OMME_ML_Compliance_Database_Management_System_RFP.docx.pdf

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS:

Multilingual Learner (ML) Compliance Data Platform

Boston Public Schools Superintendent Mary Skipper

EV00017355

PROJECT SUMMARY:

The Boston Public Schools (BPS) seeks proposals for a districtwide Multilingual Learner (ML) Compliance Data Platform to support the effective management, monitoring, and compliance of ML programs and services. The purpose of this RFP is to solicit proposals from qualified organizations capable of providing a high-quality, cloud-hosted ML management system that can track and report on data elements required by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) to ensure compliance with state and federal laws, regulations, and policies.

RFP SCHEDULE:

EVENT DATE

RFP Issue Date 09/21/2026 12:00PM

Proposal Due Date 10/06/2026 12:00PM

RFP CONTACT INFORMATION:

With the release of this RFP, all communications must be directed in writing via email to the contact person(s) below. No other City employee, consultant, or contractor is empowered to speak for the City with respect to this RFP. Any oral communication is considered unofficial and non-binding to the City.

After the proposal deadline, Vendors should not contact the RFP Coordinator or any other City official or employee, except to respond to a request by the RFP Coordinator.

The RFP contacts are:

Boston Public Schools - Office of Multilingual & Multicultural Education

2300 Washington St. Boston, MA 02119

Haniyah Habib

Email: hhabib@bostonpublicschools.org

The Website for this RFP and related documents is the City of Boston Supplier Portal which you can access via boston.gov/procurement.

All project correspondence will be posted on the Supplier Portal website. It is the responsibility of Vendors to check regularly for updates and any RFP addenda.

mailto:hhabib@bostonpublicschools.org http://boston.gov/procurement

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

PROJECT SUMMARY: 1

RFP SCHEDULE: 1

RFP CONTACT INFORMATION: 2

I. WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR 5

1.1 THE OPPORTUNITY 5

1.2 SCOPE OF WORK 6

1.3 ENTERPRISE TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS 11

1.4 RFP SCHEDULE 26

1.5 THE RFP PROCESS 26

II. RFP DETAILS 28

2.1 ADDENDA TO THIS RFP 28

2.2 NOTICES REGARDING PROPOSALS 28

2.3 CONTRACTS RESULTING FROM THIS RFP 28

2.4 WHAT TO DO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS/RFP CONTACT 29

III. HOW WE CHOOSE 30

3.1 RULE FOR AWARD 30

3.2 MINIMUM EVALUATION CRITERIA 31

3.3 COMPARATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA 34

IV. YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL 38

4.1. COVER PAGE 39

4.2. RESPONSIBILITY AND RESPONSIVENESS 39

4.3. RESPONSE TO SCOPE OF WORK 40

4.4. REFERENCES 40

4.5. CERTIFICATIONS 41

V. YOUR PRICE PROPOSAL 43

5.1 PRICE PROPOSAL (REQUIRED) 44

5.2 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (OPTIONAL) 44

VI. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS 45

6.1 CHECKLIST FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSAL 46

6.2 SUBMITTING PROPOSAL VIA BOSTON’S SUPPLIER PORTAL 47

6.3 SUBMITTING VIA MAIL / PHYSICAL DELIVERY 48

VII. APPENDICES 50

APPENDIX 1: RFP TERMS AND CONDITIONS 50

APPENDIX 2: CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS 53

APPENDIX 3: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 54

I. WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR

1.1 THE OPPORTUNITY

The Boston Public Schools (BPS) seeks proposals for a districtwide Multilingual Learner (ML) Compliance Data Platform to support the effective management, monitoring, and compliance of ML programs and services.

The purpose of this RFP is to solicit proposals from qualified organizations capable of providing a high-quality, cloud-hosted ML management system that can track and report on data elements required by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) to ensure compliance with state and federal laws, regulations, and policies.

BPS intends for this system to serve as the district’s primary ML data management platform. The selected vendor must demonstrate the qualifications, functionality, and capacity necessary to support full districtwide implementation. Contracts will be awarded to the vendor(s) offering the most advantageous proposal in accordance with the criteria outlined in this RFP.

The platform must streamline reporting and monitoring processes while maximizing the effective use of data by educators and staff across all school sites and central offices. Additional details and requirements are described throughout this RFP.

In order to both comply with state and federal policies regarding Multilingual Learner education as well as to better serve this integral group of students within our district, BPS believes it is imperative to establish a partnership to enhance and supplement the current Student Information System (SIS). Procurement of a compatible ML Data Management Platform will allow all staff working with MLs to have timely and actionable student information available to them in order to set student English Language Development (ELD) goals and develop individualized student plans that are aligned with the WIDA English language proficiency standards, track student progress as it relates to English language development, connect English language proficiency assessment data to instructional tools including grouping and specific instructional strategies. Additionally, this software will allow the district to build efficient and resilient systems of monitoring and reporting that are required to satisfy compliance with the Department of Elementary and Secondary education.

For the purpose of this RFP, the term Multilingual Learner (ML) and English Learner (EL) can be used interchangeably.

