required as part of the platform management? |
| Yes |
| 1. How many site visits or external observations does NDE anticipate annually (the RFP references ~60)? |
| This number varies depending on what year in the grant cycle the grantees are in. Currently, sites are evaluated in year 2 & 4. However, we want to ensure this is the best practice to ensure quality 21st CCLC programs; so this could change upon vendor's initial review of our current evaluation process. |
| 2. What level of survey management/distribution is expected—will the vendor distribute surveys directly or provide tools for grantees to self-administer? |
| Administer tools for grantees to self-administer |
| 3. Any multilingual considerations? |
| Yes, we currently have evaluation surveys in English, Spanish and have been receiving requests for other languages |
| Can NDE provide examples of current CIP Snapshot or Summary Reports to ensure alignment with formatting expectations? |
| You may find the current CIP snapshot on our website: https://www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc/program-evaluation/ -- the format is subject to change |
| 1. How many training events does NDE anticipate per year, and are they expected to be in-person, virtual, or hybrid? |
| 4 training events with a mix of in-person and virtual |
| 2. What is the typical/expected audience size for these training sessions (number of participants per event)? |
| Director's Day - In-person - 40-50 |
Regional Meetings - In-person 10-20 per location Monthly Director's Calls - Online External/Internal faciliator trainings -- 10-20
| 3. Does NDE have existing training materials, videos, or guides that the vendor should maintain or update? |
| These will need to be created |
| 4. Is the vendor responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of the training and TA sessions (e.g., surveys, feedback reports)? |
| yes |
| 5. Will the vendor support new grantee onboarding as part of the technical assistance plan? |
| yes |
| 1. Will NDE provide a budget range or funding ceiling for the contract to guide cost proposal development? |
| Refer to previous contracts for similar work. We anticipate additional costs in year one for evaluation of current process and potential build of a data base. |
| 2. How will renewal decisions be made—based on performance metrics, deliverable completion, or cost efficiency? |
| Renewal decisions will be based on a combination of performance metrics, |
completion of deliverables, and overall cost effectiveness.
| 1. What are NDE’s top priorities or challenges with current evaluation processes that this new contract should address? |
| Top priorities are to strengthen the consistency, accuracy, and usefulness of evaluation data across programs while meeting all federal requirements. |
| 2. How does NDE envision the Learning Center evaluation system evolving over the next five years? |
| We would expect the evaluation system to evolve/set up a timeline for change upon vendor's initial review of our current evaluation process. |
| 3. Is NDE open to incorporating new data visualization tools or dashboards that go beyond compliance reporting? |
| yes |
| 4. How does NDE define “continuous improvement” in this context—at the grantee level, statewide level, or both? |
| both |
| The Project Overview notes that 21st CCLC currently has 150 Nebraska sites. The Project Environment states that the evaluation will be done at state level as well as district/school building level for selected grantees. About how many sites will the contractor be providing TA to in a given year? Will that be something available to all 150 sites? |
| Vendor should expect to do general TA at our monthly director's call as well as further TA for new grantees or sites with staff change; on average that would be about 10% of our sites. AS well, some TA is provided to sites who need help submitting attendance. |
| The RFP notes the contractor would implement the program evaluation plan. Is a plan already available? Or would that be developed/revised as needed by the contractor? |
| As contract is coming onbaord mid-school year; this first year a plan will be provided that could be revised by contractor. After completion of the '25-26 SY, NDE would be open to contractor developing new plan based on their intiial review of current evaluation processes. |
| The deliverables listed under the Data Analysis and Data Reporting sections note a variety of reports and snapshots. About how many are needed each year beyond the annual statewide evaluation report? |
| Currently, we recieve individual grantee and statewide CIP snapshot/report, ELO snapshot/report & annual report |
| The third bullet under Training & Support notes that the contractor would conduct regional technical assistance meetings each July/August. How many regional meetings are there, and are they all done in person? If it’s in person, where are they typically held? |
| 3 regional meetings in person these will be held in western NE, central NE and eastern NE |
