RFP+amendment+1.pdf

600 E Boulevard Avenue, Dept. 201 Bismarck, ND 58505-0440

SOLICITATION AMENDMENT 1

July 17, 2025

Solicitation Number: 201-2025-1000-1 Title: School Data Migration Deadline for Receipt of Proposals: July 30, 2025, 11 AM, C.T.

Solicitation Issued: June 25, 2025

Section One Instructions, Subsection 1.3 RFP Schedule (Approximate) established a Deadline for Submission of Questions and Requests for Clarification. The responses, including any necessary amendments, are as follows:

1. Question:

What was the annual spend for the previous year on this Project?

Response:

There are no previous years on this project.

No Amendment Necessary

2. Question:

If this is a new Contract, What is the annual Budget for this?

Response:

Refer to Section Two – Background, 2.1 Budget

3. Question:

• Are you open to a hybrid delivery model with a mix of offshore and onshore resources?

• Are non-U.S. based (offshore) resources permitted to work on the project, provided that all security and compliance requirements are met?

• Do you accept offshore resources?

Response:

Per the State of North Dakota's IT Standards for Remote Access (https://www.ndit.nd.gov/sites/www/files/documents/Policies/SoND-IT-Standards- Redacted.pdf), remote access to the state network or state data outside the US or US territories is not allowed for team members, contractors, or third parties. Per the State of North Dakota's Data Classification Policy (https://www.ndit.nd.gov/governance/data-classification-policy), the data involved in this project would be classified as Moderate Risk or High Risk.

https://www.ndit.nd.gov/sites/www/files/documents/Policies/SoND-IT-Standards-Redacted.pdf https://www.ndit.nd.gov/sites/www/files/documents/Policies/SoND-IT-Standards-Redacted.pdf https://www.ndit.nd.gov/governance/data-classification-policy

4. Question:

• Work will be onsite or remote

• Will remote access to PowerSchool databases be available, or will on-site work be required at ITD facilities?

• Do you expect the vendor to perform any tasks on-site, or can all work be performed remotely?

Response:

RFP does not mandate onsite work

5. Question:

Can you please give us an extension of 1-2 weeks to submit our proposal?

Response:

As per Section One – Instructions, 1.3 RFP Schedule, the Deadline for Receipt of Proposals (Solicitation Closing) DATE WILL NOT CHANGE, July 30, 2025, by 11 AM, C.T.

6. Question:

Request for a pre-proposal conference.

Response:

No pre-proposal conferences have been scheduled.

7. Question:

How many SIS instances are in scope?

Response:

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, A. Professional Services, A.1 & A.2

8. Question:

Are stored documents in scope?

Response:

Vendors should assume only structured data is in scope.

9. Question:

Can you please confirm which datasets you intend to migrate?

Response:

Refer to Section 3.0 Scope of Work

10. Question:

• How many years of data do you intend to migrate?

• Does NDDPI expect the vendor to migrate any historical or archival data beyond what is in the current PowerSchool/TieNet systems (for example, years of historical grades or special ed records), or only the data in the live systems needed for the new Infinite Campus?

• Could the department confirm whether historical data is to be included as part of the extraction scope? If so, how many years of historical data should the vendor plan to extract?

• Do contractor's extract only a subset of data or the entire database (Like only migrate last 7 years of data) (Overall)

• How many years of historical data must be migrated per LEA, and are there any data retention policy differences between districts?

Response:

Vendors should propose a strategy, and the project team, in conjunction with the awarded vendor, will decide during onboarding.

11. Question:

Can vendors propose a phased rollout (e.g., pilot-first or staggered by region or readiness), or is the State requiring simultaneous migration across all districts and special education units?

Response:

Vendors may propose phased or pilot-first rollouts. The RFP allows flexibility in approach

12. Questions:

• Can the State provide a target start and end date for the project, and clarify whether timelines will be centrally assigned per LEA or managed collaboratively based on readiness? If interim milestones or deadlines are planned, could you outline them?

• Has Infinite Campus already been deployed? If not, what is the planned implementation timeline and anticipated go-live date?

• What are the expected start and end dates for the data migration workstream?

