Starting Where You Are Today

• Tell me about your district's current student information system and who uses it day to day. Options: Central office staff, School office staff, Teachers, Counselors, District leadership, Parents and students, Other
• Which core modules do you rely on most today, and which cause the most daily work? Options: Enrollment and registration, Attendance tracking, Master scheduling, Gradebook and assessment, Transcripts, State reporting, Special education management, Other
• Walk me through a typical week of your SIS support workload, from incoming tickets to final verification.
• How often do teachers or school office staff contact IT about usability issues or missing functionality? Options: Daily, Several times a week, Weekly, Monthly, Rarely
• If the next school year required no custom manual workarounds in your SIS, what immediate changes would you expect in daily operations?

Where the Current System Breaks Your Workflows

• What single recurring failure in your current SIS would make you start replacing it today?
• Which process creates the largest volume of manual work to meet state or district reporting deadlines? Options: Enrollment adjustments, Attendance corrections, Course and section scheduling, Grade uploads and conversions, Transcript formatting, Data extracts for downstream systems, Other
• When those failures occur, who carries the operational burden and how do they cope?
• On average, how many staff hours per week are spent fixing SIS-related data issues across the district? Options: Under 10 hours, 10 to 25 hours, 26 to 50 hours, Over 50 hours
• Which downstream system or funding process would be most damaged if these failures continued into the next fiscal year? Options: State reporting and funding, Assessment systems, Transportation, Food service, Special education, Parent and student portal, Other

How State Reporting Actually Hits Your Budget and Calendar

• If your next state submission missed compliance, what direct financial or calendar impact would you face this year?
• Describe your current state reporting workflow, who runs it, and which manual reconciliations are required.
• How many distinct state reports or submissions does your district file during a typical year? Options: 1 to 3, 4 to 6, 7 to 10, More than 10
• Which data elements routinely require manual correction before submission? Options: Student demographics, Enrollment history, Course rosters and credits, Attendance, Special education indicators, Grade conversions, Other
• Who in your district must sign off to accept a new state reporting approach within the year? Options: CIO/CTO, Assistant superintendent, Business manager/CFO, Registrar, IT manager, Other

Scheduling and Gradebook, Where Time Gets Lost

• Which scheduling or gradebook limitation causes the most teacher time lost each week?
• Walk me through your most complex scheduling model, including grade spans, shared staff, and rotation patterns.
• How many unique schedule types does your district operate across schools? Options: One standard model, 2 to 3 variations, 4 to 6 variations, More than 6
• Does your current gradebook support both standards based and traditional grading without manual workarounds? Options: Yes, both supported natively, Supports one model but needs workarounds, No, both require workarounds, Unsure
• If a schedule build failed to align with graduation or transcript rules, who would have authority to stop the rollout? Options: Registrar, Assistant superintendent, High school principal, District scheduler, Other

Who Owns What When Data Breaks

• Who is first called when a critical student data error appears in transcripts or state files? Options: Registrar, District IT, School office staff, Data manager, Other
• Walk me through the chain of responsibility for resolving data issues, from discovery to verification.
• How many full time staff are dedicated to SIS data quality or integrations? Options: None, 1, 2 to 4, 5 to 9, 10 or more
• When a data fix is applied, how do you verify it propagated correctly to all dependent systems?
• If your team lacked a single person accountable for data release, would that prevent a vendor led migration from starting? Options: Yes, Maybe, No

What Alternatives Are You Seriously Considering

• If you decided to stay with your current approach, what would have to be true about its reliability and cost?
• Select the alternatives you are actively evaluating right now. Options: Remain with the incumbent vendor, Replace with another vendor, Build a solution internally, Hybrid internal plus vendor approach, State provided tools, Other
• Have any internal teams proposed solving this without an outside vendor? Options: Yes, IT proposed it, Yes, curriculum or assessment proposed it, No internal proposal, Unsure
• Which capabilities or reference checks would make you rule an alternative in or out quickly? Options: State reporting experience in our state, References from similar sized districts, Migration and parallel run support, Scheduling complexity support, Teacher gradebook user experience, Available integration APIs
• Who are the internal stakeholders that must be convinced to choose an external vendor over an internal build? Options: CIO/CTO, Assistant superintendent, Business manager/CFO, School principals, Registrar, Board member(s)

