LMS RFP Results
March 30, 2008
Kathy Fernandes
Director of System-wide LMS Initiatives
Agenda
 Master Enabling Agreements
 Accessibility
 Product Overviews
 Scoring Summary
 Campus Surveys
 RFP Results
 Pricing
 What’s Next?
Master Enabling Agreements
 MEAs are a set of options; not the only options!!
 RFP Process provides documented information of
systems
– Campuses can use this info in their process to make
informed decisions
– Campuses perform their own evaluation and demos for
selection
 Campuses can procure from the CSU MEA
– Request quote from vendors based on CSU MEA
– Procure with a purchase order referencing CSU MEA
Accessibility
 VPAT
 RFP Accessibility Answers
 LMS Vendor Demos
 Rubric – Sandbox testing
Accessibility
 Moodle the most accessible
 Blackboard (both products) least accessible
 Accessibility is not about “adding features”
 Take accessibility seriously now –
– In 2 years accountability has to take hold
 What impact does this have on work in the future?
 CSU is being looked at as a leader in Accessibility
– Apple Computers
– State of California
– Other Universities and State Systems are
watching
Angel
 Windows Architecture
 Simple Interface
 Learning Object Repository (LOR) w/ the system
 Web 2.0 (Wiki, Blogs, RSS Feeds)
 Same Instance – Multiple Branding
 Can customize help system content
 Offers ASP service
 Can import and export IMS packaged content
 Published database schema and fully supports Dublin
Core metadata standard
 User can set Accessibility Profile
Angel (con’t)
 SUNY System – large system (70k to 100k users?)
 Scalability – looking into issues – SQL*Server?
 Median response time for urgent needs
– 2.1 Hrs for the Initial Response
– 2.26 Hrs for Follow up/Resolution
– 13 Support reps supporting 26 clients each
Desire2Learn
 Windows Architecture
 Many Large Consortium Customers
 Easy to Use – Good Interface
 Data warehouse comes with system
 Claims fewest help desk calls (75% users dive in – no
training)
 Real-time Peoplesoft Integration with Tennessee Regents
 Tight integration with Google and Outlook
 ASP - host 80% of their clients
 Scalability at 150,000 users – issues w/ SQL*Server?
 Building APIs now (no BldgBlocks/Powerlinks)
 No way to archive courses
Desire2Learn (con’t)
 UofW faculty happy w/ product across campuses
– 150,000 users, one instance
– 80% of faculty using the system
– Migrated quickly from both Bb systems
– 12.5 FTE technical staff to run whole system
 Average response time for urgent needs
– 21.62 seconds for the Initial Response
– 192 average Hrs for all levels of tickets
– 12 Support reps
Moodle and MoodleRooms
 Supports Linux, Solaris, and Windows
 Flexible
 Handles browser-based commands (forward, back,
refresh, font increase/decrease)
 MoodleRooms provides related services, but you can
host your own instance of the open source Moodle
software with them
 MoodleRooms created a tool to migrate content from
Blackboard
MoodleRooms (con’t)
– U of Louisiana getting up
– Average response time for urgent needs
 1.19 Hrs for the Initial Response
 5.73 Hrs for Follow up/Resolution
 10 Support reps never supporting more than
10 clients each
Blackboard
 Multiple Operating Systems/hardware platforms
 Full featured – multiple products
 Discuss Migration to NG
 Challenging Support
– Average response time for urgent needs
 12.64 Hrs for the Initial Response
 29.35 Hrs for Follow up/Resolution
 57 TSMS supporting 69 clients each
– Evidence of Improved Commitment to Resources
in this area
Strengths
 Blackboard - multiple OS' and ORACLE
database; multiple products: ePortfolio, Content
Mgmt System
 D2L - lots of large system institutions; Simple
interface with high faculty satisfaction according
to client reference
 Angel - Simple interface; some large system
institutions; APIs; ePortfolio, LOR
 MoodleRooms - No licensing and most flexibility
Weaknesses
 Blackboard - client relationships and support; ASP
problems; unclear direction for their product except to
migrate to common platform
 D2L and Angel run ONLY on Windows;
 D2L No archiving capability; just now creating APIs for
their product
 Windows Systems are having SQL*Server issues but
with over 100,000 users on one instance
 MoodleRooms - still looking for more examples of
large scalability (how large?); How many
programmers do you really need?
Scoring
1200
Services
1000
800
Roadmap
Monitoring
600
Integration
Features
400
Business
200
Architecture
e
Sc
or
Po
ss
ib
le
n
es
ire
2L
ea
r
D
M
oo
dl
eR
oo
m
s
E
Vi
st
a/
C
Bb
Bb
LS
0
An
ge
l
Points Assigned
Scalability
 The following slides are results from the survey
given to LMS RFP Campus Coordinators on
March 5 after the LMS Vendor Demos in
Long Beach.
As Campuses Discuss Options…
 Interest in CSU Collaborations for
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
LMS Infrastructure/ASP? 4
LMS Migrations? 7
LMS Training?
5
LMS Consulting? 4
LMS Support?
1
LMS Reporting?
