SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE BOARD OF THE TRANSITIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS Purchasing Department 801 North 11th Street Saint Louis, Missouri 63101 RFP# 064-1415 DATA WAREHOUSE AND PERFORMANCE DATA DASHBOARD ADDENDUM No. 2 Final Questions and Answers 1. Question: Is it possible for the RFP deadline to be extended for at least two weeks beyond the current deadline of April 27 th? Answer: No. 2. Question: Can you provide an estimate of what you expect to spend for this project? Recent successful bids for school district data warehouse projects throughout the country with goals that are roughly similar to St. Louis Public Schools have ranged from $750,000 to over $1 million (system implementation and the first year of operation). The variability of cost associated with these projects is primarily determined by: a. the amount and type of data and number of data sources to be integrated into the data warehouse, and b. the types of users (teachers, principals, central office administration, guidance counselors, students, etc.) and the number of users. Do you expect to spend under $1M, between $1 and $2M, over $2M? Answer: Under $1M. 3. Question: What is the funding source for this project? Answer: N/A. 4. Question: Have you seen any data warehouse solutions that meet your needs, or would like the proposed solution to emulate? Answer: N/A. 5. Question: Does the district currently have a data warehouse? If so, why is the district moving away from the current data warehouse? Answer: We currently use an add-on module of our student management system and use another one that is tied to our benchmark assessment data. 6. Question: If you do current have a data warehouse, can you provide a list of the source systems that support the data warehouse and describe the nature of the data contained in each? Answer: Tyler SIS K12 is our student management system. It houses all grades, demographics, attendance, scheduling, discipline, immunizations, IEP data. 7. Question: If you have a data warehouse, can you provide the data dictionary? Answer: No this is a propriety issue with our vendor. 8. Question: How many years of data will be migrated to the new system? Answer: To be determined. 1 P a g e
9. Question: The Scope of Services in the RFP does not mention training what are the district s expectation regarding training and professional development? Answer: You will train a few select Leaders, who will turn key it to School Leaders and Staff. 10. Question: Does the school district have a preferred training model? Answer: No. 11. Question: Do you have a learning management system (LMS) to distribute professional development/training materials to staff? Answer: MyLeanringPlan tracks our professional development units and PD 360 is used to assist teachers on weaknesses. 12. Question: Do you want the vendor to deliver training to end users or would you prefer to have the school district s professional development team deliver training to end users? Answer: include both options in your proposal. 13. Question: The RFP doesn t mention customer support/ help desk services. What is the school district s expectation in this area? Answer: We would need this initially. 14. Question: Does the school district have a Level 1 help desk? If the school district has a Level 1 help desk, how will responsibilities be divided between the school district s help desk and the vendor s help desk? Answer: We have our own internal Help Desk that handles software and hardware concerns on our current environments. I would recommend that we would consider have specific contacts that would interact with the preferred vendor on this issue. 15. Question: Does St. Louis Public Schools have a preferred database management system (DBMS) platform (MS SQL Server? Oracle?) for the data warehouse? Answer: The majority of our systems are SQL. One is Oracle. 16. Question: Does the district own DBMS licenses that it wants to leverage for this project? Answer: No. 17. Question: Does the district have a preferred business intelligence and/or analytic tool? Answer: would prefer SQL as a database structure but no current analytic tool. 18. Question: Does the district own licenses for one or more business intelligence and/or analytic tools that it wants to leverage? Answer: No. 19. Question: What district resources would be involved in the project? To what extent (i.e. how much of an FTE for each role)? Answer: To be determined. 20. Question: How many users will need to access to the proposed system? Answer: All teachers, Principals, Academic Instructional Coordinators, and central Office Personnel. 21. Question: The RFP mentions that teachers will be entering data (page 16). What type of data will teachers be entering into the system? Answer: Student Data. 22. Question: Schedule: The RFP states that the award date for the contract is expected to be in July 2015. When is the target implementation date for the project? Answer: ASAP. 2 P a g e
23. Question: Phasing of the project: Will there be a phased approach and what data is desired in each phase? Answer: Yes. 24. Question: Are vendor resources required to work primarily onsite? Answer: Include both options in your proposal. 25. Question: Security: Does the agency have a user access management system such as a single sign on system; it would want the solution to integrate with? Answer: Active Directory. No. 26. Question: Page 6, Question 4.2.1.1 We are to provide licensing and certification in the field of the requested services. Is the school district expecting proposers to have certain licensing and certifications? Answer: It is preferred. 27. Question: Page 6, 4.1 References the Scope of Services. Is the proposer expected to address the proposed Scope of Services in this section? If not, where should we put information that describes the products and services that we are proposing? Answer: If Yes. In Qualifications. If No, include your proposed products and services in the qualifications section. 