SUBJECT RFP #2847DB Progress Monitoring System by tpf49254


									                          LAKE                                        Superintendent:   School Board Members:

                                                                      Anna P. Cowin     District 1
                                                                                        Larry Metz

                                                                                        District 2
                                                                                        Scott Strong
                                                                                        District 3
Leading our Children to Success                                                         Cynthia Barrow
                                                                                        District 4
                                                                                        Jimmy Conner
Purchasing Department                                                                   District 5
29529 CR 561 Tavares FL 32778                                                           Kyleen Fischer
(352) 253-6759 Fax: (352) 742-8516

        MEMORANDUM                                                    POSTED: 5/29/2008

        DATE:             June 9, 2008

        TO:               Anna P. Cowin, Superintendent of Schools

        FROM:             Carol MacLeod, Chief Financial Officer
                          (submitted by Pamela Hayes, Purchasing Director)

        SUBJECT:          RFP #2847DB Progress Monitoring System

        The State of Florida and the Federal Government have continued to increase the
        demands for accountability in education over the past few years. Florida’s A+ Plan and
        the Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) grading systems are based on student
        performance on the FCAT test. Schools increasingly monitor student performance on
        an ongoing basis to ensure successful performance on the FCAT test. School
        Improvement requirements, requirements for low performing schools, and Title I
        requirements for Schools In Need of Improvement (SINI Schools) and schools in
        restructuring and other stages of the NCLB penalty system for failure to achieve
        Adequate Yearly Progress have continued to escalate the demand for continuous
        monitoring of student progress. Florida also adopted the Continuous Improvement
        Model that was based on the “No Excuses” improvement model included in the book,
        Closing The Achievement Gap that was based on the successful model in Brazosport,

        Approximately three years ago, the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent for
        Curriculum tasked the staff with investigating a progress monitoring system for the
        district that would meet all of these demands for our schools and the district. The staff
        immediately began reviewing all available commercial systems and systems used by
        other districts. When this review was completed, the Evaluation Committee, which
        consists or teachers, school administrators, district staff, district administrators, and
        LCEA representatives met to review the information from this extensive review. The
        Evaluation Committee agreed this system was necessary for the district and all schools
        and agreed to pursue additional information. A subcommittee comprised of teachers,
        ETS staff, and school and district administrators then visited St. Lucie County Schools
        to observe the system used in that district. The subcommittee was very impressed with
        the system used by St. Lucie and agreed to continue to pursue the development of a
        system for Lake County.

“Equal Opportunity in Education and Employment”
In the meantime, individual schools began investing in systems to meet the demand for
continuous progress monitoring . While these systems fulfilled part of the need for
monitoring student performance, all of the requirements were still not met. The district
staff continued to pursue a more efficient and effective system for the district and
included funds for this system in the 2007-2008 budget. In the Spring of 2008, The
Department of Planning, Evaluation and Accountability developed and issued an RFP
with the assistance of the Purchasing Department for a Progress Monitoring System.
Fifty-nine (59) RFP notifications were mailed and seven (7) companies submitted
proposals for consideration. A legal advertisement was published in the Florida Bid
Reporting Service on March 7, 2008 and was also posted on the Lake County Schools
Purchasing website. Copies of the submittals are available for review in the Purchasing

The Evaluation Committee met on April 17, 2008 to review and rate the submittals for
the purpose of obtaining a ranked short list of the submitting firms. The voting
members were Barry Farley, Andrea Guogas, Bill Miller, Freda Russell, Ted Wolf, and
Kathy Halbig. Attached to this recommendation is a chart illustrating the composite
ratings given to each firm.

The Evaluation Committee, including teachers, school administrators, ETS
representatives, district staff and district administrators met again on April 25, 2008, to
interview each of the short listed firms for the purpose of obtaining a final ranking
order. The voting members of the committee were Barry Farley, Andrea Guogas,
Cathy Caudill, Freda Russell, Ted Wolf, Kathy Halbig.                   Attached to this
recommendation is a chart illustrating the final ranking order of the short listed firms.

