How to Sell EdTech to School Districts

  1. Blog
  2. Demand & Channels

By Saroj Jha · October 1, 2026 · 11 min read

A school district buys through a chain of small approvals, not one decision. Win each approval in order, and get into the district’s budget before it is set. The six steps below show how, with one example company.

In three numbers

  • 86% of 607 US districts surveyed vet digital tools, even free ones, before schools use them[1]
  • 54% of district leaders ranked budget shortages among their top three challenges in 2026, up from 33%[2]
  • July 1 the day the school fiscal year starts in most states; a few start in September or October[3]

A district sale is a sequence of small approvals by different people, each of whom can say no. Founders who treat it like a software sale to a business usually stall at the privacy review or miss the budget.

In my view, the fix is to plan the whole chain before the first meeting. Here is the order I would work through it with a founder, and what to bring to each step.

Running case: Example Co. Fictional

Example Co. is a seed-stage EdTech startup with an AI reading coach for children in kindergarten to grade 3: children read aloud to it, it flags mistakes, and adults get a weekly progress report. It is winning independent tutoring centers first. Districts are its later segment, once it has evidence of reading gains. In this post the team plans what its first district deal will require, so it can prepare while it sells to centers. Example Co. and all its numbers are illustrative.

Step 1: Map the approval chain before you pitch

The path varies by district and state, but in my model a purchase passes through seven approvals. A champion finds you, usually a curriculum and instruction leader, a technology leader or a group of teachers with a problem. Teachers try it. The technology team vets it. District leaders judge the evidence. Finance finds the money in next year’s budget or an existing grant. Procurement picks the route: a direct purchase, a request for proposals (RFP) or a cooperative contract. Finally the board approves larger contracts, and rollout and training begin.

The research backs up the early steps. In CoSN’s 2026 survey of 607 district technology leaders, 86% of districts vet digital tools, even free ones, before schools use them, and 61% keep a list of approved apps[1]. And in RAND’s 2026 study of math curriculum adoption, “the final decision was most often made by district-level staff”[4].

Figure 1 In my model a purchase needs seven approvals, and four of them sit in the district office
  • Where it starts
  • District office
  • School board
  1. Where it starts 1 Champion finds you
  2. 2 Teachers try it in class
  3. District office 3 Technology vets privacy, security and fit Example Co. prepares now: privacy and security documents
  4. 4 Leaders judge the evidence Example Co. prepares now: a Tier 4 logic model
  5. 5 Finance finds the money
  6. 6 Procurement picks the route
  7. School board 7 Board approves larger contracts
  • Won with a champion and a pilot, Steps 2 and 3
  • Example Co. can prepare these two now Privacy and security documents, and the evidence: a Tier 4 logic model
  • Set by the buying route and the budget, Steps 5 and 6

Example Co. Fictional

86% of districts vet digital tools, even free ones, before schools use them

61% keep a list of approved apps

“The final decision was most often made by district-level staff”, in RAND’s study of math curriculum adoption

The seven approvals are my model; their order and names vary by district and state. Survey figures: CoSN, U.S. State of EdTech 2026, 607 districts[1]; RAND (2026)[4]. Example Co.’s preparation, from Step 1, is fictional.

Example Co., step 1 Fictional

The team maps the chain for one mid-sized district near its best tutoring centers (fictional). Two approvals it can prepare for today, before it has a champion: the evidence (its Tier 4 logic model) and the privacy and security documents. The rest start with a person.

Do this

Draw the chain for one target district. Write a name, or “unknown”, at each step, and mark the steps you have never passed before.

Step 2: Find a champion and give each person their own message

Contact the person who owns the problem, then bring in the others early. Each needs a different message:

Table 1. What each role in the buying group needs from you
Role What they need from you
Curriculum and instruction leader Fit with state standards and the current curriculum; evidence of learning
Teachers Time saved, ease of use, a clear classroom routine
Principal Impact on the school’s goals; training included
Technology leader Privacy agreement, security summary, rostering and single sign-on
Finance or business office A price that fits a known budget line, now and at renewal
Superintendent and board A short case linking the product to district priorities

In my view, the curriculum and instruction leader and the teachers usually carry the most weight, but any of these roles can slow a deal. (Rostering means loading class lists into your product automatically; single sign-on lets staff log in with their school account.)