| The final bullet under Training & Support references facilitating Continuous Improvement Process meetings for all Year 1 grantees, First Year Directors and others. Approximately how many new grantees are awarded each year? |
| 5 |
| The RFP notes “Evaluation will be collected and analyzed at a state level as well as district/school building level for selected grantees.” Does NDE know how many grantees will be selected, and how is that determination made? |
| In the '25-26 school year we have 120 sites operating a 21st CCLC program. In the '25-26 school year we have 105 ELO sites -- CCLC grantees are awarded a 4 or 5 year grant. A grant competition is held yearly to determine new grantees coming into 21st CCLC. ELO also holds a grant competition and awards grantees for two years. ELO awardees work with current 21st CCLC sites to deliver the ELO requirements. |
| There is no legal and regulator framework specified; is there any important information here for bidders? |
| Vendors will be expected to comply with all relevant state and federal laws, including FERPA, if applicable. Final contract issued by NDE will be subject to Nebraska jurisdiction, venue and interpretation. |
| Can NDE provide a list of federal compliance dates? |
| Data reporting via 21APR continues as scheduled: |
Data Entry Window 1: Activities, Staffing, and Participation – August 25, 2025 – Nov 5, 2025 Data Entry Window 2: Outcomes and Certification – November 6, 2025 – March 25, 2026
| Does the Nebraska 21st CCLC program have existing state level performance measures that can be included in the strategic review for consideration and possible amendment, or will these be newly developed? |
| Nebraska Quality Framework (https://www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc/quality-framework/) |
| Does the Nebraska 21st CCLC program have an existing database (or databases) that grantees are using to collect and clean their data? If so, what is currently in use? |
| Yes, the existing databased is managed by the current vendor. |
| The RFP notes that databases are “operated by each grantee.” Can you explain more about this model and specifically what is meant by “operated by”? |
| Grantees need the ability to upload their attendance information into the database |
| Can NDE provide an estimate of the annual number of students served by 21st CCLC programs? |
| 11000 |
| Can NDE provide an estimate of the annual number of students served by ELO programs? |
| ELO awardees work with a portion of current 21st CCLC sites to deliver the ELO requirements. |
| To what extent is there overlap between 21 CCLC and ELO grantees (e.g., number of sites with funding from both sources)? |
| ELO awardees work with a portion of current 21st CCLC sites to deliver the ELO requirements. |
| How shall vendors submit their best and final offer? |
| Refer to the instructions within the RFP. |
| Is there a not-to-exceed amount for the budget? |
| Refer to previous contracts for similar work. We anticipate additional costs in year one for evaluation of current process and potential build of a data base. |
| What time period should the work plan cover? |
| staring Jan. 2, 2026 and extending 5 years |
| To help us develop a feasible work plan, can you share information about NDE’s review and approval process for final deliverables (e.g., clearance processes, expected timelines, etc.)? |
| Vendors should propose a work plan and timeline based on their understanding of the Scope of Work and deliverable requirements outlined in the RFP. |
| The RFP states insurance coverage of: Worker’s Comp $500K/500K/500K, Fire $300K, Cyber $5M, Umbrella $5M, and Personal/Advertising Injury $1M. Our insurance coverage is as follows: Worker’s Comp $100K/100K/500K, Fire $100K, Cyber $1M, Umbrella $2M, and no Personal/Advertising coverage. Is our coverage sufficient to meet this requirement? |
| Refer to section III.J. Vendor COI's will be reviewed at the time of contract to determine this. |
| Will the system be expected to impose a workflow on the various data collection and reporting activities (e.g., survey completion, data cleaning, report submission)? |
| Not necessarily, but may be ideal. |
| Is there an existing statewide database currently in use for 21st CCLC and ELO data? If so, what is the current platform and will there be a data migration requirement? |
| Yes, the existing databased is managed by the current vendor. |
| Does NDE expect the evaluator to build a new online data system or may we propose an existing, secure, cloud-hosted SaaS platform that meets all state and federal compliance standards? |
| Either. |
| Does NDE intend to host the application internally, or is a vendorhosted cloud solution acceptable/preferred? |
| Typically NDE prefers to host ourselves, however Azure would be our cloud option. |
| Are all surveys to be disseminated online, or will paper surveys also need to be supported (e.g., scanning or manual entry)? |
| Teacher's survey - online |
If student and parents surveys continue - both
| Will the system need to send automated notifications or reminders to users when surveys or data entry windows open or close? |
| Yes |
