Project Information

Bid Title

RFP Math Coaching and PL

Issuing Agency

Guilford County Schools

Location

North Carolina

Published Date

Apr 29, 2026

Closing Date

May 6, 2026

Government Level

State & Local

Status

Closed

Ref. #

6826

Original Source

Join to Access Full Details

Bid Inquiries

Join to Access Full Details

Bid Documents

Join to Access Full Details

Project Description

QuoteID	Description	Bids Closed	Scope of Work
6826	RFP Math Coaching and PL RFP Math Coaching and PL RFP Math Coaching and PL	05/06/2026	PDF PDF PDF

Attachment Preview

Direct all inquiries to:

Velicia Moore

gaddyv@gcsnc.com

GUILFORD COUNTY SCHOOLS

Request for Proposals

Addendum #1

4/29/26

Purchasing Department 501 W.

Washington Street Greensboro, NC

27401

Request for Proposals #6826

Proposal due date: May 6, 2026

Commodity: Math Coaching

NOTICE TO BIDDERS

Please be advised that this document serves as Addendum #1 for RFP# 6826, Math Coaching

Questions received from potential bidders have been consolidated to reduce duplicate

questions.

Q1 – For the required digital copy of the proposal submission, could you please confirm the

preferred format (e.g., USB drive, email, etc.)? How do we submit the digital copy of our

response?

A1 – You should email the digital copy to Velicia Moore at gaddyv@gcsnc.com.

Q2 – What is the anticipated contract term (e.g., one year with renewal options, multi-year)?

What is the length of the contract?

A2 – It is a one-year contract with an option to renew annually for three years.

Q3 – Does GCS have defined feeder patterns (elementary schools feeding into specific middle

and high schools)? If so, is this information available to vendors for planning purposes?

A3 – GCS is organized into six zones that generally follow feeder patterns and are used for

designing professional learning support. A list of schools in each zone can be found at:

https://www.gcsnc.com/about/leadership/school-zones

Q4 – The RFP identifies Eureka Math Squared, Illustrative Mathematics, and Open Up Resources

as the district's adopted HQIM. How long has each curriculum been in use, and are all three in

active, full implementation across their respective schools?

A4 – Eureka Math Squared and Illustrative Mathematics (depending on school) have been

implemented since 2023, following prior use of Eureka Math from 2018–2023. Open Up

Resources – NC Edition has been implemented in middle schools since 2018 and in high

schools since 2019. All three are in active implementation across their respective schools.

Q5 – To ensure an appropriate staffing model, are you able to share the anticipated number of

leaders, coaches, and teachers expected to participate in the job-embedded coaching cycles?

How many total educators are expected to participate in the coaching days?

A5 – The number of participants will vary based on the vendor's proposed model and the grade

band(s) they are supporting. Vendors should propose a staffing model based on their approach

and the school counts identified in this addendum.

Q6 – Does the district anticipate an equal distribution of coaching days across K–5, 6–8, and 9–

12, or is there a specific priority band for the 2026–2027 school year?

A6 – The number of coaching days will vary based on the vendor's proposed model. Depending

on available funding, GCS is seeking options for coaching support across all three grade bands.

Q7 – Of the district's schools, is there a target number of 'priority schools' for intensive site-

based support, or is the expectation that the vendor provides equitable coverage across all

campuses?

A7 – GCS does not have a fixed number of priority schools. Vendors should propose a model

that reflects the school counts for the grade band(s) they are supporting: elementary (68

schools), middle (27 schools), and/or high (30 schools). GCS reserves the right to adjust school

participation based on funding and need.

Q8 – Can the district share if a vendor has been providing similar K–12 mathematics coaching

services over the last 2–3 years, and if so, is this RFP intended to continue that scope or pivot to

a new service model?

A8 – GCS has engaged external vendors for mathematics coaching support in recent years. This

RFP is open to proposals that continue, expand, or reimagine that support.

Q9 – What is the desired ratio of teacher-facing coaching (co-teaching/modeling) versus leader-

facing coaching (capacity building for principals and curriculum facilitators)?

A9 – GCS does not have a predetermined ratio. Vendors should propose a model that reflects

their recommended approach and provide clear rationale.

Q10 – To what extent does the district desire the coaching model to integrate with current

formative data platforms (e.g., Progress Learning or NC Check-Ins 2.0)?

A10 – GCS does not require the coaching model to integrate with specific formative data

platforms currently in use.

Q11 – Is there district-wide or site-based common planning time that can be leveraged? Or is

professional learning happening in other designated times? And if so, how frequently?

A11 – There is no district-wide common planning time, as schedules are determined at the

school level. There are opportunities to collaborate with school and district leaders to plan

professional learning at designated times during the school year.

Q12 – Is GCS able to share an estimated budget range or anticipated annual investment for this

engagement? What is the district's budget for this RFP? Is there a defined budget range or 'not-

to-exceed' amount? Would the district like to see pricing included in our proposal?

