Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for September, 2013

Ten companies have responded to that request for proposals (RFP) calling for the consolidation of information technology (IT) but because of the number of submissions, the scheduled awarding of the contract was moved back “seven to 14 days,” according to an email to bidders by Neal Underwood, assistant director of Statewide Technology.

One of the vendors being mentioned as the potential winner of the contract, expected to be worth millions of dollars, is Deloitte Consultants, one of three companies that met regularly with Division of Administration (DOA) representatives and state IT executives over the past year in discussions of what services they could provide the state.

Moreover, a confidential source said a Deloitte representative has already confided in several persons that the company “had a good shot” at winning the contract because it had been meeting with state officials over the past year.

That scenario evokes memories of the privatization of the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) a couple of years back. DOA brought Goldman Sachs in to help formulate the RFP for the privatization and the Wall Street banking firm was subsequently the lone bidder—at $6 million.

Goldman Sachs subsequently withdrew from the project in a dispute over indemnification but re-bid when the RFP was issued a second time. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Louisiana eventually landed the contract to administer the agency’s claims.

So now we have Deloitte working with state officials for a year to help formulate the RFP and the company is now said to have the inside track to winning the contract. Déjà vu all over again.

At least two other companies, including IBM, were said to have held meetings with the state in the months leading up to the issuance of the RFP. One of those reported to have attended those meetings was Northrop Grumman but that company was not one of the 10 companies submitting proposals, sources say.

Several other companies reportedly requested permission to attend the pre-proposal meetings but were denied the opportunity.

The meetings would seem to fly in the face of a July 19 memorandum from Richard “Dickie” Howze, interim state chief information officer, to DOA section heads and Council of Information Services directors in which he cautioned against any contact with potential vendors during the RFP process at the risk of possible termination.

“During this procurement process it is crucial that you and your staff do not have any contact with vendors who are potential proposers or who may be part of a proposals as a subcontractor regarding this RFP or other related RFPs,” the memo read.

Besides Deloitte and IBM, companies submitting proposals included Dell Marketing, First Data, Gabriel Systems, Information Services Group (ISG), KPMG, Peak Performance Technologies, RNR Consulting and Tecknomic.

Even though the RFP was only for “Information Technology Planning and Management Support Services,” the state wrote into the RFP that the vendor awarded the planning RFP would not be precluded from the implementation of the consolidation, in effect guaranteeing the winner of the planning contract the contract for implementation of the plans.

It also alluded to recommendations for “potential legislation to support effective implementation and administration” for “effective governance models for the statewide centralized IT services organization.”

It was not immediately clear why “potential legislation” would not have been addressed during the 2013 legislative session and prior to the issuance of the RFP as opposed to issuing a contract and then attempting to address legislative issues as they arose during the course of the contract.

In conjunction with the RFP, DOA also issued a request for information (RFI) for business reorganization (and) efficiencies planning and implementation consulting services which would seem to be an exercise in redundancy given the fact that a similar efficiency study was conducted during the tenure of former Commissioner of Administration Angele Davis and that yet another such study is already underway using Six Sigma methodology.

Six Sigma is a methodology that employs tools and techniques for process improvement. The concept was pioneered by Motorola in 1981 and is widely used in different sectors of industry.

Just as with the RFP for the planning and management support services, several vendors responded with proposals. Oral presentations, as with the RFP, however, were limited to a select few companies, including Deloitte, McKinsey & Co., Alvarez & Marsal and CGI Technologies.

McKinsey & Co. is primarily an organization offering internships to trainees for conservative political causes. Gov. Bobby Jindal, who seems hell bent on privatizing virtually every agency and service in state government, worked for McKinsey & Co. for less than a year in the only private sector job he has ever held.

The RFI required that vendors, among other things, present their approach/methodology to identify operational efficiencies, experiences in other governmental settings, and the areas of governmental services “that would produce the maximum benefit.”

Portia Johnson, executive assistant to Commissioner of Administration Kristy Nichols, sent an email to companies who submitted responses to the RFI. That email said:

“Thank you for your interest in RFI 107:01-000001238 Business Reorganization Efficiencies Planning and Implementation Consulting Services. Due to the vast response and in the interest of time, the State has chosen several vendors representative of the industry to interview. Although you have not been selected to proceed in the process, we have taken any documents submitted by you under advisement.”

Said another way: “You have been eliminated for consideration because we have other vendors with whom we prefer to do business. But we are going to go through your proposals and we will probably steal some of your ideas and you won’t get a dime for your efforts. Thank you for your trouble.”