| Approximately how many survey respondents and concurrent users should the system be designed to support during peak usage? |
| We have 11,000 students registered in 21st CCLC in the '25-26 school year |
| By what method are grantees expected to submit student-level or site data for cleaning and aggregation: via file upload, API integration, or direct data entry into the system? |
| Currently, grantees are submitting via file upload. |
| Will the system need to integrate with multiple SIS systems, and if so, is there a preferred integration method (file exchange, API, SFTP, etc.)? |
| file exchange with potential to connect to systems in the future |
| Will the system be expected to manage or track monetary awards or reimbursement amounts for grantees, or is financial management out of scope? |
| No |
| What are the specific data elements (e.g., GPA, attendance, demographics) required for GPRA reporting, and are data definitions available? |
| Please view this website for specifics: https://www.ed.gov/media/document/21apr-sea-data-guidepdf-14411.pdf |
| Are the five GPRA performance measures defined and stable, or are changes anticipated during the contract term? |
| Changes were last made and went into effect in 2022. It is possible additional changes could be made. |
| Should reports and analyses include trend and comparative analyses across years, grantees, or demographic groups? |
| Yes |
| Will the vendor be responsible for submitting and certifying data in the USDOE APR platform, or only for preparing data for NDE to certify? |
| Vendor will prepare and enter data; NDE will certify data |
| Will NDE provide report templates and specifications, or is the vendor expected to design report formats and dashboards? |
| Vendor is expected to design. |
| Will NDE require interactive dashboards or visual analytics in addition to static reports (PDF/Excel)? |
| No |
| What federal security and privacy standards must the system meet (FERPA, NIST, SOC 2, FedRAMP, etc.)? |
| FERPA, NIST 800-53, SOC 2 Type II |
| Does NDE expect the system to include functionality for scheduling, inviting, and tracking attendance for required trainings and TA sessions? |
| No |
| Please confirm which of the following trainings are required annually versus “as needed”: (a) Two CIP/Evaluation Facilitator trainings (virtual & in-person), (b) Regional TA meetings, (c) NAQCIS training, (d) New grantee onboarding, (e) One-on-one meetings, (f) Monthly grantee calls, (g) Recorded training videos. |
| all except (e) one-on-one are required annually.(e) is on an as-needed base. |
| Are travel and lodging expenses for regional or on-site trainings reimbursable separately, or should they be included in the base bid? |
| Included in the base bid |
| Approximately how many participants are expected per training event and per regional meeting? |
| Director's Day - In-person - 40-50 |
Regional Meetings - In-person 10-20 per location Monthly Director's Calls - Online External/Internal faciliator trainings -- 10-20
| What are the expected helpdesk or TA response time standards (e.g., same-day response, 48-hour resolution)? |
| The goal is to ensure prompt communication— |
typically same-day acknowledgment and timely resolution depending on issue severity.
| Please clarify the scope of work for NAQCIS. Is the vendor expected to enhance, maintain, or redevelop this system? |
| The determination of whether the vendor will enhance, maintain, or redevelop |
NAQCIS will be made following further discussion and evaluation of system needs.
| Will NDE provide a dedicated liaison or project manager for coordination between the evaluation team and internal NDE staff? |
| Vendor can expect to primarly work with 21st CCLC statewide coordinator. A NDE data specialist will assist when needed. |
| How will NDE measure performance and success for this contract (timeliness, accuracy, satisfaction, etc.)? |
| Performance measure will be based on a combination of performance metrics, |
completion of deliverables, and overall cost effectiveness.
| Can NDE confirm the frequency of standing meetings (quarterly evaluation meetings, biweekly logistics meetings, etc.)? |
| Quarterly evaluation meetings with NDE program and data staff. |
The suggested bi-weekly logistics meeting with program staff is flexible depending on needs/desires of contractor.
Monthly in attendance on grantee call
| Is there an anticipated budget ceiling or funding range for this contract? |
| Refer to previous contracts for similar work. We anticipate additional costs in year one for evaluation of current process and potential build of a data base. |
| Given the January 2, 2026 start date, what is the expected go-live timeline for system deployment and initial trainings? |
| NDE's two hard deadlines due to federal reporting would be: The attendance database will be needed by the end of the school year (mid-May), the teacher survey will need to be available in March. |
| Who is the current 21st CCLC evaluator/vendor, and will there be a formal transition or data handoff period? |
| UNMC- MMI - yes, there will be a data handoff period as MMI will have summer and fall data needed to report to the federal gov't |