R26-009 Addendum Number 01.pdf

Addendum Number 01

Date: June 10, 2026

Reference Request For Proposal Number: R26-009 Commodity: Learning Management System (LMS) Dated: May 20, 2026 For Delivery To: Radford University

Agency, Commonwealth of Virginia 501 Stockton Street Radford, Virginia 24142

Proposal Due Date/Time: July 1, 2026

After the Pre-Proposal Conference of June 1, 2026, the following attachements are being provided for our vendors:

1. The Following RFI Responses.

2. The Complete Pre-proposal Call slide deck as presented.

The Following RFI Responses are below:

RFI Questions

1. Continuing Education and Non-Credit Programming Is there a requirement or desire to support self-registration and payment for Continuing Education, IMPACT, or other non-credit programming at Radford University?

Radford Answer: It is not a requirement, please propose any options that you feel would be beneficial.

2. LMS Environment Structure and Pricing Section 4 (Specific Background) indicates that Radford University maintains three production environments (Primary, Continuing Education, and IMPACT), along with associated test environments.

a. Does the University expect these to be hosted as separate standalone cloud environments under separate URLs, or as a single environment utilizing administrative segmentation (e.g., sub-accounts/sub-organizations)?

Radford Answer: Currently there are separate testing URLs for each of the production environments and we anticipate keeping that structure.

b. For the five-year pricing proposal, should user volumes be calculated collectively across all environments, or should pricing be broken out by environment?

Radford Answer: Pricing should be broken out separately for each environment.

3. Migration vs. Optimization Requirements Section 8 (Implementation, Migration, and Transition) requests responses addressing both "Migration to a New Platform" and "Reconfiguration or Optimization of an Existing Platform."

a. Should the optimization/reconfiguration requirement be interpreted as applicable only to the incumbent vendor?

Radford Answer: No, the university wants to ensure optimization/reconfiguration has the latest security design as well as updated versions for all integrations.

4. Encryption Key Management Attachment E, Section 5(g), states that the University may elect to provide its own encryption key for data at rest.

a. Is cloud-native Bring Your Own Key (BYOK) / KMS integration a mandatory requirement at launch?

Radford Answer: No.

b. Or is institutional key control currently satisfied through standard SaaS data segregation and encryption controls?

Radford Answer: Yes.

5. SWEAP Assessments Integration Attachment A lists SWEAP Assessments among the University's current solutions.

Could the University clarify whether SWEAP is:

a. Integrated directly with the LMS through an LTI framework and gradebook integration, or

b. Utilized as an external standalone solution accessed through links or redirection? Radford Answer: The SWEAP Assessments Integration was setup through direct links.

6. Cooperative Purchasing Pricing Sheets Section 6 and Attachment F reference the VASCUPP Zone Map.

a. If a vendor offers a single national higher-education pricing structure that applies uniformly across all zones:

b. Is it still necessary to submit nine separate pricing sheets?

Radford Answer: No, it is not necessary

c. Or will a single Attachment I Pricing Schedule satisfy the requirement?

Radford Answer: One Pricing sheet will satisfy.

7. Proposal Organization Requirements Section 12.B.3 (Organization) requests that vendors organize responses according to the RFP, repeat the requirement text, and reference paragraph numbers throughout the proposal.

Because vendors are also required to complete Attachment B (Learning Management System RFP Requirements Matrix):

a. Would the University accept a proposal structure that relies on a completed Attachment B matrix, detailed narrative responses, and a clear table of contents without duplicating the full RFP text throughout the proposal volume?

Radford Answer: The University will accept proposals that do not duplicate the RFP text. You are expected to organize your proposal and reference sections appropriately for ease of evaluations.

8. Please clarify the scope of the requirement for "reconfiguration or optimization of an existing platform" on Page 8. What specific activities, deliverables, and expected outcomes are envisioned, and to what extent should proponents assume platform redesign, workflow/process optimization, configuration changes, or technical architecture modifications are included in scope?

Radford Answer: The university wants to ensure optimization/reconfiguration has the latest security design as well as updated versions for all integrations.