  • CNSI and the federal investigation of its $200 million contract with the Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH) and the ensuing resignation of DHH Secretary Bruce Greenstein, who had maintained continued contact with his old bosses at CNSI during the bidding, selection and contract awarding processes;
  • Biomedical Research Foundation (BRF) and its inside track advantage by virtue of its CEO/President also serving on the LSU Board of Stuporvisors, which issued the contract to BRF to run the LSU Medical Center in Shreveport and E.A. Conway Medical Center in Monroe;
  • Goldman Sachs helping to write the RFP for the takeover of OGB and subsequently being the only bidder on the RFP;
  • Meetings between state officials and vendors for a year leading up to the issuance of an RFP for the consolidation of IT services in more than 20 departments within the state’s executive branch;

Folks, we’re beginning to detect a pattern here.

Read Full Post »

The Division of Administration (DOA) is more than two weeks late in announcing the awarding of a contract and nearly a week late on the effective date of a contract for the consolidation of the information technology (IT) departments of more than 20 departments within the state’s Executive Branch.

The Request for Proposals (RFP) for Information Technology Planning and Management Support Services was first issued on June 28 with a July 31 deadline for the submission of proposals.

Oral interviews were to be held on Aug. 14, according to the RFP, with the announcement of intent to award set for Aug. 16 and the contract work to begin on Aug. 30. The mere fact that the announcement of intent to award was set for only two days after oral interviews smacks of a done deal; how else could the administration make a decision of this magnitude (hundreds of millions of dollars) after only two days of interviews? How could an intelligent decision be made on such complex, complicated proposals in a mere two weeks’ time?

Interim Chief Information Officer Richard “Dickie” Howze, at a meeting of Council of Information Service Directors, stressed two main points, according to those in attendance. First, he said, IBM had not already been selected (strange how he would deny something before it had been alleged) and second, the consolidation goal was not to fire people. Yeah, right.

Howze also distributed a memorandum cautioning DOA section heads and Council of Information Services directors against any contact with vendors who are potential proposers or who may be part of a proposal as a subcontractor. “If you work with a contractor who is a potential proposer, there shall be no private communications, discussion of the upcoming process, timelines, RFP content, evaluation or award,” the memo said.

“Additionally, it is not appropriate for any current state employee to provide a reference for a vendor responding to this procurement.

“These restrictions will remain in effect until the contract(s) has been awarded and the protest period has past (sic). Anyone failing to follow this policy may face disciplinary action, up to and including termination.”

Amazing what the CNSI debacle can do in helping public officials find their moral compasses, isn’t it?

Those restrictions may have been in place with the awarding of the $200 million CNSI contract by the Department of Health and Hospitals but apparently someone neglected to get the word to then-DHH Secretary Bruce Greenstein who maintained constant contact with his old bosses at CNSI right through the billing, selection and contract awarding process. Now the FBI is investigating that contract, Greenstein is gone, and the folks at DOA appear to have learned from that experience.

Or have they?

Howze, in laying out the ground rules for the current RFP, neglected to address a pre-RFP request by DOA for presentations from IBM, Deloitte and Northrop Grumman to discuss what those companies could do for the state.

Is it possible that these three players may have gained some insight and advantage in those meetings? Who attended from the state and should they now be terminated as per Howze’s memo?

We’re just sayin’….

Meanwhile, DOA’s legal staff appears to have gone into a stall mode over public records requests by LouisianaVoice, apparently preferring to bicker over semantics rather than providing public records.

On Monday, LouisianaVoice submitted the following request to DOA:

“Pursuant to the Public Records Act of Louisiana (R.S. 44:1 et seq.), I respectfully request the following information:

“According to the Request for Proposal (RFP# 107-28062013001) for Information Technology Planning and Management Support Services, under Section 1.6 (Calendar of Events), the ‘Announcement of Intent to Award’ was scheduled to be made on Aug. 16, 2013 and the ‘Contract Begin Date’ was Aug. 30, 2013.

“In accordance to that information and pursuant to the Public Records laws of the State of Louisiana, please provide me immediately with:

  • “The name and address of the winning bidder;
  • “The name of the company to whom the contract was awarded;
  • “The amount of the winning bid;
  • “The amount of the actual contract;
  • “Also, please provide me the opportunity to review all the proposals submitted in response to RFP#: 107-28062013001.

