2.5.1. Phase 2.1: Identifying reusable solutions for the PA¶

The administration identifies the candidate ‘reusable PA solutions’ that meet its requirements. The activities anticipated in this phase are:

• a search for ‘reusable PA solutions’ that currently exist within the Developers Italia platform.

This phase concludes with the:

• identification of ‘reusable PA solutions’ of interest to the public administration.

2.5.2. Phase 2.2: Assessment of reusable solutions for the PA¶

Whereas the previous phase 2.1 made it possible to identify at least one ‘reusable PA solution’ of potential interest to the public administration, through the implementation of this assessment phase the best ‘reusable PA solution’ shall be identified. Solutions that meet the majority of needs and require modifications or customisation are also eligible at this stage.

For each of the potential ‘reusable PA solutions’ of interest, steps shall be taken to:

• check that at the very least, they conform to the regulations in force, which are detailed on the software data sheet in Developers Italia. In particular:
  • compliance with the interoperability rules prescribed by the guidelines issued in implementation of Article 73 of the CAD;
  • compliance with data protection regulations;
  • compliance with minimum levels of security for public administrations.
  • compliance with accessibility requirements (Law No 4/2004).
• assess the quality of the solution through the following parameters, some of which can be found on the software data sheet in Developers Italia:
  • degree of coverage of functional and non-functional requirements;
  • the presence of an expert technician for the software in question;
  • the possible presence of agreements with third parties entered into by the owner administration and usable by the assessing administration, regarding support activities for the installation and/or customisation of the solution or, in any case, the methods of use for the solution itself (e.g. a regional in-house may make open source software available for its municipalities together with an agreement to provide installation and training services);
  • the presence of mandatory constraints and dependencies with other open software and/or proprietary software; for example, open source software may require a licence for a proprietary database, or it may require a licence for a proprietary API for a cloud service;
  • the presence and level of competence of the internal resources of the PA, as regards the management of environments and languages used in the solution;
  • the number and type of other public administrations using the open source project;
  • the viability of the open source project, through the assessment of visible indicators on the repository, such as code activity, release history, user community, longevity of the project, number of unique developers.
• estimate the Total Cost of Ownership (S:sub:TCO) as described in 2.7 Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), with particular attention paid to:
  • any software installation costs in the PA cloud or costs for using the software through SaaS mode, where present in AgID’s Cloud Marketplace;
  • any costs for the training of personnel, including those necessary for the training of the parties assigned to the management of the solution as well as those for its use by the end-users;
  • any costs required to integrate the solution with its own systems;
  • any customisation costs, including those necessary to ensure functional and non-functional requirements, not already present in the reusable software;
  • any costs for verifying compliance with the regulations in force.
• estimate the time for the production of the solution (hereinafter S_time);
• any other estimates expressing the specificity of the administration.

In order to follow up on the assessment of the above, the public administration will have to prove that, if not already in its possession, it is capable of retrieving all the necessary information in the manner provided for by the regulations.

Therefore, if:

• The cost (TCO) falls within the established budgetary constraints (S:sub:TCO< T_budget);
• Production times are compatible with the estimated times (S:sub:tempi< T_tempi);
• Any other impediments are respected.

the administration shall identify the solution best suited to its requirements on the basis of the assessment carried out. This phase concludes with the:

• determination of the best ‘reusable PA solution’, or possible absence of a solution.

2.5.3. Phase 2.3: Procurement of the reusable solution for the PA¶

If, following the previous phase 2.2, the administration has determined a ‘reusable PA solution’ that meets its requirements, it shall provide for procurement. The reuse process is described in 3.9 Reuse ofsoftware or use of open source software.

The comparative assessment shall be deemed to be complete.

In the event that the public administration has to bear costs during the procurement phase (e.g. customisation, installation, training), the administration shall acquire these services in accordance with Legislative Decree No 50/2016 and subsequent amendments and additions. (hereinafter referred to as the Public Contracts Code).

2.5.4. Phase 2.4: Identifying open source solutions¶

If it is not possible to identify a ‘reusable PA solution’, the administration MUST expand its search for solutions, which meet its requirements, to ‘open source solutions’, i.e. software released under an open licence but not owned by a public administration and therefore not published for reuse. Solutions that meet the majority of needs and require modifications or customisation are also eligible at this stage.

The activities anticipated in this phase are:

• identification of open source software projects whose ownership is attributed to parties other than public administrations. The identification process must be carried out, at the minimum, with the tools made available on Developers Italia, and can also be extended to other international platforms that manage open source software projects.

In identifying a solution, the public administration must verify:

• if the software licence is among those suggested in this document or certified by OSI (complete list).
• if the licence is compatible with the software licences that may be integrated with it and/or with its intended use;

This phase concludes with the:

• identification of ‘open source solutions’ of interest to the public administration

2.5.5. Phase 2.5: Assessment of open source solutions¶

If the previous phase 2.4 has led to the identification of at least one ‘open source solution’ of potential interest, the best ‘open source solution’ for the requirements of the public administration is identified in the assessment phase.

The assessment of open source software in this phase should follow the same assessment criteria as described for phase 2.2. Therefore, consider phase 2.5 as a duplication of phase 2.2, applied to a different set of software (third-party open source instead of reusable software).

This phase concludes with the:

• determination of the best ‘open source solution’, or possible absence of a solution.

2.5.6. Phase 2.6: Procurement of the open source solution¶

If, following the previous phase 2.5, the administration has identified an ‘open source solution’ that meets its requirements, it shall proceed with the acquisition. The acquisition process is described in 3.9 Reuse ofsoftware or use of open source software.

The comparative assessment shall be deemed to be complete.

In the event that the public administration has to bear costs during the procurement phase (e.g. customisation, installation, training), the same shall acquire these services in accordance with the Public Contracts Code.

2.5.7. Phase 2.7: Impossibility determination¶

In the event that it is impossible to identify a solution that satisfies, at least to a large extent, the requirements of the administration, between ‘reusable PA solutions’ and ‘open source solutions’, a document is prepared (without format constrictions) that justifies the reasons for the ascertained impossibility, which will be kept with the documents filed for the proceedings.

The public administration continues the comparative assessment exercise by following up with the phases anticipated within the next macro-phase 3.