District AI Index — Vendor Score Report
Formative
by Formative (GoFormative) · Report generated 4/13/2026
District AI Index — Vendor Score Report
Formative
by Formative (GoFormative) · Generated 4/13/2026
Executive Summary
“A powerful formative assessment tool with genuinely useful AI grading. Best for data-driven instruction.”
Dimension Score Breakdown
Ease of Use
Strengths
- Clean, well-designed interface that teachers can adopt quickly
- Strong integration ecosystem (Google Classroom, Canvas, Clever)
- Supports common K–12 SSO/rostering (Google or Clever)
- Free tier available for individual teacher evaluation
Gaps Identified
No critical gaps identified.
Instructional Value
Strengths
- Exceptional instructional value — directly improves teaching/learning outcomes
- Versatile use cases: Formative assessment, Real-time monitoring, AI grading
- Rich feature set with 5 documented capabilities
- Clear instructional fit documentation provided
Gaps Identified
- Significant limitations: Lesson planning, Content creation
Recommendations to Improve Score
- Publish detailed alignment documentation to pedagogy, standards, and instructional frameworks (UDL, Bloom's)
- Consider pursuing alignment documentation with Common Core, NGSS, or state-specific standards
Data Privacy
Strengths
- 4 compliance certifications verified: FERPA Compliant, COPPA Compliant, DPA Available, VPAT/ACR
- FERPA Compliant documentation publicly accessible
- COPPA Compliant documentation publicly accessible
- DPA Available documentation publicly accessible
- VPAT/ACR documentation publicly accessible
Gaps Identified
- SOC 2 Type II: Not documented — critical gap for district adoption
- Overall privacy level assessed as 'Medium' — not yet District Ready
Recommendations to Improve Score
- Pursue SOC 2 Type II certification to demonstrate security controls to enterprise buyers
- Explicitly document whether user/student data is used for AI model training — districts will ask
Accessibility
Strengths
- Strong accessibility posture across the platform
- Keyboard navigation supported
Gaps Identified
- VPAT/ACR only available on request — should be publicly accessible
Recommendations to Improve Score
- Commission a VPAT 2.5 / Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) and publish it on your website — this is increasingly a procurement requirement
- Ensure full keyboard navigation throughout the application
- Test with screen readers (VoiceOver, NVDA, JAWS) and document compatibility
- Reference specific WCAG success criteria in your accessibility documentation
Compliance Gaps
| Signal | Current Status | Action Required |
|---|---|---|
| SOC 2 Type II | Not documented | Obtain SOC 2 Type II certification/documentation |
VPAT / ACR Assessment
Priority Actions to Improve Score
The following actions would have the highest impact on your District AI Index score, listed in priority order:
- 1Pursue SOC 2 Type II certification to demonstrate security controls to enterprise buyers
- 2Explicitly document whether user/student data is used for AI model training — districts will ask
- 3Commission a VPAT 2.5 / Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) and publish it on your website — this is increasingly a procurement requirement
- 4Ensure full keyboard navigation throughout the application
- 5Publish detailed alignment documentation to pedagogy, standards, and instructional frameworks (UDL, Bloom's)
Scoring Methodology
Scores are assigned by the District AI Index editorial team across four dimensions. Instructional Value carries the highest weight (40%) because our primary audience — educators and district leaders — prioritize tools that genuinely improve teaching and learning. Overall Score = (Ease × 0.20) + (Instructional Value × 0.40) + (Privacy × 0.20) + (Accessibility × 0.20). Scores are not influenced by listing tier, affiliate status, or vendor relationships.
Full methodology: districtaiindex.com/editorial-policy
Questions About This Report?
If you believe any information is inaccurate or have updated compliance documentation, contact our editorial team.
Contact Editorial Team