In point form, simply summarize key insights on addressing barriers to participation in procurement from the below text at an 8th-grade reading level and provide brief supporting quotes with ID numbers:
Suggestions 2A.8:

0101: I always like to say “is there a document, can it be simplified.” I always want to make sure contracts make sense but does it need to always be the 90-page terms? It’s not one-size-fits-all. That’s definitely one of the things we can do better to engage more small and medium or diverse suppliers. Tools and processes can always be improved. Are our scopes, specs, criteria clear? Keeping lines of communications open. Under treaty obligations we have to advertise under certain platforms like MERX and BuyandSell, does it make sense to use other orgs to advertise our bigger RFPs more and through those associations finding other ways to engage different communities.


0104: Being a crown corp we’re a bit handcuffed with our rules, but there’s a lot of rules in those documents and it can be very overwhelming. Even internally there’s just a lot of documents. Standalone they can be easy and make sense but when you put them all together it’s overall quite overwhelming. If it wasn’t for all of the legal trade treaties and rules it would be a lot simpler.

0105: It’s challenging to do it in the government space that we’re in because we’re subject to a lot of obligations, legislation as a crown corporation. When the obligations are not necessarily contradictory but not complimentary, there is a balancing act by the organization to make sure we are compliant, and sometimes I think that these obligations can conflict with the accessibility aspect. I think the legislative side hasn’t necessarily caught up with that.

0106: I know one thing is the timeline. It takes a long time for us to do an RFP because of resources and trade agreements. If we could make requirements easier to write somehow that would improve the timeline as well. An RFP for us takes anywhere from 4-6 months.

0114: I try and put together a summary of the RFP at the start so that people get a good sense of what they’re looking for and you can dive into details after. Also laying out exactly what you’re looking for. We’ll share our statement of requirements and then they’ll just send a general proposal back, but it’s not really tailored to exactly what we’re looking for. If it’s a big contract I think an interview is essential, it’s hard to convey what you’re able to offer on paper, but if you can talk for an hour and a half you get a sense of their professionalism and their communication style, and if you’re going to be working together for several years that can be important.

0116: A public declaration or notice on every procurement that says that there is no discrimination to reassure suppliers. It’s not a requirement to be XYZ, you can be ABC. Because we’re a crown corporation, the government could talk about education for smaller suppliers on regulations, change, getting that flexibility. Having a feedback loop for the government is really important. Working grassroots and not only working with large suppliers or imposing restrictions on smaller orgs or increasing work for them.

0117: (fairly paraphrased) A liquid documentation process that allows smaller players to compete. Open the door to smaller businesses whose capacity/financial history, when compared, is obviously not as high as a larger, more established org.

0128: I do believe in some cases our contracts could be simplified, but it depends on the need, the type of procurement. 

Suggestions 2B.2

0104: A clearer feedback processes for issues, we kind of assume that they’re known and they may not be as clear as we think they are. So if there was something that was impeding someone from participating or wanting to participate, how do they let us know besides just choosing not to?

0105: I think the main factor is our policies often set out processes and guides, and one of the big changes happening now and helping drive those change is early in those processes and guides, baking in those talks about accessibility. Rather than an afterthought it’s considered at or near the beginning and I think that that will have a big effect.

0106: Think that we need it actually in the policy. That would be the one biggest thing. It’s something we’ve identified that we want to do but I don’t think that it’s in place yet. Maybe there’s a fear that it’s going to slow us down or cause more work for us to figure it all out.

0107: Plain language and clear guidelines.

0112: Education, reduce process bureaucracy.

0115: To make them simpler, more concise, and to use plain language.

0116: I think defining the categories of differently abled people and having the physical and digital infrastructure around it. The most important is training people who are not differently abled to not treat those who are without bias. It starts with the mindset.

0117: We need ownership and involvement from persons with disabilities within the organization. The organization is 200 years old, there’s a lot of things built unconsciously, you need that different lens. It’s a gigantic undertaking, we try to deal with low-hanging fruit and build on those experiences. For a large organization we rely on executive support, that tone from the top helps at the grassroots level. We’re very mindful we don’t occupy other’s spaces, when there’s particular groups of employees that need support we grow that, work with our allies, and seek support. 

0118: Really strong focus on AODA, document remediation without focusing on how else accessibility impacts the procurement cycle. Right now the assessment of capacity is much greater than the actual capacity. Need to engage people with disabilities to understand more.

Suggestions 3C.1

0102: [Adjusted to be about the organization in general] It starts with changing the landscape by providing training and education to your own people. You don’t know what you don’t know. The fear of the unknown is a major factor and as an organization we need to put more emphasis on basic training and awareness training on all, and I mean all, employees. Through that we can take a deep dive and revisit the accommodation process and teach our people who need to provide or listen to accommodation requests. We need to equip them better to have those conversations so that they can provide adequate accommodation. The majority of the organization doesn’t understand what accessibility is about, and they don’t understand the urgency of what we need to act on. We need to know where we are at and where we need to go. So awareness, education, then you deep dive and you can’t deep dive if you don’t have people who are more disability confident.