9. Microcredentialing and CBE Is microcredentialing currently part of the University's competency-based education strategy, or is the University evaluating this capability for future expansion?

Radford Answer: It is currently a part of the university’s CBE and currently we are not planning for future expansion.

10. Video Platform Strategy Is Radford University interested in or open to replacing Kaltura as its video management solution as part of this procurement, or does the University anticipate retaining Kaltura regardless of LMS selection?

Radford Answer: We are open to other solutions you would like to propose.

11. Please clarify the approximate number of existing Brightspace course shells (active and historical) and whether bulk export packages (IMSCC or D2L Capture) will be provided by the University or must be extracted by the vendor?

Radford Answer: Extracted by vendor; approximate number of existing courses will extend over a 5 year period, however the University is currently investigating further expansion of that requirement.

12. What is the total anticipated number of unique LMS users (students, faculty, staff, continuing-ed learners) and the desired concurrency SLA for peak periods?

Radford Answer: This information can be found in our public facing Fact Book https://ir.radford.edu/electronic-fact-book/. The university cannot answer concurrency numbers at this time.

13. Beyond Banner ILP and the tools listed in Attachment A, are there any custom or home-grown LTI integrations that must be preserved or rebuilt in the new LMS?

Radford Answer: No, we have not created any homegrown LTI integrations.

14. What semester is the first cohort expected to run fully on the new LMS, and is there flexibility for phased roll-out by program?

Radford Answer: We currently anticipate beginning implementation and integration November/December 2026 with a roll out to campus summer of 2027.

15. Does Radford require current SOC 2 Type II or ISO 27001 certification at proposal time, or is certification attainment post-award acceptable?

Radford Answer: Yes, before we can approve any hosted software solution, we must have a current SOC 2 Type II and HECVAT for security review.

16. What is the explicit maximum concurrent user concurrency anticipated on the LMS during peak examination periods (e.g., final exams week)? Page 4,5

Radford Answer: The university cannot answer this at this time.

17. Does the estimated 9,000 user count encompass strictly active enrollments, or must the system license alumni and continuing education populations? Page 5

Radford Answer: Access to the current LMS is determined by role. Alumni are not given access to the current LMS. However, data retention by the Library of Va requires alumni data to be retained. Continuing education populations is understood to be active users.

18. What is the historical year-over-year storage growth rate for heavy multimedia content residing within the incumbent Brightspace environment? Page 5, 8

Radford Answer: Do to the current LMS configuration this number is hard to be determined as reused content is treated as newly created content.

19. What is the total allocated storage limit currently utilized by the university for all legacy LMS operations? Page 8

a. Can the university provide a definitive budget ceiling or threshold for the initial Year 1 CapEx implementation phase? Page 10

Radford Answer:A budget range has not been established at this time for this initiative.

20. Does the procurement apparatus allow for multi-year pre-payment discounts to drastically reduce total operational expenditures (OpEx)? Page 10

Radford Answer: Payments and pricing will be part of the negotiation process if your company is selected to move forward. Please propose your best pricing for consideration.

21. What are the specific user licensing thresholds and differentiators regarding adjunct faculty versus full-time, tenured professors? Page 9 https://ir.radford.edu/electronic-fact-book/

Radford Answer: All instructors are treated equally.

22. Are clinical practitioners and preceptors at the Carilion campus treated as standard faculty users within the billing matrix? Page 5

Radford Answer: University clinical practitioners and preceptors at the Carilion campus are treated as standard faculty.

23. Does the university forecast a substantial volume increase in non-traditional or competency-based learners via the IMPACT program over the next 36 months? Page 5

Radford Answer: At this time the university has no forecast for a substantial increase in non-traditional or competency-based learners.

24. Will the financial evaluation scoring (15% weight) favor flat-rate enterprise pricing constructs or strict per-user tiered billing schedules? Page 10, 38

Radford Answer: Financial evaluation scoring will be based on the pricing schedule provided all pricing will be considered at time of negotiation. However all vendors are required to fill out and complete the pricing schedule provided. Additional pricing can be submitted separately.

25. Are there any legacy, hard-coded integrations or customizations within Ellucian Banner that currently operate outside the modern ILP/Ethos framework? Page 5, 8

Radford Answer: No.

