The Texas EB operating system built around the work districts actually have to complete.
Language Links Pro sits beside DRC's LAS Links assessment and turns assessment evidence into the district's operating workflow: identification clocks, LPAC action, family notices, teacher supports, reclassification and monitoring, PEIMS-ready reporting, and auditable proof — without re-entry.
Two ways in, before you read a word
The full platform walkthrough deck as a narrated video (31 minutes), and a nine-minute episode of the TX EB Talk Podcast on AI compliance for Texas emergent bilingual programs. Both play here; both are also worth sending ahead of a first meeting.
Language Links Pro — comprehensive platform overview
The 105-slide enterprise deck, narrated: the Texas EB lifecycle, the sixteen modules, the LAS Links wraparound, security and the fourteen roles, the DRC partnership, milestones, and the demo standard. Use it to prepare for certification, or as the pre-read you send to a district director. Captions carry the presenter script.
AI Compliance for Texas Emergent Bilinguals
TX EB Talk Podcast. A conversational episode on what "AI in the LPAC workflow" has to mean in Texas: human-approved drafts, versioned rules with effective dates, an append-only audit trail, and the claims discipline that keeps a district — and a rep — out of trouble. Good listening before a CTO or privacy-officer meeting, and a clean way to introduce the AI conversation with a superintendent.
Media files ship in the media/ folder beside this page. The page finds them automatically there or, on Squarespace, in the file library (/s/) — upload the four media files and nothing else needs to change.
What you are selling, in one breath
LAS Links tells a district where a student is. Language Links Pro tells the campus what has to happen next, who owns it, when it is due, and proves it got done. It is a wraparound — it never administers, scores, or replaces the assessment.
Assessment to action
A LAS Links or TELPAS result lands on the record and immediately sets the LPAC task, the teacher support, the monitoring action, the family notice, and the reporting state.
Texas workflow, not Texas labels
Real rule gates: required LPAC members, the 4-day / 20-day / 28-day clocks, notice-only reclassification since July 2026, PEIMS codes derived from workflow state.
Every action has an owner and evidence
Responsible role, due date, status, source record, approval, change history, and an append-only audit event for every material step.
A system districts can defend technically
14 scoped roles, tenant isolation, privileged-session controls, export logs, audit search, data lineage, negative access tests in every release.
Teacher utility inside the same system
Proficiency evidence becomes ELPS and Bluebonnet-linked supports, Quick Assess checks, growth goals, and intervention cycles — approved by the educator.
DRC assessment + program execution
Assessment stays with DRC. The platform converts results into the district's daily program workflow. One coherent story for every LAS Links customer.
How this site works
Each tab is a study module. The certification is adaptive — it starts every domain at a proficient-level question, moves up or down with your answers, and reports proficiency by domain with a weighted sales-readiness score, calibration analysis, and a coaching plan.
1. Read the tabs
Product, Texas & LPAC, Buyers, Competitors, Pricing & claims, Demo & objections. Facts, tables, and talk tracks — the same sources the assessment draws from.
Playbook
How to say every selling point precisely, the Texas market and buying calendar, procurement paths, and the team operating system.
App walkthrough
Every platform module in sidebar order with demo-campus screens, what it does, who uses it, and the step-by-step path an educator takes — plus three end-to-end journeys.
Forms & reports
The complete catalog: 52 forms, letters, packets, plans, and records with their triggers, signers, sources, and authorities, and 254 reports, dashboards, and exports.
Account & dashboards
Sign in with your Gmail address to track certification attempts and practice; personal, team, and leader dashboards.
About
Who is leading the initiative on both sides, how the partnership works, and a message from Bill Bernys to the team.
Funding
How the Bilingual Education Allotment and Title III work, what HB 2 changed, what Washington is threatening, and a BEA calculator that shows the subscription as a share of the allotment.
Leader toolkit
Regional EB analytics from TEA data, a plan generator, task lists by phase, strategic plan templates, call scorecards, and a weighted forecast.
Ask Nina
A chat assistant in Nina's voice, answering from the enablement knowledge base — positioning, Texas rules, buyers, signals, and what not to say.
Q&A
In-depth answers to every buyer, colleague, and certification question — searchable, filterable, with a one-liner for the room and the full answer behind it.
Learn
Spaced-repetition flashcards, numbers drill, thirty-second objection drill, persona role-play, a twelve-minute demo rehearsal timer, and a lightning round.
2. Practice
Run the certification in practice mode: explanation and talk track after every question, a live proficiency meter, and a quick-reference panel.
3. Certify
Certification mode holds feedback to the end. Specialist requires Proficient in all eight domains; Master Specialist requires Expert in four or more.
Ready to certify?
About 25 minutes. Confidence ratings on every item, analytics report at the end.
About this initiative
Language Links Pro is a joint initiative: created by Agentic Learning, distributed exclusively in Texas by DRC, and governed by named leaders on both sides. This page is where the team meets the people behind it — and where Bill speaks directly to the sales, product, and marketing leads carrying it to market.
A message from Bill Bernys
Executive sponsorDRC "Language Links Pro" Leadership
Bill Bernys
Executive sponsor
Pam Enstad
EVP Strategic Product Marketing
Executive Vice President, Strategic Product Marketing and Communications, DRC
Nina Trigger
Texas sales, go-to-market
Senior National Sales Manager, DRC
Amy Stolpestad
Texas product, go-to-market
Senior Director, Language Solutions, DRC — product owner of the LAS Links suite
Our partner: Agentic Learning
Language Links Pro is created and built by Agentic Learning, a Texas company co-founded by Dr. Kurt Hulett and Debra Reece, under a five-year exclusive Texas-first distribution partnership with DRC. Agentic Learning owns product development, the roadmap, and platform maintenance; DRC owns Texas sales and distribution. The primary product team we work with every day:
Dr. Kurt Hulett — Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer
Co-Founder and CEO of Agentic Learning; executive sponsor for the initiative and a listening-and-learning member of the Product Guidance Team. Thirty years as a Texas special-education teacher, assistant principal, principal, director of legal compliance, and Senior Research Director at Pearson Clinical Assessment — the credential behind every Texas-specific claim in the product.
Debra Reece — Co-Founder and Chief Operating Officer
Co-Founder and COO of Agentic Learning. Runs day-to-day coordination and execution of the build, testing, and commercialization plan, and serves on the Product Guidance Team. The operational contact for the DRC working team on delivery, implementation, and support handoff.
Mike Goynes — Chief Technology Officer
Owns the platform architecture on AWS, the 14-role security and tenant-isolation model, SIS and assessment integrations, and the verified security documentation package that IT reviewers rely on. The technical counterpart for district CTO conversations.
How the partnership works
| Area | Agentic Learning | DRC |
|---|---|---|
| Product development and maintenance | Owns | Advises through the Product Guidance Team |
| Sales and distribution — Texas | — | Owns (5-year exclusive, from late August 2026) |
| Assessment data (LAS Links) | Ingests and integrates | Provides and owns |
| District onboarding | Supports | Coordinates |
| Compliance and regulatory alignment | Owns | Advises |
| Customer support | Platform-side issues | Assessment-side issues; one front door for the district |
Milestones
Exclusive Texas-first distribution term begins
Phase 2 live demonstration to DRC's working team
Currently defined development complete; unrestricted testing begins
Full commercialization readiness
Product modules
Sixteen sidebar modules in the Texas EB Edition, every one traced to a statute and built around the draft-to-human-approval pattern. Status reflects the current build inventory: Done is demonstrated in the product today; In progress is a build obligation due October 31, 2026.
The dashboard a leader sees on Monday morning
Tiles are computed rollups, not static counts. A deadline slipping in the Compliance Tracker changes the compliance tile without a separate sync step.
Summary tiles
Total EB students · LPAC meetings with overdue count · Dual-identified (EB + special education) with ARD/LPAC action flag · Compliance status for the term
Population views
Proficiency levels · Program models (dual language, transitional, ESL content, ESL pull-out, newcomer) · Average LAS Links level by domain · TELPAS equivalent — planning estimate only, never a reclassification decision
Evidence and coverage
Students with LAS Links on file vs never assessed · Support-plan and growth-goal coverage with named gaps · Assessment freshness per student
Deadlines and activity
Upcoming LPAC meetings and procedural deadlines with statutory citations (EEOA §1703(f), 19 TAC §89.1220) · Recent activity log with AI drafts awaiting approval
Role dashboards
Teacher · School Admin · District Admin · State/Accountability · Parent Portal. Each view defaults to the user's next actions and hides everything their role does not own.
Teacher
Alert banners (overdue LPACs, missing LAS Links evidence, drafts to approve); caseload tiles; quick actions — draft a goal, draft a support plan, record scores, "what should I prioritize this week?"; each student's lowest-domain priority; this week's teaching moves from approved plans.
Campus and district
Campus roster and heat map, overdue work by owner, LPAC calendar, reclassification readiness, assessment coverage, exception queues, exports and audit views scoped to authority.
Parent portal
Verified child relationship only. Released notices, plain-language LPAC summaries, and approved family-facing data — never staff drafts, internal notes, other students, or district dashboards.
The Texas emergent bilingual lifecycle
Texas replaced "English learner / LEP" with emergent bilingual (EB) student in 2021 (HB 2066). Use the Texas term with Texas educators. The lifecycle below is one connected workflow in the product, from identification through post-exit monitoring.
Captured at enrollment; stored digitally with correction history.
Within 4 daysSurvey responses create a screening requirement, owner, due date, and alert.
AutomaticStatutory clock with reminders and escalation to responsible roles.
20 school daysRequired members validated; decision recorded with evidence.
28-day clock · TEC §29.056Parent notice in the home language; approval captured for program participation; record locked.
Notice + approvalEvery timeline, and how each one is followed and tracked
Procedural compliance in Texas is a set of clocks. The platform treats each one as a rule with an effective date, a trigger event, an owner, a due date, evidence requirements, and an audit record — not as a reminder on a spreadsheet. The table lists the clocks; the panel below explains the mechanism.
| Clock | Rule | Trigger | Owner | What the platform does |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Home Language Survey | At initial enrollment (within 4 days); once per Texas career; 19 TAC §89.1215 | Enrollment record created | Registrar / campus | Creates the HLS task; locks the survey to the permanent record; any non-English answer opens the identification clock. |
| Identification and LPAC placement | Within four weeks / 20 school days of initial enrollment; 19 TAC §89.1226(b), §89.1220 | HLS answer other than English | LPAC coordinator; test administrator | Counts school days from the district calendar; schedules preLAS / LAS Links by grade and program; applies the domain-based identification rule to the result; opens the LPAC review task with the required-member gate; escalates at 10, 15, and 18 school days. |
| Parental notice and approval | Before program entry; notice in English and home language; Title III: within 30 days of the start of school or two weeks of placement; 19 TAC §89.1240; ESSA §3113(b)(3)(A) | LPAC placement decision | LPAC coordinator | Generates the notice from the decision, holds it for educator sign-off, records delivery and the response (approval or denial with PEIMS code); the program-entry step cannot complete without it. |
| Rolling 28-day compliance clock | Per-student identification cycle; TEC §29.056 | Enrollment or transfer | Campus administrator (escalation) | A recurring per-student object with reminders, escalation to responsible roles, and a closed-with-evidence state; feeds the dashboard's overdue count. |
| Program placement and coding | Effective on entry; PEIMS program type, parental-permission code; TEC §29.066 | Approval captured | PEIMS coordinator | Derives the PEIMS EB indicator, program type, and permission code from the workflow state; validates before the fall snapshot. |
| Assessment participation decisions | Before each state assessment window (TELPAS spring; STAAR/EOC; TELPAS Alternate / STAAR Alternate 2 with the ARD); 19 TAC §89.1220 | Assessment calendar | LPAC; ARD for dual-identified | Schedules the decision meeting ahead of each window, records participation and designated supports with member attestations, and syncs the accommodation record to the IEP view. |
| Annual review | End of each school year; 19 TAC §89.1220(g) | District calendar (EOY window) | LPAC | Builds the prep packet (TELPAS, LAS Links growth, STAAR, CBM, teacher input); applies reclassification criteria; records continue / reclassify with evidence; queues notices. |
| Reclassification | End of year only; TELPAS Advanced High composite + reading criterion; notice-only since July 2026; 19 TAC §89.1225–1226 | Annual review determination | LPAC | Versioned rule (July 2026 change applied on its effective date); generates the reclassification notice; sets the PEIMS exit and monitoring status. |
| Post-exit monitoring | Two years (monitored 1 = F, monitored 2 = S), then former-EB tracking; review at least at year end; 19 TAC §89.1228 | Reclassification | LPAC | Creates year-1 and year-2 review tasks with due dates; carries status through campus changes; return-to-services path with parental approval. |
| Dual-identified coordination | ARD–LPAC joint decisions; IDEA timelines (initial evaluation within 45 school days of consent; ARD within 30 calendar days of the evaluation report; annual ARD; reevaluation every 3 years); 19 TAC §89.1230 | Special education referral or IEP event | LPAC coordinator + ARD facilitator | Flags dual-identified students on the dashboard; links LPAC and ARD calendars; keeps one accommodation record; alerts when an IEP decision changes language services. |
| Newcomer and immigrant coding | Immigrant indicator (three years or less in U.S. schools); immediate enrollment (Plyler, McKinney-Vento) | Enrollment data | Registrar; PEIMS | Tracks the three-year immigrant window; supports newcomer program timelines; no enrollment blocked for missing documents. |
| Bilingual exception / ESL waiver | Annual application by November 1; PD plan; 19 TAC §89.1207 | Staffing review | District EB administrator | Tracks the application deadline and the professional-development plan milestones. |
| Summer school for young EB students | 120 hours for students entering K or grade 1; parental approval; TEC §29.060 | Spring roster | District EB administrator | Builds the eligible list from identification data; tracks approvals and hours. |
| PEIMS submissions | Fall snapshot (funding counts), summer submission (year-end status); TEDS calendar | TEA submission calendar | PEIMS coordinator | Validates, previews, and exports before each deadline with a correction queue and history; the district submits through TSDS. |
| Annual program evaluation | Yearly report to the board; 19 TAC §89.1265 | End of year | District EB administrator | Assembles reclassification by cohort, TELPAS growth, achievement, LTEL counts, and monitoring outcomes. |
| LAS Links data continuity | DRC INSIGHT maintenance purge each June | DRC calendar | Assessment coordinator | Ingests Student Data Files with lineage before the purge; results persist on the longitudinal record. |
1. Rules with effective dates
Every timeline lives in a versioned rules layer: statute or rule citation, the counting basis (school days vs calendar days), the trigger event, the due-date formula, the owner role, and the evidence that closes it. When TEA changes a rule, a new version takes effect on its date and prior decisions keep the version that applied to them.
2. Triggers, not reminders
Clocks start from record events — an HLS answer, a placement decision, a reclassification, an IEP change — not from someone remembering to set a reminder. The district calendar supplies school-day counting; transfers and re-enrollments restart the right clocks automatically.
3. Owners and escalation
Each open item has a responsible role and due date; reminders go to the owner, escalation goes to the campus administrator and then the district EB administrator as thresholds pass. The Morning Brief and Compliance Command Center show overdue items by campus and owner.
4. Gates and evidence
Steps cannot close without their evidence: an LPAC is not 'ready' without required members; program entry is not complete without the parental response; a notice is not released without educator sign-off; an export does not run with validation errors. Overrides are permission-gated, reason-coded, and audited.
5. One record, many views
The same workflow state drives the LPAC packet, the family notice, the teacher dashboard, the PEIMS indicator, and the compliance audit — so a deadline met in one place is met everywhere, and nothing is re-keyed.
6. Proof
The append-only audit trail records who did what, when, under which role, with before/after values and the rule version in force. A monitoring review, an OCR inquiry, or a parent question is answered from the record, not reconstructed from memory.
LPAC — the customer's unit of work
The Language Proficiency Assessment Committee is a campus committee. It identifies, places, reviews at least annually, sets assessment participation and accommodations, reclassifies, and monitors after exit. Most compliance findings originate here.
| Program | Required members | Platform gate |
|---|---|---|
| Bilingual education | Campus administrator · certified bilingual educator · parent of a current EB student not employed by the district | Meeting cannot be marked ready until every required member is confirmed. Finalization validates membership, participation, evidence, mandatory fields, notices, and authorization. Overrides are explicit, permission-gated, reason-coded, and audited. |
| ESL | Campus administrator · ESL-certified teacher · parent |
Program models
Dual language immersion (one-way, two-way) · Transitional bilingual (early exit, late exit) · ESL content-based · ESL pull-out. A bilingual program is required at elementary grades when 20+ EB students in one grade share a home language.
TELPAS vs LAS Links
TELPAS: annual spring, K–12, four domains, Beginning / Intermediate / Advanced / Advanced High plus composite. LAS Links (DRC): identification and progress monitoring, L1 Beginning through L5 Above Proficient. The platform crosswalks both on one record; any TELPAS "equivalent" is a planning estimate only.
Reclassification
TELPAS Advanced High composite plus a reading criterion (STAAR Reading Meets or an approved alternative), decided by the LPAC. July 2026: the parental-approval gate was removed — reclassification is notice-only. STAAR-Alt 2 alternative reclassification remains Not Observed pending TEA's process.
Post-exit monitoring
LPAC monitors years 1 and 2 (PEIMS F and S), continued tracking years 3–4, former EB year 5+. Return-to-services logic when a monitored student struggles. Indicator codes re-evaluate in real time from workflow state.
PEIMS
EB indicator, bilingual/ESL program type, parental permission, TELPAS participation, monitored status. The platform maps, validates, previews, and exports with history and a correction queue. The district still submits via TSDS.
Dual-identified and funding
EB + special education: coordinated ARD/LPAC action (19 TAC §89.1230). Dual-language allocation math (50/50, two-thirds/one-third) checked against live rosters. Bilingual Education Allotment eligibility rests on documented parental approval — captured and time-stamped.
Scenario to know cold
A student's HLS lists Spanish and the family declines program placement. The student is still identified as EB, still takes TELPAS, is still reviewed annually by the LPAC, and the denial is documented and coded in PEIMS. Parental approval governs participation, not identification.
Buyer by buyer
Every buyer compares something different. Lead with their proof point, and sequence a mixed room as: the director's lifecycle problem → live teacher utility → the technical review for IT. Pricing comes after value.
Discovery questions that expose the gap
Process, not features
"Walk me through how you find out today that an LPAC is overdue at a campus — and what happens next. Who finds out last, and how many days late?"
Assessment to action
"When LAS Links results come back, how many hands touch them before a teacher changes what happens in class?"
Evidence behind 'it works fine'
"How many required-member gaps or late notices did your last monitoring review find, and how did you know?"
Cost of the current way
"How many staff hours went into last spring's end-of-year LPAC cycle? How many PEIMS exceptions came back?"
Competitive landscape
Summit 360 is the closest direct Texas product competitor. Ellevation is the strongest national incumbent. Both are sophisticated. Language Links Pro wins on demonstrably better Texas workflow execution — not a longer checklist, and never on claims that competitors lack basics.
| Dimension | Language Links Pro | Summit K12 / Summit 360 | Ellevation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Posture | Texas-first EB program-management and workflow platform wrapped around LAS Links | Integrated EL ecosystem: Connect to Literacy (instruction) + Summit Insights (program oversight) | Mature national ELD suite: data, Forms, Strategies, Benchmark, family communication, professional learning |
| Scale (public) | New entrant via DRC distribution | ~2,000 districts, 1M+ learners | 1,900+ districts, 2.5M+ ELs, 50+ jurisdictions |
| Genuinely stronger at | Texas rule execution with effective dates · LAS Links adjacency · PEIMS/TSDS reconciliation · owned, dated, evidenced next actions · provable audit | Student-facing four-domain instruction with formative feedback · integrated Texas ecosystem · 90+ language parent communication · professional learning | Installed base and trust · Forms · Strategies · first-party Benchmark (up to 3/yr) · broad integrations incl. LAS Links, WIDA, MAP, i-Ready · professional learning |
| Family communication | Texas notice logic, workflow timing, educator sign-off, audit linkage | Family letters, 30+ to 90+ languages | Parent letters, signatures, digital and offline tracking |
| LPAC operations | Granular Texas forms, clocks, membership validation, decision gates, PEIMS linkage — lead only when proven live | Digital LPAC records, rosters, signatures, TEA letterhead | Forms and cycle management |
| Multi-jurisdiction | Texas launch-ready; rules engine, WIDA/NYSESLAT in build plan | Texas and California; broader offerings nationally | 50+ jurisdictions |
| Avant | Assessment vendor priced per test ($19.90–$39.90). Adjacent category — route to DRC's assessment conversation; never compare per-test to per-student pricing. | ||
Competitive risks and countermeasures
Summit closes the workflow gap
Treat Summit as the Texas benchmark; re-check Summit 360 releases before every major cycle; keep a live competitor matrix.
Ellevation wins on trust first
Borrow trust: DRC credibility, reference districts, implementation evidence, security evidence, measurable workflow outcomes.
We look administrative
Teacher utility and assessment-to-instruction in every demo, not an appendix.
Breadth creates complexity
Dashboards default to next actions; irrelevant modules hidden by role; clicks and time-to-completion measured.
Texas depth becomes expansion debt
Rules, forms, mappings, and effective dates live outside core logic; no national-scalability claim until a second jurisdiction is proven.
Security on paper only
Negative authorization, tenant-isolation, support-session, restore, and audit tests before commercialization.
Pricing and total cost
Compare total cost, not headline rate. Build the prospect's table with their EB count in the room.
| Product | Published rate | Basis | Additional fees |
|---|---|---|---|
| Language Links Pro | $14.50 | Per enrolled EB child, per year — full platform | None stated at list; volume/multi-year per the master agreement |
| Ellevation | $11.50 – $16.00 | Per active EB per year; tiered by count and module (2025 Texas ESC-1 list; awarded contracts $14–$25) | $7,000 district minimum · implementation $9.8K – $27.9K · training $1,250 – $5,000 per session |
| Summit 360 | Not disclosed | Quote-based | Connect to Literacy awarded at $9.95 – $29.95 per student in public bids |
| Avant | $19.90 – $39.90 | Per test administered, not per year | Remote proctoring $15 per session · section retake $10 |
Agreement, milestones, and support
5-year exclusive Texas-first distribution term with DRC begins
Phase 2 live demo to DRC's working team
All currently defined development complete; unrestricted end-to-end testing begins
Full commercialization readiness including mutually approved DRC additions
Service level
99.5% uptime · tiered service credits capped at 25% of monthly fees · no credit for AI generation-time performance. Contract questions route to DRC.
Support handoff
Assessment-side issues (LAS Links administration, scoring, results) stay with DRC. Platform-side issues route to Agentic Learning under a tiered severity model. One front door for the district.
Implementation package
District provisioning and role scope · historical roster and identification-record migration · SIS connectivity validation before go-live · role-specific training (teacher, LPAC, admin) · quick-start references.
Claims discipline
These are certification gates. A confident wrong claim to a coordinator who uses the competitor daily costs more than any feature gap.
Say
- "Purpose-built Texas EB workflow platform designed to connect assessment, program operations, instruction, family communication, and reporting."
- "Designed as a LAS Links wraparound; it does not replace or score LAS Links."
- "Built to manage role-specific workflows from identification through reclassification and monitoring."
- "Capabilities shown as complete are backed by October 31 acceptance evidence and January 4 commercialization release status."