28. Question: The Scope of Services (page 17) references a multi-year work plan including ongoing consulting services with deliverable and metrics for gauging effectiveness of partnership. It list task such as ongoing management of the data warehouse. What tasks do you envision for ongoing management of the data warehouse? Answer: Yes. 29. Question: Page 7, Bid Response Elements Is the school district looking for proposers to answer the questions on page 18 (Qualifications) in response to this section? Answer: YES. 30. Question: Page 18, (Qualifications) The school district is looking for a vendor who has the ability to collect and analyze data. Please confirm that the data to be collected and analyzed will be sourced from the data warehouse. Also confirm that the data will be provided for analysis in a manner that is consistent with FERPA regulations. Answer: We are only seeking the vendor to collect and analyze the dat.a 31. Question: Please clarify the number of references requested and where they should be located. Is the references part of the response to question 4.2.3.1 or 4.2.3.2? Answer: YES. 32. Question: Question 4.2.3.4 requests, among other things, a copy of our license to do business in the City of St. Louis (MO). Is it possible to provide that license prior to the award of the contract? Answer: YES. 33. Question: Is the proposer to provide a resume for each member of the project team (4.2.3.5) or only key personnel (page 18 Qualifications C.)? Answer: YES. 34. Question: Please confirm that the minimum qualifications that a company must meet be considered is that the applicant or applicant team must have extensive data warehouse/ dashboard expertise with public schools and school boards for a minimum of five (5) years. Answer: It is preferred. 35. Question: Can Word versions of the forms be provided? Answer: YES. 3 P a g e
36. Question: To your best knowledge, what is the actual current total student enrollment for SLPS as of today (within 100 students)? I have seen numbers from 22,000 to over 30,000, depending on where we ve looked. Answer: The current enrollment is: 25,903 PreK 12th grade. 37. Question: What is the projected enrollment in SY 15-16 as of October 2016, to your best knowledge? Answer: The projection is static for next year. B. Re: Deliverable #4: 38. Question: While Schoolzilla is uniquely positioned to deliver best-in-class service and products to meet needs outlined in Deliverables 1,2,3 and 5 in the Scope of Services, Deliverable # 4 ( Growth Model ) requires a suite of experiences and capabilities that will best be served by a separate, highly specialized organization - one with deep, specific expertise in designing and evaluating student growth and other value-added-measures in the context to the specific requests and considerations listed in the RFP for Deliverable #4. a. To that end, we have identified several leading partners who we are connected with as options for this particular deliverable, including: b. Batelle for Kids - has done similar work with districts and states, including Ohio and Tennessee c. Wisconsin Center for Educational Research - partners with Chicago Public Schools on similar work d. Several consultants with deep experience around student growth, modeling, and VAM 39. Question: The question is - would SLPS prefer that: 1. We simply select the partner we feel will best serve SLPS in this need, and include them as a subcontractor in the RFP for Deliverable #4? Answer: This is option that can be proposed by the vendor. 40. Question: We provide SLPS with a list of options, and partner with SLPS in competitively selecting a partner for this subset of the RFP either before 4/27, or after the RFP process is complete (if SLPS removes Deliverable #4 from this RFP)? Answer: This is an option that can be proposed by the vendor. a. Question: A third option? Answer: If you have a third option; include it in the proposal. b. Question: B. Re: Section 1, 2.2.: It says here that delivery is to be by 1:00 AM on 4/27, while in other areas above says 1:00 PM on that same date. QUESTION: Please confirm for clarity due to the discrepancy. Is 1:00PM on 4/27 the deadline? Answer: See Addendum #1. c. Question: C. Re: Item 4.2.2.7 and 4.2.3.5: Include the above information for each person/entity that is part of the project team for this Proposal. (Referring to name, email, fax, tel, address, etc.) Provide a brief summary of the primary role(s) and resumes describing the background and qualifications of each member of the project team for this Proposal. QUESTION: Does each person/entity and each member of the project team in these two cases refer to all people/ entities that are writing the proposal, or all people/entities that will be part of the project team delivering on the project should Schoolzilla win the award and contract? Answer: The Project Team. 41. Question: D. Re: Item 4.2.3.4 Copies of Licenses and Certifications (including, but not limited to, license to conduct business in the City of St. Louis, Missouri). Question: Is Schoolzilla required to obtain a special license to conduct business in the City of St. Louis, Missouri, and if so, can you please refer us to the appropriate office to do so? Answer: Not at that this time. 4 P a g e
