Educational Technology Tool/Solution

Request for Proposals - Educational Technology Solution Project Kitty Hawk
PROJECT KITTY HAWK
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Educational Technology Tool / Solution
Enhancing Student Engagement, Learning Communication & Authentic Assessment
Issued by Project Kitty Hawk, Inc. ("PKH")
RFP Reference # [RFP-EDTECH-2026-01]
Issue Date October 9, 2026
Notification of Intent to Respond October 16, 2026
Questions Due October 16, 2026
Proposals Due October 30, 2026, 4pm EDT
Anticipated Award December 2026
Contact PKH Learning Experience and Design Team
(PKHLXD@projectkittyhawk.com)
Purpose
Project Kitty Hawk invites qualified educational technology vendors to submit proposals for a
technology solution that advances student engagement, enables students to communicate their
learning and competencies, and supports authentic assessment in higher education - while
thoughtfully addressing the realities of AI in academic environments.
(C) 2026 Project Kitty Hawk | RFP-EDTECH-2026-01 | For Recipient Use Only

Request for Proposals - Educational Technology Solution Project Kitty Hawk
SECTION 1 - ABOUT PROJECT KITTY HAWK
1.1 Who We Are
Project Kitty Hawk (PKH) is an education technology and services nonprofit dedicated to helping North
Carolina's public universities attract and educate more working adults.
Born from the UNC System's commitment to opportunity and innovation, we partner with the
state's institutions to create online programs and services specifically designed to meet the unique
needs of adult learners. Together, we're working toward North Carolina's 2030 attainment goal: 2
million adults with a degree or credential, empowering individuals, strengthening the workforce, and
driving the state's economic growth.
We recognize that meaningful assessment goes beyond multiple-choice examinations and requires
authentic tasks that reflect the complexity of professional and civic life. We equally recognize that
artificial intelligence is no longer an emerging force; it is woven into the fabric of every discipline and
workplace.
Rather than treating AI as a threat to academic integrity, we seek tools that help faculty and students
engage with AI thoughtfully: establishing clear boundaries where human reasoning must stand alone,
while empowering students to leverage AI tools responsibly, transparently, and skillfully where
appropriate.
1.2 Why We Are Issuing This RFP
Several intersecting needs have prompted this solicitation:
* Students across our programs struggle to articulate their learning - not because they lack skills,
but because they lack structured opportunities and scaffolding to reflect on, document, and
communicate what they know and can do.
* Faculty face mounting pressure to design assessments that are both rigorous and resistant to AI-
assisted shortcuts, without penalizing students who use AI tools constructively.
* Academic programs need better mechanisms for demonstrating learning outcomes to
accreditors, employers, and other external stakeholders.
* The current assessment ecosystem is fragmented: tools for engagement, portfolio capture, skills
documentation, and assessment analytics are siloed across multiple platforms.
We are seeking a unified or deeply integrated technology solution that addresses these challenges
holistically.
(C) 2026 Project Kitty Hawk | RFP-EDTECH-2026-01 | For Recipient Use Only

