Consider the implications of choosing a Competetive Access Provider (CAP) for telecommunications services.

Experiences from the Departments of Transportation (DOTS) of multiple states in selecting telecommunications options.

California,United States; Georgia,United States; Maryland,United States; Michigan,United States; Minnesota,United States; Missouri,United States; New York,United States; Texas,United States; Virginia,United States; Wisconsin,United States

Background (Show)

Lesson Learned

In the deregulated telecommunications environment, agencies have a much wider and more varied choice for telecommunications services. There are many firms, each offering different services, prices and business arrangements. As a result, agencies will need to carefully consider the basis for its decision to contract with a Competitive Access Provider (CAP). This decision process requires that agencies fully understand their system requirements, as these will inform the selection of the most appropriate choice. In addition, there are a number of other implications of choosing a CAP that need to be considered. These include:
  • Plan for access fees charged by the local phone company. The local phone company will charge access fees to CAPs, so agencies will need to consider the effect of these fees on the overall cost of the telecommunications network.
  • Consider how the CAP will interconnect with the local phone company's network. It is highly likely that the CAP will need to interconnect with the local phone company’s network; however, cross provider interconnects represent situations where cost is incurred and where responsibility becomes disputed if there are service problems. Thus, the form of the interconnect and how responsibility is delegated for problems along the interconnect will need to be addressed.
  • Assess the specific capabilities of the CAPs and their quality of service. There may be significant differences in the capabilities of CAPs, so agencies should pay careful attention to the services that the CAPs offer. For example, some CAPs may be able to offer dark fiber or unloaded twisted pairs, while others may be limited to specific types of services. As part of this assessment, agencies should consider the quality of service provided by different CAPs (this may include measures of bit error rate, reliability, or other relevant factors).
  • Assess the business stability of the CAPs under consideration. In the current deregulated environment, firms with relatively smaller assets are still able to enter the market. The long-term stability of these firms, however, may be questionable, and the agency may find itself in a long-term contract with a firm that is no longer in business in the region.
  • Investigate the local manpower resources of the CAP. Agencies will want to determine that the CAP has the necessary local manpower to diagnose and respond to problems or outages.
  • Consider the ability to modify the contract. Agencies will want to insure that they are able to modify their contract with a CAP to allow for growth. In order for networks to evolve and grow, agencies must be able to explore their options for interconnection and integration with other systems.
This lesson highlights a range of factors that are important in selecting a service provider. Through careful consideration of these issues, agencies can increase the likelihood that they will obtain high quality, cost effective services that meet their telecommunications needs.

Lesson Comments

No comments posted to date

Comment on this Lesson

To comment on this lesson, fill in the information below and click on submit. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field. Your name and email address, if provided, will not be posted, but are to contact you, if needed to clarify your comments.


Communications for Intelligent Transportation Systems - Successful Practices: A Cross-Cutting Study

Author: Vince Pearce

Published By: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration

Source Date: 2000

EDL Number: 11488

Other Reference Number: FHWA-JPO-99-023/FTA-TRI-11-99-02

URL: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/2867

Other Lessons From this Source

Lesson Contacts

Lesson Contact(s):

James Pol

Agency Contact(s):

Richard Dye
Chesapeake Highway Advisories Routing Traffic

Lesson Analyst:

Margaret Petrella
RITA/Volpe National Transportation Systems Center


Average User Rating

0 ( ratings)

Rate this Lesson

(click stars to rate)

Application Areas

None defined


United States

Systems Engineering

Show the V

System Requirements

Focus Areas

None defined

Goal Areas



None defined

Lesson ID: 2007-00368