This RFP is open to any vendor who would like to respond, and the City encourages participation from small, local, minority-owned, women-owned, and veteran-owned businesses. To support equality of opportunity for these businesses, we also encourage respondents to solicit for the subcontracting of goods and services from certified businesses. The City’s directory of certified businesses is available at cityofboston.gov/slbe/search.

Successful proposers will be awarded a one-year contract with two one-year options for renewal at the sole discretion of the awarding authority.

1.2 SCOPE OF WORK

Boston Public Schools (BPS) currently manages Multilingual Learner (ML) data, compliance documentation, service tracking, and instructional supports primarily within a cloud-based platform, with a limited number of supplemental manual processes. BPS seeks a comprehensive, web-based Multilingual Learner (ML) management platform that centralizes multilingual learner program administration, improves operational efficiency, enhances instructional decision-making, and supports federal, state, and District compliance requirements.

The proposed solution shall provide an integrated platform that supports the complete multilingual learner lifecycle from initial identification and screening http://cityofboston.gov/slbe/search through instructional planning, service delivery, compliance monitoring, reporting, and historical record management. The platform needs to be able to generate all documentation required by DESE and translate all mandated family facing paperwork for our nine major BPS languages.

The functional requirements described in this Scope of Work are intended to complement, and not duplicate, the Enterprise Technology Requirements contained in Section 1.3. Technical, security, accessibility, hosting, implementation, support, and infrastructure requirements are addressed separately in Section 1.3.

A. Student Monitoring and Compliance

The proposed solution shall support the complete management of multilingual learner programs by:

● Managing the lifecycle of English Learners (ELs), Pre-EL students (K0/K1), Former English Learners (FELs), and Opt-Out students.

● Automatically identifying students requiring multilingual learner review, monitoring, or intervention based on District-defined criteria.

● Creating, managing, monitoring, and archiving Individual Learning Plans (ILPs).

● Providing a library of instructional goals, classroom supports, intervention strategies, and educator resources to support ILP development.

● Collecting and incorporating parent input into ILPs.

● Tracking ILP goals, interventions, staff responsibilities, progress monitoring, and completion.

● Generating, translating, distributing, and archiving required parent notification letters and multilingual learner forms.

● Managing ELD folders and all required federal, state, and District multilingual learner compliance documentation.

● Supporting structured LEP review workflows, including documentation of review decisions and status changes.

● Automatically initiating multilingual learner screening workflows based on

Home Language Survey responses, enrollment information, prior multilingual learner status, or other District-defined criteria.

● Capturing required screener rationale and maintaining historical screening records, including Pre-IPT, K W-APT, WIDA Screener, LAS Links, native language assessments, and successor assessments.

● Tracking student performance using ACCESS, WIDA, LAS Links, and other approved multilingual learner assessments.

B. Instructional Support

The proposed solution shall support instructional planning and student success by:

● Providing educator-friendly dashboards and comprehensive student profiles.

● Supporting differentiated instruction through actionable student data and customizable instructional planning tools.

● Tracking student growth over time through progress-monitoring tools and longitudinal reporting.

● Supporting evidence-based instructional practices and multilingual learner interventions.

● Allowing educators to document instructional notes, observations, and interventions within student records.

● Integrating relevant instructional information, including applicable language goals from EdPlan or comparable systems, to reduce duplicate data entry where feasible.

C. User Functions and Workflow Management

The proposed solution shall:

● Support District-defined functional roles for teachers, service providers, school administrators, and central office staff, including role-specific workflows appropriate to multilingual learner program responsibilities.

● Allow authorized District administrators to view the platform from another user role for troubleshooting, verification, and quality assurance.

● Allow authorized users to upload, organize, update, retrieve, and archive multilingual learner documentation, including assessments, ILPs, monitoring forms, compliance records, parent communications, and supporting documentation.

● Generate automated reminders and notifications for required actions, upcoming deadlines, and multilingual learner compliance activities.

● Provide configurable electronic workflows supporting:

○ Initial multilingual learner identification and screening

○ Newcomer Assessment and Counseling Center (NACC) intake documentation and workflow management

○ Individual Learning Plans (ILPs)

○ Former EL monitoring

○ Opt-Out documentation

○ SLIFE instructional planning and program modifications

○ Parent notification letters

○ EL Progress Reports

○ District-specific multilingual learner forms and approval workflows

● Allow upload and storage of equivalent out-of-state multilingual learner documentation and assessment records.

D. Reporting, Analytics, and Automated Monitoring

The proposed solution shall provide:

● Interactive dashboards and visualizations at the student, school, regional, and district levels.

● Drill-down reporting capabilities with configurable filters.

● Visualizations of multilingual learner performance, compliance status, assessment results, instructional services, and student growth.

● Downloadable reports in commonly used formats.

● Automated compliance monitoring, validation, and error checking.

● Configurable alerts identifying missing documentation, compliance concerns, required actions, and upcoming deadlines.

● Dashboard indicators identifying newly enrolled students requiring multilingual learner review or screening.

● The ability for authorized users to save and share dashboards and visualizations to support instructional planning and collaboration.

E. Data Management and Integration

The proposed solution shall:

● Support approximately 45,000 enrolled students while maintaining responsive performance for districtwide multilingual learner operations.