- House wording: "jurisdiction / TEA / agency", not "state". "Workflow-driven AI", not "multi-agent AI system". Never name internal frameworks; never "autonomous".
Never say
- "Summit or Ellevation cannot do LPAC, family communication, program management, progress monitoring, or reclassification workflows."
- "Language Links Pro is more secure" — unless a specific, independently supportable control comparison has been completed.
- "Fully commercial on October 31." October 31 is development-complete and testing; January 4, 2027 is commercialization.
- "All 14 roles, every integration, every security control, or every jurisdiction workflow is complete" — without acceptance-test evidence.
- "We're SOC 2 certified" or any encryption/retention specific not in the verified security documentation package.
- "We do your PEIMS submission" — we deliver validated export; the district submits via TSDS.
Every Texas district that runs Ellevation, Summit, or Frontline pays for it from a funding line that already exists — most often the Bilingual Education Allotment or Title III. This tab explains those lines, what the 2025 Legislature changed, what Washington is threatening, and how to turn all of it into a reason to buy. Figures are as published by TEA and the U.S. Department of Education as of September 2026; verify the current basic allotment and weights on the district's Summary of Finances before quoting.
How Texas funds emergent bilingual programs
Bilingual Education Allotment (TEC §48.105)
Part of the Foundation School Program. For each EB student in average daily attendance the district earns the basic allotment multiplied by a weight: 0.10 for a standard bilingual or ESL program; 0.15 for an EB student in dual language immersion (one-way or two-way); 0.05 for a non-EB or reclassified student in a two-way dual language program. With the basic allotment at $6,215 after HB 2's $55 increase, that is roughly $622, $932, and $311 per student per year.
What BEA can pay for
Program and student evaluation · instructional materials and equipment · staff development · supplemental staff · teacher salaries (HB 2 expanded this from "salary supplements") · smaller class sizes · supplies for quality instruction. Districts must spend at least 55% of BEA on direct program costs and code it to Program Intent Code 25. Language Links Pro fits "program and student evaluation" and "instructional materials and equipment" — El Paso ISD and Ector County ISD charge their incumbent platforms to bilingual funds today.
What BEA depends on
Identification, program placement, and documented parental approval, coded correctly in PEIMS. A student whose approval is missing, or whose program code is wrong, does not generate the weight. That is why the platform's approval capture and PEIMS validation are a funding conversation, not just a compliance one.
Other state lines that touch EB students
Early Education Allotment — 0.10 for K–3 students who are EB or economically disadvantaged (HB 2 now reserves part of it to fund full-day pre-K for 4-year-olds). Compensatory Education Allotment — most EB students also qualify; HB 2 repealed the 55% direct-spending requirement (October 2025), giving districts more flexibility. Allotment for Basic Costs — new under HB 2 to offset inflation. Bilingual exception / ESL waiver districts must fund a comprehensive PD plan from BEA.
What HB 2 (89th Legislature, 2025) changed
| Change | Detail | What it means in a sales conversation |
|---|---|---|
| Dual language under "alternative methods" now earns 0.15 | Districts operating a bilingual exception with a TEA-approved alternative language method (dual language immersion one-way or two-way) can receive the extra 0.05 to reach the full 0.15 weight — but only with full approval under TEC §29.054, and capped at $10 million statewide per biennium ($5M/yr). TEA's June 10, 2026 revision applied it for 2025-26: about 200 school systems and roughly $31 million in added bilingual allotment revenue. "Approved with conditions" does not qualify; non-approved programs fall back to 0.10, and their non-EB DLI students generate nothing. | Approval, program-model coding, and PEIMS classification decide whether a district gets the extra ~$311 per EB DLI student. Ask: "Is your dual-language program fully approved, and does your PEIMS coding match it?" The platform's program-model tracking and DLI allocation checks are the evidence. |
| BEA may fund base teacher salaries | Allowable use expanded from "salary supplements" to "teacher salaries" — districts can move bilingual pay into competitive base salaries. | Budgets are being restructured; the software line is small relative to salary lines. Position the subscription as a fraction of BEA (the calculator below shows the share). |
| Bilingual certification incentives | An additional $2,000 per teacher candidate in bilingual education or special education under the Preparing and Retaining Educators through Partnership allotment; a one-time $1,000 Teacher Certification Incentive for uncertified teachers who certify by 2026-27 (payouts August 2026 and 2027). | Districts are adding bilingual-certified teachers — each new certified teacher is a new LPAC educator member who needs a workflow. Teacher-facing utility matters more, not less. |
| Weights not increased generally | The House version would have raised the weights to 0.12 / 0.17 / 0.07 beginning 2026-27; the enrolled bill did not. Expect the proposal to return in the 90th Legislature (January 2027). | If weights rise in 2027, BEA grows and the "share of BEA" argument gets stronger. Do not quote the higher weights as current. |
| Retention allotments and basic allotment | Teacher Retention Allotment ($2,500 / $5,000 by experience), Support Staff Retention Allotment, and a $55 basic-allotment increase; most of HB 2's $8.5 billion went to compensation. | Discretionary new money is limited (Cypress-Fairbanks still projects an $80.9M deficit). Sell re-pointing an existing line at lower total cost, not new spending. |
Federal funding: Title III and the fight over it
Title III, Part A today
The only federal stream dedicated to English learners: $890 million nationally, flat since FY2023 (up from $831M in FY2022) while the EL population grew about 30%. Allocated to states 80% by EL share and 20% by recent-immigrant share, then to districts by formula; at least 95% passes through to districts; direct admin capped at 2%; strictly supplement-not-supplant. Texas's share is among the largest in the nation. TEA's 2026-27 Title III Basic Supports application is due September 8, 2026; the grant period runs September 1, 2026 – August 31, 2027.