Are there any fixed milestones that the migration team should align to?

• What is the anticipated go-live schedule for Infinite Campus implementations across LEAs, and will it be phased (for example regionally) or all at once?

• Will all schools switch systems at once, or one at a time? Will each LEA have someone to work with contractor's? (Overall)

• Is there a timeline for Infinite campus implementation or is it already implemented (B.1)

• Is there a specific timeline the department is anticipating for this migration to be completed by (B.1)

• Can you provide a draft timeline based on the required deliverables in Section 3.2(C.1)?

• What is the expected start and end date for the LEA implementation phase when Infinite Campus will begin importing the data?

• Will all LEAs transition to Infinite Campus at the same time, or will there be a phased/staggered migration schedule?

• Will all LEAs transition at once, or will the migration be staggered across phases or waves?

• Can the State provide a draft timeline or calendar of major milestones that the vendor’s schedule must align with?

• What is the anticipated contract start and end date for this data migration engagement?

• What is the anticipated contract start and end date for this project?

Response:

Contract start date is approximately August 14, 2025, Vendors must propose a detailed schedule with milestones with a June 30, 2026 go live dated.

Amendment: Delete Section Three, Scope of Work, Contract Deliverables, and Estimated Schedule C.1 paragraph 4 in its entirety and replace with:

Offeror must submit a draft schedule that addresses the deliverables and milestones specifically described in the Scope of Work. The proposed schedule may incorporate other deliverables, work products, and milestones, or work breakdown that the offeror feels are significant in the project. Offeror’s schedule must support a go-live date of June 30, 2026.

13. Questions:

• What are the expectations around post-migration support or warranty from the vendor, if any, after the deliverables are completed and data is handed off?

• While the RFP states that data import will be handled by Infinite Campus, could the department confirm whether the vendor is expected to provide any support to ITD in the event of issues arising during the data load process?

• What type of database is powerschool and Tienet? (Overall)

• Can you share the total number of records being migrated from

Powerschool/Tienet to Infinite Campus (Overall)

• Has the State assessed the technical capabilities of each LEA? Can we receive a categorization (High/Medium/Low) to help prioritize our 'assist vs perform' strategy?

• What is the typical IT staffing at small LEAs? Are we working with dedicated IT staff or teachers wearing multiple hats?

Response:

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, 3.2 Requirements, C.1 Contract Deliverables, and Estimated Schedule This is part of the discovery process.

14. Questions:

• Are all LEAs using the same version of PowerSchool? If not, can the State provide a version breakdown?

• What are the specific PowerSchool database versions across all LEAs, and are there any legacy versions that might require specialized extraction approaches?

Response:

All LEAs are on the same version.

15. Question:

Do all PowerSchool instances reside in the central Bismarck data center, or are some hosted externally?

Response:

All PS instances are located in Bismarck and TIENET is cloud hosted. Refer to Section Two – Background, 2.2 Technical Architecture Overview.

16. Questions:

• Are any third-party PowerSchool plugins or extensions in use that store data relevant to the migration?

• Has the State conducted an audit of PowerSchool plugins/extensions currently in use?

Response:

The awarded vendor will have access to this information in the discovery process.

17. Question:

Can the State provide examples of common custom schema elements used across LEA PowerSchool instances?

Response:

This can be provided to the awarded vendor.

18. Question:

Can the State provide a sample export of PowerSchool data (with sensitive fields removed) to help vendors assess structure, field usage, and data quality expectations?

Response:

No.

19. Questions:

• What technology stack is used to host PowerSchool data, and are there preferred or supported ETL tools?

• Will the State cover any associated tool licensing costs, or are those the vendor’s responsibility?

• Will the vendor be allowed to use North Dakota's existing Azure tenant and resource group for this project?

• Could the department please clarify whether the vendor is expected to provide licenses for data mapping/transformation tools if the design requires it, or if there is a list of tools available for use during the engagement?

• If available, could the department share a list of preferred or supported data mapping/transformation tools that vendors are encouraged to use?

• What Extract and transform tools available for the contractor to use beyond what is listed in the RFP or can we bring our toolset or recommendations (Overall)

• Does the State expect the vendor to provide tools or scripts to automate data cleansing and schema transformation, or is a manual, consultation-based approach acceptable?