The response we received on Tuesday from attorney Joshua Paul Melder said:

“We have received your public records request regarding Request for Proposal No. 107-28062013001. You have requested information rather than documents, therefore the Public Records Act is inapplicable. Nevertheless, in an effort to be helpful we have identified some documents that may contain the information you seek, including the Notice of Intent to Award the Contract and the proposals submitted for the RFP.  Please advise if you would like to inspect these documents and we will collect them for copying or for your review.

“The contract has not been executed yet, however, we will be happy to provide a copy to you upon its final execution.”

At least he did extend an offer to provide a copy of the contract upon its execution, whenever that may be.

We fired off our response:

“You have a very narrow definition of what is public record and what is information, one which does not square with the law as set forth in RS 44:2 (a). The Public Records Act (RS 44:2 (a) is quite broad in its definition of public records. You should familiarize yourself with it. As a courtesy, I am attaching the definition below:”

RS 44: (2)(a)  All books, records, writings, accounts, letters and letter books, maps, drawings, photographs, cards, tapes, recordings, memoranda, and papers, and all copies, duplicates, photographs, including microfilm, or other reproductions thereof, or any other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, including information contained in electronic data processing equipment, having been used, being in use, or prepared, possessed, or retained for use in the conduct, transaction, or performance of any business, transaction, work, duty, or function which was conducted, transacted, or performed by or under the authority of the constitution or laws of this state, or by or under the authority of any ordinance, regulation, mandate, or order of any public body or concerning the receipt or payment of any money received or paid by or under the authority of the constitution or the laws of this state, are “public records”, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter or the Constitution of Louisiana.

“I’m reasonably certain what I am seeking will fall within the public records law as defined above.”

However, just to demonstrate that we can be flexible, we are altering the wording somewhat and re-submitting our request thus:

According to the Request for Proposal (RFP# 107-28062013001) for Information Technology Planning and Management Support Services, under Section 1.6 (Calendar of Events), the “Announcement of Intent to Award” was scheduled to be made on Aug. 16, 2013 and the “Contract Begin Date” was Aug. 30, 2013.

In accordance to that information and pursuant to the Public Records laws of the State of Louisiana, please provide me upon final execution with:

  • Documents containing the name and address of the winning bidder;
  • Documents containing the name of the company to whom the contract was awarded;
  • Documents containing the amount of the winning bid;
  • Documents containing the amount of the actual contract;
  • Also, please provide me the opportunity to review all documents containing the proposals submitted in response to RFP#: 107-28062013001.

If it’s semantics they want, it’s semantics they’ll get.

Read Full Post »

This is a saga about a horrendous experience I had last week—an experience from which I was certain I would fail to emerge with body and mind intact. It was an adventure so stressful that in looking back, I would strongly urge everyone reading this to avoid repeating my ill-advised expedition.

It all started with a planned Labor Day weekend in Biloxi and the decision to book two hotel rooms for my wife Betty, me, a daughter and three grandchildren.

Because we wanted two adjoining rooms, I thought it best to call the hotel directly. Instead, the toll-free number I dialed somehow turned out to be that of Hotels.com. Thus began the Nightmare on College Street.

My therapist has since suggested that I advise you that whatever your future travel plans may be, at all costs avoid any dealings with Hotels.com.

Only my experience in trying to extract public records from the Jindal administration over the past two years prepared me for what I was about to endure.

The level of ignorance, ineptitude, disdain for the public and sheer arrogance encountered in my dealings with Hotels.com was almost comparable to that of the Division of Administration and the Department of Education. For the rigorous training those two agencies put me through in preparation for Hotels.com, I am grateful. Without the mental toughness forced upon me by the Jindal administration, I might have given up in my quest for justice for the little man.

Upon receiving an automated answer after dialing the toll-free number, I pressed “1” for English and “1” again for reservations. After a brief wait, a male, heavily-accented voice came on the line. I would learn later that he was in Hotel.com’s call center in the Philippines. So, already I am agitated at the propensity of American businesses to suck up our hard-earned dollars while taking jobs out of the country and hiring cheap help in Third World countries.

That aside, I explained that I wanted two non-smoking rooms with two beds in each room, a request he seemed to understand readily enough. The price he quoted me was precisely twice the rate for a single room—$299.50 for two non-smoking rooms at $149.75 each. I gave him my credit card information, email address and telephone number and everything seemed to be going smoothly. Too smoothly, it turned out.

It’s times like that one should never let his guard down. Little did I know that I was being lured into a mental maze that would leave me foaming at the mouth and ready to take a ride on the Disoriented Express and to be checked into the Hotel Silly instead of the Comfort Inn in Biloxi.

