NDE Response to Vendor Questions - NDERFP0728.pdf

Nebraska Department of Education Response to Vendor Questions

NDERFP250728 - High-Quality IEP Development and Implementation Pilot

Project

# Questions Answer

1 Is this solution true integration with the IEP system used within the state?

a. If yes, what system is it integrated with?

Nebraska does not have a state IEP system. The expectation would be that the product would be able to integrate with whatever system the individual District would be using selected for the pilot and then any other system of any other district in the state.

2 What system/vendor/services is this RFP replacing? Nebraska does not have a current system/vendor/services.

3 What has prompted NDE to issue this RFP? For example, is there an OSEP finding or directive that is being addressed?

Nebraska has identified a need for improvement through its monitoring and performance data (e.g., State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report indicators) that reveal gaps in IEP quality, implementation fidelity, or student outcomes. Feedback from educators, families, or advisory councils highlights inconsistent IEP practices across districts or difficulty meeting federal requirements.

4 What is the budget for the services listed in the

RFP?

The Nebraska Department of Education has not established a specific budget range for this pilot.

Vendors are expected to propose a cost structure that is commensurate with the scope of work described in the RFP, including technology, professional development, and support services.

All proposed budgets should be fully justified and aligned to the deliverables and outcomes outlined in Section V.

NDE will evaluate cost proposals in accordance with the RFP evaluation criteria to ensure the proposed approach is both cost-effective and sustainable.

5 How many districts, schools, and staff do you anticipate participating in the pilot?

Nebraska will start by selecting one pilot district.

6 How are you identifying the pilot districts? Nebraska has identified the pilot district based on monitoring data that indicates the district would benefit from the additional support.

7 The RFP states, “The solution must integrate technology, instructional coaching, and data-informed tools.” Can you provide additional information on what technology and data-informed tools should be integrated?

The technology and data tools should work together so that instructional coaching and professional learning are guided by actual student and implementation data, allowing educators to adjust instruction and IEP goals quickly and effectively. By streamlining data entry, organizing information visually, and embedding evidence-based prompts, the tool makes it easier for educators to craft clear, measurable goals, write data-rich present levels, and monitor progress continuously—leading to stronger IEPs and quicker instructional responses.

8 The RFP states the solution, “Includes a repository of instructional and behavioral resources that span Birth–12 across:

• Core academics: reading, writing, math

• Social-emotional and behavioral support

• Specialized areas: speech, autism, ELL, functional/life skills, OT, transition” Assuming this is separate from the professional learning, can you provide additional information about the type of resources requested? Is a curriculum required?

– Intervention guides, lesson ideas, and instructional routines for reading, writing, and math.

– Research-supported approaches for social-emotional learning (SEL), behavior intervention, and positive behavioral supports.

– Sample activities or protocols for students with speech-language needs, autism, English language learners (ELL), or significant cognitive disabilities.

– Resources for occupational therapy, transition planning, and functional/life skills instruction.

– Fidelity checklists, progress-monitoring rubrics, and data-collection templates.

– Family engagement handouts and communication tools.

Downloadable/Adaptable Materials: Printable guides, digital templates, and video demonstrations.

Searchable, Birth–Grade 12 Scope: Organized by grade span, disability category, and content area for easy access by teachers, related-service providers, and coaches.

Alignment with Standards and IEP Goals: Resources should link clearly to state academic standards and common IEP goal areas.

The RFP does not require a stand-alone or proprietary curriculum.

Instead, it seeks a curated, evidence-based resource bank that educators can draw from to supplement their existing curriculum and support individualized instruction and behavior interventions.

9 Is the expectation that professional learning and coaching that occurs at least quarterly is delivered once and/or in one location? Or is the preferred that each participating district receive training and coaching quarterly?

NDE is looking to do one pilot project. The coaching would be with this one district for the first year.

10 The Overview and Requirements 2.c both refer to systems change for districts. Will selected vendor be responsible for completing a needs assessment, developing a theory of action, and/or partnering with district leadership to develop action plans to support systems change? Or is it preferred that this work align with existing action plans and systems change initiatives?

It is preferred that this work align with existing action plans and systems change initiatives.

11 What criteria, methods, and/or systems are currently being used to determine IEP quality, literacy outcomes, and educator retention?

IEP quality - Differentiated Monitoring, literacy outcomes - District Performance Plans, Educator retention - retention surveys

12 What is the timeline for implementing? The implementation timeline will be determined in collaboration with the selected contractor once the award is made.

Generally, NDE anticipates that key planning and initial setup activities will begin shortly after contract execution, with pilot activities launching during the first year of the contract term.

Vendors should include in their proposals a detailed implementation schedule—covering planning, training, technology deployment, and initial pilot operation—aligned with the scope of work described in Section V.

NDE will work with the selected contractor to finalize specific milestones and dates during contract negotiations.

13 Is NDE interested in custom development of resources or do they prefer an off-the-shelf solution?

NDE is not interested in building out a custom development of resources.

14 What data from NDE and/or district systems is available for integration into proposed solution?

The Nebraska Department of Education (NDE) maintains several data systems that could be leveraged, subject to appropriate privacy and data-sharing agreements. Examples include:

Student Information Systems (SIS) data reported by districts to NDE, including enrollment, demographics, and program participation.

Special Education data submitted through the Improving Learning for Children with Disabilities (ILCD) reporting platform, including IEP timelines, services, and compliance indicators.

Assessment data such as statewide reading and math assessments and other statewide accountability data sets.