Request for Proposals - Educational Technology Solution Project Kitty Hawk
SECTION 2 - SUMMARY OF SERVICES NEEDED
Project Kitty Hawk is seeking an educational technology solution that fulfills the following core service
areas. Vendors are not required to address every area through a single monolithic platform but must
clearly articulate how their proposed solution covers applicable areas listed below either natively or
through documented integration with third-party tools. Please note that PKH operates in a Canvas
environment with an enterprise instance. We support individual institutions utilizing sub-accounts. Data
from potential technology tools cannot cross sub-accounts to ensure privacy for each sub-account.
2.1 Tools that Prove They Help Student Achieve Learning Outcomes
Adaptive / retrieval practice tools: Practice engines that adjust difficulty or content based on
performance (spaced repetition, mastery-based progression). Proof: measurable retention or transfer
gains, not just completion or time-on-task.
Writing & revision tools: Tools that scaffold the drafting process - outlining, iterative feedback, revision
tracking - rather than only evaluating a final product. Proof: revision quality correlates with improved
final work against a rubric.
Competency-mapping tools: Systems that tie student artifacts to specific program- or course-level
competencies over time. Proof: longitudinal evidence of skill development, useful for accreditation and
outcome verification.
2.2 Tools That Foster Authentic Engagement in an AI-Enabled Environment
Structured peer discussion / peer review platforms: Tools that use protocols (e.g., calibrated peer
review, structured response requirements) to force genuine engagement with specific peer content
rather than generic posting. Proof: engagement quality correlates with demonstrated mastery of a course
outcome.
Collaborative annotation tools: Shared annotation of texts, code, or data sets where the interaction is
visible, tied to a specific artifact, and inherently hard to fake since it requires responding to what is
actually on the page.
Team-based / multiplayer problem-solving platforms: Simulations or exercises where students
collaborate with each other to solve a shared problem: crisis response, strategy, design challenges. Proof:
individual contribution tracking plus evidence that collaboration improved outcome mastery.
Group project contribution tools: Tools that make individual contributions to teamwork visible to
instructors, discouraging free-riding and giving insight into process, not just final output.
2.3 Tools That Enable Asynchronous Practice of Traditionally In-Person Skills
Video-based self- and peer-assessment: Students record a skill demonstration (presentation, teaching,
clinical technique, performance) and receive rubric-based peer or instructor feedback asynchronously.
Written case analysis / branching decision simulations: Text-based scenarios (business, legal, healthcare,
ethics) where students make sequential decisions and see consequences unfold, without needing to be
physically present or synchronously engaged.
Lab and technical simulations: Virtual labs (science, engineering) or coding/data sandboxes that let
students practice hands-on or technical skills outside a physical lab setting. Proof: competency
equivalence to in-person lab work.
Studio / creative critique platforms: Asynchronous critique tools for creative disciplines (art, design,
music, film) that replicate the studio crit experience outside class time.
Practicum / fieldwork documentation tools: Structured self-assessment and rubric-based observation
tools for clinical, teaching, or fieldwork placements, allowing skill demonstration and feedback without
requiring in-person observation for every instance.
(C) 2026 Project Kitty Hawk | RFP-EDTECH-2026-01 | For Recipient Use Only

Request for Proposals - Educational Technology Solution Project Kitty Hawk
Important Note on AI
Vendors must not frame AI detection as the primary value proposition of their solution. We are
looking for tools that treat AI as a dimension of the broader educational environment; one that
requires thoughtful design, not a blanket prohibition.
The proposed solutions to the service areas listed above must also include the following reporting,
analytics, implementation, and support features.
Reporting & Analytics
* Program-level outcome reporting for accreditation and continuous improvement.
* Student-facing dashboards that show progress toward skill/learning outcome attainment.
* Faculty and administrator reporting on cohort-level engagement and assessment trends.
* Data export capabilities in standard formats (CSV, LTI).
Implementation & Support
* Onboarding and training resources for faculty, students, and administrators.
* Ongoing technical support with defined SLAs.
* A roadmap for product development that reflects input from institutional partners.
* FERPA-compliant data practices and SOC 2 (or equivalent) security certification.
(C) 2026 Project Kitty Hawk | RFP-EDTECH-2026-01 | For Recipient Use Only

Request for Proposals - Educational Technology Solution Project Kitty Hawk
SECTION 3 - ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION AND PROPOSAL SUBMISSION
REQUIREMENTS
All proposals must be submitted electronically by October 30, 2026 at 4:00pm EDT to the contact listed
on the cover page. Late submissions will not be considered. Proposals must be submitted in PDF format
unless otherwise specified.
3.1 Required Proposal Components
Proposals must include all the following components in the order listed:
1. Cover Letter - A brief letter (1-2 pages) identifying your organization, acknowledging receipt of
this RFP, confirming eligibility, and expressing your intent to propose.
2. Executive Summary - A concise (no more than 2 pages) overview of your proposed solution,
why it is the best fit for Project Kitty Hawk, and a summary of your pricing approach.
3. Company Background - See Section 4 below (Vendor Qualifications) for required content.
4. Solution Description - A detailed description of your proposed platform or solution, aligned to
the five service areas described in Section 2. Use headings that mirror the Section 2 structure for
easy cross-referencing.
5. Services Needed Responses - A response to at least one of the three core service areas
described in Section 2. Responses should be narrative (300-600 words per service area) and
may include screenshots, workflow diagrams, or links to video walkthroughs.
6. AI Approach Statement - A dedicated section (no more than 2 pages) describing your
organization's philosophy and technical approach to AI - including AI-enablement features, AI
disclosure/detection capabilities, and your roadmap for responsible AI development in your
product.
7. Technical Specifications - A summary of system architecture, LMS integration capabilities (LTI,
API, SSO), data security certifications, accessibility compliance (WCAG 2.1 AA or higher), and
performance SLAs.
8. Implementation Plan - A proposed timeline and methodology for implementation, including
onboarding, training, and go-live milestones.
9. Pricing Proposal - A clear, itemized pricing structure including: base platform licensing (per
seat, institutional, or enterprise), pricing to scale over 3 years if student/faculty use grows,
implementation and onboarding fees, ongoing support and maintenance costs, and any optional
add-on modules.
10. References - Contact information for three (3) higher education institutions currently using
your solution, with a brief description of how each is using it.
11. Sample Agreement / Terms of Service - A draft of the standard agreement or terms of service
your organization uses with higher education clients.
3.2 Proposal Format & Length
* Maximum length: 20 pages (excluding appendices, screenshots, and sample agreement).
* Font: 11-point serif or sans-serif; 1-inch margins minimum.
(C) 2026 Project Kitty Hawk | RFP-EDTECH-2026-01 | For Recipient Use Only

