School transportation departments navigate constrained budgets, staffing challenges and rapidly evolving technology that rely on procurement tools: Request for Information (RFI), Request for Proposals (RFP), Request for Bids (RFB) and pilot programs.
Using those tools properly yields optimal results. RFIs help districts—particularly large ones—understand market capabilities before committing to specifications.
RFPs allow districts to evaluate solutions based on expertise, implementation plans and long-term value utilizing a scale or scoring system for multiple companies offering similar products or services. Factors include sustainability, customer support and training. RFBs are critical for standardized purchases, ensuring transparency, fairness and fiscal accountability through objective competition. Bid specs yielding the most results consider the operational needs and what problem needs resolution.
Industry consultant Alexandra Robinson noted an RFI is a fact-finding process to ask questions, research the product and conduct demonstrations. These findings result in writing the RFP or RFB. The proof is in the real-world pilot test of the solution.
A School Transportation News reader survey last year indicated 32 percent of transportation directors and supervisors engage in pilot programs. Thirty-five percent said they submit an RFI prior to submitting an RFP. Software provider Transfinder noted it participated in 217 percent more RFPs in 2025 than in 2024.
Ashley Jones, assistant director of special projects for Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) transportation department in North Carolina, noted challenges faced in preparing for an RFP process include the hurdle of balancing the wish list of operations and maintenance with budget restraints.
“We also struggle with ensuring what we buy today won’t be obsolete in two to three years,” she added. CMS released an RFP in December for transportation telematics service and hardware, to improve upon GPS tracking, driver behavior metrics and on-time arrival rates. The district formed an RFP team including transportation operations, IT team members and finance. “This prevents us from buying a software solution we can’t support or maintain,” Jones said.
CMS utilizes a weighted scoring rubric that considers pricing, experience, specific vendor offerings, and references. It holds a pre-bid meeting internally but not publicly for potential companies placing a bid, Jones noted.
“This is included in the bid and part of our scope of work,” she added. “Vendors can ask additional questions during the process if needed.”
The decision to bid is based on several review meetings involving the CMS internal transportation team to determine basic needs and potential operational gaps.
“Before drafting the scope of work, the team collaborated to categorize requirements into fundamental needs versus additional capabilities,” said Jones. “Key drivers identified for this included the benefit of an accurate telematics platform including the essential need for accurate reports for bus arrivals, the desire to improve transparency between parents and school transportation, and the requirement for advanced diagnostic tools to streamline workflow for the maintenance team.”
When developing specifications, it is crucial to ensure a district is requesting technology that is current and open to competition, Jones noted.
“Specifications must be developed from market research, pilot program opportunities and the internal transportation team,” she added.
A standardized amount of bonding and insurance is required of all vendors. Onsite maintenance is handled through an internal team for oversite. The bid winner produces a maintenance and return merchandise authorization plan.
Jones noted each vendor has different parameters regarding their product warranties. This information is included in the grading rubric and considered during bid awards. To ensure system effectiveness, the RFP includes a mandatory continuation plan.
“We require the selected vendor to assign a dedicated, full-time employee to oversee the entire initial rollout,” Jones said. “The dedicated support must continue for an additional six months to facilitate continuous training for staff and immediately address software or hardware issues that may occur in the rollout period.”
Daniel Kang, Los Angeles Unified School District transportation director, noted a source selection committee was established in the district’s most recent RFP for upgraded GPS, tablets and camera systems.
The committee of subject matter experts from dispatch, technology, fleet, and the deputy director interviewed those who already utilize the top three scoring systems.
“Having direct conversations with fellow school districts allowed for honest feedback,” noted Kang. Key questions addressed the system’s highlights, outstanding concerns, whether the district would purchase the product again, and lessons learned.
When Austin (Texas) ISD put out an RFP in 2017 for stop-arm camera technology, it included a request for a six-month pilot program “to see how they would perform—the technology, reporting system, our interaction with our police department,” said Kris Hafezizadeh, Austin ISD executive director of transportation and vehicle services.
Austin ISD used the previous solution until last April, at which point district officials released another RFP to review other existing technologies, vendors and opportunities, using similar specs from the first RFP.
Hafezizadeh assembled a panel including transportation, law enforcement and legal representation to observe a presentation by top vendors, awarding the contract after school board approval to BusPatrol effective last May 1.
Hafezizadeh noted the district’s procurement office handles much of the RFP details: Writing the correct specs, considering the technology involved, and others involved in the process.
The district’s panel viewed proposals using Bonfire procurement technology, a cloud-based platform offering online solicitation, submission contract evaluation and management, and vendor performance. Hafezizadeh said RFP priorities were customer service, quality and responsiveness followed by financial and technical aspects.
“If you’re dealing with a district [of] our size, we are not awarding something to a company that may not know anything about [the issue] and are still trying to get the experience,” he said.