Early childhood and Part C data, where relevant to participating districts.

Access to any of these data sets would require formal data-sharing agreements and adherence to FERPA and other federal and state privacy requirements.

Vendors are encouraged to describe in their proposal how their solution would securely integrate with such systems and specify any technical or security requirements needed to support that integration.

15 Can you clarify the difference of “1. Original Contractual Agreement Form signed manually in ink or DocuSign” and “Completed Attachment A:

Contractual Agreement Form?” in solicitation requirements?

Attachment A is the document itself; the “original signed form” is the completed Attachment A with the required signature to finalize the contractual agreement.

16 How many districts and schools will be included in the pilot, and what grade levels will be prioritized?

Nebraska will start by selecting one pilot district.

17 Should professional development include paraprofessionals and related service providers, or is the focus primarily on certified teachers?

The focus at this time would be with case managers who are developing IEPs. In Nebraska this would be certified special education teacher, school psychologists, and appropriately certified/licensed related service providers.

18 Is there a required format (e.g., minimum hours, required in-person sessions) for quarterly PD and coaching, or can the vendor propose a flexible structure based on district needs?

The vendor could propose a flexible structure based on district needs.

19 Does NDE expect the vendor to provide a complete IEP management platform, or would integration with existing district IEP systems (such as PowerSchool or SEIS) be acceptable?

Nebraska does not have a state IEP system. The expectation would be that the product would be able to integrate with whatever system the individual District would be using selected for the pilot and then any other system of any other district in the state.

20 If a platform is required, must it include case management features (compliance documentation, service tracking), or is the focus primarily on instructional resources and progress monitoring tools?

No platform is required.

21 Would NDE consider proposals where the vendor provides professional development and instructional support services while partnering with an ed-tech provider for the platform component?

Yes.

22 What level of evidence is required under ESSA Tiered Evidence standards? Will unpublished but independently evaluated results (e.g., external evaluator reports) be considered acceptable?

No. Unpublished but independently evaluated results do not meet ESSA’s tiered evidence requirements unless the evaluation has been formally published or otherwise publicly released with sufficient methodological detail for third-party review. Simply having an internal or private external evaluator’s report is not sufficient to qualify for Tier 1–3 evidence.

23 Is there a required or expected frequency for data collection (e.g. quarterly, biannual, annual), or should vendors propose a schedule based on best practices?

The vendor could propose a schedule based on best practices.

24 Are there specific Nebraska frameworks, regulations, or instructional models that vendors are expected to align with beyond IDEA and Nebraska Rule 51 compliance?

Not for compliance, however, the Nebraska MTSS Framework is what is used for improvement efforts in Nebraska: https://nemtss.unl.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/23-NeMTSS_Framework.pdf

25 What is the anticipated budget range for this project?

The Nebraska Department of Education has not established a specific budget range for this pilot.

Vendors are expected to propose a cost structure that is commensurate with the scope of work described in the RFP, including technology, professional development, and support services.

All proposed budgets should be fully justified and aligned to the deliverables and outcomes outlined in Section V.

NDE will evaluate cost proposals in accordance with the RFP evaluation criteria to ensure the proposed approach is both cost-effective and sustainable.

26 Will multiple vendors be awarded (e.g., one for technology, one for PD), or is NDE seeking a single comprehensive solution?

NDE is seeking a single comprehensive solution.

27 For cost proposals, may vendors present tiered pricing based on the number of districts/schools ultimately selected?

Yes. Nebraska will start by selecting one pilot district.

28 Are there page limits or formatting requirements for the technical response that are in addition to the PDF formatting?

No.

29 Do we need to use the pricing template as is or could we provide a more detailed breakdown of cost?

A more detailed breakdown of costs would be welcomed.

30 Do you have a specific target for number of schools or specific educators that will be supported by the initial pilot program? Even a range or baseline would be helpful for cost estimates, etc.

Nebraska will start by selecting one pilot district.

31 Our read is that you are NOT interested in a platform that will actually be a comprehensive IEP platform-- is that accurate? Would you ever consider a platform that combines the data-driven tools to create quality IEPs and also would support case management processes and actual IEP creation and compliance requirements?

Nebraska does not have a state IEP system. The expectation would be that the product would be able to integrate with whatever system the individual District would be using selected for the pilot and then any other system of any other district in the state.

32 There are several places that mention coaching-- is this individual coaching at the teacher level? At what cadence in addition to professional development would instructional coaching be provided? And to who?

The expectation would be for coaching on the product to maximize the district's usage.

33 The website mentions instructional design and delivery-- where along the continuum is the focus for this instructional design and delivery? Cotaught or push-in classes? or more resource/self-contained environments. Are specific evidence-based curricula of interest or is the expectation that teachers are using the platform to design their own lessons and instructional plans?

In a pilot of this scope, the solution would ideally support the full continuum of special education service delivery, not just a single model.

That typically includes:

Co-taught or push-in classes where general and special educators share instructional responsibility.

Resource-room or small-group settings for targeted skill instruction.

Self-contained classrooms for students with more intensive needs.

The goal is to build capacity for high-quality IEPs that drive instruction in all environments where a student’s IEP is implemented.

During the pilot, districts might identify one or two priority settings to start with (for example, co-taught literacy blocks and resource rooms) but the design should be scalable across settings.

34 Is the professional development desired specifically focused on IEP development and implementation or will content-specific professional development for math, literacy, etc. be separated?

Specifically focused on IEP development.