● Maintain multilingual learner records, including demographics, enrollment, instructional services, schedules, language proficiency, assessments, compliance documentation, and historical records.

● Store and retain active and archived multilingual learner records, including ILPs, FEL monitoring forms, parent notification letters, Opt-Out forms, Seal of Biliteracy documentation, Edwin Analytics reports, and related compliance documentation.

● Support exchange of multilingual learner program data using Ed-Fi standards or equivalent open standards.

● Synchronize multilingual learner demographic, enrollment, scheduling, assessment, and program data with District systems, including Aspen/SIS, Panorama, and other approved data sources.

● Support District-specific mapping of Ed-Fi and vendor data elements where necessary.

● Migrate active and historical multilingual learner records from the District's current platform.

● Support District customization of multilingual learner forms, reports, dashboards, data visualizations, and approved bulk data imports.

F. Vendor Qualifications and Performance Expectations

Boston Public Schools will evaluate the proposed solution based on its demonstrated ability to:

● Reduce administrative workload through workflow automation and elimination of duplicate data entry.

● Improve multilingual learner compliance monitoring and reporting.

● Provide timely, accurate, and complete documentation supporting federal, state, and District reporting requirements.

● Increase visibility into multilingual learner services, instructional supports, and student progress.

● Support data-informed instructional decision-making.

● Support District multilingual learner operational workflows and interoperability with existing student information systems.

● Demonstrate successful implementation of comparable multilingual learner management systems serving school districts of similar size and operational complexity.

Proposers shall provide evidence of successful implementations of comparable scale, describe relevant customer deployments, and demonstrate how the proposed solution satisfies the functional requirements identified in this Scope of Work.

1.3 ENTERPRISE TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS

1.3.1 Applicability and Technology Review

These requirements establish the standard technical requirements for technology procurements conducted by or on behalf of Boston Public Schools and shall be incorporated into applicable technology solicitations as determined by the Office of Technology.

Offerors shall address each applicable requirement identified in this section as part of their proposal response.

Technology solutions proposed under this solicitation are subject to review by the Boston Public Schools Office of Technology.

Selection of an Offeror does not authorize implementation or production use of the proposed technology solution.

Implementation of any technology solution resulting from this solicitation is subject to completion of the Office of Technology's technical review process and satisfaction of the applicable Enterprise Technology Requirements. No technology solution shall be implemented, connected to District systems or networks, exchange District data, or be placed into production until the Office of Technology has confirmed that the applicable requirements have been satisfied.

The Office of Technology reviews proposed technology solutions to determine whether they can be securely implemented, effectively supported, and sustainably operated within the District's technology environment.

1.3.2 Technical Requirements

Offerors shall describe how the proposed solution satisfies the following requirements.

A. Identity and Access Management

Mandatory Requirements The proposed solution shall:

● Support secure authentication.

● Support role-based access controls.

● Support secure user deprovisioning.

● Maintain administrative audit logging.

● Support integration with District-approved identity providers.

Preferred Capabilities

The proposed solution should:

● Support Single Sign-On (SSO).

● Support SAML 2.0, OAuth 2.0, OpenID Connect, or equivalent industry standards.

● Support automated user provisioning.

● Support Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA).

Required Technical Response

Describe the authentication methods, identity provider compatibility, provisioning and deprovisioning capabilities, and any limitations.

B. Integration and Interoperability

Mandatory Requirements

The proposed solution shall:

● Support secure import and export of District data.

● Provide documented methods for exchanging data with other enterprise systems. Support standards-based integration where available.

Preferred Capabilities

The proposed solution should:

● Provide REST APIs or equivalent integration capabilities.

● Support workflow automation.

● Support recognized interoperability standards appropriate for the proposed solution.

Required Technical Response

Describe available APIs, integrations, reporting capabilities, data exchange methods, import/export capabilities, and identify any middleware, manual processes, or additional software required.

C. Data Governance, Security, and Privacy

Mandatory Requirements

The proposed solution shall:

● Protect District data using industry-standard security practices.

● Recognize Boston Public Schools as the owner of all District data.

● Support secure export of District data.

● Support secure deletion of District data upon request or contract termination. Execute the Boston Public Schools approved Data Privacy Agreement, or another mutually acceptable agreement approved by Boston Public Schools, prior to the exchange of District data.

Preferred Capabilities

The proposed solution should:

● Maintain SOC 2 Type II or equivalent independent security assessment.

● Maintain documented incident response procedures.

● Maintain documented disaster recovery and business continuity capabilities.

● Provide customer-accessible audit logging.

Required Technical Response

Describe:

● Data governance practices

● Encryption methods

● Security monitoring

● Incident response procedures

● Disaster recovery and business continuity capabilities

● Security certifications

● Any subcontractors or subprocessors with access to District data

D. Accessibility

Mandatory Requirements

The proposed solution shall comply with applicable federal and state accessibility requirements.

Preferred Capabilities

The proposed solution should:

● Maintain a current VPAT.

● Support WCAG 2.1 AA or newer.

● Support screen readers.

● Support keyboard navigation.

● Incorporate Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles, where appropriate.

Required Technical Response Describe accessibility features, testing practices, accommodations, and available accessibility documentation.

E. Technical Requirements

Mandatory Requirements

The Offeror shall identify all technical requirements necessary to implement and operate the proposed solution.