Operational Readiness, The Gates We Must Clear

• What single integration failure or unavailable data source would stop the project from proceeding on time?
• List the third party systems that must exchange student data with the new SIS. Options: Learning management system, Assessment platform, Food service, Transportation, Special education case management, Identity provider, Other
• Do those systems expose APIs or will you need scheduled extracts and flat files? Options: APIs available and supported, APIs available but limited, Only scheduled extracts or flat files, Unsure
• Who currently owns credentials and API access for each integration, and are they authorized to grant vendor access?
• How clean and complete are the historical student records you plan to migrate, on a 1 to 5 scale? Options: 1 very messy, 2, 3 partially ready, 4 mostly clean, 5 fully ready
• If required data extracts cannot be produced within the first 30 days, do you have an alternative path to proceed? Options: Yes, alternate extracts exist, Yes, we can produce them with extra effort, No, project would pause, Unsure

Acceptance Criteria That Would Make Leadership Sign

• Name the measurable outcome from a pilot that would cause your leadership to approve a full deployment immediately.
• List the acceptance criteria you require for state reporting, migration completeness, and teacher gradebook performance.
• What is your target availability requirement for peak reporting and grading periods? Options: 99.9%, 99.5%, 99%, Less than 99%
• How many weeks of parallel operation with the legacy system do you require before cutover? Options: None, 1 to 2 weeks, 3 to 6 weeks, More than 6 weeks
• If a pilot met your top acceptance metric but exceeded budget by 10%, would you still move forward? Options: Yes, Maybe with adjustments, No

Timing, Budget, and Decision Triggers

• How many months of unresolved data gaps would force you to stop the project? Options: 0 to 1 month, 2 to 3 months, 4 to 6 months, More than 6 months
• Outline your current procurement timeline and any board or district meeting dates that gate a vendor decision.
• What budget range have you allocated or expect for an SIS replacement and first year implementation? Options: Under $100,000, $100,000 to $250,000, $250,000 to $500,000, $500,000 to $1,000,000, Over $1,000,000, Unsure
• Identify the roles that ultimately approve budget and contract signoff, and any constraints they require. Options: Board of Education, Superintendent, Business manager/CFO, Assistant superintendent, Procurement officer, Other
• If a vendor could meet your top three acceptance criteria within your budget and timeline, would you commit to a formal pilot within 30 days? Options: Yes, Maybe, No

• Solution Experience — Enrollment to State Reporting

• Confirm the current state and its cost to your team
• You confirm the demonstrated workflows eliminate the manual reconciliation and exception handling you described for state reporting.
• Run a district-specific migration dry run on the provided sample extract and deliver a migration report before the follow-up session.
• You confirm the teacher grading flow meets your expectations for reduced time and fewer grade corrections.
• Proof: Enrollment and registration scenario
• Configure and run a sample state-reporting submission using the meeting's mapping decisions and share the output and exception log.
• Proof: Scheduling across elementary, middle, high models
• You agree on the remaining evidence needed to move to commercial and implementation scoping, including a migration dry run and sample state submission.
• Provide a representative SIS extract including enrollment, schedules, grades, and transcripts for the pilot scenarios.
• Proof: Teacher grading workflow with real scenarios
• List all downstream systems that consume SIS data and the owners for each integration point.
• Proof: Transcript generation and state reporting submission
• Confirm and document the district's success signals and acceptance criteria for state reporting and data migration.
• Integration and migration implications
• Validate the future state

• Solution Experience — Enrollment to State Reporting
• Solution Experience Deck
• Solution Brief — Enrollment to State Reporting

• meeting
• slides
• document

• Migrate Student and Enrollment Records
• Import Historical Grades and Transcripts
• Configure State Reporting and Submission Packages
• Build Master Schedules and Course Sections
• Configure Gradebook for Standards and Traditional Grading
• Setup Attendance Rules and Automated Rollups
• Generate State-Specific Transcript Formats
• Integrate with LMS and Assessment APIs
• Provision API Connectors for Food Service and Transportation
• Integrate Special Education Data Exchange
• Configure Parent and Student Portal Access
• Run Parallel Data Synchronization and Hypercare Support
• Train Teachers and Office Staff on Platform