1
LMS Best Practices? (added later)
Summary of LMS Interests/Considerations
 Moodle = 11
 Angel = 8
 D2L = 7
 BB LS = 8
 BB Vista = 3
 Sakai = 3
Campus Directions – Those Staying for Now
 WebCT CE
 Bakersfield
 Maritime
 Sacramento
 San Jose
 San Marcos
 Sonoma
 Chico  Vista
 Blackboard
 Channel Islands
 Dominguez Hills
 East Bay
 Fresno
 Fullerton
 Pomona
 San Diego
 San Luis Obispo
Campus Directions –
Those Actively Shopping
 Long Beach - Bb 6.3 ASP
 Los Angeles - CE 6.2
 Northridge CE, Bb 7.1, Moodle
 San Bernardino - Bb 7.1
 Stanislaus Bb 7.3, eColleges
Campus Directions – Those Going or Gone
 Humboldt Moodle
 Monterey Bay  Moodle
 SFSU  Moodle
The Only Group
Actually Doing LMS Collaboration
Responses From












Angel Learning
Blackboard (Vista/CE)
Blackboard (Learning System)
Campus Management
CollegeBrain
Desire2Learn
Ecollege
Embanet (Moodle)
Embanet (Sakai)
IBM (Sakai)
Moodlerooms (Moodle)
SumtotalUnicon (Sakai)
After Phase I
 Angel Learning
 Blackboard (Vista/CE)
 Blackboard (Learning System)
 Desire2Learn
 Moodlerooms (Moodle)
Discoveries
 Desire2Learn—Detailed accessibility evaluation
found that Desire2Learn’s system fails to meet
minimum requirements. Gaps are few and may be
repairable. In addition, the proposed version of
Desire2Learn, 8.2.2, was found to be infringing on a
current US patent.
Discoveries
 Blackboard did not submit ANY pricing for hosting
 Blackboard Learning System (LS)—Detailed
accessibility evaluation found that Bb LS fails to
meet minimum requirements. Barriers to
accessibility are serious and distributed densely
across the entire application.
 Blackboard Vista/CE—Detailed accessibility
evaluation found that Vista/CE fails to meet
minimum requirements. Equally effective access to
people with disabilities is not provided in the
system.
Final Vendor Selections
Angel Learning
Moodlerooms
What Does This Mean?
 MEAs are options not your only options
 CSU needs a more competitive selection
 Vendors can cure their ills later (timing TBD)
 Transition time (2-years?)
 Negotiate an extension of current contract with
Blackboard
 If Bb doesn’t cure their ills, campuses might be at
legal risk or need more accommodations
 D2L version 8.3 perhaps cures their ills?
Summary of Pricing
 For full list of licensing and service costs, consult
each companies’ Pricing Proposal
Small Campus LMS License Pricing
with Support (1st Year)
Angel
$17,500-38,000 1,000-10,000 FTE
Bb (LS and CE)
$33,500-51,900
1-8000 FTE
Bb (Vista Only)
$72,200-111,500
1-8000 FTE
D2L
$29,000-$85,500 1,000-10,000 FTE
Moodle/Rooms
$0 - $21,250
Support up to
10,000 FTE
Medium-size Campus LMS License Pricing
with Support (1st Year)
Angel
Bb (LS & CE)
Bb (Vista Only)
D2L
Moodle/Rooms
$56,000-72,000 15,000-20,000 FTE
$63,400
8001-15,000 FTE
$72,500 15,001-25,000 FTE
$131,200
8001-15,000 FTE
$157,500 15,001-25,000 FTE
$96,875-126,000 10,000-20,000 FTE
$0 - $35,000
Support up to
20,000 FTE
Large Campus LMS License Pricing
with Support (1st Year)
Angel
Bb (LS & CE)
Bb (Vista Only)
D2L
Moodle/Rooms
$85,000-155,000 25,000-50,000 FTE
$82,300 25,000-50,000 FTE
$183,700
25,000-50,000FTE
$137,500-175,000 20,000-35,000 FTE
$0 - $61,250
Support 20,000 30,000 FTE
2nd Year LMS Licensing
 Angel
– Up $2k to $5k depending on size
 Bb
– 5% increase from first year
 D2L
– No change from first year
 Moodle/Rooms
– No change from first year
3rd Year LMS Licensing
 Angel
– Up $2k to $10k from first year depending on size
 Bb
– 10% increase from first year
 D2L
– No change from first year
 Moodle/Rooms
– No change from first year
Sample ASP/Hosting Prices
Angel
Bb (LS & CE)
No Submission
Silver or Gold?
System Specs?
No Submission
Bb (Vista Only)
No Submission
No Submission
$100,000
20,000 FTE
$1 per user per year
$21,000 maximum
10,000 to 20,000
FTE
D2L
Moodle/Rooms
70% to 145% of
license fee
Need More Information?
 At dat.cdl.edu under CSU LMS Initiatives
–
–
–
–
Contains LMS RFI and RFP
RFP Results
RFP Responses
Pricing Proposals
 Kathy Fernandes – kfernandes@csuchico.edu
What’s Next?
 Negotiate Bb Extension of Current Contract (for 2yrs?)
 Put MEAs in place
 Handoff to Campuses to do Local Evaluation
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Go Deeper Into Product Evaluations
Campus Review of CSU RFPs & Summary Results
Campus Determine Local Criteria for LMS
Put the LMS on Meeting Agendas now
Campus Conversations, Committees, Processes
Product Demonstrations
Deeper Reference Checking of other Customers
 Strategic and Project Planning
 Transition? Migration?