On May 6, 2008, fee/contract negotiations were conducted with representatives from
Riverside Publishing. This contract will become effective immediately after Board
approval and will provide firm prices for a five-year period. The contract does allow for
cancellation after the first and ensuing years with notice. Attached is a copy of the


1. Approve the award of RFP #2847DB Progress Monitoring System to Riverside
   Publishing of Rolling Meadows, Illinois and approve the execution of the contract.

2. Do not approve the award of RFP #2847DB Progress Monitoring System to
   Riverside Publishing of Rolling Meadows, Illinois and do not approve the execution
   of the contract.

I recommend the approval of the award of RFP #2847DB Progress Monitoring System
to Riverside Publishing of Rolling Meadows, Illinois and approve the execution of the
contract. Contract subject to attorney review and will provided under separate cover.

The proposed Progress Monitoring System will provide a vehicle to implement all newly
developed curriculum maps and pacing guides. It will facilitate the administration and
scoring of approximately three district-wide benchmark assessments each year, end-of
course exams, teacher-made assessments, and mini-assessments to monitor student
progress on standards. In the future, it is anticipated this system will also provide the
means to administer prescriptive learning when students need assistance in mastering
standards and dialog has begun to explore the mechanism to link the information from
this system to e-Sembler. This system should be extremely beneficial to teachers,
schools and the district and will provide the basis to monitor student progress, prepare
reports for school improvement, and provide the means to administer end-of-course
tests and meet other future requirements.

The process from School Board Policy 7.71 was utilized to obtain an award

Funding for this contract was included in the 2007-2008 Department of Planning,
Evaluation and Accountability budget. These Board-approved funds included a total of
$227,000. In addition, approximately $125,000 was targeted in the Title II Grant
through the Curriculum Department. The expenditure of Title II funds was approved by
representatives in the Department of Education. The costs are projected over a five
year period based on student enrollments. Grade levels will be phased in to make this
system cost effective for the district. A spreadsheet is attached to estimate costs for the
five year time period. The attached spreadsheet of estimated costs indicates the first
year of implementation (2008-2009) will be covered by funds included in the 2007-2008
budget. Should this system be approved by the Board, these budgeted funds will be
expended by June 30, 2008 and will require the need to budget only minimal funds for
the operation of this system in the 2008-2009 fiscal year. Funds will again be budget for
four years beginning in 2009-2010. Should this system continue to benefit the district in
monitoring student progress, it will continue to be an ongoing cost for the district.
Approval of the proposed five-year contract will ensure the best rate for the district.
Should the price for this system decline over time, Riverside Publishing has agreed the
district would benefit from these cost savings. In addition to the cost from Riverside, a
first year purchase of approximately 80 scanners for an estimated cost of $28,000 will
be needed. Existing bids will be utilized to make this purchase.

This system should replace any and all programs purchased and now used by individual
schools. This will result in cost savings for schools and will allow schools to use these
funds to assist with the improvement of student performance.

The RFP process for this item was prepared and facilitated by Barry Farley, Testing
Manager and Pamela Hayes, Purchasing Director, in accordance with School Board
Policy 7.70. The specifications for this RFP were reviewed by Pat Nave, Assistant
Superintendent for Curriculum, Andrea Guogas, Director of Secondary Curriculum, and
Kathleen Farner Thomas, Director of Planning, Evaluation and Accountability.
Questions may be directed to Ms. Hayes at 352-253-6850 or Mr. Farley at 253-6790.