What happened in 2025–26
May 2025: the President's FY26 budget proposed eliminating Title III. June 30, 2025: the Department withheld $6.8B in K-12 formula funds including all $890M of Title III; released July 28 after a month of district uncertainty. February 2026: Congress enacted FY26 with Title III level-funded at $890M, an oversight briefing requirement, and new measures against withholding. May 2026: the Office of English Language Acquisition was eliminated; Title III moved to the Office of State Support and Accountability. July 2026: funds distributed on time for 2026-27.
What is at risk for 2027-28
The FY27 President's budget again proposes zero for Title III and proposes folding seventeen K-12 programs into a single "MEGA" block grant. On June 10, 2026 the House Appropriations Committee approved a bill eliminating Title III ($890M), Title II-A ($2.19B), and Title I migrant education ($428M) and cutting Title I-A by $1.9B; an amendment by Rep. Escobar (D-TX) to restore Title III failed. The Senate has not marked up; a continuing resolution and a post-election decision are expected. Districts are budgeting Title III conservatively — "don't spend it until it's in hand."
Other federal lines
Title I, Part A — the largest K-12 program; EB students are served under it and Title I can fund EL supports. Title IV-A — the flexible block grant commonly used for edtech; slightly increased in the House bill. Title I, Part C (migrant) — proposed for elimination. Title III's immigrant set-aside grows with newcomer enrollment (Texas immigrant-identified students rose 22% in one year to 193,831).
BEA revenue and license-share calculator
Estimate a district's Bilingual Education Allotment from its EB counts and see the Language Links Pro subscription as a share of it. Uses the current weights and a $6,215 basic allotment; ADA is approximated from enrollment with a 95% attendance factor. Rule of thumb, not a Summary of Finances.
Funding opportunities and calendar
| Opportunity | Source | When | Fit for Language Links Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bilingual Education Allotment (formula) | State — Foundation School Program | Flows through the Summary of Finances all year; driven by PEIMS fall snapshot and attendance | Primary line. Allowable as program/student evaluation and instructional materials; protects the allotment by documenting approvals and coding. |
| Alternative-method dual language 0.15 approval | State — TEA (TEC §48.105(a-1)/(a-2)), $10M per biennium cap | Biennial approval; 2025-26 round complete June 2026; next window for the 2027-29 biennium — apply the day it opens | Program-model tracking, DLI allocation checks, and PEIMS classification make the case for full approval and the extra 0.05. |
| Title III, Part A Basic Supports | Federal via TEA (eGrants) | Application due September 8, 2026 for 2026-27; annual | Allowable as supplemental EL technology with a supplement-not-supplant note; treat as at-risk beyond 2026-27. |
| Title I, Part A | Federal via TEA | Annual application; forward-funded July 1 | Supports EB students at Title I campuses; can fund family engagement and instructional supports. |
| Title IV-A (Student Support and Academic Enrichment) | Federal via TEA | Annual; flexible block grant | Commonly used for educational technology; a secondary line where BEA is committed. |
| Bilingual certification incentives ($2,000 PREP; $1,000 TCI) | State — HB 2 | TCI payouts August 2026 and August 2027; PREP annual | Not for software — but each newly certified bilingual teacher is a new platform user and LPAC member. |
| Compensatory Education Allotment (flexibility) | State | Ongoing; 55% direct-spend rule repealed October 2025 | Freed local flexibility for at-risk services that overlap EB populations. |
| Cooperative purchasing contracts | TIPS, BuyBoard, Choice Partners, ESC cooperatives, DIR | Any time; district memberships reaffirmed each July | Not funding — the compliant purchasing path once a funding line is identified. |
Legislative watch — what to track, what to say
Texas 90th Legislature — convenes January 2027
Watch for: a return of the 0.12 / 0.17 / 0.07 weight increase; changes to the $10M alternative-method cap; Texas Education Freedom Accounts (SB 2) effects on enrollment and ADA from 2026-27; any LPAC or reclassification statute changes that the rules engine would absorb. Say: "The rules layer is versioned with effective dates — when the Legislature moves, the workflow moves with it."
Federal FY27 appropriations
Watch for: the Senate Labor-HHS-Education bill, a continuing resolution past September 30, and the post-election conference outcome on Title III; USED restructuring and where Title III administration lands. Say: "We don't tie your subscription to Title III. Fund it from the allotment your EB students already generate."
TEA implementation letters
Watch for: To the Administrator Addressed (TAA) letters on HB 2 implementation, Summary of Finances revisions, the alternative-method approval window, and the Funding Guidebook update. Say: "Your Summary of Finances shows the bilingual allotment by row — let's read it together and see what the coding is leaving on the table."
District budget season
Watch for: budget workshops February–April, adoption in June (July–June districts) or August (September–August districts), and the fall PEIMS snapshot that sets next year's BEA. Say: "The identification clocks and parental approvals captured before the snapshot are next year's allotment."
Sources: HB 2 enrolled bill and TEA implementation letters (July 2025, June 2026 Summary of Finances revision); TEA Funding Guidebook; Texas Education Code §48.105 and §29.054; U.S. Department of Education FY2027 Congressional Justification (English Language Acquisition); House Appropriations Committee FY27 Labor-HHS-Education bill (June 2026); FY26 enacted appropriations (February 2026); TEA 2026-27 Title III, Part A application. Weights, caps, and dates should be re-verified before quoting to a district.
