There just aren't that many firms in the enterprise solutions space that work closely with government: Accenture, IBM, Booz Allen Hamilton, Deloitte. What I love about this CfA accelerator is that it might get people to focus on a business sector that has huge upside if only you can break through. Technologists should get together and try to break up the slow-moving giant's dance with governments: it is the one of the ways we're going to get a government than might be both better and cheaper. This seems like a great first step.
But: the people making these choices aren't stupid. Government has very little appetite for the startup-style thinking of trying something, trashing it and iterating. Maybe it's because tax payer money is at stake, but any kind of risky venture is seen as a bad thing. We have to combat that, first.
99% of the time, the government goes with the giant, ossified consulting firm. However, 1% of the time, they decide to take a risk. They don't just go with the local start-up, though. They hire Bob's nephew, who's "a real whiz with computers." Bob's nephew puts together a minimum viable product, then Bob's 12 year old nephew accidentally sends out a mass e-mail with everyone's medical records.
The agency then gets accused of not taking privacy seriously, so a whole new set of privacy rules are enacted. Only a industrial giants have the patience to wade through this paperwork, so they scoop up every job for a while.
Eventually, someone looks at the insane standards and points out that the government could save millions of dollars that they're paying to IBM by just hiring a startup. Bob then points out that they could save thousands of dollars on this bloated startup by just hiring his nephew.
I wish this site would present a clear list of reasons to pick a civic startup over a social media or mobile startup.