26. For the OneRoster 1.1 integration, does the university demand real-time API synchronization, or is delayed, nightly batch processing acceptable? Page 8

Radford Answer:The university would prefer real-time API synchronization instead of nightly batch processing.

27. How frequently are automated grade pass-backs initiated from the LMS to Ellucian Banner during end-of-term grading periods? Page 8

Radford Answer: Grades are initiated by instructor during mid-term and final grading period.

28. Regarding the Technolutions Slate CRM, what specific behavioral telemetry data points are currently being ingested from the LMS to support prospective student models? Page 5

Radford Answer: No LMS data is not being ingested into Slate.

29. Does the integration with EAB Navigate 360 require bidirectional communication pathways, or does the LMS serve strictly as a unidirectional data provider? Page 8

Radford Answer: The LMS serves strictly as a unidirectional data provider. If you have options please propose.

30. How does the university currently map and authenticate non-credit or continuing education users who may not reside in the primary Banner SIS database? Radford Answer: non-credit and continuing education users are maintained in banner.

31. Are there strategic plans to transition from Ellucian Banner to a different modern ERP within the five-year lifecycle of this LMS contract? Page 5

Radford Answer: At this time there is no strategic plan to transition to a different ERP system within the Five-year lifecycle. We do anticipate moving to the Ellucian SaaS.

32. What specific Banner operational tables are utilized to trigger automated course shell generation prior to a new academic semester? Page 5

Radford Answer: It is according to the ILP application and can be discussed during post award of contract.

33. Does the university possess dedicated, in-house API engineers to assist the vendor with the Banner Ethos configuration during Phase 2? Page 8 Radford Answer: Yes

34. Will the new LMS be required to push granular attendance tracking data back into Ellucian Banner for federal financial aid (Title IV) auditing compliance? Page 7,8 Radford Answer: No, not at this time.

35. Beyond Microsoft Entra ID (Azure AD), does the university utilize any secondary identity providers or localized LDAP servers for external guests or contractors? Page 8 Radford Answer: Not at this time.

36. Does the Duo multifactor authentication (MFA) requirement apply natively to mobile application access, or strictly to browser-based LMS logins? Page 8, 28 Radford Answer: Yes

37. Given the university's deployment of AWS for Ellucian Banner, is there a preference for the LMS to reside within a specific AWS availability zone to mitigate latency? Page 8, 28 Radford Answer: United States

38. Does the university intend to route cloud traffic through an enterprise-grade Cloud Provider Interconnect (CPI), or will it rely on standard internet gateways? Page 29 Radford Answer: IT will rely on a standard internet gateway.

39. Must the vendor provide dedicated, localized penetration testing results, or are annual global SOC 2 Type II audit reports sufficient for the CISO? Page 30 Radford Answer: Annual global SOC 2 Type II audit reports sufficient for the CISO. The University is open to working with the vendor on localized penetration testing if needed.

40. Are there strict, automated protocols governing the retention and secure destruction (e.g., NIST SP 800-88) of student records upon graduation? Page 30 Radford Answer: These are outlined by the Library of Virginia.

41. Does the CISO require the vendor to assume indemnification liabilities in the event of an external ransomware breach targeting the cloud infrastructure? Page 29,31 Radford Answer: Yes, but this would need to be negotiated with University legal council before contract award.

42. Regarding the eCampus exclusive contract, what specific transaction and payload data must be passed back from the bookstore storefront to the LMS? Page 15 Radford Answer: Transaction data is stored in Banner and not part of the LMS

43. Does the eCampus integration rely purely on LTI 1.3 Deep Linking, or are there proprietary API calls required for financial transaction processing? Page 8 Radford Answer: Transaction data is stored in Banner and not part of the LMS.

44. Are there any legacy LTI 1.1 tools currently in use by specialized departments that have not yet established a migration path to LTI 1.3 Advantage?

Page 8 Radford Answer: Yes.

45. For the Anthology Ally integration, what alternative format generation limits (API calls per minute) are currently enforced to prevent throttling? Page 5 Radford Answer: The University is unable to answer this question.