Required Technical Response

Identify:

● Supported browsers and operating systems

● Mobile compatibility

● Hardware requirements

● Required URLs, domains, IP addresses, firewall allowlists, ports, proxy configurations, browser extensions, client software, or other infrastructure dependencies

● Any licensing prerequisites, required third-party software, integrations, subscriptions, or other external dependencies necessary to implement or operate the proposed solution

F. Artificial Intelligence (If Applicable)

Mandatory Requirements

If the proposed solution includes Artificial Intelligence (AI) functionality, the

Offeror shall disclose:

● AI capabilities

● AI providers or models utilized

● Whether District data is used to train AI models

Preferred Capabilities

The proposed solution should:

● Provide administrative controls for AI functionality.

● Support human oversight.

● Provide citation or source attribution, where applicable.

Required Technical Response

Describe AI functionality, governance controls, and administrative settings. If no AI functionality is included, state that no AI capabilities are included.

G. Implementation and Support

Mandatory Requirements

The Offeror shall provide implementation and ongoing support sufficient to deploy, maintain, and support the proposed solution.

Preferred Capabilities

The proposed solution should include:

● Dedicated implementation resources

● Customer Success or Account Management

● Administrator and end-user training

● Technical documentation

● Service Level Agreements (SLAs)

Required Technical Response

Describe the implementation methodology, project management approach, testing, training, technical support model, escalation procedures, and ongoing support.

H. Data Transition and Offboarding Mandatory Requirements

The proposed solution shall support Boston Public Schools' ability to transition to another solution upon contract expiration or termination.

Preferred Capabilities

The proposed solution should:

● Export District data in commonly used, non-proprietary formats.

● Export historical records, attachments, metadata, and audit history.

● Support user account deprovisioning.

● Provide transition assistance.

● Support secure deletion of District data.

● Minimize technical or financial barriers to transition.

Required Technical Response

Describe:

● Data export process

● Available file formats

● Transition assistance

● Migration support

● Secure deletion process

● Expected transition timeline

● Any fees associated with transition services

1.3.3 Required Technical Response

To facilitate the technical evaluation of proposals, Offerors shall include a dedicated section titled Enterprise Technology Requirements Response.

Responses shall:

● Follow the order of the requirements presented in this section.

● Clearly describe how the proposed solution satisfies each requirement.

● Identify any limitations, exceptions, or dependencies.

● Identify any additional software, licensing, hardware, professional services, or third-party products required.

● Reference supporting documentation where applicable.

If the proposed solution does not satisfy one or more Mandatory Requirements, the Offeror shall clearly identify each exception, explain why the requirement cannot be met, describe any available alternative approach, and identify any associated operational, technical, security, or financial impacts to Boston Public Schools.

Responses shall be specific to the proposed solution and shall not rely solely on marketing materials, brochures, or hyperlinks.

Failure to provide sufficient information to evaluate these requirements may result in a lower technical evaluation score.

1.3.4 Supporting Documentation

Upon request, Offerors shall provide supporting technical documentation, as applicable, including:

● Architecture diagrams

● API documentation

● Security documentation

● Privacy documentation

● VPAT

● SOC 2 Type II reports or equivalent independent security assessments

● Disaster recovery and business continuity documentation

● Artificial Intelligence governance documentation

1.3.5 Technical Evaluation

The Office of Technology will evaluate the technical merits of the proposed solution, including, but not limited to:

● Technology architecture

● Cybersecurity

● Data governance and privacy

● Identity and access management

● Accessibility

● Integration and interoperability

● Artificial Intelligence (if applicable)

● Implementation readiness

● Vendor support capabilities

● Long-term supportability

● Total cost of ownership

Boston Public Schools reserves the right to request demonstrations, technical discussions, reference checks, or additional supporting documentation as part of the evaluation process.

Boston Public Schools Technical Specifications

Category Options

BPS

Requirement Vendor Response Required

Authentication GSuite Preferred Describe method of integration

How will students and staff login to the application?

Clever Preferred Confirm compatibility

SAML Preferred Confirm compatibility

Active Directory Accepted Confirm compatibility

Standalone accounts

Prohibited

Data Interoperability Clever

Preferred Describe implementation

If your application requires data sharing, what is the protocol that will be used to transfer data?

One Roster API Preferred Provide integration method

One Roster CSV Accepted Describe standards used

Ed-Fi 3.2 Preferred Describe standards used

Custom CSV ETL

Data Security Massachusetts Student Data

Privacy Preferred Describe standards used

How is our student and staff information protected in your system?

Organizational data sharing agreement

Accepted Describe standards used

Parental Approval

Accepted Describe standards used

Users agree to vendor's Terms of Service

Email Security DMARC Compliance

Required Describe standards used

Accessibility

Vision Supports (screenreader, enlarged text, contrast, table of contents/nav)

Preferred Describe standards used

How does your platform provide accessibility for

Hearing Supports

(captioned Preferred Describe standards used all learners? videos, transcript, adjust volume)

Mobility Supports (mice, keyboard nav, table of contents to exit/move around)

Preferred Describe standards used

Literacy Supports (language options, picture/video, TTS, STT, dictionary, word prediction)

Preferred Describe standards used

Cognitive Supports

(simplify text, picture/video, vocabulary, ease of navigation)

Preferred Describe standards used

Comprehensive document on assistive technology features linked here.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1MoMFC30v_ZFFhR0qwbD8lNf0POs1np1wOls7AU3a4OQ

Hardware Chromebooks Required Describe standards used

What are the hardware requirements for your application?