• What tools or templates have you successfully used in similar large-scale migration projects?

• Do you have any preferences in terms of technology?

Response:

Vendors may propose tools, licensing is the vendors responsibility unless otherwise negotiated.

20. Question:

What methods are available for extracting data from TieNet (e.g., API, UI export, bulk data)?

Response:

Vendors should propose preferred methods.

21. Questions:

• Will vendors have direct access to TieNet, or will extractions be initiated by LEAs or EduTech staff?

• Will the selected vendor be provided access to the centralized PowerSchool servers (in Bismarck) at the database level, or will each LEA initiate its own data export?

• Regarding TieNet data extraction: Will PowerSchool (the vendor) be providing a full data export of TieNet for all 31 SEUs, or is the expectation that each SEU exports its own data?

• Do schools download TieNet data, or do they need contractor to do it? (Overall)

• Will the awarded vendor be allowed secure access (e.g., VPN, remote desktop) to the centrally hosted PowerSchool servers for the purpose of data extraction?

• Does the TieNet system provide RESTful APIs or only flat file exports?

Response:

Data access will be coordinated with the awarded vendor.

22. Questions:

• Is there a standardized TieNet export format or template?

• Will the data migration team be able to access the data directly from TieNet? If yes, will the data need to be accessed through APIs or can the team connect via

ODBC/JDBC?

• Will the State facilitate vendor access to the TieNet system and documentation to support schema mapping, given it is cloud-hosted on PowerSchool-owned/leased servers?

• Are there any already-defined file format guidelines (e.g., CSV, JSON, XML) or naming conventions for data handoff to Infinite Campus?

Response:

The awarded vendor will receive the TieNet schema.

23. Questions:

• When will the Infinite Campus schema and import templates be made available— before or after contract award?

• What is the required file format for delivery (e.g., CSV, JSON, XML)?

• What format and mechanism will Infinite Campus provide for data import (e.g., CSV templates, API endpoints), and will the vendor have access to an Infinite Campus test environment for validation?

• Could the department provide details on the file format and structure of the template file provided by Infinite Campus for data import? Are there any limitations or known constraints vendors should be aware of?

• Will Infinite Campus give contractor's templates or rules to follow for mapping?

(A.6)

• Will a mapping guide be provided for TieNet data? (A.2)

• If there are customizations made to the source database, can infinite campus make enhancements to accommodate those customizations (A.3/A.5)

• What data fields do you require be extracted from PowerSchool? (i.e.

Student_Name, Student_Number, etc.?)

• Will NDDPI provide the complete Infinite Campus data schema documentation, including field validation rules and business logic constraints?

• Will the State provide access to current PowerSchool/TieNet configurations or schemas in advance, especially for LEAs with customized data schemas?

• Will Infinite Campus provide any tools, templates, or validation utilities for mapping and aligning data to their pre-defined schema? If so, will these be shared with vendors early in the process?

• What file formats are expected or preferred for data hand-off to Infinite Campus (e.g., CSV, XML, SQL dumps)?

Response:

Schemas will be shared with the awarded vendor

24. Questions:

• Are vendors responsible for validating data against Infinite Campus schemas using test tools or import templates?

• How should vendors handle custom or unmapped fields—archive, document, or exclude?

• What is the process for requesting custom fields in the statewide Infinite Campus instance?

Response:

See Section Three – Scope of Work, 3.2 Requirements

25. Question:

• Can vendors contact Infinite Campus directly to clarify schema/import questions, or must all communication go through the State?

• Will subject matter experts (SMEs) for PowerSchool, TieNet, and Infinite Campus be available to the vendor for consultation during the course of the project?

• Will the contractor get direct access to PowerSchool systems, or will LEAs help with that? If the contractor choses to extract data on behalf of the LEA (Overall)

• Will all schools switch systems at once, or one at a time? Will each LEA have someone to work with contractor's? (Overall)

• In the RFP it is mentioned that the scope is only for Extraction and cleansing and having the files ready to be loaded infinite campus. Does the contracor need to work with the implementation team of Infinite Campus to answer any questions or feedback they may have to load the data (3)

• During the analysis of the data if the contractor has any questions, will there be an infinite campus implementation team be available to answer any questions (3)

• Could you specify the types and approximate volumes of data (e.g., student records, attendance, transcripts, IEPs) to be extracted and cleaned from PowerSchool and TieNet?