46. How does the university currently manage storage quotas for Kaltura video hosting to prevent excessive cloud egress costs? Page 5 Radford Answer: The University’s current license allows for unlimited storage.

47. Does the integration with Zoom require the automated synchronization of cloud recordings directly into the specific chronological LMS course module?

Page 5 Radford Answer: No

48. Are there specialized LTI parameters required for clinical simulation tools utilized exclusively by the College of Nursing? Page 5 Radford Answer: No

49. How is the Watermark CES (Course Evaluations) integration configured to prevent student anonymity breaches during grading periods? Page 5 Radford Answer: Integration is configured via student login.

50. Will the vendor be directly responsible for the licensing costs of Respondus LockDown Browser, or is that managed under a separate university contract? Page 5,15 Radford Answer: This is currently handled by the University and the vendor will not be directly responsible, if you have a different solution you would like to propose that will be evaluated.

51. Are there specific publisher integrations (e.g., Pearson, McGraw- Hill) required natively beyond the eCampus aggregator ecosystem? Page 9 Radford Answer: Some publishers have been vetted ensuring that students do not see a paywall when accessing publisher pages.

52. Can the university provide an estimated total historical data payload (in Terabytes) requiring migration from the Brightspace production environment? Page 8,9 Radford Answer: No, not at this time.

53. Due to Brightspace restrictions on direct SQL access, will the university assist in negotiating temporary API throttling limits with D2L to expedite the data extraction? Page 8 Radford Answer: If a new LMS is selected for the University we expect D2L will be a good partner in the transition.

54. Does the university require the forensic migration of historical student submission files, or only the preservation of the final gradebook structures? Page 8 Radford Answer: If a new LMS is selected for the University we expect D2L will be a good partner in the transition.

55. Will proprietary Brightspace question types (e.g., algorithmic/calculated questions) need to be normalized via QTI 2.1 middleware, or will faculty reconstruct them? Page 9 Radford Answer: The University anticipates some content will need to be recreated. However please refer to Attachment B regarding your implementation project and timeline in your proposal.

56. Is a prolonged "overlap" period planned where both Brightspace and the newly procured LMS run concurrently in production? Page 8 Radford Answer: Please see Question 14 If a new LMS is selected for the University we anticipate D2L will be a good partner in the transition.

57. What specific User Acceptance Testing (UAT) criteria and use cases must be met before CITL signs off on the Phase 3 implementation milestone? Page 8 Radford Answer: This criteria will be negotiated post award.

58. Will the university dedicate internal ITS project managers to interface directly with the vendor's implementation engineering team? Page 8 Radford Answer: Yes

59. During the "Train-the-Trainer" phase, how many internal administrative super-users does the university intend to formally credential? Page 10 Radford Answer: As mentioned the universty currently has 3 production instances. With a maximum number of administrators would be 4 per instance. A maximum number of superusers, if applicable would be 2.

60. Are there specific institutional change-management protocols required to manage faculty resistance to the new pedagogical interface? Page 10 Radford Answer: No

61. What is the university's definitive timeline for officially deprecating the Brightspace platform to a read-only historical state? Page 8 Radford Answer: Please see Question 14 If a new LMS is selected for the University we anticipate D2L will be a good partner in the transition.

62. Does the university explicitly require the vendor to license and provide the K-12 educator pathways curriculum (e.g., Edmentum), or is this strictly optional functionality? Page 5 Radford Answer: No

63. If external curriculum is provisioned, does the university require the vendor to supply licensed remote adjunct instructors to teach these specific online modules? Page 8 Radford Answer: No

64. What are the specific clinical hour-tracking mandates required by the state nursing board that the LMS must log via xAPI? Page 5 Radford Answer: The University’s current LMS does not track those hours.