Failure to file a protest within the time prescribed in section 120.57(3), Florida Statutes shall constitute a waiver of proceedings
under chapter 120, Florida Statutes. Protest procedures are explained in the bid/RFP document.
                                                RFP #2847 Progress MontitoringEstimated 5 Year Cost

                                       2008-2009          2009-2010            2010-2011              2011-2012              2012-2013
Approximate student count                    30,000             33,000                36,000                 40,000                 42,000
Grades included                                3-12               2-12                  1-12                   K-12                   K-12
Cost per student Edusoft                       6.25               6.25                  6.25                   6.25                   6.25
Cost per student Assess2
Know (In year 2 - 5 cost is
times 30,000 as this is 3-12
material only)                                $1.50              $1.50                 $1.50                  $1.50                  $1.50

Implementation Management                 $2,500.00
Training                                $27,000.00         $14,400.00           $14,400.00             $14,400.00             $14,400.00
Set-up                                  $16,800.00
Projected cost**                          $278,800         $265,650              $284,400               $309,400               $321,900
Budget year                           2007-2008         2009-2010*            2010-2011              2011-2012              2012-2013
Funding source                     Title II         Plan,Eval,Acct         Plan,Eval,Acct         Plan,Eval,Acct         Plan,Eval,Acct
                                   Plan,Eval,Acct   (9160 -Fund 100)       (9160 -Fund 100)       (9160 -Fund 100)       (9160 -Fund 100)
                                   (9160 -Fund 100) Curr. (Fund 100)       Curr. (Fund 100)       Curr. (Fund 100)       Curr. (Fund 100)
                                                    Title II (if avail.)   Title II (if avail.)   Title II (if avail.)   Title II (if avail.)
                                                    Title I (if avail.)    Title I (if avail.)    Title I (if avail.)    Title I (if avail.)
                                                    IDEA (if avail.)       IDEA (if avail.)       IDEA (if avail.)       IDEA (if avail.)

*No funds need to be budgeted for the 2008-2009 Fiscal Year because 2007-2008 funds
will cover the first year of implementation.

**Final cost determined by estimate of student count for school year. Adjustments to be made in following
school year if necessary.
                                             RFQ #2847DB Progress Monitoring System
                                                    Composite Ranking Sheet

RFP #2847DB presentations were made by the two short listed firms with each committee member ranking each presentation by
assigning one or two points (two being the highest). These points were then added together to determine the committee’s
final ranked short-list.

                    Committee               NCS Pearson, Inc       Riverside Publishing

                             #1                      1                         2
                             #2                      1                         2
                             #3                      1                         2
                             #4                      1                         2
                             #5                      1                         2
                             #6                      1                         2
                             #7                      1                         2
                             #8                      1                         2

                                  TOTAL :            6                        12

Presentation Date: April 25, 2008
                                                EVALUATION FORM - COMMITTEE MEMBER TOTALS
                                                    RFQ #2847DB Progress Monitoring System

                           Committee Member 1

                                                  Committee Member 1

                                                                        Committee Member 2

                                                                                             Committee Member 2

                                                                                                                   Committee Member 3

                                                                                                                                        Committee Member 3

                                                                                                                                                              Committee Member 4

                                                                                                                                                                                   Committee Member 4

                                                                                                                                                                                                         Committee Member 5

                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Committee Member 5

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Committee Member 6

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Committee Member 6

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              RANKING TOTALS:
Totals / Ranking Order:






Riverside Publishing      98.00                         7              91.00                       7              98.00                       7              93.00                       7              85.00                       7              95.00                       6              41

Pearson Option 2          84.00                         5              71.00                       6              97.00                       6              91.00                       6              82.00                       6              97.00                       7              36

Performance Matters       86.00                         6              62.00                       5              89.00                       5              57.00                       4              72.00                       4              65.00                       5              29

CTB/McGraw                80.00                         3              50.00                       4              82.00                       4              79.00                       5              77.00                       5              64.00                       4              25

Scantron                  80.50                         4              62.00                       5              69.00                       3              46.00                       2              70.00                       3              53.00                       3              20

School City, Inc.         43.00                         2              50.00                       3              47.00                       2              47.00                       3              66.00                       2              48.00                       1              13

Maximus                   26.00                         1              32.00                       2              26.00                       1              32.00                       1              56.00                       1              50.00                       2                8

To top