Request for Proposals - Educational Technology Solution Project Kitty Hawk
* File naming convention: [VendorName]_PKH_RFP_EDTECH_2026.pdf
* Appendices may include product documentation, case studies, or additional screenshots but
should be clearly labeled and referenced from the main proposal body.
3.3 Questions & Clarifications
Vendors may submit written questions to PKHLXD@projectkittyhawk.com no later than October 16,
2026. Questions and anonymized responses will be shared with all registered vendors via email no later
than October 23, 2026. Vendors are responsible for monitoring communications from Project Kitty Hawk
during the RFP period.
3.4 Demos & Presentations
Shortlisted vendors will be invited to participate in a live product demonstration (approximately 60-90
minutes) with a cross-functional evaluation committee. Demonstrations will be scheduled during
November/December 2026. Vendors should plan to demonstrate the solution against at least two of the
"services needed" as described in Section 2.
3.5 Evaluation Criteria
Proposals will be evaluated by a cross-functional review committee using the following weighted
criteria:
Evaluation Criterion Weight Max Points
Functionality & Feature Fit (Section 2) 30% 30
AI Approach & Academic Integrity Capabilities 20% 20
Ease of Use & Student/Faculty Experience 15% 15
Technical Architecture, Security & Integrations 10% 10
Implementation Approach & Vendor Support 10% 10
Pricing & Total Cost of Ownership 10% 10
Vendor Qualifications & References 5% 5
TOTAL 100% 100
3.6 Disclaimers
Vendors are advised that PKH is not committed to any course of action as a result of its issuance of this
RFP and/or its receipt of a proposal from any specific vendor or other firms in response to it. In
particular, vendors should note that PKH may:
* reject any proposal which does not conform to instructions and specifications which are issued
herein;
* not accept proposals after the stated submission deadline;
* not necessarily accept the lowest priced proposal;
(C) 2026 Project Kitty Hawk | RFP-EDTECH-2026-01 | For Recipient Use Only

Request for Proposals - Educational Technology Solution Project Kitty Hawk
* reject all proposals, if it so decides;
* negotiate with one or more firms;
* award a contract in connection with this RFP at any time;
* award only a portion of the contract;
* make no award of a contract.
Proposals will be evaluated by a cross-functional review committee using the weighted criteria listed
above.
3.7 Confidentiality
This RFP, and all information provided to the Vendor in connection herewith, is PKH's confidential and
proprietary information. The Vendor may not disclose this RFP, or any information that PKH may
provide the Vendor to assist the Vendor in developing a Proposal, to any other person or entity without
the prior written approval of PKH. The Vendor may use such information solely for the purpose of
responding to this RFP. Absent PKH's prior written consent, the Vendor may not disclose to any third
party or person that it has received this RFP, the substance of this RFP, or any PKH decision with respect
to the Vendor's Proposal. The Vendor may not make copies of this RFP, nor other documents provided
to the Vendor in connection herewith, without PKH's prior written consent.
The Vendor will maintain accurate records of the names of persons who have seen this RFP (or other
documents provided in connection herewith) and, upon PKH's request, will identify all such persons to
PKH.
3.8 News Releases
Vendors who are submitting a proposal are not at liberty to discuss this RFP outside the PKH community.
If a Vendor is awarded a contract, they are not to release the details, either orally or in writing, of this
RFP without prior written consent of PKH. The PKH Senior Vice President of Partnership Success shall
review and approve any written news releases prior to release.
3.9 No Contractual Relationship
Nothing contained in this RFP creates, nor shall be construed to create any contractual relationship
between PKH and any Vendor. PKH makes no commitment in or by virtue of this RFP to purchase any
services or supplies from any Vendor. Nor does receipt of any Vendor's Proposal place PKH under
obligation to enter an agreement to purchase supplies/services ("Agreement") with that or any other
Vendor. Such Agreement shall be in a form acceptable to PKH's legal counsel and shall be signed by
both parties. The Vendor agrees, however, to incorporate its representations set forth in its response to
this RFP concerning performance into the Agreement. Each Proposal shall constitute an offer, which
remains valid for a minimum period of 180 days after the Proposals Due date.
(C) 2026 Project Kitty Hawk | RFP-EDTECH-2026-01 | For Recipient Use Only