65. Does the university require specialized Special Education (SPED) interventionists for the IMPACT competency-based programs? Page 5 Radford Answer: No

66. Are there specific Individualized Education Program (IEP) accommodation workflows that must be hard-coded into the LMS accessibility layer? Page 7,16 Radford Answer: No

67. Will the system be required to dynamically generate certificates of completion for continuing education students independent of the Banner SIS? Page 8 Radford Answer: Yes

68. Does the university prefer a decentralized administrative model where individual colleges manage their own template branding autonomously? Page 7 Radford Answer: No

69. Is the adoption of the "Offline-First" capability considered a critical, non-negotiable requirement for serving rural populations in southwest Virginia? Page 7 Radford Answer: No

70. How does the university currently facilitate peer-to-peer pedagogical collaboration outside of standard asynchronous discussion boards? Page 7 Radford Answer: Please see Attachment A.

71. What are the definitive reporting benchmarks and key performance indicators the Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning (CITL) will use to measure the success of the new LMS one year post-launch? Page 7 Radford Answer: Benchmarks will be determined post award.

72. Regarding e-learning, Are you seeking a platform for Faculty to develop their own custom e-learning content? Or are you seeking a vendor that has in-house e-learning development capability? Or both? Radford Answer: This could be both.

73. How many total number of active licenses are required? Radford Answer: This information can be found in our public facing Fact Book https://ir.radford.edu/electronic-fact-book/.

74. What is your target date for having the new LMS live and accessible to users? Radford Answer: Please see Question 14

75. How many years of historical data need to be migrated? How many courses need to be migrated from your current system on average? Radford Answer: The expectation is at least 5 years. The number of courses vary year to year.

76. Who will be responsible for ensuring the LMS is properly implemented? Do you have a dedicated LMS Administrator? Radford Answer: Yes

77. How many team members will be involved in creating content, and do you have a designated administrator? Radford Answer: We have designated administrators.

Instructors create the content.

78. Is pre-built content important to you? If so, what topics are you interested in? Radford Answer: Please propose all topics you would like for us to consider.

79. Who will be responsible for creating company-specific content? Radford Answer: Radford University

80. Who will be in charge of the LMS implementation on your team? Radford Answer: To be determined post award.

81. How many team members are dedicated to this project? Radford Answer: To be determined post award, admins include no less than 7.

82. Will the LMS be managed by the HR or Operations team? Who will be the system owner?

a. What are the top three issues you are currently facing that we can help address? Radford Answer: The University will not address this question. Please refer to Section 1. Purpose, and Section 4. Background and Specific Background.

83. What external authoring tools are you using currently? Radford Answer: Instructors have curated their own content over the years. Some have used: Camtasia, D2L’s Course Builder, and worked with their chosen book publishers.

84. What has been your experience with these tools? Radford Answer: Each tool has its own unique design setup and learning curve. One is not necessarily better than another.

85. Are there any language requirements for the content?

a. What is your budget for this LMS project? Radford Answer: A budget range has not been established at this time for this initiative.

86. Do you have a document management system like SharePoint? Where do you store important documents and SOPs? Radford Answer: Yes, we utilize Microsoft 365 SharePoint.

87. What is your current onboarding process for new hires and is the onboarding training something you want to incorporate in your LMS as a part of onboarding? Radford Answer: HR has their own system for onboarding separate from the LMS.

88. Do you have any coaching or mentorship programs as part of your learning initiatives? Both, the Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning and Information Technology Services lead coaching and training initiatives at Radford University. Radford Answer: Mentorship programs exist, but may be modified according to selected proposals of this RFP.

89. Regarding Section 9.C.11 (Training, Support, and Change Management) and Section 16 (Excessive Downtime): Does Radford University intend to provide first-line (Tier 1) technical support to its students and faculty internally through its own IT Help Desk / CITL? Will the University accept an ongoing support model where the Contractor acts exclusively as Tier 2/Tier 3 support, responding directly to three

(3) designated institutional LMS Administrators rather than the broader student/faculty population? Radford Answer: Yes, Radford intends to provide first-line Tier 1 technical support and will review and negotiate support models you would like to propose.

90. Attachment E, Section 4.b states that the Vendor will not allow access to University Data to subcontractors outside the United States without prior notification. Can the University clarify if this restriction applies strictly to 'live' customer data, PII, and production database environments? Will the University permit offshore company personnel to work on core software application updates, non-production code environments, or generic configurations, provided they have zero access to live student records, production environments, or Personally Identifiable Information (PII)? Radford Answer: Yes, this restriction applies strictly to 'live' customer data, PII, and production database environments. The University will entertain, discuss and negotiate offshore personnel should your company advance to the negotiation stage of our solicitation before award and contract signature.