He gave me a confirmation number and we ended the call.

A few minutes later I received an email confirmation and that’s when the fun began.

It was confirmation for one room at $149.75. Well, at least they got the rate correct but the deal was for two adjoining rooms at a combined cost of $299.50.

I called the toll-free number again, dialed “1” for English and “1” again for reservations and got a very nice lady named Amanda. She was in Missouri, not the Philippines and I soon learned that (a) it was hot where she was because the air conditioning was out and (b) her computer was down—probably because someone was working on the air conditioning, she reasoned. I failed to make the connection.

I was on the line for a little more than an hour with Amanda and I became increasingly familiar with two of her favorite terms: “I’m sorry about this” and “hold on just a minute.” If I heard those two phrases once, I must’ve heard them 20 times…each.

Somehow, the confirmation email for my second room, at $149.75 did manage to come through despite her computer problems. But then she insisted on transferring me to customer service, along with her recommendation to complain long and loud about the SNAFU. Her, I appreciated because I was certainly prepared to do just that.

But when I got customer service, after another 20-minute hold time, they informed me that they were indeed sorry for the inconvenience but their computers were down and they were unable to help me and could I call back tomorrow?

You betcha.

Friday afternoon I called and pressed “1” again for English and “1” a second time for reservations and asked to be put through to customer service. I have reason to believe the reservations representative moonlights for the Transportation Security Administration (you know, the sadists who work at the airports) because I had to answer an entire battery of questions I believe were designed to trick me and to deny access to customer service.

But I fooled them and got through and after going through the ordeal of explaining my experience from the very first call to make reservations to the computer malfunction call to this call, I gave the guy my two confirmation numbers (two being necessitated because of the original mistake of making a reservation for just one room).

This guy was so sympathetic and understanding that after another series of “I apologize” and “Hold on just a minute,” he came back on the line to assure me he was going to try and get me a partial refund (which, by the way, was precisely what I demanded). “Please hold while I get authorization for that,” he said.

After hearing nothing but silence on the line for about 10 minutes, I finally realized he wasn’t coming back. So I did the obvious thing, glutton for punishment that I am: I called back and dialed “1” for English and “1” for reservations, asked for customer service, answered the same security questions and this time was told that I would receive a 25 percent refund. “On each room?” I asked. By now I was ready to up the ante to 50 percent on each room.

“Hold on, I’ll check,” he said.

Yes, I know what you’re thinking but this time I was not disconnected and he finally returned to say yes, I would get a 25 percent refund on each room. “Great,” I said. “Now I want you to send me written confirmation of that to my email address.”

“What is that name and email address, sir?”

“You already have my name and email address on my original reservation confirmations,” I said.

“But I need it for your refund confirmation,” he said.

I gave it to him and he processed the refund on the first confirmation and whether you choose to believe this absurdity or not, he actually asked for my name and email address again.

“Why do you need that again?” I asked.

“For the second confirmation.” Sounding by this time more like Porky Pig than myself, I managed to give him the information—for what I swear must have been at least the 10th time in this surreal series of telephone chats.

So, I was elated a few minutes later when an email popped up on my screen from Hotels.com. Elated, that is, until I read that the refund was for only one reservation—the original one.

I started to call back but after the mercury shattered the bulb in my home blood pressure kit (and I didn’t even have the Velcro® cuff on my arm), I decided to wait until Saturday morning before we left for Biloxi to see if it might come in overnight. Of course, it didn’t.

Finally, upon our return home Sunday night, I called Hotels.com once more and pounded “1” for English and drove a metal spike through “1” for reservations and once again went through the entire lengthy explanation which by now was taking longer to recite than it took me to read Moby Dick in college (to this day, the only thing I remember from that god-awful book is the opening line: “They call me Ishmael.”).

Believe it or not, I finally got the second email confirmation of the $37.44 refund for the second room. Now, I’ll just have to check my credit card invoice when it comes in to see if the refunds actually went through. To tell you the truth, I’m not holding my breath.

As a postscript to this saga, when we checked into the Comfort Inn in Biloxi, the reservations were waiting for me—adjoining rooms. As a wave of relief swept over me, I explained to the lady behind the counter what I had encountered with Hotels.com.

She just shook her head, handed me a hotel business card and said, “I hate dealing with those people. They’re all a pain. You should’ve just called us direct.”

I gave her my best Bob Newhart deadpan stare and politely referred her to the third paragraph of this rant.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts