Checkpoint 1.6

1.6 — EdTech Vetting & Procurement ProcessSustainability lens

What this is

Before any EdTech tool is adopted, this checkpoint asks how it is reviewed. A formal pre-adoption process examining instructional value, privacy, security, accessibility, equity, and total cost. Applies to paid tools, free tools, and teacher-initiated sign-ups.

Why it matters

Tools adopted informally — teacher sign-ups, freemium apps, browser extensions — often arrive without the privacy review, training, or use guidance that protect students and staff. A vetting process is the upstream step that gives data governance, PD, and use guidelines something to work on; teachers benefit too, because they know which tools are cleared.

Connects to

The Framework: Condition #8 (Strategic Tool Selection).

Maturity levels

Not Started
No formal vetting. Teachers sign up for tools individually. Tools proliferate unchecked. No inventory of what is in use.
Emerging
Informal review for major purchases. No standard rubric. No process for free or teacher-initiated tools. Inventory is partial and out of date.
Established
Formal vetting committee or workflow with a standard rubric covering instruction, privacy, security, accessibility, equity, and cost. Applies to free and paid tools alike. All tool requests routed through the process. An annual shadow-IT sweep surfaces unauthorized free tools, browser extensions, and freemium apps already in use that bypassed procurement, so they can be vetted, retired, or formalized. Current inventory maintained.
Expanding
Vetting process is transparent to staff, includes teacher and student pilot input, integrates with curriculum planning, includes a sunset/renewal mechanism, and aligns with state approved-vendor lists where applicable. Post-adoption outcomes tracked.

Go deeper with

Example resource
CoSN K-12 Community Vendor Assessment Toolkit (K-12CVAT) and the Student Data Privacy Consortium National Data Privacy Agreement (NDPA)
Also consider