91. Section 4 (Instructional Tool Ecosystem and Enterprise Systems) details integrations with Ellucian Banner via the Intelligent Learning Platform (ILP) framework, along with several standard LTI tools (Turnitin, Respondus, Kaltura, etc.). Will Radford University accept standard, industry-recognized open-source blocks, plugins, or native API connectors (such as LTI 1.3 certified plugins) to fulfill these requirements? Or is the University anticipating the commission of unique, bespoke custom code integrations explicitly built from scratch for this contract? Radford Answer: Yes, and we are not anticipating the explicitly built from scratch.

92. Section 7 (Administrative, Configuration, and Operational Flexibility) asks vendors to distinguish between configurable, customizable, and extensible components. For platforms built on highly flexible, open-source core frameworks, will the University evaluate configuration via stable core plugins on equal footing with proprietary vendor-configured systems? Radford Answer: Yes

93. Section 10.A (Selection Criteria) allocates 10% of the evaluation weight to SWaM business participation. If an out-of-state prime contractor is not currently certified by the Virginia Department of Small Business and Supplier Diversity (SBSD), what specific spend metrics, targets, or subcontracting commitments within the submitted 'SWaM Procurement Plan' are required to secure the maximum available evaluation points in this category? Radford Answer: To receive the maximum available evaluation points in the SWaM category the proposing vendor, prime Contractor must be registered with SBSD at time of proposal. Submitting a SWaM utilization plan with your proposal with a certified subcontractor will award partial points.

94. Attachment I (Pricing Schedule) requests itemized rates for both remote and on-premises implementation and training services. Does the University have a mandated minimum requirement for on-site/on-premises presence during the migration and transition launch, or will proposals that utilize a 100% remote delivery model be fully accepted and evaluated equally? Radford Answer: The University does not have a mandated minimum requirement. That can be discussed and negotiated at the proper time. We will evaluate proposing remote delivery equally.

95. Our business is a Pennsylvania corporation in good standing. To ensure we are fully compliant with Virginia Code § 2.2-4311.2, does the public body require us to obtain a Virginia Certificate of Authority and provide an SCC ID number for this specific contract before the contract is awarded? Radford Answer: Pursuant to Virginia Code § 2.2- 4311.2, the University requires offerors to comply with all applicable Virginia laws regarding authorization to transact business in the Commonwealth. If your organization is required by Virginia law to be authorized to transact business in Virginia, the required State Corporation Commission (SCC) identification number must be provided prior to contract award. If your organization is not required to be authorized to transact business in Virginia, the statute requires that you provide a statement describing why such authorization is not required. Questions regarding registration requirements should be directed to your legal counsel and/or the Virginia State Corporation Commission.

96. Primary Pain points & User Counts

Clarifying Questions:

a. What are the primary reasons Radford is evaluating LMS alternatives? Radford Answer: Please refer to Section 1. Purpose, and Section

4. Background and Specific Background.

b. What are the primary pain points driving this LMS review (e.g., faculty usability, student experience, analytics, cost, administration, integrations, AI capabilities, support concerns)? Radford Answer: Please refer to Section

1. Purpose, and Section 4. Background and Specific Background.

c. What is the total active user count across all LMS environments? Radford Answer: This fluctuates year-to-year based on enrollment and business models for IMPACT and Continuing Education enrollments. Enrollment and staff information can be found in our public facing Fact Book https://ir.radford.edu/electronic-fact-book/.

97. Migration Scope and Historical Data Context from RFP: The RFP requires a detailed migration strategy encompassing course content, user data, and integrations. It also outlines paths for migrating to a completely new platform or reconfiguring/optimizing the existing environment.

Clarifying Questions:

a. How many years of historical course content must be migrated from Brightspace? Radford Answer: At least 5 years.

b. How many active versus archived courses require migration? Radford Answer: Currently, requirements of data retention is 5 years. The number of courses varies year to year and will be determined post award.

c. Are historical student submissions, grades, discussions, and assessment records expected to be migrated? Radford Answer: Yes

d. Are there any data retention requirements governing historical LMS records?