Example Co., step 2 Fictional

Its likely champion is the district’s K–3 literacy coordinator, introduced by a tutoring-center owner whose students attend the district’s schools (fictional). The team writes one sentence for each role before the first meeting.

Figure 2 One product, six messages: each role in Example Co.’s buying group hears the answer to its own question

Example Co.’s AI reading coach for K–3 Fictional

  • C Curriculum leader Likely champion: the K–3 literacy coordinator — Their question Does it fit our standards, and does it work? — “Daily read-aloud practice, matched to your K–3 reading standards”
  • T Teachers — Their question Will it save time in class? — “Every child reads aloud each day; you see who needs help, without extra marking”
  • P Principal — Their question Does it serve the school’s goals? — “Progress for every K–3 reader, with training for your staff included”
  • IT Technology leader — Their question Is student data safe? — “A signed privacy agreement and a security summary, before any pilot”
  • F Finance office — Their question Which budget line pays, now and at renewal? — “Start with one grade, priced to renew from core funds”
  • SB Superintendent and board — Their question How does it serve district priorities? — “Reading gains tied to the district’s literacy goal”

Roles and needs follow the table above, from my practice. Example Co.’s champion and messages, from Step 2, are fictional.

Do this

Write the six sentences before your first meeting. Send the champion the ones for the people they will need to convince.

Free tool

Write one brief for each person who signs off

The free Three-Lens Persona Brief builds a profile around goals, pain points, objections, triggers and channels, so each role in the buying group gets its own message.

Open the persona brief

Step 3: Run a pilot built to turn into a contract

Agree on four things before the pilot starts:

  • The success measures. Use the ones districts already trust, such as test scores, teacher feedback and usage data. Pick one of each where you can.
  • The length. Long enough to see use settle, short enough to finish before budgets are set.
  • The decision date. Tie it to the district’s budget calendar, not your quarter.
  • Training. In RAND’s math study, most principals bought the vendor’s professional learning bundled with the curriculum[4]. Include it in the pilot, so the district sees the product at its best.

Then write the pilot report yourself, in the district’s language: the goal, what was measured, what happened, and what it would cost to roll out. Make it easy for your champion to forward.

Example Co., step 3 Fictional

The team plans an eight-week pilot in six kindergarten to grade 2 classrooms, measured by the district’s own reading screener, a short teacher survey and weekly usage. The decision date falls in winter, before the draft budget. All details are fictional.

Figure 3 Example Co. agrees four things before its eight-week pilot, and writes the report itself

Before Agree four things

  • Measures The district’s reading screener, a teacher survey, weekly usage
  • Length 8 weeks in six K–2 classrooms
  • Decision date In winter, before the draft budget
  • Training Included in the pilot

Signed by the champion before any classroom starts

During Help use settle

  1. Week 1
  2. Week 2
  3. Week 3
  4. Week 4
  5. Week 5
  6. Week 6
  7. Week 7
  8. Week 8

Every week: a short usage note to the champion

  • Week 1 Fix setup issues
  • Week 4 Mid-point check with teachers
  • Week 8 Final usage and screener results

After Write the report

  1. The goal
  2. What was measured
  3. What happened
  4. The cost to roll out

Decision in winter In the district’s words, easy for the champion to forward, before the draft budget

Example Co.’s plan Fictional

The four agreements and the report outline are my practice from Step 3. Example Co.’s pilot plan is fictional.

Do this

Put the four agreements in a one-page pilot plan and ask your champion to sign it before any classroom starts.

