1. @MarkRJohnsonNC supervises a @NC_RtA universal screener procurement process that was a hot mess.

2. @Istationed is awarded the $8.3 million contract.

3. Everyone, including @Amplify, says "WAIT, WHAT?!"

4. @NCDIT has to determine if procurement was legal.

5. We wait.

6. A pandemic arrives.

7. We wait.

8. @Istationed tries to find new ways to get paid.

9. We wait.

10. DPI cancels the @NC_RtA contract with @Istationed, given that we're not going back to school this year.

BUT...

11. DPI also announces they will "immediately begin a new process to procure one, uniform reading diagnostic tool before the start of the 2020-21 school year."

People, part of what we learned at the @Amplify v. @Istationed hearing was the trainwreck that was the procurement process supervised by @MarkRJohnsonNC. There was felony wiretapping, missed deadlines, staff turnover, struggles over the definition of "consensus."

There was the problem that if the committee couldn't select a vendor by December, the team was concerned there wouldn't be time to get everything in place for a smooth rollout of the selected tool in the following September.

... But now, it's suddenly cool to *start* a new procurement process in late April?! And we're telling ourselves it'll be fine to roll this out in August?

Now, if we allow for the dream scenario wherein the @NC_RtA contract goes back to @Amplify (as it should, because that's the one the panel of actual experts voted for over @Istationed), then perhaps this truncated timeline will work?

I suppose we'll see? But let's keep an eye on this @NC_RtA universal screener contract procurement, shall we? Especially since apparently we're entering into a new procurement without knowing whether the last one was illegal, and...

... without knowing whether the DPI employee who possibly committed felony wiretapping during the procurement process is still employed by DPI and could be involved in this new procurement.