Statewide Longitudinal Data System
           RFP Process
    Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
             ...
Washington State Profile
 66,544 sq. miles   Land area (2000)
 6,287,759          Population (2005)
 Under 5 yrs old    6....
Brief History
    2002 – OSPI began creating the Core Student Record
    System (CSRS)
    2003 - created the State Studen...
Goals of RFP
 Select the best partner the state could grow with
 Create buy-in from vendors, school districts and
 ESD’s
 ...
RFP Process
 Created a data advisory committee
  School Districts, Educational Service Districts, and
  multiple vendors
 ...
RFP Process
 RFP review committee
  One SIS Vendor, Two District CIO, One ESD CIO,
  Agency Developers, agency CIO
   Repo...
RFP Process
 Scored each RFP based on:
  Technical/Design Implementation
  Costs
  Project Planning
  Experience of compan...
RFP Process
 Face to Face Interviews with Management and Team
  Selected final 4 based on scores for interviews
  Selected...
RFP Lessons Learned
Needed more detail about current state systems
Expect to be challenged by vendors once selection
proce...
Statewide Longitudinal Data System
           RFP Process
          Joe.Egan@k12.wa.us
Center for Educational
Performance and Information

    Margaret Merlyn Ropp, Ph.D.

      NCES MIS Conference
          M...
Responding to Needs – Next
      Generation Systemsuse
 • Vision – Collect once, store once,
   many times –
   – Good ste...
Responding to Needs – Next
     Generation (Educational Entity
 • School Code Master
                      Systems
   Mast...
Procuring Two System
   Rewrites – The Challenges
• Needed new ideas + migration from existing systems
   – Multiple exist...
What we requested…
• RFP included multiple components –
  vendors could bid on one or more
  options
  – Detailed requirem...
What we got...
Vendors developed partnerships to bid on all
  the components
• Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) solutions
•...
What we learned…
• Managing a fixed-price deliverable bid
  – Added 2,000 extra hours for unknown
    requirements
  – Ven...
Procurement Tips
• DO
  – Include cross-agency/program
    stakeholders on the JEC - locals as
    advisors
  – Create a t...
Contact Meg at CEPI
• Telephone:   517-241-2374
• E-mail:      roppm@michigan.gov
Lessons Learned
         Ohio’s Request for Proposals (RFP):
Education Management Information System Redesign for
        ...
Background
•1990
    The Education Management Information System (EMIS) was
    developed for ODE to collect aggregate stu...
System Inefficiencies

•   Collection and storage of duplicate demographic data across
    various student data files

•  ...
RFP Objectives

• Improve the Education Management Information System
  reporting from the 26 regional sites to the Ohio
 ...
RFP Objectives

• Design, develop and implement a relational database
  structure for efficient data validation, maintenan...
Lessons Learned

Request for Information (RFI)

       •   Provides an open forum for feedback and questions
           fr...
Lessons Learned

Clear and Concise Business Objectives

•   Clearly state the business problem to be solved and the
    ob...
Lessons Learned

RFP Writer Qualifications

   •   Must have a good understanding of the business
       objectives for th...
Lessons Learned
Involvement and Communication

   • Initiate and require frequent discussions with procurement
   administ...
Lessons Learned

TIME……TIME ……TIME ….NEVER ENOUGH!


    •It always takes more time than you plan!

    •Build in EXTRA, E...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Statewide Longitudinal Data System RFP Process

813 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
813
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Statewide Longitudinal Data System RFP Process

