> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://experience-digital-transform.gitbook.io/experience-digital-transformation/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://experience-digital-transform.gitbook.io/experience-digital-transformation/roadmap/module-6-from-a-proven-foundation-to-a-national-roadmap/6.5-sourcing-each-block-without-lock-in.md). # 6.5 Sourcing each block without lock-in For each block decide what your own teams build, what you outsource and what you do with a partner, and write open standards and the terms for leaving into every contract. {% embed url="" %} Sourcing each block without lock-in (\~5 min) {% endembed %} **Watch first (\~5 min).** Then read on: the page carries what the video says, and the AI usage tip. > **Single message.** For each block decide what your own teams build, what you outsource and what you do with a partner, and write open standards and the terms for leaving into every contract. ## The concept Lock-in is rarely one bad decision. It is written into contracts, clause by clause, that nobody read for the day the ministry wants to leave. Sourcing decides who builds each block; the contract decides whether you can leave later. PAERA gives three options for each block. Build in-house what your own teams can realistically create and keep running. Outsource what they cannot, such as software development, cloud services or cybersecurity, and manage the risks with a risk management framework. Work in partnership with technology firms, government agencies, universities or groups such as GovStack. A combination of the three usually gives the most flexibility. PAERA also says what the government's own staff should be: intelligent purchasers, not IT specialists, apart from the few who keep the overall architecture. Two things are not options. The GovStack Sandbox is a place to learn: its own pages call it a demonstration and learning tool, and say that it is not a production-ready system. And a product's listing is evidence, not a promise. GovStack's testing pages describe a self-assessment of a product against the functional requirements, tests of its interfaces, and a compliance level of 1 or 2. Ask for those results, and still test the product in your own installation, because no listing tests your installation or your contract. The World Bank found that, for identity systems, procurement can change the overall cost by 25 per cent to over 100 per cent. It names open technology standards, and an architecture designed so that no single vendor controls it, as the guard against relying on one supplier. The Universal DPI Safeguards Framework asks that digital public infrastructure avoid vendor lock-in and share open specifications, and it counts lock-in among the causes of unsustainability, with long-term costs. So write four checks into every tender and contract: the open standards named, export of all data and configuration, help with leaving, and licence terms that outlive the contract. Here is Progressa's table, built as an example. The registration service runs on a product the ministry buys, and the ministry's analysts configure it in-house; the contract requires the service description to be exportable at any time. The learner register's product and its first load are outsourced, while the data steward is the ministry's own; every record and the schema must be exportable. Identity is not bought at all: the services use the identity authority's sign-in under an agreement. Payments go through the government's Payments block, in partnership with the ministry of finance, which runs it. Each row names the option chosen and the clause that keeps the ministry free to leave. ## Your turn โ€” Check a draft tender or contract for lock-in {% hint style="success" %} **๐Ÿ’ก AI usage tip** ยท Check a draft tender or contract for lock-in **Bring:** The draft tender or contract, with its clause numbers. **Get:** A table of the four lock-in checks with the clause that meets each, or the word missing, and a list of questions for the lawyer and the procurement officer. **Time:** \~10โ€“15 min ยท **Assistant:** any; the tips are tool-neutral. **Watch for:** The prompt points out gaps; the lawyer and the procurement officer decide. {% endhint %} **The problem it solves.** A draft tender or contract can look complete and still leave the ministry unable to leave. This prompt reads the draft against four checks โ€” the open standards named, export of data, help with leaving, licence terms โ€” and reports, clause by clause, what is present, what is weak and what is missing. {% tabs %} {% tab title="Prompt" %} Copy the prompt, replace the bracketed parts with your own context, and run it in the AI assistant of your choice. Never paste personal data or unpublished documents โ€” see [How to use the plays](https://experience-digital-transform.gitbook.io/experience-digital-transformation/government-enterprise-architecture-gea/developing-a-gov-enterprise-architecture-gea/start-here/how-to-use-the-plays). ``` Below is a draft tender or contract for [the block or service] in [country X]: [paste the text, with its clause numbers]. Read it against four checks. (1) Open standards: does it name the published specification the product must follow, with its edition? (2) Export: can the ministry export all its data and all its configuration, in a documented format, at any time and at no extra charge? (3) Help with leaving: does it set a transition period, the supplier's work in it and its price? (4) Licence: can the ministry keep running what it paid for after the contract ends? For each check, quote the clause that meets it, or write 'missing'; mark a clause 'weak' where it meets the check only in part, and say why. Do not redraft the contract and do not give legal advice. Output: a table of the four lock-in checks with the clause that meets each, or the word missing, followed by a short list of questions for the lawyer and the procurement officer. ``` [Open in Claude](https://claude.ai/new?q=Below%20is%20a%20draft%20tender%20or%20contract%20for%20%5Bthe%20block%20or%20service%5D%20in%20%5Bcountry%20X%5D%3A%20%5Bpaste%20the%20text%2C%20with%20its%20clause%20numbers%5D.%20Read%20it%20against%20four%20checks.%20%281%29%20Open%20standards%3A%20does%20it%20name%20the%20published%20specification%20the%20product%20must%20follow%2C%20with%20its%20edition%3F%20%282%29%20Export%3A%20can%20the%20ministry%20export%20all%20its%20data%20and%20all%20its%20configuration%2C%20in%20a%20documented%20format%2C%20at%20any%20time%20and%20at%20no%20extra%20charge%3F%20%283%29%20Help%20with%20leaving%3A%20does%20it%20set%20a%20transition%20period%2C%20the%20supplier%27s%20work%20in%20it%20and%20its%20price%3F%20%284%29%20Licence%3A%20can%20the%20ministry%20keep%20running%20what%20it%20paid%20for%20after%20the%20contract%20ends%3F%20For%20each%20check%2C%20quote%20the%20clause%20that%20meets%20it%2C%20or%20write%20%27missing%27%3B%20mark%20a%20clause%20%27weak%27%20where%20it%20meets%20the%20check%20only%20in%20part%2C%20and%20say%20why.