FDOT’s $1.2 Million “Single Source” Procurement: A Case Study in Vendor Lock-In

The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) recently posted a single source procurement notice that perfectly illustrates how government agencies can become trapped in perpetual vendor relationships. Their intended three-year, $1,179,153 contract with AskReply, Inc. for maintaining the Grant Application Process (GAP) and Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) system offers a textbook example of how initial proprietary implementations can lead to decades of non-competitive procurements.

Breaking Down the GAP-CIPs Procurement

Let’s analyze what FDOT is actually seeking:

• Service: Maintenance and support for web applications that manage grants, forms, capital inventories, and other functions
• Duration: Three years
• Price: $1,179,153.02 (approximately $393,000 annually)
• Justification: The applications were built using AskReply’s proprietary platform, making them the “only known vendor” who can provide support and upgrades

The key phrase that should catch any vendor’s attention is “only known vendor.” This suggests FDOT hasn’t actively explored whether other companies could provide these services—they’re simply assuming the original developer must continue maintaining the system.

Why This Isn’t Really “Single Source”

The procurement notice reveals several claims that modern IT vendors should question:

1. The “Proprietary Platform” Argument

While AskReply may have built the system using their proprietary platform, this doesn’t necessarily mean they’re the only vendor capable of maintaining it. Consider:

• Modern reverse engineering and code analysis tools can help understand system architecture
• API documentation and database schemas can often be extracted and documented
• Many “proprietary” platforms are actually built on standard technologies with custom layers

2. The “Custom Designed” Claim

FDOT states these applications were “custom designed for the needs of the Department.” However, custom design doesn’t equal vendor lock-in. Any experienced development team can:

• Study existing functionality through user testing and documentation
• Map business processes to understand requirements
• Propose migration strategies to modern, open architectures

3. The “Significant Investment” Fallacy

The notice mentions “significant investment of public resources” in these systems. This sunk cost fallacy often keeps agencies tied to outdated vendors. But continuing to pay $393,000 annually for maintenance might actually cost more than modernizing the system entirely.

Red Flags in the Procurement

Several aspects of this procurement raise questions:

1. No mention of system age: How long has AskReply maintained this monopoly?
2. Vague technical requirements: The notice doesn’t specify what maintenance entails
3. No performance metrics: Are there measurable outcomes for this $1.2 million?
4. Limited exploration of alternatives: The phrase “only known vendor” suggests minimal market research

What Vendors Should Do Right Now

If you provide web application development, maintenance, or modernization services, this procurement represents an opportunity to challenge the status quo. The notice period ends May 29, 2025, giving you time to act. Here’s your action plan:

1. Submit a Capability Statement

Contact Destyne Grayson at [email protected] with a detailed explanation of how your company could:

• Maintain and support web-based grant management systems
• Work with legacy code and databases
• Provide migration paths to modern architectures
• Offer competitive pricing compared to the current arrangement

2. Ask Specific Questions

Request more information about:

• The technical stack of the GAP-CIP system
• API documentation availability
• Database structures and access
• Current system performance and user satisfaction
• Specific maintenance tasks required

3. Propose Modern Alternatives

Demonstrate how contemporary approaches could benefit FDOT:

• Cloud-based architectures with better scalability
• Open-source alternatives that eliminate vendor lock-in
• Modern security frameworks
• Better integration capabilities with other state systems
• Lower total cost of ownership

4. Form Strategic Partnerships

If your company doesn’t have all capabilities in-house, consider partnering with:

• Legacy system migration specialists
• Grant management software providers
• Florida-based IT firms familiar with state requirements

The Bigger Picture: Breaking the Cycle

This FDOT procurement exemplifies a pattern seen across government agencies: initial implementations create claimed “proprietary” dependencies that justify decades of sole-source contracts. The approximately $393,000 annual maintenance cost suggests a substantial system, but it also indicates significant ongoing revenue that should attract competitive interest.

Consider the math: Over 10 years, FDOT might spend nearly $4 million on maintenance alone. For that amount, they could likely rebuild the entire system using modern, open architectures that promote competition for future maintenance contracts.

Why This Matters for Florida Taxpayers

When agencies default to single source procurements based on historical vendor relationships rather than current market capabilities, several problems emerge:

1. Limited innovation: Without competition, vendors have little incentive to improve or modernize
2. Price inflation: Monopoly positions typically lead to higher costs over time
3. Technology stagnation: Systems remain frozen in outdated architectures
4. Vendor dependency: Agencies become increasingly unable to change providers

Your Window of Opportunity

The May 29, 2025 deadline provides time for vendors to demonstrate their capabilities to FDOT. This isn’t just about winning a single contract—it’s about establishing that viable alternatives exist in the marketplace.

Even if FDOT proceeds with AskReply for this contract cycle, well-documented vendor responses could:

• Position your company for future opportunities
• Educate FDOT about modern alternatives
• Potentially lead to the next procurement being competitive
• Demonstrate the false economy of perpetual sole-source arrangements

Action Items for Interested Vendors

1. Review the complete notice on the Vendor Bid System (VBS)
2. Prepare a comprehensive response addressing FDOT’s specific needs
3. Submit your capability statement well before the May 29 deadline
4. Document your communication for future reference
5. Consider requesting a meeting to discuss modernization options

The Bottom Line

FDOT’s GAP-CIPs maintenance procurement represents millions in potential business currently locked behind questionable “proprietary platform” claims. By responding to this single source notice with concrete alternatives and competitive pricing, vendors can challenge the status quo and potentially unlock significant opportunities.

The question isn’t whether AskReply built the original system—it’s whether they’re truly the only vendor capable of maintaining it in 2025. If your company has experience with web applications, grant management systems, or legacy modernization, this notice deserves your immediate attention.

Remember: Every successful challenge to a single source designation helps create a more competitive, innovative, and cost-effective government technology marketplace. Your response matters—not just for this contract, but for the future of government IT procurement in Florida.

Contact Destyne Grayson at [email protected] before May 29, 2025, to submit your capability statement for this procurement.