Hmm. Top ten reasons to allow the VA to develop it's own spftware: 1) Demonstrated best quality (I don't want to have to list references for all these. It someone whats references, please ask.) 2) Demonstrated lowest cost. 3) VA workforce know the existing software and therefore the potential problems better than an outside firm. 4) VA workforce more likely to review what all the stakeholders will want. This includes researchers, lab personnel, supervisors, ward clerks, clinical providers. The VA programmers learned a long time ago that they need direct access to front line users to ensure the best product and by in. For Cerner, it is a technical project. They will create an interface to existing software. 5) Software cycle time for the VA is probably 100 times faster than the software cycle time for Cerner. This means the VA will fix a problem in 24 hours, while Cerner may take months. In fact, some people believe this re-iterative software development technique allows the VA software to reflect the dynamic healthcare environment more accurately and quickly. This may be part of the secret of their success. Implied here is a "perfect EHR" (or piece of healthcare software) is only perfect for a blink of an eye. The the healthcare environment changes and so must the software. 6) Avoidance of "vendor lock-in". Once the VA commits a large amount of resources to one vendor, and no one else is allowed to even look at the code, the vendor has a "monopoly" on that project. It is too costly (and embarrassing) to discard, so the vendor can dictate terms. Paradoxically, this stifles free market behavior exactly at the point of contract execution. 7) Better coding standards. The VA programmers are held to a higher coding standard than proprietary vendors. This leads to better security, execution and portability. 8)Trickle down via Public Domain. Although, this may not be a consideration by the VA, it should be. Tax-payers buy that software and we should own it. Already there are innovative privite enterprise projects that will certainly lower costs of delivering EHRs to the safety net providers of the United States. Moreover, it projects using this software could be transformative; or at least provide a blueprint to solving healthcare data fragmentation. This trickle down should be a boon to any astute VA administrator. Indirect saving to the American taxpayer should increase their "good press" and help justify their budgets. Choking it off will eventually cause the opposite, once the public catches on. 9) If it's not broke, don't fix it. WHAT ARE THINKING! They have the best outcomes with the lowest costs at a time when every other government program seems to be under fire. Of course, this administration's basic premise is that private industry can do it better than the government. Never let the facts get in the way of your position. 10) I can't think of any others.Anyone what to help me out?

m