The twelve-minute scenario demo
Scenario-based demos prove workflow execution. Feature tours invite checklist comparisons you will not win against a national suite. One student, start to finish, with role-scoped accounts and production-equivalent test data.
| Step | What you show | What it proves |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Create the student; capture the Home Language Survey | Stage 1 digital intake with history |
| 2 | Watch the identification pathway and clock start from the survey response | Executable Texas timelines |
| 3 | Ingest or associate LAS Links results with source lineage | Wraparound; DRC branding on screen |
| 4 | Prepare the LPAC; try to mark it ready with a member missing; validate; record decisions; capture sign-off | Real gates, not labels |
| 5 | Generate the family notice in the home language; show educator sign-off and delivery status | Texas notice logic with audit linkage |
| 6 | Convert domain evidence into Bluebonnet/ELPS supports and one approved teaching move | Teacher utility; not an admin tool |
| 7 | Show campus and district dashboards updating from the same workflow state | No duplicate entry, no sync step |
| 8 | Run reclassification/monitoring logic; show PEIMS indicator codes change | Rule-versioned Texas reclassification |
| 9 | Validate PEIMS; surface an intentional error; correct; revalidate; export with history | Reconciliation with evidence |
| 10 | Switch among teacher, LPAC, campus, district, parent, auditor accounts | 14-role scope, materially different data |
| 11 | Attempt cross-student and cross-tenant access; show the denial logged | Security in observable behavior |
| 12 | Open the audit trail for the student | Who, what, when, under which role, with what approval |
Objections and responses
Pilot design and closing
Pilot that proves value
One campus cluster through a full identification-to-reclassification cycle including an LPAC cycle and a PEIMS validation. Success metrics defined up front: overdue LPACs, time per LPAC packet, unresolved PEIMS exceptions, missing member signatures. A DRC owner and a district owner. A 60–90 day decision date written into the agreement.
Defensible value
Staff hours per LPAC cycle, late-notice and exception counts, and BEA revenue tied to documented approvals — baselined during discovery and measured after. Never guarantee assessment outcomes or "zero findings".
Close on a plan
"Send me a proposal" → confirm the decision path, send a scoped implementation plan with owners and dates alongside the proposal, reference January 4 readiness and the proof library, and bring the DRC account team in for terms. Discounting is DRC's call.
How to say it: message architecture
Buyers punish inconsistency — Gartner's 2025 buyer survey found 69% of B2B buyers report conflicts between what sellers say and what the vendor's materials say, and 73% actively avoid vendors whose outreach is irrelevant to them. Every rep uses the same three layers below, tailored to the person in front of them.
The 8-second line
"LAS Links tells you where a student is. Language Links Pro tells your campus what has to happen next, who owns it, when it's due — and proves it got done."
The 30-second version
"It's the Texas EB operating system built around the work your district actually has to complete. It sits beside LAS Links — never replaces or scores it — and turns results into LPAC action, family notices, teacher supports, reclassification and monitoring, PEIMS-ready reporting, and an audit trail. $14.50 per enrolled EB student per year, distributed and supported through DRC."
The 2-minute version
Open with the market (1.3 million EB students, one in four Texas students). Name the gap (the work between the assessment and the audit lives on spreadsheets). Walk one student: HLS → clock → LPAC with required members → notice → teaching move → PEIMS code → audit event. Close with the DRC relationship, the January 4 readiness standard, and the offer of a twelve-minute scenario demo.
The reframe every conversation should land
Challenger research (CEB/Gartner, 6,000+ sellers) found the sales experience drives 53% of buyer loyalty — more than brand, product, service, and price combined — and that the highest performers in complex sales lead with an insight that reframes the buyer's problem, then tailor it to each stakeholder, then take control of next steps. The reframe above is the insight. It works only because it leads to something Language Links Pro specifically does.
Cost of inaction (quantify it)
Staff hours per LPAC packet × LPACs per year · late-notice count · PEIMS exceptions returned · monitoring students lost track of · BEA dollars resting on approvals nobody can find. Ask for last spring's numbers in discovery; use them in the proposal.
Take control of next steps
Never end a meeting without an owner and a date: scenario demo scheduled, security package sent to IT, pilot metrics drafted, DRC account team introduced. Write the success metrics into the pilot so the close is a review, not a negotiation.
Constructive tension, not contradiction
When a buyer says "our process works fine", ask what evidence supports it. When they praise Ellevation or Summit, agree — then ask how the Texas action gets executed from it. Never argue; ask for the proof.
Key selling points — say it this way, not that way
Each row is a selling point, the precise phrasing, the phrasing that costs credibility, and the proof to show. Precision is the difference between a coordinator nodding and a coordinator correcting you.
The Texas market, precisely
Numbers from TEA's Enrollment in Texas Public Schools, 2024-25. Use them to open, to size a district, and to make the case for urgency. EB counts by district, home language, and grade are public on TEA's PEIMS standard reports — pull the prospect's before the first call.
Where the students are (ESC regions by total enrollment)
| Region | 2024-25 enrollment | Note |
|---|---|---|
| 4 — Houston | 1,246,551 | Largest region; HISD is the current proof-point deployment |
| 10 — Richardson (Dallas) | 910,252 | Second-largest; many large districts with mature EL platforms |
| 11 — Fort Worth | 595,779 | Fast-growing suburbs; newcomer growth |
| 20 — San Antonio | 506,197 | High EB share; strong dual-language programs |
| 1 — Edinburg (Rio Grande Valley) | 435,144 | Highest EB concentration in the jurisdiction; bilingual program depth |
| 13 — Austin | 397,937 | Growing; procurement-savvy districts |
| 19 — El Paso | 160,879 | Dual-language leadership; border enrollment dynamics |
Total enrollment shown; EB share varies by region (Region 1 and 19 far above the 24% average). Pull EB counts per district from TEA before territory planning.
Territory focus — where to spend time first
Tier 1 · Existing LAS Links districts with a competitor renewal inside 12 months
Two-product conversation already has a door. Run the Texas workflow pilot alongside the incumbent with a decision point before renewal. Highest win probability, shortest cycle.
Tier 2 · LAS Links districts running EB compliance on spreadsheets and shared drives
No incumbent to displace. Lead with the reframe and the cost of inaction; the scenario demo usually closes discovery in one meeting.
Tier 3 · Non-LAS Links districts
Co-sell with the DRC assessment team. Language Links Pro is the reason to consider LAS Links for identification and progress monitoring — the wraparound is the differentiator for both products.
The Texas buying calendar and procurement path
Selling well in Texas means knowing when money is decided and how a purchase order can legally be issued. Most lost K-12 deals are lost to the calendar, not to a competitor.
Needs assessment and budget development. Highest-leverage window for new relationships: line items are still being drafted.