0104: Making it a lot simpler, less reliant on some of our external stakeholders (sometimes we know what we need to do but still need their input and that can slow down the process), and a mechanism for us to be involved earlier with our client groups. A lot of times they’ve worked on something for 6 months and they say “okay go buy it” and now we’re opening their documents and asking questions and it slows the process.

0105: The process piece. As we review policy and do revisions we are trying to think about what connections need to be made to identify accessibility from all the different organization. From our own org, from people who are responding and engaging with RFPs, the types of deliverables we are asking for and what we use them for.

0106: We have the ability for something called team-led competitive process where the business team is allowed to run their own competitive process under the threshold. While that empowers the business team to do things faster, the problem is they never do it right. Maybe we should have procurement advisors more involved but then there’s a huge workload issue, it would require much more strength in procurement. If we made that change we would definitely need more resources. We are large in spend but relatively small in size. The majority of things that we buy are between 100-600k, which means a lot of this procurement work is being don by non-procurement people.

108: Better visibility throughout our supply chain and across the board, having better databases and having more investment in systems and technology, launched SAP Ariba, need for more software efficiency, from a technical requirements standpoint, would love if all our clients had better skills in technical writing 

0111: I would love if industry was ready to move quickly, when I want to roll things out, a huge risk I run is that no one is going to be there to fill those needs There’s a fear of failure and a fear of innovating, if staff at all levels but specifically junior levels were more supported to pilot new things 

0114: I would have it move faster. Quicker turnarounds, and I know this is tough because there’s only so many sourcing people. The main one is that it can be really challenging with how slow our sourcing process can be, and I don’t think it’s the fault of anyone in sourcing, I think it’s just the way our systems are set up and I think it holds us back from even wanting to go to tender because it doesn’t suit our project timelines. 

0115: Number one is to make it more user-friendly. The people in procurement are extremely helpful, but I shouldn’t have to reach out to the people to solve a problem or to answer a question that I can’t find an answer to. Making the process more aligned. One of the frustrations for me is supplier registration. Suppliers that I deal will often have difficulty completing our supplier registration form, and that means the whole process halts until the supplier is registered. Particularly for small suppliers it’s difficult for them to complete the form because they don’t have the information or may not be incorporated, and sometimes our registration system doesn’t work, so for a small supplier it’s very frustrating. It’s frustrating for me because I can’t start the process and it’s even more frustrating for them because they’re spending time and energy and our system is basically a barrier for them to start that process. There is a workaround if the system can’t work, but then it kind of defeats the purpose of the process. It’s not sending a good message to a supplier we want to engage with and not making it easy for them to do business with us.

0117: Too large, very complex. Very large organization and it can be very difficult to move things. Status quo, resistance to change. Technological barriers – if an old process is reliant on a particular technology that excludes a particular group, that requires more change.

0120: Invest in company technology infrastructure. The website causes problems for suppliers and makes simple things time-consuming and difficult. Host a meet-the-buyer event internally so the business teams and HR attend and get exposure to more diverse suppliers and the atmosphere.

0128: In general we don’t have a docu-sign function and that would enhance things internally and I hope for suppliers as well. Otherwise we’re sending a pdf out and asking them to sign it and send it back and it’s a lot of work.

Suggestions 3C.2

0105: Procurement processes are inherently complicated, largely driven by statutory and legislative obligations that we have. We need to continue to meet those while creating an environment flexible enough to provide whatever level of accessibility that we can.

0106: I would want our aspirations (i.e. supplier diversity) to make it into policy. The things that we talk about that are important I would want to see in policy. I don’t know what effect it would happen, but it’s one thing I can think of.

0114: I think it’s just really important to have strong ESG rated requirements that go in every RFP, even if they don’t seem too applicable, so that they’re considered every time. 

0118: Website refresh and think about how we can change our communication about procurement, collect disaggregated business ownership, exploring self-identification, set-asides, first round of invitations being diverse suppliers and THEN you go to other suppliers

0119: I would bump all the thresholds up because we have such a big spend. Their thresholds are more in line with a smaller organization (city spends a couple billion and has thresholds for an org closer to 500k spend). I’d like to see a schedule that outlines what doesn’t fall in procurement. I find the city’s schedule A or what isn’t procurement is very limiting, so we see things that don’t fall well into our processes, and it just doesn’t make sense. There could be carve outs for a lot of these equity seeking groups.