Response:

The awarded vendor will work in concert with the State, LEAs and Infinite Campus.

26. Question:

• Can the State provide estimated data volumes or record counts per LEA or per system?

• Are there known data quality challenges, such as inconsistent formats, nulls, or ID mismatches?

• Can the State provide estimates of the volume of data to be migrated from each PowerSchool and TieNet deployment?

• Do contractor's need to move all custom data or just what is needed? (A.3/A.5)

• Will the State provide examples or documentation of custom PowerSchool schemas currently in use by any LEAs to help vendors scope the complexity of cleansing and aligning these schemas?

• Can the State provide an estimated volume or size of data per LEA (e.g., average number of student records) to help estimate effort for extraction and cleansing?

• What specific types of data must be extracted (e.g., attendance, discipline, grades, schedules), and are there any exclusions from scope?

• What is the approximate data volume range across LEAs (smallest to largest in terms of student records, historical data years retained)?

Response:

The awarded vendor will have access to this information during the discovery process.

27. Questions:

• What encryption requirements apply to data at rest and in transit?

• Are there any data privacy, security, or compliance requirements beyond standard FERPA considerations that the vendor should incorporate (e.g., requiring Azure Government Cloud usage, specific encryption standards, etc.)?

• What are the specific data security requirements for handling PII during the migration? Are there encryption standards or secure transfer protocols mandated?

Response:

The vendor is responsible for proposing how PII, FERPA, and HIPAA information is safeguarded. Reference https://www.ndit.nd.gov/governance/data-classification-policy

28. Question:

Is there a designated secure file transfer system or protocol for submitting cleaned files?

Response:

The awarded vendor will work in concert with the State, LEAs and IC.

29. Question:

Can vendors use their own secure systems, or are State systems required?

The vendor is responsible for proposing how PII, FERPA, and HIPAA information is safeguarded.

30. Question:

Will a Third-Party Security Questionnaire (TPSQ) be required if vendors are not hosting any platforms?

Response:

See Section Five – Proposal Evaluation, 5.8 Third-Party Security Questionnaire

31. Question:

What categories of PII must be scrubbed, and is scrambling, encoding, or anonymization required?

Response:

The vendor is responsible for proposing how PII, FERPA, and HIPAA information is safeguarded.

32. Questions:

• Will State-level or school-level IT personnel be available during the migration process to support coordination and access?

• What level of engagement is expected between the vendor and LEA stakeholders—should vendors plan for individual engagement with all LEAs or through regional/state coordination?

Response:

Refer to Section Two – Background, 2.0 Background Information (paragraph 3) and Section Three – Scope of Work, C.1 (paragraph 3, item 1).

33. Question:

• Are the 167 school districts (representing approximately 400 schools), 17 Career and Technology Centers, 6 Regional Education Associations, and 2 State Institutions all leveraging a single, centralized instance of PowerSchool, or are they operating in independent, separately managed environments?

• Could the department clarify whether all 167 school districts follow a common PowerSchool data schema and version, or whether there are variations across districts? Additionally, does each school maintain its own PowerSchool instance?

• Similarly, could the department confirm whether the 17 Career and Technology Centers, 6 Regional Education Associations, and 2 State Institutions use a consistent schema or operate with independently structured data models?

• With regard to the 31 Special Education Units, could the department clarify whether they follow a standardized data schema within TieNet, or if schema variations exist?

Response:

They are independent, separately managed environments.

34. Questions:

• Are all the PowerSchool instances hosted in the same database using the same data structures? If not, roughly how many separate database instances and/or different versions/major customizations are there?

• Could the department provide insights into the expected data volume for PowerSchool and TieNet—such as the number of databases and tables, approximate database sizes, and any relevant server infrastructure information?

Response:

No. Each instance of PowerSchool has its own database.

35. Question:

Can the State clarify which specific modules or functional areas of Infinite Campus are included in the initial implementation scope?

Response:

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, 3.2 Requirements, A.1

36. Question:

What level of effort or involvement is expected from the 7-member ITD EduTech team in the project, and in what specific areas would the State like the vendor to rely on them?

Response:

EduTech will assist with subject matter expertise. Refer to Section Two – Background,

2.0 Background Information.

37. Question:

Does the $250K limit for cost include the costing of the infrastructure or is it just the cost of delivery of solution?

Response:

Refer to Section Two - Background, 2.1 Budget

38. Questions:

• Lastly, could the department elaborate on the expectations for data cleansing?

Specifically, does it involve correcting data values and resolving inconsistencies, or is it limited to formatting and schema alignment only?

• Could you please clarify the level of data cleansing expected from the vendor?

Specifically, we would like to know if the vendor's role includes: (3.2)

Ensuring that the data aligns with Infinite Campus' predefined schema, or

Addressing broader data quality issues, such as:

• Correcting inconsistencies

• Handling missing values

• Ensuring overall data integrity

Response:

Vendor should propose preferred methods.

39. Question:

Our company is based out of state and we do not have any contract with State of North Dakota. Can we still bid for this project work?

Response:

Yes, any business that is registered with the ND Secretary of State can submit a bid for this proposal. Please refer to Section One, 1.5 Secretary of State Requirements.

40. Question:

• How many LEAs use custom data? Will LEAs give contractors' info on it, or do contractors need to find it themselves? (A.3/A.5)

• How many users will be concurrently accessing the system? Also, please specify the total number of users.

Response:

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, C.1. It is part of the discovery process.

41. Question:

If the LEA's insist on those customizations to be intact in Infinite campus who would be the decision maker to decide whether it is needed or not (A.3/A.5)

Response:

State will make the decision.

42. Question:

What project management tool is being used? Or can we bring our own tools (B.1) Response:

Microsoft Project is the scheduling tool the State will be using for the master project schedule. Awarded vendor shall provide tasks and participate and collaborate with STATE on a detailed project schedule.

43. Question:

Can the contractors do the work on their laptops, or would the department issue laptops to the contract resources? (Overall) Response:

The awarded vendor will use their own laptops, which will need to comply with the ND State IT security requirements.

44. Questions:

• Beyond what is outlined in the RFP, is there any limitation on the type and number of resources the contractor can bring to complete the work. As long as it is within the mentioned budget (B.1)

• If a vendor plans to use subcontractors, is prior experience with North Dakota LEAs required or preferred for those partners?

• Will you be using any subcontractors? If so, who are they and what part of the work will they handle?

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, 3.3 Experience and Qualifications, D.3

45. Question:

Can the State clarify whether all LEAs currently have internal IT teams capable of executing the data extraction themselves, or if the awarded vendor should assume responsibility for performing the extraction for certain LEAs without internal capacity?

Response:

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, 3.2 Requirements, A. Professional Services

46. Question:

Can the State confirm whether it expects a formal Risk Management Plan and Quality Management Plan to be submitted as part of the proposal, or only upon contract award?

Response:

Upon contract award.

47. Question:

For the required references, would the State accept similar SIS migration projects done for higher education institutions, or must they strictly be K-12 focused?

Response:

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, 3.3 Experience and Qualifications, D.4

48. Questions:

• Who is the current incumbent for this project?

• Are there any incumbents currently providing similar services?

Response:

There is no incumbent as this is a new project.

49. Questions:

• How does your team plan to support North Dakota’s transition from

PowerSchool/TieNet to Infinite Campus?

• Will your approach differ based on LEA size or technical capability?

• Are you proposing to assist LEAs or directly perform the extraction and cleansing tasks?

• Can you describe your methodology for extracting custom schema data from

PowerSchool instances?

• How will you handle alignment to Infinite Campus’s predefined data schemas— especially for districts with non-standard configurations?

• How will you coordinate across diverse stakeholders like DPI, REAs, CTE centers, and EduTech?

• How do you manage risks around handling sensitive student data across multiple agencies?

• Can you provide a breakdown of costs by activity (e.g. extraction, cleansing, project management)?

• Are there any anticipated travel or incidental costs we should be aware of?

• We would require a down payment on the project to help with expenses initially. Would this be possible and if yes, what percentage of the proceeds will be committed to that?

• Does the Infinite Campus environment have built-in data validation reports post-import, or will we need to develop custom validation scripts?

• What is the State's preferred escalation path when LEAs are non-responsive or fall behind schedule?

• If a migration fails validation, what is the rollback process? Are there specific windows when re-migration attempts can occur?

• What backup procedures are in place during the migration period? Are there specific recovery point objectives we must meet?

• What level of documentation is expected for each LEA's migration (runbooks, data mapping documents, validation reports)?

• What is the expected handoff process to ongoing Infinite Campus support teams?

• If a proposed resource becomes unavailable or allocated to any other project at the time of award/project start date can we deploy another resource with the same/similar experience and skillset?

Response:

Vendor should propose preferred methods.

50. Question:

What experience do you have with ETL processes involving PowerSchool and TieNet?

Response:

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, 3.3 Experience and Qualifications

51. Question:

We would import the data to Infinite Campus with a specific tool that requires an API connection, or the data uploaded with CSV files. Do you see an issue with that?

Response:

Scope of Work does not include importing data.

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, 3.0 Scope of Work, paragraph 4.

52. Questions:

• What project management methodology (e.g. Agile, PMP-based frameworks) will guide your work?

• How will you collaborate with the State’s project manager to maintain timelines and accountability?

Response:

Refer to Section Three – Scope of Work, 3.2 Requirements, B. Project Management

53. Question:

• What resources from the STATE do you anticipate needing at each milestone?

• Who will be on your project team, and what roles will they fulfill?

Vendor should provide anticipated resources for each milestone.

54. Question:

Does NDDPI hold FedRAMP, StateRAMP, or HITRUST certifications?

Response:

Refer to Section Five – Proposal Evaluation, 5.8 Third-Party Security Questionnaire

55. Question:

Will there be milestone payments throughout the project? If yes, what would be the milestones?

Response:

Vendor should propose a delivery schedule and a cost proposal.

56. Question:

Will a staging/testing instance of Infinite Campus be available for data validation and testing before production imports?

Response:

Yes.

57. Questions:

• What are the specific data quality metrics that define a 'successful' migration?

(e.g., 99% student record accuracy, zero critical field mismatches)

• How will the State measure the vendor's performance when the final data quality depends on LEA participation in cleansing activities?

• What is the acceptable threshold for data discrepancies that require manual review versus automatic rejection?

Response:

Vendor should propose preferred metrics.

58. Question:

Are there blackout periods when LEAs cannot participate in migration activities due to operational needs (testing periods, enrollment windows)?

Response:

The awarded vendor will determine this information during the discovery process.

59. Question:

What is the State's contingency plan if a significant number of LEAs cannot complete their migrations within the contracted timeline?

Response:

Undetermined at this time.

60. Question:

Are the TieNet LEAs using standardized data entry practices, or should we expect significant data format variations?

Response:

The awarded vendor will determine this information during the discovery process.

61. Question:

Who has final approval authority for data cleansing decisions at each LEA?

Response:

LEAs are responsible for the final approval.

62. Question:

Are there any data pain points that you are facing currently (e.g., data duplication, inconsistent records, reporting lags)?

Response:

No current pain points, the State is migrating from one Student Information System to another.

Bidders are instructed to acknowledge receipt of and compliance with this amendment by signing below and returning the Solicitation Amendment Acknowledgement page with your solicitation response.

Questions regarding this amendment must be submitted in writing to the Procurement Officer.

Julie Crispell Procurement Officer E-mail: jcrispell@nd.gov Telephone: 701-328-2735 TTY Users call: 7-1-1

AMENDMENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Solicitation Number: 201-2025-1000-1 Title: School Data Migration Solicitation Amendment Number:

By my signature below, I hereby acknowledge receipt of and compliance with this amendment.

COMPANY NAME

SIGNATURE

PRINTED NAME

TITLE

DATE