Request for Proposals - Educational Technology Solution Project Kitty Hawk
SECTION 4 - VENDOR QUALIFICATIONS
Project Kitty Hawk is committed to selecting a vendor partner that is not only technically capable but
organizationally stable, mission-aligned, and experienced in the complexities of higher education.
Vendors must demonstrate the following minimum qualifications to be considered.
4.1 Minimum Eligibility Requirements
Proposals that do not meet the following requirements will be disqualified from further review:
* The vendor must be an incorporated legal entity in good standing in its jurisdiction of operation.
* The vendor must have a minimum of three (3) years of demonstrated operation as an
educational technology company or division.
* The vendor must be able to provide at least three (3) verifiable references from accredited
higher education institutions that are currently active customers.
* The vendor's solution must be FERPA-compliant and must operate in accordance with applicable
U.S. data privacy laws.
* The vendor's solution must meet WCAG 2.1 Level AA accessibility standards (documentation
required).
4.2 Preferred Qualifications
The following qualifications are not mandatory but will strengthen a proposal:
* Experience serving institutions with programs under regional or specialized accreditation (e.g.,
SACSCOC, HLC, AACSB, CACREP, CCNE, CAHME, NASPAA).
* SOC 2 Type II certification or equivalent third-party security audit within the past 24 months.
* Published case studies demonstrating measurable student outcomes (engagement, retention,
skill attainment) attributable to the vendor's solution.
* Participation in or alignment with national higher education AI governance frameworks (e.g.,
EDUCAUSE AI in Higher Education guidelines, UNESCO AI Ethics recommendations).
* An established customer advisory board or formal mechanism for incorporating institutional
feedback into product development.
* Interoperability with at least three major LMS platforms (Canvas, Blackboard, Moodle, D2L) via
certified LTI 1.3 integration.
4.3 Required Company Background Documentation
In the Company Background section of the proposal, vendors must include:
1. Organization name, address, and website.
2. Year founded and a brief history of the company, including major product milestones.
3. Ownership structure (publicly traded, private, nonprofit, investor-backed) and any parent
company relationships.
4. Total number of full-time employees and the size of the product and engineering teams
specifically. Please specify if employees are US or Internationally based.
5. Location where your data is stored, in the US or off-shore.
(C) 2026 Project Kitty Hawk | RFP-EDTECH-2026-01 | For Recipient Use Only

Request for Proposals - Educational Technology Solution Project Kitty Hawk
6. Number of current higher education institutional customers (as distinguished from individual
user accounts).
7. A brief description of the company's mission and its approach to the intersection of technology
and education.
8. Any pending or active litigation relevant to product performance, data security, or contractual
disputes.
9. Financial stability documentation (at minimum, a signed letter from an executive attesting to
the organization's financial health; audited financials or a Dun & Bradstreet report preferred).
4.4 Subcontractors
If the vendor intends to use subcontractors for any component of the proposed solution (including
hosting, implementation, or support), this must be disclosed in the proposal. The vendor remains the
primary point of accountability for all deliverables and SLAs regardless of subcontractor involvement.
4.5 Conflicts of Interest
Vendors must disclose any existing relationships with Project Kitty Hawk employees, board members, or
advisors. Project Kitty Hawk reserves the right to disqualify proposals where an undisclosed conflict of
interest is identified.
A Note on Partnerships
Project Kitty Hawk is not simply purchasing software. We are seeking a vendor that will be a long-
term strategic partner in our educational mission. We place significant weight on vendor
responsiveness, transparency, and alignment with our values around equity, access, and student
success. We look forward to reviewing your proposal.
- End of Request for Proposals -
(C) 2026 Project Kitty Hawk | RFP-EDTECH-2026-01 | For Recipient Use Only