18F/18f.gsa.gov

---
title: "Using agile methods to improve the RFP process"
date: 2018-05-22
authors:
- randy-hart
- mheadd
tags:
- agile
- acquisition services
- alaska
- health and human services
- procurement
- state and local practice
excerpt: "The process of developing and issuing RFPs is often viewed as
a one off - a special activity that occurs infrequently and in isolation.
What if we applied the principles of iteration and continuous
improvement to the way that RFPs are developed?"
---

> “Let us not look back in anger, nor forward in fear, but around in
awareness.” - **James Thurber**

One of the fundamental principles of agile is [continuous
improvement](https://agile.18f.gov/6-iterate.html) — the idea that each
successive iteration can be improved upon by critically examining what
happened previously and looking for ways to improve.

This is often not how we conduct government procurements, which are
typically viewed as one-off, bespoke exercises that occur infrequently
and in isolation. Ironically enough, even when governments are issuing
solicitations for agile software development services, they seldom apply
agile principles to improving the way that these solicitations are
developed and managed.

At 18F, our core mission is to help our federal and state partners
become better builders and buyers of digital services. In our work with
federal agencies and state governments, we employ [a variety of tools
and strategies](https://modularcontracting.18f.gov/) aimed at
streamlining procurements, reducing risk and using agile methodologies
to develop digital services that work for users. Part of this work
involves using the principles of agile to help our partners improve the
way that the procurement process works, particularly for vendors that
may be new to government contracting.

In our work with the State of Alaska, we’ve [embraced transparency and
openness](https://18f.gsa.gov/2017/09/12/how-alaska-is-using-transparency/)
in the development of RFPs and related documents, and leveraged GitHub
to reach out with and interact with prospective vendors. This approach
has also allowed us to iterate on the RFP documents themselves, by first
publishing a draft version of these documents publicly and allowing
vendors and other stakeholders to comment and ask questions, and then
incorporating those comments into the final RFP.

We’re also iterating on our process by looking critically at the initial
procurement by the State of Alaska and identifying things that worked
well and those that didn’t.

Building on the work we’re doing with Alaska and other partners, here
are some ideas for how you can apply the principle of continuous
improvement to your procurement process:

## Ask vendors for feedback

By engaging with vendors early and often, agencies can increase their
chances of getting more numerous and higher quality responses to RFPs.
[Keeping vendors in the
loop](https://github.com/AlaskaDHSS/EIS-Modernization/wiki) and asking
for feedback as you develop procurement documents is a great way to
ensure that what you’re asking vendors for is clearly articulated and
described.

Part of the vendor engagement process involves asking vendors to give
you feedback on the procurement process once an award has been made and
to get suggestions for future changes that can improve the process. By
understanding what vendors liked and didn’t like about your procurement
process, you can work to ensure that as many vendors as possible submit
bids.

In our work with the State of Alaska, we used a simple [Google Form
](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdustMAV7GzSNk1nmr_EKVt_E4e2pFcZOiyh1_l7rO4h_Rqkg/viewform)to
solicit vendor feedback after an award had been made. In soliciting this
feedback, we cast our net far and wide and asked both firms that had
submitted bids for feedback as well as those that expressed an interest
but did not submit bids. After the comment period closed, we [posted
excerpts and a summary of the comments we
received](https://github.com/AlaskaDHSS/RFP-Search-Unification/blob/master/post-award-vendor-info/retrospective-on-buy-1.md)
to the state’s GitHub organization. This was an important aspect of our
work to solicit comments from vendors — we believe being open and
transparent about the kinds of feedback vendors provide is an important
part of signaling to the vendor community that you take their feedback
seriously and intend to use it.

## Hold a retro

In agile software development, retrospectives are a way for a team to
reflect on the work done in the previous sprint to highlight things that
have gone well, and also to talk about things that could be improved
going forward. At 18F, we work with our partners in cross functional
teams that include a range of skill sets needed to successfully develop
an RFP, select a vendor, and work with a vendor post award.

Every member of our combined 18F and partner team — contracting
officers, product owner, technology leads, designers, etc — brings
something to the table that is needed to help ensure a successful
procurement. Employing the principles of agile retrospectives to our
work allows each member of our team to offer ideas for how the next
procurement can be improved.

After the initial procurement in Alaska concluded, we conducted [an
internal
post-mortem](https://github.com/AlaskaDHSS/RFP-Search-Unification/blob/master/post-award-vendor-info/Post-Mortem_on_the_first_Alaska_buy.v2.pdf)
on how the the procurement was run to get our team's thoughts and ideas
on what worked well and what didn’t. We also [critically evaluated our
use of
GitHub](https://github.com/AlaskaDHSS/EIS-Modernization/blob/master/using-github-for-procurement-docs.md)
as a way to develop procurement documents and engage with vendors.

Each of these exercises provides valuable information that can be used
to improve how vendors are engaged on public sector technology
procurements. Each new procurement in a [modular contracting
strategy](https://modularcontracting.18f.gov/modular-procurement/)
becomes an opportunity to improve on the one that came before — helping
identify vendors that will enable governments to deliver high quality
digital services to the public.