Step 4: Have the privacy and security paperwork ready

In my experience, the privacy and security review is where startups lose the most time. Have these ready before the first meeting:

  • A privacy policy written for schools, covering FERPA and, if children under 13 use the product, COPPA. To receive student records without parental consent under FERPA, you must work under the district’s direct control and use them only for the purpose it authorized[5].
  • A signed data-privacy agreement. Many districts use a standard one, such as the Student Data Privacy Consortium’s National Data Privacy Agreement[6]; offer to sign the district’s.
  • A security summary: where data is stored, who can see it, and what happens when a contract ends.
  • Product safety and accessibility information. In the CoSN survey, 55% of districts require vendors to provide safety information and 29% accessibility information[1]. Under the Justice Department’s ADA rule, web content and apps a district provides, including through vendors, must meet WCAG 2.1 Level AA from April 2027 or April 2028, depending on its population[7],[8].
  • Interoperability details: rostering, single sign-on and how data moves to the systems the district already uses. 52% of districts name someone to review interoperability during purchasing[1].
  • An evidence summary stating your ESSA evidence tier and the study you are running next.
Figure 4 Most districts vet tools before use, but fewer than a third ask vendors about accessibility

Share of 607 US school districts, 2026

  • Vet digital tools before schools use themIncluding free tools 86% District practice
  • Keep a list of approved apps 61% District practice
  • Require safety information from vendors56% in the report’s summary 55% Asked of vendors
  • Name a person to review interoperabilityDuring purchasing 52% District practice
  • Require interoperability information from vendors 46% Asked of vendors
  • Require accessibility information from vendors 29% Asked of vendors
Show the numbers as a table
What districts do Type Share of districts
Vet digital tools before schools use them District practice 86%
Keep a list of approved apps District practice 61%
Require safety information from vendors Asked of vendors 55%
Name a person to review interoperability District practice 52%
Require interoperability information from vendors Asked of vendors 46%
Require accessibility information from vendors Asked of vendors 29%

CoSN, U.S. State of EdTech 2026: one response per district from its most senior education technology leader, collected January to March 2026[1]. The safety share is 55% in the procurement chart and 56% in the key findings. Bars drawn to scale from zero.

One rule shapes all of this. The FTC says data collected with a school’s authorization cannot be used “for any commercial purpose, including marketing, advertising, or other commercial purposes unrelated to the provision of the school-requested online service”[9]. The Department of Education warns that using student data for “targeted advertising directed to students or their parents” “will likely violate federal or state privacy laws”[10]. Say so plainly in your documents; technology leaders look for it. The FTC’s amended COPPA Rule took effect on June 23, 2025, with most changes due by April 22, 2026; the FTC did not adopt its proposed ed tech changes[11]. This is general information, not legal advice.

Figure 5 Five sets of rules sit behind a district’s privacy and accessibility review
  • Rule What it means for a vendor Dates to know
  • FERPA 34 CFR Part 99 A district can share student records without parental consent only with a “school official”: you do work its staff would otherwise do, under its direct control over the records, and use them only for the authorized purpose[5],[10]. Regulation last amended in 2011; the Education Department’s vendor guidance dates from 2015
  • COPPA 16 CFR Part 312, children under 13 A school can consent in place of parents only when the data serves a school-authorized educational purpose and nothing commercial[9],[12]. A recording of a child’s voice is personal information[13]. Amended rule in force since June 23, 2025; compliance due April 22, 2026. The FTC did not adopt its proposed ed tech changes[11]
  • State student-privacy laws California and New York as examples California bars K–12 services from targeted advertising, building student profiles and selling student data[14]. New York requires a data security and privacy plan and the Parents’ Bill of Rights in each contract[15]. New York’s Part 121 regulations in force since January 28, 2020
  • Standard agreements National Data Privacy Agreement The Student Data Privacy Consortium’s standard contract: fixed clauses plus a state exhibit. Signing its general offer (Exhibit E) lets other districts adopt the same terms[6]. Version 2 in use; usage guide updated April 2025
  • Accessibility ADA Title II, 28 CFR 35.200 Web content and apps a district provides, including through vendors, must meet WCAG 2.1 Level AA[7]. April 26, 2027 or April 26, 2028, depending on population; both moved back a year on April 20, 2026[8]

Official texts and agency guidance, checked October 14, 2026. General information, not legal advice; state rules vary, so check the district’s state.