Mac OSX Accepted with school approval Describe standards used

Windows 10 Accepted with school approval Describe standards used iOS Accepted with school approval Describe standards used

Other (please specify)

Accepted with BPS approval

Describe standards used

Training & Support

Online training (webinars, self-paced learning) and documentation

Required Describe offerings

How will staff receive support before and after roll-out?

Email support Accepted Describe offerings

Phone support Accepted Describe offerings

On-site training Accepted Describe offerings

1.4 RFP SCHEDULE

EVENT DATE

RFP Released 09/21/2026 12:00PM

Deadline: Questions Due to the City Via email to hhabib@bostonpublicschools.org

09/28/2026 12:00PM

Consolidated Q&A Posted by the City 09/29/2026 12:00PM

Deadline for Proposals See Submission Instructions for details

10/06/2026 12:00PM

1.5 THE RFP PROCESS

THE RFP PROCESS

This RFP contains all the details you will need to submit a proposal in response to this opportunity. Please read this RFP carefully.

Vendors submit proposals by compiling all the requested information and submitting it to BPS prior to the bid deadline (10/06/2026 12:00PM). Vendors must follow the instructions for submitting their proposals as laid out in this RFP.

Proposals must be signed and complete, and BPS will not consider proposals that are submitted late.

After you have submitted your proposal, the contact you listed in your proposal will receive periodic email updates to let you know:

● If your application has been received

● If your proposal has been awarded or denied the contract

● If we need any follow up information.

BPS will evaluate all proposals according to the process laid out in this RFP. It will then notify the successful bidder(s) by the listed Contractor Selection Date (10/16/2026).

If your proposal is successful, you will need to enter into a contract with BPS before beginning work. No work may be done before a contract is signed.

II. RFP DETAILS

2.1 ADDENDA TO THIS RFP

Any official clarifications or addenda to this RFP will be posted to the RFP website (boston.gov/procurement.) Vendors are responsible for checking this website and incorporating any updates into their proposals.

2.2 NOTICES REGARDING PROPOSALS

Please note that all proposals will be public record. Do not submit confidential information in your bid.

BPS may cancel this RFP, or reject in whole or in part any and all bids, if the District determines that cancellation or rejection serves the best interests of the District.

This RFP is open to any vendor who would like to respond. We look forward to receiving your proposal.1

2.3 CONTRACTS RESULTING FROM THIS RFP

The term of the contract will be 1 year with 2 one-year options to renew, running from the date of execution.

1 This RFP is open to any vendor who would like to respond, and the City encourages participation from small, local, minority-owned, women-owned, and veteran-owned businesses. To support equality of opportunity for these businesses, we also encourage respondents to solicit for the subcontracting of goods and services from certified businesses. The City’s directory of certified businesses is available at https://data.boston.gov/dataset/certified-business-directory.

http://boston.gov/bid-listings/ https://data.boston.gov/dataset/certified-business-directory

Important: By submitting a proposal, each vendor acknowledges that any resultant contract will include the RFP specifications (Appendix 1), Boston’s standard contract terms and conditions (Appendix 2), and its insurance requirements (Appendix 3). The selected vendor(s) should not expect to alter or amend these terms.

2.4 WHAT TO DO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS/RFP CONTACT

Vendors can ask questions in writing by emailing them to Haniyah Habib hhabib@bostonpublicschools.org with RFP number (EV00017355) in the subject line.

Before the proposal deadline, all communications must be emailed to Haniyah Habib hhabib@bostonpublicschools.org with RFP number (EV00017355) in the subject line.2,3

3 After the proposal deadline, Vendors should not contact the RFP Coordinator or any other City official or employee about this RFP, except to respond to a request by the RFP Coordinator.

Vendors may continue to contact City officials and employees about issues unrelated to this RFP.

2 No other City employee, consultant, or contractor is empowered to speak for the City with respect to this RFP. Any oral communication is considered unofficial and non-binding to the City.

III. HOW WE CHOOSE

BPS will evaluate your proposal based on two sets of criteria: minimum evaluation criteria and comparative evaluation criteria.

3.1 RULE FOR AWARD

The contract will be awarded to one responsible and eligible bidder whose proposal represents the best value to BPS and meets the responsibility and eligibility criteria below.

3.2 MINIMUM EVALUATION CRITERIA

First, we will review all proposals to see if they meet the submission requirements listed below.

MINIMUM EVALUATION CRITERIA 1: SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

- Did the vendor submit the proposal by the deadline, appropriately and truthfully?

- Did the vendor submit separate technical and price proposals (with no price information in the technical proposal)? Note: Any technical proposal that includes price information will be disqualified from consideration.

- Did the vendor submit all the necessary forms and documentation requested in this RFP?