  1. 1. Statewide Longitudinal Data System RFP Process Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Olympia, Washington
  2. 2. Washington State Profile 66,544 sq. miles Land area (2000) 6,287,759 Population (2005) Under 5 yrs old 6.3% Under 18 yrs old 23.6% 1,013,189 Students (K12) 58,011 Classroom Teachers (K12) 17.4 Students per Teacher 7 Student Information Systems 40 School Districts w/o a SIS
  3. 3. Brief History 2002 – OSPI began creating the Core Student Record System (CSRS) 2003 - created the State Student Identifier (SSID) CSRS V2 enhanced the SSID system by collecting student data element information School districts push a monthly data file 3
  4. 4. Goals of RFP Select the best partner the state could grow with Create buy-in from vendors, school districts and ESD’s Reduce the data collection efforts of the school districts Collect more data Student to teacher Student to course Teacher to course Student to program
  5. 5. RFP Process Created a data advisory committee School Districts, Educational Service Districts, and multiple vendors Discuss Challenges with current system Data to be collected and why Communicate statewide Leveraged educational video conference system
  6. 6. RFP Process RFP review committee One SIS Vendor, Two District CIO, One ESD CIO, Agency Developers, agency CIO Report back to advisory committee Helped develop the RFP Reviewed the RFP Selected the final candidate
  7. 7. RFP Process Scored each RFP based on: Technical/Design Implementation Costs Project Planning Experience of company Experience of implementation team Fiscal Health
  8. 8. RFP Process Face to Face Interviews with Management and Team Selected final 4 based on scores for interviews Selected final two for additional interviews Selection completed Contract Negotiations SOW
  9. 9. RFP Lessons Learned Needed more detail about current state systems Expect to be challenged by vendors once selection process is complete Thoroughly address security in RFP Be extremely careful Competition is fierce – RFP and SOW must be strong Be detailed but be careful - Don’t want to get locked in because of minor changes Add-on or out of scope will be costly COTS solutions – high long term licensing costs
  10. 10. Statewide Longitudinal Data System RFP Process Joe.Egan@k12.wa.us
  11. 11. Center for Educational Performance and Information Margaret Merlyn Ropp, Ph.D. NCES MIS Conference March 2007
  12. 12. Responding to Needs – Next Generation Systemsuse • Vision – Collect once, store once, many times – – Good stewardship of data and resources at the state and local levels • Student Data System – why rewrite? – Funding (FTE) vs. Accountability – where is a student at a point and time and who is responsible? – Lack of Alignment with federal reporting deadlines and longitudinal – Current process resulted in “collect many times, store many times and use once!”
  13. 13. Responding to Needs – Next Generation (Educational Entity • School Code Master Systems Master) • Student data system could not be rewritten without changing the underlying structure of entity relationships • “Schools” are more than buildings at which you report a broken window – Consortia – Charter schools – “Virtual schools” – Early Childhood providers outside of the K-12 constellation – Accountability – who is responsible for providing instruction?
  14. 14. Procuring Two System Rewrites – The Challenges • Needed new ideas + migration from existing systems – Multiple existing student data systems that need to use one Unique Identification Code (UIC) – e.g., assessment, special education, career and technical education, adult education • A vendor generating a statement of work for an RFP or requirements is prohibited from winning another contract for system design and implementation. • Needed a blend of transactions and snapshots to determine how frequently to update specific subsets of data elements and a create manageable workflow
  15. 15. What we requested… • RFP included multiple components – vendors could bid on one or more options – Detailed requirements gathering – Student Data System – Education Entity Master – Optional student transcript functionality
  16. 16. What we got... Vendors developed partnerships to bid on all the components • Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) solutions • Warehousing solutions based on ETL processing • Customizing some existing resources • Build-from-scratch 100% customization.
  17. 17. What we learned… • Managing a fixed-price deliverable bid – Added 2,000 extra hours for unknown requirements – Vendors asked many questions to clarify the scope – we had 90% of the high-level requirements completed
  18. 18. Procurement Tips • DO – Include cross-agency/program stakeholders on the JEC - locals as advisors – Create a template for cost breakdown – hours by role, estimates for state infrastructure requirements – Make sure IT is ready to go – vendors may propose cutting-edge when government values stability and older software versions – Ask trusted colleagues to review the statement of work
  19. 19. Contact Meg at CEPI • Telephone: 517-241-2374 • E-mail: roppm@michigan.gov
  20. 20. Lessons Learned Ohio’s Request for Proposals (RFP): Education Management Information System Redesign for Longitudinal Data Beth Juillerat Chief Information Officer
  21. 21. Background •1990 The Education Management Information System (EMIS) was developed for ODE to collect aggregate student data from LEAs. •1998 A change in state law enabled the collection of unidentifiable student level data via the use of a unique data verification code. •2003 No Child Left Behind introduced new requirements for disaggregation of data and calculating adequate yearly progress. ODE began collecting student data with a unique identification number.
  22. 22. System Inefficiencies • Collection and storage of duplicate demographic data across various student data files • Continued data storage in flat file formats that limit efficient access, management and use of the data for longitudinal analysis and linkages between student and staff data • Continued restrictions of the collection of data to a weekly batch mode rather than utilizing new technologies and standards to support real time data submissions
  23. 23. RFP Objectives • Improve the Education Management Information System reporting from the 26 regional sites to the Ohio Department of Education using School Interoperability Framework standards and infrastructure. • Allow school district data to be shared more efficiently and effectively with the Ohio Department of Education using School Interoperability Framework standards and infrastructure.
  24. 24. RFP Objectives • Design, develop and implement a relational database structure for efficient data validation, maintenance, and retrieval of data. • Enable the Ohio Department of Education to more efficiently and effectively manage longitudinal student data for operational purposes and decision making.
  25. 25. Lessons Learned Request for Information (RFI) • Provides an open forum for feedback and questions from potential vendors. • Brings to light areas in which there was lack of clarity in the scope or goals of the project.
  26. 26. Lessons Learned Clear and Concise Business Objectives • Clearly state the business problem to be solved and the objectives of the project • Articulate the limitations or inefficiencies of the existing system
  27. 27. Lessons Learned RFP Writer Qualifications • Must have a good understanding of the business objectives for the project and the scope of the initiative. • Must be familiar with the state procurement process and structure.
  28. 28. Lessons Learned Involvement and Communication • Initiate and require frequent discussions with procurement administrators • Solicit assistance and feedback from education and technology stakeholders •Leverage available expertise such as SIFA
  29. 29. Lessons Learned TIME……TIME ……TIME ….NEVER ENOUGH! •It always takes more time than you plan! •Build in EXTRA, EXTRA time for multiple iterations and reviews, including legal!

×