Example Co., step 4 Fictional

The team has a privacy page and an evidence summary. It still needs a security summary and a data-privacy agreement it is willing to sign, so it drafts both while it sells to centers. Because children read aloud to it, and COPPA counts a recording of a child’s voice as personal information[13], its privacy page says recordings are used only to give reading feedback. The status is fictional.

Do this

Make a folder with all six documents. Send it to the technology leader before they ask.

Step 5: Choose the purchasing route the district already uses

There are three routes: a direct purchase, a formal bid such as an RFP, or a cooperative contract. State law and district policy set the bid limit; for California districts it is $119,100 in 2026[16]. When federal grant money pays, federal rules apply as well: a purchase up to the micro-purchase threshold, generally $15,000 since October 1, 2025, needs no competing quotes if the price is reasonable, and one above $350,000 needs a formal bid[17],[18]. Cooperative contracts let a district buy from an agreement another public body has already competed, and federal rules encourage this: recipients of federal funds “are encouraged to enter into State and local intergovernmental agreements” for purchasing[19].

Three kinds of cooperative are worth knowing:

  • National cooperatives. NASPO ValuePoint lists public school districts among eligible buyers; a district can buy only where its state, or the district itself, has a participating addendum with the supplier[20].
  • Regional service agencies. In New York, for example, BOCES coordinate cooperative bids for member districts[21].
  • State contracts and approved lists. Some states run their own; New York districts, for example, may buy from state contracts[21].

Rules differ by state. New York districts may “piggyback” on another government’s contract for equipment, supplies and related services only if it was awarded competitively and opened to other buyers[22], and since July 2026 the state Education Department has barred the practice for construction[23].

Figure 6 A district buys through a contract it already uses, a formal bid or a direct purchase, and dollar limits decide which
1 Is your product on a cooperative contract this district uses? Yes Buy from that contract Already competed; federal rules encourage shared purchasing No 2 Is the purchase above the district’s bid limit? Yes Answer the bid or RFP A formal process with public notice, on the district’s timeline No Direct purchase Below the limit, under the district’s own rules

Dollar limits that change how a district must buy

  • Example Co.’s starting offerOne grade, a year $4,000 Fictional
  • Federal micro-purchase thresholdNo competing quotes needed if the price is reasonable $15,000 Federal funds
  • New York bid limit, purchase contractsGeneral Municipal Law § 103 $20,000 State law
  • California bid limit, school districtsPublic Contract Code § 20111, 2026 $119,100 State law
  • Federal simplified acquisition thresholdAbove it, formal sealed bids or proposals $350,000 Federal funds
Show the numbers as a table
Limit Applies to Amount
Example Co.’s starting offer Example Co., fictional $4,000
Federal micro-purchase threshold Federal funds $15,000
New York bid limit, purchase contracts State law $20,000
California bid limit, school districts State law $119,100
Federal simplified acquisition threshold Federal funds $350,000

Decision path simplified from my practice. Limits: the FAR thresholds raised on October 1, 2025[18], which apply to federally funded purchases through 2 CFR 200.320[17]; New York[24]; California, from January 1, 2026[16]. A district spending federal funds must meet both its own rules and the federal ones. Example Co.’s price is fictional. Bars drawn to scale from zero.

Example Co., step 5 Fictional

The team asks three districts near its centers which contracts they buy from (fictional). Two use the same regional cooperative, so getting onto that contract becomes a Series A goal. Until then it plans direct purchases of one grade at an assumed $4,000 a year (Step 6), below the state’s bid limit.

