Update case-study-challenge-small-agency-legacy-application-migration.mdx

Author: kevinwehmuellerooi

tech-far-hub/content/resources/case-studies/case-study-challenge-small-agency-legacy-application-migration.mdx

@@ -15,8 +15,7 @@ By Scott Simpson
 This case study was a finalist selected as part of the [Digital Acquisition Professional Program Case Study Challenge](https://www.challenge.gov/?challenge=ditap-case-study). To see the original case study, click [here](../../../../tech-far-hub/static/assets/files/small-agency-legacy-application-migration-ditap-case-study.pdf).
 </Summary>
 
-> [!NOTE]
-> All people and situations are fictional. No real people are depicted in the scenarios below. All images are AI generated and do not intentionally mimic any specific person.
+> **All people and situations are fictional.** No real people are depicted in the scenarios below. All images are AI generated and do not intentionally mimic any specific person.
 
 ## Background
 A small federal agency has a legacy on-premise application that is twenty plus years old. The application is used to interact with the American public in order to meet the agency’s primary mission. Due to its age and design, the application is difficult to navigate and currently requires a human staffed help desk to walk users through the process. Even with this assistance, the application has a high percentage of non-completion, greater than 75% abandonment. Approximately 1 million citizens attempt to use to the application each year.
@@ -73,15 +72,13 @@ Review with Reva and Lars common agile principles that should be (or should have
 | --- | --- |
 | PMO Liaison: | Lars, I understand that you’re worried about the IGCE and a D&F for cost reimbursable contract type. Let’s put that off to the side for now and talk about it again later. It’s not that it’s not important, but we can make the decision on contract type after we perform some market research. Maybe it’s even a question that we might want to put into the RFI. What do you think about that? |
 
-> [!TIP]
 > This puts the concern into a “parking lot” for later.
 
 | Speaker | Dialogue |
 | --- | --- |
 | Lars: | Alright, whatever. If this thing isn’t awarded on time, it’s not my fault.  |
 | PMO Liaison: | Let’s post a quick request for information to SAM and tell vendors that this is most likely going to be awarded this fiscal year. |
 
-> [!IMPORTANT]
 > What type of information do you ask for? Do you send a copy to the CIO’s vendor?
 
 | Speaker | Dialogue |
@@ -98,7 +95,6 @@ Review with Reva and Lars common agile principles that should be (or should have
   - Ask about potential evaluation methods for the solicitation phase.
   - Ask about possible technology solutions to better match the public to services (including AI, etc.)
 
-> [!IMPORTANT]
 > Are there any others?
 
 | Speaker | Dialogue |
@@ -109,7 +105,6 @@ Review with Reva and Lars common agile principles that should be (or should have
 | Lars: | What is your hangup with discovery?! |
 | PMO Liaison: | Discovery is actually something we do every day, we just don’t call it discovery. If you’ve ever use Netflix or Pandora, you’ve been part of a discovery session. Those two apps ask what you like and don’t like and then recommend new content based on your answers.  |
 
-> [!IMPORTANT]
 > What other every-day examples could you use to describe discovery?
 
 | Speaker | Dialogue |
@@ -119,8 +114,7 @@ Review with Reva and Lars common agile principles that should be (or should have
 | Reva: | Okay, but that doesn’t solve our problem about the SOW or PWS. I need to get that written in like 2 days or I have to go through this whole PR waiver process. |
 | PMO Liaison: | What if we used a statement of objectives? That’s a lot easier to put together and it actual works better for an agile procurement anyways. |
 
-> [!TIP]
-> Tell them more about an SOO.
+> Tell them more about a SOO.
 
 | Speaker | Dialogue |
 | --- | --- |
@@ -139,14 +133,12 @@ Review with Reva and Lars common agile principles that should be (or should have
 | --- | --- |
 | PMO Liaison: | Before writing your requirements, you should spend some time gathering user stories from all of your stakeholder offices. |
 
-> [!TIP]
 > Tell them more about user stories.
 
 | Speaker | Dialogue |
 | --- | --- |
 | PMO Liaison: | You should also consider holding discovery sessions with public users, especially those ones that didn’t complete the interaction with application. It would be great to know why they exited the application. Another great best practice is to design with the end in mind. This would mean talking with offices like security, privacy, accessibility to ensure that all of their requirements (ATO, 508 compliance, US web design standards, etc.) were included from the beginning. It would also help to avoid any surprises later in the process. |
 
-> [!IMPORTANT]
 > What other agile best practices you could advise the team to consider regarding their overall migration?
 
 ## Scenario 2 – Solicitation
@@ -207,7 +199,6 @@ As the AIA, you setup a meeting with Helena (CO):
 | --- | --- |
 | AIA: | This all has to be really confusing for you since you’re just joining the team. We should do some ice breakers at our next few meetings so that you get to know everyone! Let’s talk first about your role as the CO. FAR 1.102-5 says that as the CO, you should be the one to take the lead in encouraging business process innovations and ensuring business decisions are sound. Maya, our attorney, and Nate with Privacy, are just advisors to you. I’ve got a few resources that I think might help you streamline this procurement and get it awarded on time. The first one is the DHS Procurement Innovation Lab. They’ve got some trainings you can take and some literature you can read. You should also check out the Periodic Table of Acquisition Innovations, which most of us just call the PTAI. It’s got samples of how other agencies have used innovations and GAO cases that support them. Since you’re new to IT procurement, I don’t know if you’ve heard about the DITAP program yet. |
 
-> [!TIP]
 > Explain the program. 
 
 | Speaker | Dialogue |
@@ -216,7 +207,6 @@ As the AIA, you setup a meeting with Helena (CO):
 | Helena: | I heard that the CIO really wants me to sole source the award just to get it done. | 
 | AIA: | Five months should be lots of time to award this contract. But, just in case, I’ll reach out to our industry liaison and talk to them about whether they know of a Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) vendor we can make a quick award to. An SBIR Phase 3 isn’t considered a sole source, the competition was already done as part of Phase 1 and 2, so that should be okay with our CPO. But I’ll talk to her about it too. By the way, That coding challenge Reva suggested is a good idea. It might shave off a week or more from the evaluation time. |
 
-> [!TIP]
 > Tell her more about why. 
 
 | Speaker | Dialogue |
@@ -226,7 +216,6 @@ As the AIA, you setup a meeting with Helena (CO):
 | Helena: | I don’t think that’s going to meet the evaluators’ needs. Maya still won’t let them ask any questions. | 
 | AIA: | Well, I’m not sure Maya’s right about that either. The GAO has consistently said that a critical part of discussions is allowing the offerors an opportunity to revise their earlier proposal. Plus, you might not even be in FAR Part 15.3. Maybe you’ll use the GSA Schedule to award this under 8.4 and you can use select best suited, then negotiate instead of discussions. |
 
-> [!TIP]
 > Tell them more about this. 
 
 | Speaker | Dialogue |