Radford Answer: Five years of data shall be retained.

e. What is the total estimated storage volume (in Gigabytes or Terabytes) of the course content and user files currently housed within the existing LMS that will need to be migrated? Radford Answer: This has not yet been determined.

f. Will the university's technical team handle the bulk extraction of courses from the existing Brightspace instance (e.g., providing common cartridge or native export zip files), or is the vendor expected to directly extract data via API/database access?

Radford Answer: The vendor is expected to provide this service.

98. System Architecture and Environment Segregation Context from RFP: Radford University currently operates separate environments to serve distinct academic populations, including a Primary instance, a Continuing Education instance (~500 licenses), an IMPACT program instance for competency-based education, and corresponding test environments.

Clarifying Questions:

a. Under the new solution, does the university prefer to maintain completely separate, isolated cloud instances/tenancies for these distinct populations, or are you open to a unified multi-tenant/sub-account architecture with localized administrative controls? Radford Answer: Separate including tests instances.

b. To help us accurately scope user tiers and volume licensing, could the university provide the approximate annual active user counts (or peak concurrent users) for both the Primary instance and the IMPACT program instance? Radford Answer: Primary instance approximate annual active user counts can be found by looking through our factbook (https://ir.radford.edu/electronic-fact-book/) at historical Annual Enrollment as well as Faculty and Staff information. IMPACT program would be approximately 300 per year.

99. Integration Scope and Technical Specifications Context from RFP: The RFP lists several specific third-party instructional tools in its ecosystem, including Respondus, Turnitin, Anthology Ally, Kaltura, VoiceThread, Perusall, eCampus bookstore, Zoom, Watermark, and Top Hat. The Requirements Matrix also notes potential integration needs for a Student Information System (SIS), Human Resources Information System (HRIS), and Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system.

Clarifying Questions:

a. Outside of the Ellucian Banner SIS, does the university have specific HRIS or CRM platforms (e.g., Salesforce, Banner HR) that require native or custom API integrations with the new LMS? Radford Answer: Only Slate and Navigate 360 at this time.

b. Can the university provide a full list of any current publisher-specific integrations or smaller localized tools that must also be supported? Radford Answer: As publisher integrations are fluid, the list includes but is not limited to: Cengage, Hawkes, Macmillian, McGraw Hill, Pearson MyLab, Perusall, Sage Vantage, Stukent. There are no localized tools. Publisher integrations can be discussed during post award of contract.

c. For the listed instructional tools, are all integrations currently using the LTI

1.3 standard, or are there legacy LTI 1.1 setups that will need to be updated during transition? Both

d. Which integrations are considered mandatory at go-live versus desirable post-implementation enhancements? Radford Answer: All current functionality should be available at time of go-live.

e. Is integration with Watermark CES and SWEAP considered mandatory for all vendors? Attachment A identifies some integrations but does not clearly indicate priority levels. Radford Answer: Yes.

f. What competency-based education capabilities are required for the IMPACT program? Radford Answer: The competency-based programs are designed with release conditions to ensure content is understood prior to moving forward to the next level.

100. AI Requirements Clarifying Questions:

a. The RFP references AI-assisted tools and future AI capabilities. Could the university clarify which AI use cases are of greatest interest, such as:

i.Course creation assistance ii.Assessment generation iii.Learning analytics iv.Student support/chatbots

Radford Answer: The University is open to reviewing and evaluating any AI-assisted tools and future AI capabilities you would like to propose. The AI tool will need to be reviewed for IT Security purposes.

b. Does Radford have an institutional policy on AI use in academic settings that vendors should align to? Radford Answer: The University vets all AI components to ensure security and integrity of data. AI components shall not share data for learning capabilities outside of the university’s instance and the university maintains ownership of all AI and university created content.

101. Implementation & Timeline Clarifying Questions:

a. What is the target go-live date for the new LMS environment? Radford Answer: We currently anticipate beginning implementation and integration November/December 2026 with a roll out to campus summer of 2027

b. Has a budget range been established for this initiative? Radford Answer: A budget range has not been established at this time for this initiative.