Do this

Before you chase any cooperative, ask two or three target districts which contracts they actually buy from.

Step 6: Time the decision to the budget, and price for renewal

I have found no reliable study of how long a district sale takes, so plan around the budget instead. For most states the school fiscal year “begins on July 1 and ends on June 30”, though Alabama and the District of Columbia start on October 1, and Nebraska and Washington on September 1[3]; Texas districts choose July 1 or September 1[25]. Pennsylvania districts must adopt their final budget by June 30[26], and California districts by July 1[27]. In my experience, a product that is not in the draft budget by spring usually waits a year. The EdTech marketing calendar sets this out season by season.

Price for what a district can renew from its core budget. Federal pandemic relief gave schools about $190 billion across three rounds of ESSER funds[28]; the last round had to be committed by September 30, 2024, and spent within 18 months of that date even with an extension[29]. In RAND’s spring 2026 survey of 481 districts, 54% of leaders ranked budget shortages among their three most pressing challenges, up from 33% in 2025[2]. In CoSN’s 2026 survey, 42% named the refresh and modernization of classroom technology as the area most at risk now that emergency funding has ended[1].

That suggests three practical moves: show the cost per student and per teacher, show what the product replaces, and offer a starting scope (one grade, one subject) that fits an existing budget line. The Pricing and Packaging Playbook covers packaging in more depth.

What Instructure’s and PowerSchool’s filings show

Two school-software companies described this pattern in filings from their years as public companies. Both have since been taken private: PowerSchool by Bain Capital in October 2024[30] and Instructure by KKR and Dragoneer in November 2024[31]. These are what the filings say, not an account of how the companies, or any district, made choices internally.

Instructure (maker of the Canvas learning platform) told investors in its 2015 IPO registration statement that “Potential customers typically conduct extensive and lengthy evaluations before committing to our applications and services” and that “The sales cycle between our initial contact with a potential customer and the signing of a license varies.” Among the factors it said affect that sales cycle, it listed “the timing of customers’ budget cycles”. And it described a seasonal pattern: “We have historically experienced a pattern of higher sales and new academic customers in the second and third quarters, as a result of school procurement periods, which are typically based on a fiscal year ending June 30”[32].

PowerSchool, which sells school software to districts, described what happens after the sale in its annual report for 2021: “PowerSchool’s contracts typically have a three-year term with one-year rolling renewals, although we have many large contracts with terms that extend beyond three years. Customers are billed annually in advance, with a small number of customers billed semiannually, quarterly or monthly. We experience predictable annual renewal cycles, with a meaningful portion of invoices for service periods beginning in July and September”[33].

Figure 7 Two filings describe one deal shape: a long evaluation, a purchase in season, then a renewal every year

  1. 1 Evaluate Instructure S-1, 2015

    “Potential customers typically conduct extensive and lengthy evaluations before committing to our applications and services”

  2. 2 Buy in season Instructure S-1, 2015

    “higher sales and new academic customers in the second and third quarters, as a result of school procurement periods”

  3. 3 Renew every year PowerSchool 10-K for 2021

    “PowerSchool’s contracts typically have a three-year term with one-year rolling renewals”
Instructure: higher sales Second and third quarters PowerSchool: many invoices start Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

July 1: the school budget year starts in most states

Instructure, Form S-1, October 9, 2015[32], and PowerSchool, Form 10-K for 2021[33], quoted verbatim. Instructure’s fiscal year is the calendar year, so its second and third quarters run April to September. Both companies have since been taken private. This is what the filings say, not how any company or district decided.

Read together, the filings say what the budget rules imply: long evaluations, purchases bunched around the start of the school fiscal year, and a renewal every year after that. A startup should plan for all three.

Example Co., step 6 Fictional

The team assumes a full district price of $15,000 a year for all K–3 classrooms, the same assumption it used to size the district segment. For a district with an assumed 1,500 K–3 students, that is $10 per student a year. Its starting offer is one grade at an assumed $4,000 a year, timed so the champion can put it in the draft budget in spring. All prices are illustrative.