Board budget workshops, RFPs and cooperative POs. Vendors not already known by February compete against committed budgets.
Fiscal year-end sprint and new-year POs. Texas districts run July–June or September–August fiscal years — ask which.
LAS Links renewal dates and competitor renewal dates are the two calendars that matter most. Map both for every account.
Bid threshold
Texas Education Code §44.031: purchases of $50,000 or more (aggregate, 12 months) require a best-value method — competitive sealed proposals, an RFP, or an interlocal / cooperative contract. At $14.50 per EB student, a 3,500-EB district crosses the threshold. Know the district's path before proposing.
Cooperative contracts
TIPS (Region 8 ESC), BuyBoard (TASB), regional ESC cooperatives, and DIR for technology. A cooperative award lets a member district issue a PO against an already-competed contract in weeks rather than a semester. Confirm which vehicles DRC's contracts sit on and which the district is a member of. Never say "you don't have to bid it" — say "there is a compliant path to purchase."
Funding sources
Bilingual Education Allotment (weighted funding for EB students in bilingual/ESL programs, higher for dual language — tied to documented parental approval); Title III (supplemental EL services; keep a supplement-not-supplant note); local and general funds. Procurement removes the solicitation, not the funding documentation.
Privacy agreements
Expect a Texas Student Data Privacy Agreement (TX-NDPA) request from any district; the SOW requires execution-ready privacy documentation. Send the security package and subprocessor register before IT asks. FERPA handling is documented; SOC 2 status is stated only from the verification package.
Board approval
Larger purchases need a board vote even on a cooperative contract. Provide the superintendent's office a board-ready one-pager: problem, workflow, price, DRC partnership, implementation dates, measurable outcomes.
Implementation before LPAC season
Identification clocks start the day school opens. A district that signs in spring and goes live in August walks into its heaviest LPAC period with the platform running. Sell the timing, not just the tool.
The team operating system: precise, focused, trained, passionate
Research is consistent on what separates high-performing sales teams: insight-led conversations, message consistency, deliberate practice, and managers who coach to the conversation rather than the forecast. Organizations with a strong coaching culture outperform on revenue; the framework dies at the manager layer when coaching does not change.
Precise
One claims list, one status sheet for every SOW item, one price. Every rep certified before customer contact. The study guide and this site are the single source; collateral is checked against the Say / Never say list before it leaves a laptop. When you don't know, say "I'll confirm" — never guess a regulatory or security fact.
Focused
Territory tiered by LAS Links status, competitor renewal date, and EB count. Pipeline stages with evidence-based exit criteria: discovery answers captured → scenario demo delivered → technical package sent → pilot metrics agreed → DRC account team engaged. No stage advances on optimism.
Trained
Certification is the entry gate; recertification after each release (January 4 first). Weekly 30-minute role-play on one objection and one persona. Monthly competitor refresh against Summit 360 and Ellevation's current releases. Every rep records the twelve-minute scenario demo and is signed off by a manager before running it live.
Passionate
Passion is specific, not loud. 1.3 million children, one in four Texas students, each with clocks that protect their access to services. Every missed LPAC is a child waiting. Open every team meeting with one student story from a district — that is what keeps the reframe honest and the reps precise.
Weekly cadence and leading indicators
| Rhythm | What happens | Metric watched |
|---|---|---|
| Daily | Pre-call: pull the district's EB count, program models, LAS Links status, and known incumbent. Post-call: log the four discovery answers. | Discovery completeness (4 of 4 answers captured) |
| Weekly | 30-minute role-play: one objection, one persona, one rep on camera; manager coaches on the reframe and next-step control. Pipeline review on exit criteria, not stage names. | Scenario demos delivered · technical packages sent · pilots with written metrics |
| Monthly | Competitor refresh; claims-list review; one customer story shared; certification scores reviewed by domain across the team. | Team domain heat map · calibration (sure-and-wrong rate) |
| Quarterly | Recertify on any domain below Proficient; update the Texas rules cheat sheet against TEA changes; territory re-tiering by renewal dates. | Two-product rate at LAS Links renewals · pilot-to-contract conversion |
New-rep ramp: 30 / 60 / 90
Days 1–30 · Know it
Read every tab. Pass certification at Specialist. Shadow three customer meetings. Memorize the three message layers and the Say / Never say list. Learn the demo campus cold.
Days 31–60 · Show it
Record the twelve-minute scenario demo; get manager sign-off. Run discovery on ten Tier 1 and Tier 2 accounts with a certified rep. Build one district's cost-of-inaction baseline and total-cost comparison.
Days 61–90 · Sell it
Lead a scenario demo and a technical review. Draft one pilot agreement with written metrics. Bring one LAS Links renewal into a two-product conversation. Recertify; target Master Specialist.
Precision is measurable.
The certification's calibration report tells you which claims a rep would repeat with confidence and get wrong. Fix those first.
Sources: TEA, Enrollment in Texas Public Schools, 2024-25 (Oct 2025); Texas Education Code §44.031; TIPS and BuyBoard public program descriptions; Gartner B2B buyer survey (June 2025); CEB/Gartner Challenger research summaries. Competitor and procurement details should be revalidated before external use.
Learn
Short, repeatable practice. Flashcards use a simple spaced-repetition loop: cards you miss come back sooner; cards you know retire to the back. Everything here runs on this page and resets when you close it.
Questions & answers
Every question a buyer, a colleague, or a certification item is likely to ask — with a one-line answer for the room, the full answer, why it matters to the buyer, the proof or demo move, and the pitfall to avoid. Search across everything; filter by category; expand any card.
Sales Leader Toolkit
For the DRC sales leader running the Texas motion: market analytics from TEA data, researched buying signals by district, a plan generator that turns targets into territories and weekly activity, phase-by-phase task lists, strategic plan templates, coaching instruments, and a stage-weighted forecast. Everything runs on this page.
Study guide
Facts to know cold and talk tracks to rehearse out loud, by certification domain. The assessment samples every subtopic listed.
Sales certification
Adaptive assessment · 8 domains · analytics report