%20Do%20not%20redraft%20the%20contract%20and%20do%20not%20give%20legal%20advice.%20Output%3A%20a%20table%20of%20the%20four%20lock-in%20checks%20with%20the%20clause%20that%20meets%20each%2C%20or%20the%20word%20missing%2C%20followed%20by%20a%20short%20list%20of%20questions%20for%20the%20lawyer%20and%20the%20procurement%20officer.) *(pre-fills the prompt in a new chat; check the bracketed parts before sending)* *What to bring and what you get are in the box above.* {% endtab %} {% tab title="Example input" %} {% hint style="warning" %} **Draft worked example, 2026-10-04.** Progressa is the fictional country used across these courses. The input below and the output in the next tab were made for this page by running the prompt once; they are shortened, and they have not been checked as the worked examples of the method have. {% endhint %} The bracketed parts of the prompt were replaced with the following: **\[the block or service]:** the learner register (PLR): the product and its first load, outsourced. **\[country X]:** Progressa. **\[paste the text]:** extracts of a draft contract, invented for this example. * **4.2** The system shall comply with international interoperability standards and the GovStack Digital Registries specification. * **7.1** At the end of the contract, the Supplier shall deliver to the Ministry an export of all learner records in CSV format. * **7.3** Exports requested during the contract are charged at the Supplier's standard rates. * **9.1** The Ministry is granted a non-transferable licence to use the Software for the term of this Agreement. * **11.4** On expiry, the Supplier shall co-operate in good faith with any successor. {% endtab %} {% tab title="Example output" %} {% hint style="warning" %} **Draft: model output, shortened and unverified.** Read it with the notes in the next tab, not on its own. {% endhint %} | Check | Clause | Status | Why | | -------------------- | -------- | ------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | 1. Open standards | 4.2 | weak | Names the Digital Registries specification but no edition; "international standards" names nothing | | 2. Export | 7.1, 7.3 | weak | Records only, not the schema or the configuration; only at the end; charged during the contract | | 3. Help with leaving | 11.4 | weak | "Co-operate in good faith" sets no period, no tasks and no price | | 4. Licence | โ€” | missing | 9.1 ends the licence with the contract; no clause lets the Ministry keep running the system | **Questions for the lawyer and the procurement officer:** * Which edition of the Digital Registries specification should 4.2 name? * Can 7.1 cover the schema, the quality rules and the load configuration, and allow an export at any time at no charge? * Should the contract set a transition period, the supplier's tasks in it and its price, in place of 11.4? * Does an annex or the supplier's standard terms say anything more on the licence? {% endtab %} {% tab title="Reading the output" %} This is the teaching part of the tip. Work through the output the way a chief architect would: what is earned, what is invented, what is missing.
1. The weak exit clause is plainly read Clause 11.4 names no period, no work and no price, and the run says so in those terms. A ministry that relied on "good faith" would learn its meaning on the day it tried to leave. That reading is supported by the text.
2. "Missing" is a reading of the extract, not of the contract The run marked the licence missing from five pasted clauses. An annex or the supplier's standard terms may say more, and calling a check missing is close to a legal view. The prompt rules that out; the lawyer reads the whole contract.
3. The data the ministry must own is wider than records The export check looks at learner records. Leaving also needs the schema, the quality gates of the five tiers and the set-aside rows with their reasons. Check that the contract names the data steward as the ministry's own and the load configuration as the ministry's property.
{% hint style="danger" %} **Safeguard.** The prompt points out gaps; the lawyer and the procurement officer decide. Read every clause the model reports as present in the contract itself, because a quotation can be shortened in a way that changes its meaning. {% endhint %} {% endtab %} {% tab title="What next" %} Each block's sourcing choice, with the clause that keeps the ministry free to leave, is recorded beside its owner in the governance page of [6.6](/experience-digital-transformation/roadmap/module-6-from-a-proven-foundation-to-a-national-roadmap/6.6-governance-that-keeps-shared-blocks-shared.md). The export clause is tested again when the register's loads are reconciled in [6.8](/experience-digital-transformation/roadmap/module-6-from-a-proven-foundation-to-a-national-roadmap/6.8-keep-the-foundation-healthy-and-safe.md). {% endtab %} {% endtabs %} ## Sources * PAERA v1.0, sections 5.6 and 3.1.1 () * World Bank, Understanding Cost Drivers of Identification Systems, 2018, page 7 () * United Nations, Universal DPI Safeguards Framework, 2024, pages 15, 23 and 25 () * GovStack Sandbox documentation, edition 1.1.1 () * GovStack testing application (), with the GovStack website page 'How is Compliance Measured?' --- # Agent Instructions This documentation is published with GitBook. GitBook is the documentation platform designed so that both humans and AI agents can read, navigate, and reason over technical content effectively. Learn more at gitbook.com. ## Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the following URL with the `ask` and `goal` query parameters: ``` GET https://experience-digital-transform.gitbook.io/experience-digital-transformation/roadmap/module-6-from-a-proven-foundation-to-a-national-roadmap/6.5-sourcing-each-block-without-lock-in.md?ask=&goal= ``` `ask` is the immediate question: it should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. `goal` is what the user is ultimately trying to achieve, the reason they need the answer. Sharing it helps GitBook give you a better, more relevant answer. A goal is most helpful when it describes the outcome the user wants rather than restating the question. For example, with `ask=how do I create an API token`, a goal like `automate deployments from our CI pipeline` lets GitBook tailor the answer to that use case. The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation. Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.