We will then review the proposals against the minimum evaluation criteria listed below. These criteria reflect the standards that the City considers essential for this contract. We will rate any vendor that does not meet these minimum criteria as “not responsive” and they will not be further considered.

MINIMUM EVALUATION CRITERIA 2: CATEGORY DESCRIPTION

1. Vendors must demonstrate experience providing multilingual learner data management, compliance monitoring, instructional support, and student information platforms to at least five (5) public school districts or educational agencies comparable in size, diversity, or complexity to large urban school districts.

2. Vendors must demonstrate a minimum of five (5) years of experience providing multilingual learner management platforms supporting one or more of the following domains: multilingual learner identification and screening, English language proficiency assessment data management, ESL service tracking, Individual Learning Plan (ILP) management, Former English Learner (FEL) monitoring, compliance documentation, reporting and analytics, and instructional planning tools.

3. Vendors must provide platforms that align with applicable federal and state requirements, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, the Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA), ESSA, Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education multilingual learner requirements, and Boston Public Schools multilingual learner compliance requirements.

4. Vendors must demonstrate compliance with all applicable student data privacy and security laws and regulations, including FERPA and applicable state privacy requirements, and must ensure secure data storage, transmission, access controls, and audit logging.

5. Vendors must agree to execute confidentiality, non-disclosure, and data-sharing agreements required by Boston Public Schools and the City of Boston.

6. Vendors must provide a secure digital platform that supports single sign-on (SSO) authentication, role-based user access controls, and integration with District-approved systems.

7. All proposed assessments must be currently normed, commercially available, and supported by technical manuals documenting reliability, validity, fairness, sensitivity, specificity, and normative data.

8. All proposed assessments must be available in English. Preference will be given to assessments and supporting materials that are also available in languages commonly represented within Boston Public Schools, including but not limited to Spanish, Portuguese, Vietnamese, Haitian Creole, Cape Verdean Creole, Chinese, French, and Somali.

9. Vendors must provide platform tools that support multilingual learner program stakeholders, including educators, multilingual learner staff, school administrators, and district staff, with appropriate role-based workflows and access.

10.Vendors must provide digital administration, scoring, reporting, and data management capabilities for all proposed assessments.

11. Vendors must provide evidence of the ability to support multilingual learner program administration across multiple school settings, including district, school, and classroom environments, with integration and data exchange capabilities where appropriate.

12.Vendors must demonstrate the capacity to provide implementation support, technical assistance, onboarding, and professional development to district staff throughout the contract period.

13.Vendors must certify that all proposed assessments, scoring systems, digital platforms, and related materials are legally licensed for use in educational settings and comply with all applicable copyright and licensing requirements.

3.3 COMPARATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA

Proposals that have met all minimum evaluation criteria will move to the next stage of evaluation. In this stage, we will evaluate proposals according to the comparative evaluation criteria described below.

For each criteria below there are four possible ratings:

● Highly Advantageous: The Project Team meets MOST or ALL of the qualifications listed.

● Advantageous: The Project Team meets SOME of the qualifications listed.

● Not Advantageous: The Project Team meets FEW of the qualifications listed.

● Unacceptable: The Project Team meets NONE of the qualifications listed.

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA 1: . System Functionality & Integration

● Evaluation will focus on the extent to which the proposed solution provides a fully integrated, end-to-end system that meets all functional requirements.

● Demonstrated ability to manage the full ML lifecycle (identification, ILPs, monitoring, compliance, reporting) within a single unified platform

● Depth and usability of ILP creation, tracking, and progress monitoring tools aligned to WIDA and DESE requirements

● Native integration (not workaround-based) with Aspen/SIS, Ed-Fi, SSO (Clever/GSuite), and Panorama

● Ability to generate, store, and manage all required compliance documents (ILPs, PNLs, Opt-Out, FEL monitoring) within the platform

● Evidence that core features are built-in and not dependent on third-party add-ons or manual processes

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA 2: Data Management, Scalability & Performance

● Evaluation will assess the system’s ability to reliably support a districtwide implementation at scale.

● Proven capacity to manage data for ~45,000+ students with real-time processing and no performance degradation

● Ability to support concurrent users across schools and central office staff without latency issues

● System performance benchmarks (response time, uptime ≥ 99.9%, real-time alerts and dashboards)

● Data architecture supporting large-scale reporting, drill-down analytics,and longitudinal student tracking

● Evidence of successful implementation in districts of comparable size, complexity, and regulatory requirements

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA 3: . Compliance, Automation & Workflow Efficiency

● Evaluation will prioritize how well the system reduces administrative burden while ensuring full compliance.

● Degree of automation in compliance workflows (e.g., ILP triggers, monitoring alerts, error validation, reporting deadlines)

● Built-in safeguards to prevent incomplete or non-compliant submissions

● Ability to automatically generate and track required documentation aligned with federal, state, and BPS policies

● Integration of compliance processes into daily educator workflows (not separate systems)

● Reduction of duplicate data entry and manual tracking through system design

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA 4: .Implementation, Support & User Experience

● Evaluation will assess the vendor’s ability to ensure successful adoption and long-term usability.

● Demonstrated capacity to provide a dedicated support team with ongoing engagement, including regular strategic check-ins with district leadership.

