1. Planning for life after CodeForAmerica
Collaborative Innovation in Local Gov

2. Who are we ?
Chris Osgood Jeff Friedman
Co-Chair, Boston Co-Chair, Philadelphia
Chris.Osgood@boston.gov Jeff.Friedman@phila.gov
@newurbanmechs @urbanmechanics
Nigel Jacob Story Bellows
Co-Chair, Boston Co-Chair, Philadelphia
Nigel.Jacob@boston.gov Story.Bellows@phila.gov
@nsjacob @urbanmechanics

3. What are we going to talk about ?
1
Thinking long-term about how to sustain and evolve all
The effort that have gone into the CFA engagement
Dealing with the near-term, logistical aspects of rolling
2
Out the CFA technologies

4. The Challenge and the Opportunity
1 The Challenge: the civic tech world is a developing space and as
such, best practices are still in the early phases
2 The Opportunity: You will have the experience and skills
To contribute to how this new field evolves

5. Longer term: keeping the spirit of innovation alive
There are many different angles here, including….
1 Open data is just the first step:
Since you’re here you already get this; this is really about Open Innovation
2 Expanding from CIO to CTO
We need to develop a human-centered engineering culture in local gov
3 Changing how we hire / How to hire a CFA fellow (!)
Local gov is a mission-oriented organization; pitch the mission
4 Partnering with other cities:
- CFA Peer Network
- G7
- New Urban Mechanics

6. Near-term questions and issues
1 Dealing with the roll-out of the CFA-developed tech
2 How to (quickly) extend the CFA technology
3 Dealing with different technology cultures
4 Approaching the procurement questions

7. Near-term issue: Rolling out the tech
1 Setting expectations
Framing the CFA tech as experiments or proofs-of-concept can be
A powerful way to manage expectations
2 Commit to thinking like a product manager
Adopting an “agile” approach can help enforce a Product-discipline;
Find the natural product managers in your organization,
eg: Justin Holmes
3 Thinking clearly about goals
Building trust is often easier than focusing on efficiency,
eg: Citizens Connect

8. Near-term issue: Extending the tech
1 Doing the work yourself
Depending on your skillset, this could be a great confidence-building
Exercise; however, maintaining a focus on the value proposition can be
Challenging
2 Contracting with individual fellows
This can work really well for specific features and/or fixes; however,
Challenges with sustainability tend to arise
3 Contracting with a team/startup of fellows
This can work very well for both city and fellows/startup; however,
This also requires true collaboration and discipline
4 Contracting with a third party developer
A natural starting point, but finding the right partner (ie: not IBM)
Requires a thoughtful approach

9. Near-term issue: Dealing with different Technology cultures
1 Getting comfortable with the tools: GitHub, Heroku, etc
These tools are remaking the collaborative tech development world; they
Speed deployment but also require a thoughtful approach to building
A community around your code
2 Thinking about opensource
If your project is successful you may well see other cities interested in
Learning from you; opensource enables this but needs a certain
“community manager” approach, eg: MBTA
3 Dealing with very different vendors
If your intend to spend much time in civic tech, you need to get
Comfortable with startups and their cultures; outreach is key!!!
4 Embrace (and enable) your local Civic Hackers!!!
Civic hackers can be an incredible resource; The CFA Brigade is a great
Way to get the local community engaged; relationships need care and
feeding

10. Near-term issue: Approaching the procurement question
1 Local gov often has an adversarial relationship with
vendors
2 If we are going to innovate sustainably we need to re-
think how we work with vendors (and who those
vendors are)
3 A quick story: Boston and ConnectedBits

11. Near-term issue: Approaching the procurement question (cont’d)
1 Each state’s procurement laws and rules vary, but they
all generally seems to provide a few procurement
options
2 For example in Massachusetts:
• < $5,000 : “Sound business judgment”
• We can just write a contract (within standard contract limits)
• Usage: smaller, immediate feature changes/fixes
• < $25,000 : Verbal bids
• We must solicit 3 bids but must take the lowest bid
• Usage: Proof-of-concept development
• > $25,000 : RFP
Usage: Scaling successful POC’s

12. Near-term issue: Approaching the procurement question (cont’d)
1 RFP’s aren’t as scary as we once thought
2 By digging in we discovered that this route, while somewhat
onerous in terms of writing and the process, actually provides a fair
bit of flexibility
3 The real issue is the "usability" of RFP's; their length tends to
preference larger institutions; this can be addressed by thinking in
terms of design.
4 Some potential options: RFP EZ, City of Boston’s legislative tweak…

13. Near-term issue: Procurement reform in MA (baby steps):
SECTION 1. Subsection (b) of Section 1 of Chapter 30B of
the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after
clause (34), the following clause:-
(35) a contract of less than $100,000 for open source
deliverables. Within sixty days of entering into such a
contract, the governmental body shall provide public
notice of the contract on its website for at least two
weeks. The public notice shall specify the dollar amount,
contractor, and subject matter of the contract and identify
the manner in which open source deliverables will be
made available to the public.

14. Pause
Questions?

15. We want to help!
Chris Osgood Jeff Friedman
Co-Chair, Boston Co-Chair, Philadelphia
Chris.Osgood@boston.gov Jeff.Friedman@phila.gov
@newurbanmechs @urbanmechs
Nigel Jacob Story Bellows
Co-Chair, Boston Co-Chair, Philadelphia
Nigel.Jacob@boston.gov Story.Bellows@phila.gov
@nsjacob @urbanmechs