4 ms·

This seems to put most of the blame on the gov workers managing the contracts, and very little on the contracted companies themselves. I would find it hard to b

• kctess5 11y ago
  It sounds like the people hiring the contractors didn't exactly do their due diligence. > unclear who is really in charge, sometimes it's no one > vague deliverables from people who don't know what they're talking about > tons of cash, regularly, with no end in sight Sounds like an incredibly profitable and easy contract. It's an ethical grey area, but it's not surprising that companies took advantage.
  • OliverJones 11y ago
    "easy contract?" I doubt it. Ten million users on the go-live date? Interchange of health-care data from system to system? Getting Oracle's identity / authentication management system integrated as a door-one requirement? Hostile congresscritters doing everything in their power to torpedo the project? The only difference between this and a typical giant cluster#uck is the vast and visible scale.
• humanrebar 11y ago
  > I would find it hard to believe that they also weren't absolutely sure what they were milking. It was pretty clear that the project was doomed to start with. Maybe some companies didn't bid because they knew that, leaving only companies that were either naive or willing to get paid for a broken product and then blamed and abused after. In other words, I completely disagree. The buck absolutely needs to stop at the people putting out the contracts and spending the money.
• tssva 11y ago
  This is one of several IG audits covering the healthcare marketplace roll out. The purpose of this particular audit was to review the government's management of the contractors.