● Clarity, feasibility, and timeline of implementation plan aligned to SY27–28 go-live requirement

● Quality and availability of training (role-based, ongoing, scalable for districtwide staff)

● Strength of technical support model (response times, SLAs, issue resolution within 48 hours)

● Intuitiveness of user interface for educators, administrators, and central office staff

● Evidence of high user satisfaction and adoption rates in comparable districts

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA 5: . Specialized Capabilities & Differentiation

● Ability to provide human-generated translation workflows embedded in the system

● Advanced customization aligned to BPS-specific ML workflows and policies

● Unique features not commonly available in standard ML data systems

● Demonstrated innovation in connecting compliance, instruction, and data systems

IV. YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Your application will be submitted in two parts. The first part (this section) is the Technical Proposal. The Technical Proposal is where you tell us why you are the best candidate for this role.

Do NOT mention pricing in this section. If you include pricing information in your technical proposal your proposal will be rejected in its entirety.

Why can’t you include price in the technical proposal? The law requires that we look at the technical and pricing proposals separately. This allows us to first determine who would be the best at implementing the project, without considering price. Next, we consider price proposals. Once both technical and price proposals are evaluated, we choose the proposal that provides the best overall value.

Your technical proposal should consist of the following sections (each detailed in the following pages). Your technical proposal should be submitted as one document that addresses all components listed below.

● (4.1) Cover Page

● (4.2) Responsibility and Responsiveness

● (4.3) Response to Scope of Work

● (4.4) References

● (4.5) Certifications

● (4.6) Standard Contract Forms

4.1. COVER PAGE

Please include a cover page as the first page of your technical proposal.

COVER PAGE

RFP Title and Number

Primary Organization Name

Contact Information Name

Title

Address

Email

Phone

A brief introduction highlighting why you would be a good partner for the City on this project (4-5 sentences).

4.2. RESPONSIBILITY AND RESPONSIVENESS

Please include a brief narrative describing how you meet each of the minimum evaluation criteria (see section 3.2). This section is where you explain how your solution meets or exceeds our needs. Please provide us with a narrative that explicitly describes how your proposed assessment package meets our needs, with specific references to the Scope of Work and the criteria laid out in the Evaluation Criteria

● Include price as an evaluation criteria

● In technical proposal, request list of

● assessments and their quality

4.3. RESPONSE TO SCOPE OF WORK

This section is where you tell us how your solution meets or exceeds our needs by answering the questions/prompts below. Feel free to use anything (e.g. graphics, links to your work, etc.) that helps you make your case. To understand how we will evaluate your proposal generally, and this section specifically, see section 3.3, “Comparative Evaluation Criteria.”

4.4. REFERENCES

Please submit three references from school districts similar to BPS who have used your assessments in the past three years. BPS may contact these references if after evaluation your proposal is determined to best meet BPS’ needs.

REFERENCE FORMAT

Contact for whom work was performed

Reference Name and Title

Phone number

Email

Project Start and End Dates

Brief Project Description

4.5. CERTIFICATIONS

Please provide a copy of this section with your bid, signed and dated. This certification should be signed by the person submitting the proposal.

If you currently have a different level of insurance coverage than that described in Appendix 3 and you do not plan to comply with these insurance requirements, please include an explanation in your proposal why your existing coverage is sufficient to manage the risk of this project.

The undersigned certifies under penalties of perjury that this bid or proposal has been made and submitted in good faith and without collusion or fraud with any other person. As used in this certification, the word "person" shall mean any natural person, business, partnership, corporation, union, committee, club, or other organization, entity, or group of individuals.

The undersigned certifies that s/he has read the standard contract terms in Appendix 2, understands that the winning vendor will be required to accept these terms, and understands that the winning vendor should not plan on being able to alter these terms.

Unless indicated otherwise in their proposal, the undersigned certifies that the firm they represent either currently complies or will plan to comply with the Insurance Requirements in Appendix 3 by the date of contract signing, and will provide documentation of such coverage to BPS.

The undersigned certifies that, to the best of his knowledge, s/he has reviewed both this RFP and any additional official addenda before submitting his bid.

Signature:

Name:

Title:

V. YOUR PRICE PROPOSAL

● IMPORTANT: The Price Proposal (and all pricing information) MUST be submitted separately from the remainder of the proposal. No price information may be included in the Technical Proposal. If you do not separate all pricing information from your Technical Proposal, your proposal will be rejected.

● Please note:

- The total price will be used to compare price proposals.

- In the price proposal, the City asks that you provide detailed pricing for all deliverables in the SOW with the understanding that the deliverables and quantities of goods and services the City notes in this RFP are estimates only and that the final SOW may change during contract negotiations between the City and the selected vendor(s).

- Labor and delivery are assumed to be included in the price.

- Equipment cost for required proprietary equipment must be noted and included in the price proposal (e.g., tooling for maintenance, software/firmware subscription).

- No additional charges will be allowed, unless they are included in your Price Proposal, including travel and related lodging, subsistence, miscellaneous (ad-hoc) expenses or other expenses.

- Any taxes due will be assumed to be included in your price of services.

Boston is exempt from federal excise taxes (Federal Exemption No.

