Child Care Administrator’s Improper Payments Information Technology Guide

Download Guide in Word (993 KB) or PDF (635KB) format.

C. Identifying and Evaluating Alternatives (continued)

5. Avoiding Common Mistakes

Many of the following tips are adapted from Karl M. Kapp’s “Winning E-Learning Proposals: The Art of Development and Delivery.” Avoiding these common mistakes can help States effectively procure the products and services necessary to meet their business/service objectives:

• Poorly written or illogical content - Despite their enormous importance, RFPs are notoriously poorly written. Vendors are more likely to bid on a RFP which is well written. In addition to standard writing procedures, such as using a technical editor, writers of RFPs may want to include diagrams, examples, and reference additional, available documents such as an Agency’s strategic plan, descriptions of the existing technical environment, and a synthesis of the stakeholder needs.
• Providing too little detail - Vendors cannot help meet business/service needs or solve problems if there is too little information about the current business process, technological infrastructure, or proposed budget. States should avoid providing unnecessary detail regarding solution design. Sharing information about the current technical environment helps vendors understand the gap between current operations and their proposed solution. Clearly stating budget constraints helps vendors to assess and propose viable solutions.
• Lack of imagination - The RFP process is a good time to brainstorm internally and think outside of the box. As a Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) approach gains hold among States, more RFPs are calling for web-based services that can be used across the enterprise by multiple programs. Additionally, the advent of framework technology creates new possibilities to leverage a single software product across multiple programs. Looking to the experience and solutions used in other industries with similar functions may produce new, innovative ideas.
• Poorly scoped – Poorly scoped RFPs typically overstate or understate the business/service needs and the level of effort. Discussing lessons learned with other States can help a State avoid this problem.
• Failing to account for business needs – If the RFP does not clearly include the statement of business needs and the desired outcomes, the quality of all other aspects of the RFP process does not matter. If vendors know the business needs driving your RFP, they can leverage their knowledge to help identify a solution.
• Overly strict interpretation of the “Cone of Silence” – Many States maintain strict requirements related to interaction between State personnel and vendors, particularly during the RFP process. This is often referred to as the “Cone of Silence.” Vendors possess great knowledge of industry practices and technological capabilities that can be valuable to the RFP team in understanding the external environment and identifying potential options. Finding acceptable ways for the RFP Team to have access to this knowledge of vendors could significantly benefit the project. Options for acceptable interaction with venders include: issuing a Request for Information (RFI), issuing a draft RFP for comment, holding a pre-bid conference, and providing time for “discovery” for vendors to interview and observe State and local staff so that they better understand the business processes and challenges.