A12 – GCS is not able to share a budget range at this time. Yes, vendors should include pricing

in their proposal based on their proposed scope, model, and the grade band(s) and school

counts they are supporting. All projects are awarded contingent upon funding.

Q13 – The RFP indicates that GCS may award contracts to multiple vendors. Does GCS

anticipate assigning specific schools or cohorts of schools to individual vendors?

A13 – GCS reserves the right to assign schools or grade bands to vendors based on expertise,

capacity, and available funding. Vendors should clearly indicate in their proposal which grade

bands and HQIM curricula they are prepared to support.

Q14 – If GCS engages multiple coaching vendors, how does the district envision coordinating

across vendors to ensure coherence? Is GCS open to a vendor serving in a district-level

coordination role (Sections 5.4, 5.6, 5.7)?

A14 – Coordination across vendors will be managed by the GCS Mathematics Department. If a

vendor's proposed model includes a coordination role, they are welcome to include that in their

proposal.

Q15 – Beyond the evaluation rubric provided, does GCS assign specific weights to cost relative

to the technical evaluation criteria (Sections 5.1–5.7)?

A15 – The evaluation rubric provided in the RFP reflects the criteria by which proposals will be

scored. Award will be made based on best value to GCS, which includes both technical merit

and cost.

Q16 – Is there a preferred or maximum page length for proposals? Are there specific formatting

requirements beyond those stated in the RFP?

A16 – No.

Q17 – Can you please share the required forms that will need to be submitted with the Scope of

Work?

A17 – There are no additional forms required in addition to your proposal.

Q18 – Does GCS expect coaching to reach every mathematics teacher in a school, or does the

district envision a model in which a subset of teachers receive direct coaching while all teachers

participate in professional learning?

A18 – This will depend on the model proposed by the vendor. Typically, decisions about which

teachers receive direct coaching have been made in partnership with school leadership teams.

Q19 – Are any components of the coaching cycles or professional learning (Sections 5.2 and 5.3)

eligible for virtual delivery, or does GCS require all services to be delivered on-site?

A19 – Components of coaching cycles and professional learning are eligible for virtual delivery.

Q20 – Are there specific professional learning windows (e.g., pre-service weeks, designated PD

days) or district calendar constraints we should be aware of for planning purposes?

A20 – GCS will communicate restricted planning dates to selected vendors prior to contract

start. Vendors should build flexibility into their proposed schedules.

Q21 – Does GCS currently use specific walkthrough or observation tools for monitoring HQIM

implementation? If so, should vendors align to existing tools or propose new ones?

A21 – GCS currently has walkthrough tools for monitoring HQIM implementation across K–5, 6–

8, and 9–12 mathematics. Selected vendors would be expected to make connections to these

existing tools. The district team looks forward to working closely with selected vendors and is

open to adapting or refining tools collaboratively.

Q22 – Beyond the UDL framework mentioned in the RFP, are there specific district-developed

'Instructional Playbooks' or coaching rubrics that the vendor's model must integrate with?

A22 – GCS has district-developed protocols that define effective PLC and coaching activities.

The GCS Mathematics Department will work with selected vendors to ensure alignment between

external coaching and professional learning and these existing frameworks.

Q23 – Has the UDL resource referenced in Section 5.5.2 (Lampert, 2024) been adopted

districtwide and is it currently in use in GCS schools?

A23 – This resource serves as one of several anchor texts that guide professional learning

supported by the GCS Mathematics Department.

Q24 – How many curriculum facilitators and multi-classroom coordinators currently serve GCS

mathematics? Are these roles school-based, assigned to clusters, or centrally deployed?

A24 – Curriculum facilitators and multi-classroom coaches are hired and managed at the school

level. Each school has at least one; some serve mathematics exclusively and others serve as

generalists. At the district level, GCS has three elementary mathematics coordinators and two

secondary mathematics coordinators.

Q25 – Section 5.7.2 references tools and protocols that remain with GCS beyond the contract

period. Does the district intend for vendors to transfer ownership of these materials, or for GCS

to have a perpetual right to use them?

A25 – GCS expects that tools, resources, and protocols developed or customized as part of this

engagement will remain available for GCS use beyond the contract period. Vendors should

describe their approach to knowledge transfer and sustainability in their proposal.

Q26 – How many days of coaching and professional learning is GCS planning for?

A26 – GCS is not prescribing a fixed number of coaching or professional learning days. Vendors

should propose a model that reflects their recommended approach for the grade band(s) they

are supporting, with clear rationale for the scope of services.

Commodity Codes

• NAICS 541611Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services
• NAICS 611430Professional and Management Development Training

* Disclaimer: Government BidHub provides information on bids, RFPs (Requests for Proposals), and RFQs (Requests for Qualifications) solely for convenience and informational purposes. This site is not an official public notice board. For official details, responses, or inquiries, please contact the relevant government agency directly.