0122: Operating like I was private sector where I could work with one supplier, develop a vendor network. Because I would be working from ground level and building my relationships with small businesses and potentially grow together. It works well and it’s win-win, and maybe the supplier would be more keen to work with me compared to no where you deal with medium and large companies that you can’t negotiate with. Maybe some contracts I’ll compete, but the ability to choose. When you bid on everything then sometimes by the time you get the vendor to a good spot the contract is ending and you’re going to market again, and you lose all that investment of effort and time.

Suggestions 3C.3

0104: I think it would be more identifying what those barriers were. Seeing wat we can do to adapt and accommodate. Maybe it is who those vendors are who want to participate but haven’t in the past. Meeting with someone before they become a supplier and telling them about how to do business with us. So when something comes up that suits their needs, they're prepared for it.

0107: Attitudinal barriers are the most important things that I face every day. Specific to hiring there are so many barriers. When someone is hired with a disability and then eventually request an accommodation, it’s seen as lying about their ability to do the job, rather than a reflection of changing circumstances, or a misunderstanding about the requirements of the position. The lack of understanding between equity and equality, the perception that we need to treat everyone the same way. Many people see support as an advantage, not as an equity strategy so that the person can just perform. Lack of knowledge that seniority is not as important as human rights, employment equity.

0108: Make sure that everyone interested in doing business is not shy to reach out, ongoing outreach and engagement in the market 

0109: 3 bids and a buy, small buying and simpler tendering processes. Push things out at a scale that doesn’t trigger USMCA requirements but are still competitive tenders. Make things that are currently soler-sourced/purchased directly by end users more formal so that we can publicize more, 100k-200k sweet spot of worth pursuing but realistic for a small business. Asking ourselves early in the process “have we considered accessibility?”

0112: Head: When I speak to partners they want accessibility clauses, which is easy, but the workflow that follows from there is the difficult part. I wouldn’t characterize it as tokenism, it’s not understanding the implications of having a clause without knowing how to execute it is. SEE RECORDING Arming people with the knowledge to make the decision themselves, or when they need to go to the expert group/escalate. Director: Red tape and bureaucracy is maybe the biggest problem to making procurement more accessible. Another big piece is education. We put a clause in that says everything must be accessible but don’t know what it means when, for example, you buy pens. Improving that education and making processes more efficient.

0113: I would simplify the process to becoming a supplier. This would entail ensuring that all application materials are in plain language, the process is in plain language and the steps are simple and not numerous, and the bidding process is simple. I would also ensure that diverse suppliers are highlighted when purchasers of services/products are looking for a supplier. 

0114: Trying to reach out to a broader list of suppliers or maybe, our RFPs are sometimes posted publicly but not always, and I think going public is helpful because you never know who might come down the pipeline that wasn’t previously considered. Being open to feedback from the people we’re working with. I’m certainly not an expert but if someone said “for this reason I need 2 extra weeks” we’re usually quite open to providing extra time.

0115: The front end user experience from the external user perspective. I can deal with the internal problems but I think for the external user that has to be improved, because I don't think it's a positive experience for the external supplier.

0117: Unconscious ableism is alive. People are used to doing things the way they’ve been doing them. Policy, procedures, process, systems, behaviours, and attitudes that we built over the years. We need to educate people to understand the other side as well as the opportunities, innovation ,support available and how we can be a just society economically and socially. It’s vital we reflect every member of the community coast to coast. 


0119: I would like to see us market ourselves better in the government sector. The process can appear to be onerous, but go for it, and just really encourage them. I find some of the requirements of equity seeking suppliers for them to have certification is a barrier to them (e.g. 51% owned for business who maybe had to bring in venture to get capital or similar)

0120: Consulting with various suppliers and certifying organizations as to which platforms are most user friendly instead of looking only for the cheapest option. Ask before we implement to hear what options are available.

0121: Technology would be number one. Social procurement, meaning that the contract will definitely be awarded to a small company which has people with disabilities on staff. Providing awareness, knowledge and disability confidence in others to promote them to do business with vendors with disabilities.

0123: I think it comes back to resources. It’s difficult to make improvements or changes when we’re just doing the work to keep the lights on, and things slip through the cracks.

0125: I think it’s resourcing. There’s a lot of information, they have a great site, and this area’s involving and that’ll be an opportunity to incorporate more information, but sometimes these questions come up like “what should we do without a procurement advisor?” We have to wait 6 months for an advisor but we have questions from our internal customers. Incorporate into training what we can do as facilitators to be more accessible/inclusive. We learned that our evaluator saw the accessibility component as part of a demo, the vendors did, and it really raised awareness that we’ve asked for evaluators. That triggers the thought process, how do I use these, are there others who should be using it?

0127: We’re always advocating for anonymizing. If you didn’t know anything about the person bidding, and you’re strictly looking at what the product is, that could help remove a lot of bias. Even in the personal relationship space, if you didn’t know which company was which during evaluation, you couldn’t attribute it to anybody. It would be an onerous process, you’d need someone to take care of stripping identifying information from the proposals, but it could be done.