Migrate Student and Enrollment Records

• How many years of student enrollment history must be migrated (for example: current year only, current + 3 prior years, or full historical archive)? Options: Current year only, Current + 1 year, Current + 3 years, Full historical archive, Other
• Which student identifier should be authoritative in the new student information system (SIS): state student identifier, local student ID, or alternate ID? Options: State student identifier, Local student ID, Alternate ID (please specify)
• Do you require migration of withdrawn, expelled, or alumni records to preserve transcripts and longitudinal reporting? Options: Yes, No, Only specific cohorts (specify)
• What file formats and extract types will you provide for enrollment data (SIS export, CSV extract, full database dump, API access)? Options: SIS export / vendor extract, CSV extracts, Database export (SQL), API access, Other
• Define the acceptance criterion for enrollment migration accuracy (example: 99% match on key identifiers and required demographic fields).

Import Historical Grades and Transcripts

• Specify the range of historical grade data to import (current term, last 3 years, all archived transcripts). Options: Current term only, Current + 1 year, Current + 3 years, All archived transcripts
• Provide the transcript artifacts that must be preserved during import (official transcript PDF, course history, term-level grades, GPA calculation method). Options: Official transcript PDFs, Course and term history, GPA calculation method, All of the above, Other
• Do legacy grade scales, weighting rules, or previous GPA algorithms need to be replicated for historical accuracy (plus/minus scales, honors weighting, drop-lowest)? Options: Yes, replicate exactly, No, convert to district standard, Only for select cohorts (specify)
• How should the migration handle changes in course codes or course mergers across years to preserve transcript continuity?
• Specify the acceptance threshold for transcript import (for example: student-level parity for 95% of records or audited sample pass rate). Options: 95% parity, 99% parity, Audit sample only, Other

Configure State Reporting and Submission Packages

• List the state reporting packages and cycles you must support (annual fall submission, end-of-year, special program submissions) and required file formats.
• Confirm whether configuration must include state-specific elements such as attendance codes, special education indicators, residency and program eligibility flags. Options: Yes, include all state-specific elements, Partial (specify elements), No
• Provide any existing field-to-state mapping documentation or a sample previous submission that should be used as the baseline for mapping. Options: Upload mapping, Provide sample file, No mapping available (we need help)
• Who in your district will be the approver for state submission validation reports (title/role)?
• Define measurable acceptance criteria for state reporting readiness (for example: zero fatal validation errors, max X warnings, or reconciliation match rate). Options: Zero fatal errors, Max 1-5 fatal errors (agree remediation), Validated reconciliation report required, Other

Build Master Schedules and Course Sections

• How many schools and scheduling models must the master schedule build support (list each school with its scheduling model: traditional, block, rotating, hybrid)?
• What course catalog elements must be imported (course codes, credit weight, department, prerequisites, cross-listed courses)?
• Will room and staff assignments be provided in your schedule source files or will they be assigned after initial section creation? Options: Provided in source files, Assigned after initial load, Mixed (specify)
• List target section size rules and enrollment caps per course type (for example: core = 25, lab = 15).
• Identify any cross-school offerings or shared-teacher assignments that must be preserved during the build and how they are currently encoded.

Configure Gradebook for Standards and Traditional Grading

• Indicate which grade levels will use standards-based grading versus traditional grading and where mixed models apply. Options: K-5 standards-based, 6-12 traditional, District-wide traditional, Mixed (specify)
• Identify the grade scales and mark types required (proficiency bands, A-F, percentages, custom scales) and provide examples.
• Confirm whether standards tagging and standards-to-assignment mappings must be imported from your current gradebook. Options: Yes, import mappings, No, we will recreate in new system, Partial (specify)
• Describe your district rules for GPA calculation, weighting, and class rank that must be implemented in the gradebook (weighted courses, exclusion rules).
• Name the role that will own gradebook configuration decisions and approve teacher-facing gradebook workflows.