42. Question: We recognize that a core part of the work in Deliverable #1 will be systematically uncovering this information - and we are comfortable providing broad estimates of implementation costs with limited or no additional information regarding systems in use (and therefore, to be plugged in to the Schoolzilla data warehouse and data dashboard) as well as information regarding other questions found below. That said, the more clarity we can receive now, the tighter we can make our scope, deliverables and pricing in the RFP response. Please answer to the best of your availability and capacity given the RFP timelines and your internal considerations. a. A. Clarification of data systems being used in SLPS today: b. Please provide any additional clarification or documentation that is readily available regarding as complete a list of systems and software that stores or collects data in SLPS today. This includes information such as: Student Information System (SIS) Answer: Tyler SIS K-12. 43. Question: Do you have one or multiple instances running for the district? Answer: 1. 44. Question: Do any schools use platforms other than Tyler to store final or in progress grades? Answer: Some teachers still use paper gradebooks. 45. Question: 2. Assessments (State) Answer: MAP GLA & EOC. 46. Question: What State Assessments have been administered in the previous five years other than the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP)? eg. English Language Learner Assessments Answer: None. 47. Question: Assessments (Formative) Answer: Acuity, Star. 48. Question: What formative assessments are known to be in use in SLPS? Answer: Acuity, Star. 49. Question: Are any of those assessments slated to be phased out as of this time? Answer: Not yet determined. 50. Question: Are there any assessments that are no longer given for which it would be important to bring in historical data? Answer: No. Blended learning programs 51. Question: Which, if any, blended learning programs are known to be in use district-wide SLPS, and would incorporating data from these systems be part of the scope of this project and data dashboard? Answer: Behavior Tracking? Answer: Some schools use PBIS. 52. Question: Are discipline referrals, incidents and action details recorded in Tyler SIS? Answer: Yes. 53. Question: Are any programs other than Tyler known to be used for storing this information? egg. Kickboard, PBIS SWIS, etc. Answer: Not in SLPS. Intervention data? Answer: RTI. 5 P a g e
54. Question: Are student interventions currently being tracked in a systematic way? If so, which programs house this information? Answer: Part of Tyler SIS. Special Education and other data: 55. Question: Where is data on Individual Education Plans (IEP s) and other Special Education data currently stored? Answer: Tyler SIS. 56. Question: What sources are used to capture Social Emotional Learning? Answer: This will most likely be a 2016 2017 initiative. B. Clarification of current metrics in use: a. Question: When discussing the level of achievement adjusted for student need, are you referring to student, school and other achievement / growth measures that are adjusted based on student demographic or other considerations? If not, can you please clarify? Answer: b. Question: Displaying achievement adjust for student need: How does SLPS operationalize need (e.g., Special Education, Free or Reduced Lunch, 504, English as a Second Language) Answer: N/A. c. Question: How is college and career readiness currently being determined in SLPS? eg. Percent graduating from high school, percent attending/graduating from four year colleges, etc. Answer: N/A. d. Question: Are there any current plans to revise this definition? And if so, would this fall under the scope of Deliverable #4? We are excited to support your work on this. Answer: N/A. 57. Question: When the RFP refers to Assessment Sub Scores, is this referring to subject, standard, and or item level scores? All of the above? Not yet defined? Answer: Not yet defined. 58. Question: Please clarify the districts part of Benchmarking against other students, classes, school, and districts. Answer: To be determined. a. E.g. Is SLPS envisioning anything beyond benchmarking against other districts using publically available data? (I.e. does SLPS have a data-sharing agreement with other districts or consortia of districts)? Answer: N/A. Additional questions and clarifications: Audit: 59. Question: To what extent should the audit of existing data systems, assessments and practices examine the culture and value of data as an agent of change? Answer: To be determined. 60. Question: What access will the vendor have to complete the audit (e.g., access to teacher professional development)? OR, are there any levels of access that the vendor should NOT expect to receive? Answer: To be determined. 6 P a g e
61. Question: We anticipate the data quality is an important piece of this audit. Can you confirm that this will be a needed piece of the audit and data warehousing solution? Answer: To be determined. 62. Question: Subgroups: How frequently are subgroups created and who creates these groups? Answer: To be determined. 63. Question: What external reporting needs are there (e.g., research requests, grants/funders, Civil Rights reporting, accrediting agencies)? Any readily accessible list of such needs would be helpful. Answer: To be determined. Standard Data Questions 64. Question: Can we assume unique IDs across students, staff, schools, and courses? Answer: Yes a. Is there a need to handle data for students for when they were (e.g., historical tracking) and/or are no longer a part of the district (post-secondary matriculation)? Answer: They would also have their own unique ID b. How many years of historical data will be required for analyses? Answer: To be determined Implementation: 65. Question: How many individuals (or FTEs) will be dedicated to building and iterating on customized dashboards and reports for various needs and stakeholders? Answer: To be determined. 66. Question: Is there a strongly preferred roll-out sequence (e.g., bottom-up beginning with teachers and working up to senior leadership, or vice versa, etc.)? Answer: To be determined. 67. Question: Can you provide a list of vendors that SLPS has employed in the past for similar data warehousing, visualization, and consulting services, if any? Answer: Tyler SIS, EDMIN, Engrade. 68. Is there a current, reliable identity provider (e.g. Active Directory)? Answer: Active Directory. VAM (Value Add Measures) 69. Question: Is it possible to share the current logic/algorithm to determine value-add of student growth (if a version currently exists)? Answer: N/A. 70. Will VAM be used as both a formative and summative measure for schools, staff, and students (or others)? Answer: N/A. END OF ADDENDUM 2. 7 P a g e