The contract stipulates Austin ISD gets 65 percent of each $300 citation, and BusPatrol gets 35 percent. “With the stop-arm cameras, we want the highest revenue shared with us, and the best technology and process as possible,” Hafezizadeh said.
Equipment, installation implementation and maintenance is no cost to the district, said Hafezizadeh, adding funds from the citations are used to pay police officers for time they invest in approving or disqualifying violations as well as the appeal judge the district hires to hear monthly appeals.
Hafezizadeh noted support requires attending community and PTA meetings and discussions with local and state legislators. The Austin ISD web page outlines the stop-arm law and consequences when motorists are cited.
In creating specs, Hafezizadeh said he wants a turnkey operation, including maintenance. Also, key are the implementation timeline and training bus drivers on the technology.
The RFP also addresses district and vendor responsibilities regarding financial matters, bonding and insurance. The process includes what kind of insurance the company needs to have to be qualified to send its proposal. When a video camera is not working properly, BusPatrol is tasked with sending a maintenance team to check on its status and make repairs. Hafezizadeh serves as project manager. A district police chief serves as a direct contact for violations, hearings or legal issues.
In its contract, BusPatrol indicated what it will take care of in the case of a collision, such as if a camera is hit and damaged.
“They replace it,” Hefezizadeh said. “The equipment belongs to them.”
As part of a continuation plan, he meets with BusPatrol bi-weekly to review previous months’ reports and discuss topics such as providing more community educational opportunities.
Ohio Pilot Programs Target Improved Reliability, Efficiency
As student transportation professionals across the country grapple a host of challenges, two pilot programs in Ohio seek insights into how to improve access, reliability and cost-effectiveness in pupil transportation.
The Ohio Department of Education and Workforce (ODEW) said the pilot programs aim to inform future strategies and guide the development of comprehensive solutions to address ongoing absenteeism, high transportation costs, outdated student rosters, noncompliance with individualized education programs (IEP), and reliability and efficiency.
Established under the 135th General Assembly’s House bills 33 and 250, the programs are designed to explore alternative transportation methods and address inefficiencies in the current system. ODE established the pilots for the Educational Service Center of Central Ohio (ESCCO) and the Montgomery County Educational Service Center (MCESC). They launched the pilots for the 2024-2025 school year. In a program summary, ODEW said both organizations are tasked with identifying students facing transportation difficulties, arranging approved vehicles for eligible students, and ensuring compliance with transportation requirements for students with disabilities as outlined in their IEPs.
ODEW funds the programs by deducting the statewide average cost per student—$1,214.29 for fiscal year 2025—from participating districts’ state transportation payments. Additionally, the educational service centers received federal Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief grant funds to support transportation expenditures.
The MCESC pilot program, branded as Ride Smart Ohio, focuses on using alternative vehicles with a capacity of nine passengers or fewer, according to ODEW.
The program not only provides transportation for students but also creates flexible income opportunities for teachers, staff and community members. Ride Smart Ohio utilizes advanced software from Trust-Ed to ensure a secure and user-friendly system, empowering school staff to play an active role in transportation efforts.
In fiscal year 2025, MCESC received over $493,000 in funding for the pilot program. For fiscal years 2026 and 2027, the program will receive $250,000 annually to continue its operations.
As of November, Ride Smart Ohio entered service contracts with six districts, including West Carrollton, Mad River, Valley View, Northmont, Oakwood Schools, and Dayton Public Schools. Seven active drivers currently provide daily transportation for 13 students, including seven who attend Ohio Deaf and Blind Education Services.
The program has prioritized safety and compliance, completing 100 percent of vehicle inspections and driver physicals before the school year began. Updated driver training modules have been implemented to align with state rules. Looking ahead, Ride Smart Ohio plans to recruit and onboard new drivers, enhance data reporting, schedule refresher training, and review fleet management before winter maintenance.
The ESCCO pilot program, which concluded last June, focused on providing transportation for Columbus City Schools. During its operation, 23 drivers transported 60 to 65 students to three community schools. The program received over $5 million in funding for fiscal year 2025.
ODEW highlighted key findings in September. It found that participating students saw improved attendance, averaging 13 more days in school compared to the previous year. Non-school bus transportation using smaller vehicles proved effective and reliable, but the cost of third-party contractors was significantly higher—more than five times the amount received through state transportation funding.
Additionally, outdated and inaccurate student roster information from schools created delays and extra work. Despite these challenges, families and community school participants expressed high satisfaction with the program state funding model.
Editor’s Note: As reprinted from the March 2026 issue of School Transportation News.
Related: Building a Successful RFP
Related: Student Transportation Veteran Provides Tips for School Bus Technology RFPs
Related: Leading the Modernization of Student Transportation
Related: (Recorded Webinar) Evaluating School Bus Technology RFPs and Suppliers