Setup Attendance Rules and Automated Rollups

• Estimate the number of attendance codes and absence types to be configured (excused, unexcused, medical, field trip, in-school suspension). Options: Fewer than 10, 10-20, More than 20
• Describe the attendance-taking workflow teachers use today (homeroom roll, period-by-period, advisory check-in) and any exceptions.
• Indicate whether you require automated absence rollups for state reporting and automated parent notifications. Options: Yes - both rollups and notifications, Rollups only, Notifications only, No
• Outline the triggers that should generate parent notifications (full-day absence, tardy threshold, unverified absence) and preferred notification channels. Options: Email, SMS, Portal push, Multiple (specify)
• Name the role responsible for validating attendance rollup calculations prior to state submission.

Generate State-Specific Transcript Formats

• How will out-of-state transfer credits and course equivalencies be represented in state-specific transcript layouts?
• Will cumulative GPA on the state transcript follow the state formula or a district-level variant for reporting and graduation eligibility? Options: State formula, District variant, Combination (specify)
• Estimate the number of graduating cohorts that require legacy grade conversion rules applied to their transcripts. Options: 1 cohort, 2-3 cohorts, More than 3 cohorts
• Outline the validation checks required before producing official transcripts (credit totals, graduation seed, audit of dual enrollment entries).
• Designate the district role responsible for approving final transcript layouts and any state certification documents.

Integrate with LMS and Assessment APIs

• Enumerate the LMS and assessment endpoints that require integration for roster and grade exchange and provide connection method (API, SFTP).
• Choose the integration cadence required for each endpoint: real-time, hourly, nightly batch, or weekly. Options: Real-time, Hourly, Nightly, Weekly, Other
• Enumerate authentication methods supported by each integration endpoint (for example: API key, OAuth 2.0, certificate, IP allowlist). Options: API key, OAuth 2.0, Certificate, IP allowlist, Other
• Designate the district role who will supply API credentials and approve access to each integration endpoint.
• Explain how you will verify integration health post-deployment (reconciliation reports, automated monitoring, error thresholds).

Provision API Connectors for Food Service and Transportation

• Detail the food service and transportation systems requiring connectors and the data exchange types (meal eligibility, routing, stop assignments).
• Choose the update cadence for meal eligibility and routing data: real-time, hourly, nightly batch, or weekly. Options: Real-time, Hourly, Nightly, Weekly
• Declare which student identifier will be used to match records across connectors (state student identifier, local ID). Options: State student identifier, Local student ID, Other (specify)
• Document any SLA requirements, retry policies, or vendor change windows that the connector must honor for meal and bus routing updates.
• Give the contact who will provide access to vendor API documentation or legacy endpoint credentials for connector development.

Integrate Special Education Data Exchange

• Explain the special education data elements that must be exchanged (Individualized Education Program dates, accommodations, service minutes, eligibility codes).
• Attach or list the export formats used for special education data (CSV, XML, secure SFTP, API) and any encryption requirements. Options: CSV, XML, Secure SFTP, API, Other
• Summarize required timelines for transmitting IEP changes and evaluation updates to third-party providers and state systems.
• Document any custom IEP fields or district-specific special education attributes that must be preserved in the exchange.
• Declare the coordinator who will approve special education data mappings and validate legal/compliance requirements prior to go-live.

Configure Parent and Student Portal Access

• Explain how parent and student accounts should be provisioned: bulk upload from SIS, self-registration with verification, or single sign-on (SSO). Options: Bulk upload, Self-registration, Single sign-on (SSO), Hybrid
• When will parents and students receive portal access relative to enrollment events (on registration, after identity verification, at start of term)? Options: On registration, After verification, At start of term, Other
• Clarify whether multilingual support and localized content are required in the portal and list languages needed. Options: English only, Spanish, Multiple (specify)
• Outline the self-service actions parents and students must be able to perform (update contact info, view schedules, submit attendance appeals, view grades).
• Identify any data privacy or consent workflows required for parent access (opt-ins, FERPA consents, restricted records). Options: Standard FERPA controls, Additional consent required, Restricted records excluded, Other

Run Parallel Data Synchronization and Hypercare Support

• How long do you require parallel operation with the legacy SIS (days, weeks, until reconciliation threshold met)? Options: 1 week, 2-4 weeks, Until reconciliation threshold met, Other
• What reconciliation reports and reconciliation frequency will be used to validate parallel sync (daily reconciliation, weekly summaries, discrepancy logs)? Options: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Custom
• Are there blackout windows, state reporting deadlines, or high-availability periods during which cutover cannot occur? Options: Yes (specify windows), No
• State any fixed-fee out-of-scope items for this engagement (for example: custom connector development beyond listed endpoints, full custom reporting beyond templates).
• Who will be the on-call contact for hypercare issues and what are the expected response SLAs during hypercare?