102. Can the Cost Proposal (Attachment I) be submitted as a separate document along with the response to ensure confidentiality of pricing? Radford Answer: Yes, the Cost proposal can be submitted as a separate document. Please be aware pricing will not be held confidential as a State Agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia our spend is available to the public.

103. Please confirm whether references from our commercial clients where we are delivering similar LMS services (in terms of scope and complexity) are acceptable in lieu of educational or governmental references? Radford Answer: Yes, these will be considered.

104. Is there an incumbent vendor for this requirement, and are they eligible to participate in this RFP? Radford Answer: Please See Section 4 Background, Specific Background. They are eligible to participate.

105. Can we submit exceptions or redlines to the Terms and Conditions as part of the proposal submission? Radford Answer: You may submit exceptions or redlines.

Please not that our General Terms and Conditions are Commonwealth of Virginia standard terms that cannot be changed.

106. What is the expected pricing model - Should pricing be quoted per FTE, per active user, per named user, or per course enrollment? Radford Answer: Financial evaluation scoring will be based on the pricing schedule provided all pricing will be considered at time of negotiation. However all vendors are required to fill out and complete the pricing schedule provided. Additional pricing can be submitted separately.

107. Page 23 indicates that the signed proposal should be returned in a separate envelope. Please confirm whether a signed copy of Attachment C is required at submission, and if yes, whether it can be submitted as a separate document? Radford Answer: Yes a signed copy of Attachment C is required at submission and can be submitted as a separate document however you intend to submit your proposal response.

108. Please confirm whether Attachment E is for reference only, or if it requires a response as part of the submission? Radford Answer: Attachment E is considered our addendum to Terms for Hosted or Cloud services. This will be considered part of the Contract. If you have exceptions or redlines we will consider and negotiate before contract aware.

109. What are the different formats of assessments required? Is there a specific preference or can we recommend? Radford Answer: Discussion posts, quizzes, exams, surveys, assignments, etc. Recommendations are welcome.

110. Given the scope and complexity of this procurement, would the State consider a four (4) week extension to the proposal submission deadline to allow Offerors to submit more complete and competitive responses? Radford Answer: At this time we are not extending our submission deadline.

111. Will the State consider vendor-proposed solutions or architectures that differ from the examples described in the RFP, provided all functional and technical requirements are met? Radford Answer: Yes, The University will consider vendor-proposed solutions, but reserves the right to the final decision.

112. Does the State anticipate conducting a Best and Final Offer (BAFO) phase? Radford Answer: This will be determined during the negotiations.

113. Will post-submission discussions be limited to proposal clarifications, or may limited negotiations occur prior to award? Radford Answer: If your company is selected both post-submission discussion and negotiations will occur with any potential vendor prior to final award.

114. Where will the LMS have to be hosted - Radford or vendor cloud? Is there a preferred Cloud service provider? Radford Answer: The University anticipates the LMS will be vendor cloud hosted and will evaluate the Cloud service provider you have chosen. A recent HECVAT and SOC II Type II are required for our security review.

115. .Will Radford facilitate agreements with other 3rd parties whose tools we have to integrate with? Radford Answer: Any tool you are requested to integrate with by the University we will facilitate the agreement. If you are proposing an alternative tool we would ask you include this in your proposal.

116. The RFP References a “fully developed, widely adopted SaaS solutions. Would Radford consider an open-source LMS platform such as Open edX when delivered as a fully managed SaaS solution by an experienced provider? Radford Answer: What the RFP references is the most preferred, but the University will evaluate your proposal if you decide to respond the RFP.

117. Does Radford require a vendor-owned SOC 2 Type II report, or would equivalent controls and certifications from the underlying cloud infrastructure provider be considered acceptable? Radford Answer: A recent HECVAT and SOC II Type II are required for our security review.

118. Does Radford expect separate development, testing/UAT, staging, and production environments as part of the proposed solution? Radford Answer: Yes, the University expects separate development and testing environments as part of the proposed solutions.