Do this

Find out when your target district drafts and adopts its budget, and set your pilot’s decision date at least a month before the draft.

What changes by stage?

  • Pre-seed — Sell to a few schools directly and learn the approval chain (Step 1). Write your privacy policy and evidence logic model now (Step 4).
  • Seed — Standardize the pilot: fixed length, agreed measures, a report template (Step 3). Sign your first state data-privacy agreements and join one cooperative contract your target districts use (Step 5).
  • Series A–B — Build a small team for district sales, with named territories. Track renewals as closely as new deals, because renewal is where budget pressure bites (Step 6).

What mistakes should I avoid?

  • Selling only to teachers. They can start a deal but rarely sign it.
  • Starting the privacy review after the pilot. Start it before.
  • Open-ended pilots. Without agreed measures and a decision date, a pilot becomes free use.
  • Ignoring the budget calendar. A yes in May can still mean a start more than a year later.
  • One pitch for everyone. The finance office and a teacher need different answers.

Related on AAJ

Articles

Playbooks

Templates and tools

References

The superscript numbers in the article match this list.

Laws, regulations, thresholds and filings were checked on October 14, 2026. The legal points in this article are general information, not legal advice.

  1. CoSN (2026). “U.S. State of EdTech 2026.” Report by Paula Maylahn, with partners CDW Education, Lightspeed Systems, AASA, Sogolytics and MCH. One response per district from 607 district education technology leaders, January to March 2026. Safety information is required by 55% in the procurement chart and 56% in the key findings. cosn.org
  2. Clinton, T., Master, B. K., Rainey, L. R. and Keskin, A. K. (2026). “Shrinking Budgets, Fewer Students: How District Leaders Are Navigating a New Landscape of Reduced Resources and Competitive Pressures.” RAND, RR-A4737-4, July 14, 2026. American School District Panel survey of 481 districts, March 18 to May 4, 2026. rand.org
  3. National Center for Education Statistics (2023). “Documentation for the NCES Common Core of Data School District Finance Survey (F-33), School Year 2020–21 (Fiscal Year 2021).” NCES 2024-304, October 2023. nces.ed.gov
  4. Covelli, L., Wolfe, R. L., Steiner, E. D. and Diliberti, M. K. (2026). “What Factors Drive the Adoption of High-Quality Math Curricula and Professional Learning? Crosscutting Findings from the American Educator Panels.” RAND, RR-A4632-1, March 19, 2026. rand.org
  5. 34 CFR 99.31(a)(1)(i)(B), Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act regulations: conditions for treating a contractor as a school official (last amended December 2, 2011, 76 FR 75641). ecfr.gov
  6. Access 4 Learning Community, Student Data Privacy Consortium. “NDPA v2 Usage Guide and Development Process”, version 2.4, April 2025. files.a4l.org
  7. 28 CFR 35.200, requirements for web and mobile accessibility (ADA Title II): WCAG 2.1 Level AA, including content provided “through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements”. ecfr.gov
  8. US Department of Justice (2026). “Extension of Compliance Dates for Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities.” Interim final rule, 91 FR 20902, April 20, 2026: compliance dates moved to April 26, 2027 and April 26, 2028. federalregister.gov
  9. Federal Trade Commission (2022). “Policy Statement of the Federal Trade Commission on Education Technology and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act”, May 19, 2022. ftc.gov
  10. US Department of Education, Privacy Technical Assistance Center (2015). “Responsibilities of Third-Party Service Providers under FERPA” (PTAC-FAQ-5), August 2015. studentprivacy.ed.gov
  11. Federal Trade Commission (2025). “Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule.” Final rule, 90 FR 16918, April 22, 2025: effective June 23, 2025; compliance date April 22, 2026; proposed ed tech amendments not finalized. federalregister.gov