• Master Services Agreement (MSA)
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Subscription Order Form
• Service Level Agreement (SLA)
• Data Processing Agreement (DPA)
• Implementation Payment Schedule
• Change Order Agreement
• Migration Acceptance Certificate
• State Reporting Acceptance Addendum
• Public Sector Procurement & Security Rider (triggered if required by buyer procurement rules)

• Go-live Health Check (weeks 1-4)
• First Measurement Review (weeks 4-10)
• Acceptance Gate Review (around day 90)
• Monthly Operational Review (first 6 months, then as needed)
• Quarterly Success Review (ongoing)

• Deliver the monthly adoption and reporting metrics export including WAU and manual reporting time estimates.
• Publish the acceptance decision record including pass/fail per criterion and the buyer approver's acknowledgement.
• If any criteria failed, deliver a remediation plan with milestones and verification steps for conditional acceptance.
• Provide proof of legacy data archive or read-only retention along with the planned decommission or contract termination timeline.
• Adoption trends and activity review
• Confirm that teacher WAU and manual reporting hours are trending toward targets or have an agreed remediation plan.
• Maintain ticket burn-down momentum with clear next-step tasks for critical defects.
• Decide which operational tweaks will be implemented within the next 30 days.
• Reconfirm success criteria and owners
• Update the hypercare tracker with status changes and expected resolution dates for priority tickets.
• Produce a short list of prioritized configuration or training changes to implement in the next 30 days.
• Quarterly outcome metric review
• Confirm whether quarterly metrics meet the targets recorded in Implementation Scope or identify required corrective actions.
• Validate integration uptime and agree remediation for any connectors below agreed availability thresholds.
• Set a 90-day priority list tied to measurable outcomes for the next quarter.
• Provide the quarterly metrics packet showing state reporting accuracy, WAU trends, and integration uptime with source logs.
• Deliver a prioritized backlog with target delivery quarters for the top enhancements agreed in the meeting.
• Schedule technical follow-up sessions for any integration with recurring errors to define permanent fixes.
• Deployment validation checklist marked complete for items verified during the session.
• High-priority blockers identified and a short remediation plan with dates created.
• Owners confirmed for ongoing status updates and the next measurement meeting.
• Publish the deployment validation summary with sample record checks and migration job logs within 48 hours.
• Create a tracker of open defects and remediation dates for review at the next measurement meeting.
• Provide an initial user adoption snapshot (logins, gradebook entries, attendance submissions) for the next meeting.
• Present first measurement data
• Clear understanding of current metric values for teacher WAU and state reporting accuracy and how they compare to targets.
• A prioritized remediation plan with dates that brings metrics on track before the acceptance gate.
• Agreed interim checkpoints and escalation contacts for high-risk items.
• Deliver a metrics dashboard export showing weekly teacher WAU, state reporting error counts, and migration completeness for the past 6 weeks.
• Produce a remediation plan with discrete tasks, estimated effort, and target close dates for each metric gap.
• Schedule any required technical or training detailed review sessions to address identified root causes.
• Restate acceptance criteria and numeric targets
• Each acceptance criterion from Implementation Scope is evaluated and recorded as pass or fail.
• A documented acceptance decision is captured with the buyer's designated approver noted.
• Legacy system decommission or read-only retention is confirmed and a final data archive validation is scheduled.
• State reporting accuracy and manual effort
• Integration health and downstream consumer feedback
• Present outcome data against each criterion
• Root cause diagnosis for gaps
• Deployment and migration validation
• Hypercare ticket and defect burn-down
• Document pass/fail per criterion and formal acceptance decision
• Persistent issues and enhancement backlog review
• Remediation plan and timeline to acceptance gate
• Early adoption signals and usage patterns
• Next quarter operational priorities
• Open issues and blockers
• Confirm escalation path and interim check-ins
• Short-term enhancement or configuration requests
• Incumbent retirement and data archive
• Agree immediate remediation actions
• Remediation items and resolution timeline