A-108-328) and from Massachusetts sales and use taxes (Certificate No. E-046-001-380). Exemption certificates will be provided, if requested, following the award.

- The vendor will bear the onus of any errors made in pricing the services (e.g., omitting a component of the services).

5.1 PRICE PROPOSAL (REQUIRED)

Please provide a total price for the complete package of services proposed using the pricing worksheet below. Pricing should be inclusive of all assessment tools, digital platforms, scoring and reporting systems, implementation costs, technical support, training, professional development, licensing fees, subscriptions, and any additional costs associated with the proposed solution.

Vendors should provide detailed pricing for all products and services included in the proposal, including any optional components, add-on features, or tiered pricing structures. Pricing should reflect Year 1 annual costs. All pricing must be submitted separately from the Technical Proposal.

OMME ML Compliance Database Management System Pricing.xlsx

5.2 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (OPTIONAL)

You have the option (but are not required) to attach additional information describing any costs that don’t fit into the above template, to describe the reasoning behind your pricing, or to state any assumptions you made while filling out the template.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MJEBu4NhFZAFBBPYpwsfMF_xJZ3jCPSW/edit?gid=1668094675#gid=1668094675

VI. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

To be considered responsible and eligible, you must submit a complete proposal prior to 10/06/2026 12:00PM.

Complete applications can be submitted in two ways:

● Electronically, through the City of Boston Supplier Portal; or

● Physically, by mail or physical delivery.

Complete instructions for each of these methods are provided below. The City does not accept proposals submitted by email or by any other means.

Applicants often run into technical issues with the City of Boston Supplier Portal. We strongly recommend submitting your proposal in advance of the deadline to allow for enough time to navigate any technical issues you may have.

The City will NOT be able to consider proposals that are submitted late or that do not follow these guidelines.

6.1 CHECKLIST FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSAL

This checklist is for your use only; you do not need to submit this checklist along with your proposal. Respondents are strongly advised to complete the checklist before submitting their proposal to avoid disqualification. Your completed proposal should include:

CHECKLIST ITEM

COMPLETE

IMPORTANT: Submit separate technical and price proposals. (Do NOT include any price information in your technical proposal, otherwise your proposal will be rejected.)

A. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Included a cover page with all required information (section 4.1) II.

Included a narrative describing responsibility and responsiveness (section 4.2)

Included a narrative your response to the Scope of Work (section 4.3) Included required references (section 4.4) Included required certifications (section 4.5)

B. PRICE PROPOSAL

Provided detailed budget and pricing (section 5.1) Provided additional information about pricing proposal (optional, section 5.2)

6.2 SUBMITTING PROPOSAL VIA BOSTON’S SUPPLIER PORTAL

Vendors can submit a proposal electronically through the Supplier Portal. You can access the Supplier Portal from boston.gov/procurement at the Supplier Portal link.

We do not accept proposals submitted via email or other electronic communication.

To submit using the Supplier Portal, follow the steps on this website https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/embed/e/entering_a_bid_on-line_1.

pdf. Below is a summary of those steps:

- REGISTER (If you are not yet registered as a “bidder” on the Supplier Portal)

- https://www.boston.gov/departments/procurement/how-use-suppli er-portal provides step-by-step instructions to register.

- FIND EVENT:

- Log in to your account.

- Click Main Menu > Manage Events and Place Bids > View Events and

Place Bids.

- Enter “EV00017355 into the search box and click the “Search” button.

- Click “Name of the Event.”

- Click “View Event Package.” Here you can download forms and documentation linked to this RFP. We recommend starting with “Main RFP Document File name.”

- Click the ‘OK’ button to return to the ‘Event Details’ page.

- ENTER YOUR BID:

- Click on the ‘Bid On Event’ button.

- Attach or enter your technical proposal, price proposal and forms.

- SUBMIT YOUR BID:

- Once you have responded to all required fields, you may click “Validate

Entries” to confirm if your application is ready to be submitted.

- To submit your bid, click “Submit Bid.”

http://boston.gov/procurement https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/embed/e/entering_a_bid_on-line_1.pdf https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/embed/e/entering_a_bid_on-line_1.pdf https://www.boston.gov/departments/procurement/how-use-supplier-portal https://www.boston.gov/departments/procurement/how-use-supplier-portal

We recommend submitting your proposal at least 24 hours prior to the deadline.4

6.3 SUBMITTING VIA MAIL / PHYSICAL DELIVERY

You may submit hard copies of the Technical and Price Proposals by mail, delivery service, or in person. If you choose to submit a hard copy, you must submit two separate envelopes: a complete Technical Proposal in one sealed envelope and a Price Proposal in a second sealed envelope.

The envelopes should be clearly marked as follows:

ENVELOPE #1 - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

**technical proposal should have absolutely no reference to price**

ENVELOPE #2 - PRICE PROPOSAL

Name of Even: Compliance Database Management System

RFP Number: EV00017355

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Submitted by: [Name of Vendor]

[Date Submitted]

Name of the Event: Compliance Database Management System

RFP Number: EV00017355

PRICE PROPOSAL

Submitted by: [Name of Vendor]

[Date Submitted]

The envelopes should be delivered or mailed to:

MAILING/DELIVERY ADDRESS

Lisa Moore-Procurement Partner…