  12. Federal Trade Commission (2020). “COPPA Guidance for Ed Tech Companies and Schools during the Coronavirus.” Business blog, April 9, 2020, updated 2022. ftc.gov
  13. 16 CFR 312.2, Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule, definitions: personal information includes “a photograph, video, or audio file where such file contains a child’s image or voice”. ecfr.gov
  14. California Business and Professions Code § 22584 (Student Online Personal Information Protection Act). leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
  15. New York State Education Department. “Education Law 2-d: Fact Sheet for Parents”: Part 121 of the Commissioner’s regulations took effect on January 28, 2020. nysed.gov
  16. California Department of Education. “Bidding Requirements”: the bid threshold for equipment, materials, supplies and non-construction services is $119,100 from January 1, 2026 (Public Contract Code § 20111). cde.ca.gov
  17. 2 CFR 200.320, procurement methods (89 FR 30136, April 22, 2024). Under § 200.1 the micro-purchase and simplified acquisition thresholds follow the FAR at 48 CFR subpart 2.1. law.cornell.edu
  18. Federal Acquisition Regulation: Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds (FAC 2025-06), 90 FR 41872, August 27, 2025, effective October 1, 2025: micro-purchase threshold $10,000 to $15,000; simplified acquisition threshold $250,000 to $350,000. federalregister.gov
  19. 2 CFR 200.318(e), general procurement standards, as revised April 22, 2024 (89 FR 30136). ecfr.gov
  20. NASPO ValuePoint. “FAQs for Buyers”: eligible buyers include public school districts; a participating addendum is “a bilateral agreement executed by a supplier and a participating entity”. naspovaluepoint.org
  21. New York State Education Department. “Cooperative Purchasing”, last updated February 1, 2022: a BOCES can act as the coordinating agent for joint bids, and districts may buy from state contracts let by the Office of General Services. p12.nysed.gov
  22. New York State Office of General Services (2023). “GovBuyU: Piggybacking and Using Cooperative Contracts”, General Municipal Law § 103(16). ogs.ny.gov
  23. New York State Education Department (2026). Memorandum on cooperative “piggybacking” contracts, July 17, 2026. nysed.gov
  24. Office of the New York State Comptroller (2025). Churchville-Chili Central School District audit, Report 2025M-18, June 2025: General Municipal Law § 103 generally requires competitive bidding for purchase contracts above $20,000. osc.ny.gov
  25. Texas Education Agency. “Fiscal Year Start Date”: a school district or charter school may choose a fiscal year starting July 1 or September 1 (Texas Education Code § 44.0011). tea.texas.gov
  26. Pennsylvania Department of Education. “General Fund Budget.”. pa.gov
  27. California Department of Education. “Budget Status.”. cde.ca.gov
  28. US Department of Education. Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (historical page): about $13.2 billion for ESSER I, $54.3 billion for ESSER II and $122 billion for ARP ESSER. ed.gov
  29. US Department of Education, Office of State and Grantee Relations (2024). “ARP ESSER and ARP EANS obligation deadlines and liquidation extensions.” Memo, June 12, 2024: obligate by September 30, 2024; liquidate by January 28, 2025, or up to 18 months after the obligation deadline with an approved extension. ed.gov
  30. PowerSchool Holdings, Inc. (2024). Form 8-K, exhibit 99.1: “Bain Capital Completes Acquisition of PowerSchool”, October 1, 2024. sec.gov
  31. Instructure Holdings, Inc. (2024). Form 8-K, exhibit 99.1: “KKR and Dragoneer Complete Acquisition of Instructure”, November 13, 2024. sec.gov
  32. Instructure, Inc. (2015). Registration statement on Form S-1, filed October 9, 2015. US Securities and Exchange Commission. sec.gov
  33. PowerSchool Holdings, Inc. (2022). Annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021. US Securities and Exchange Commission. sec.gov

More in Industry Playbooks

Part of the Industry Playbooks hub - see all 10 resources on this topic.

Also useful in Sales & Pipeline.