3 ms·

I think the answer is simple - the Governor of Kentucky took an active role in the project and assigned someone that you can actually pinpoint to be in charge o

by nhebb 13y ago

I think the answer is simple - the Governor of Kentucky took an active role in the project and assigned someone that you can actually pinpoint to be in charge of it. Contrast this to the federal site, where it's difficult to tell who was really managing the project. Talking Points Memo did a good write-up of the Kentucky site [1] back in October [2], and in the last half of the article, two things stand out: "Testing was undertaken throughout every step of the process, said Carrie Banahan, kynect's executive director, and it was crucial because it allowed state officials to identify problems early in the process. She laid out the timeline like this: From January 2013 to March, they developed the system; from April to June, they built it; from July to September, they tested it." ... and ... "From a design standpoint, Kentucky made the conscious choice to stick to the basics, rather than seeking to blow users away with a state-of-the-art consumer interface. A big part of that was knowing their demographics: A simpler site would make it easer to access for people without broadband Internet access, and the content was written at a sixth-grade reading level so it would be as easy to understand as possible." [1] https://kyenroll.ky.gov/ https://kyenroll.ky.gov/ [2] http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/how-kentucky-built-the-country-s-best-obamacare-website http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/how-kentucky-built-the-count...

hga 13y ago
It took a bit more than that. The person in charge and Deloitte agreed on the ruthless simplicity you've outlined, and which we can also judge by the short timelines, 6 months to design and build, 3 months for system testing and fixes. Implicitly, your summation also tells us requirements were frozen early enough in the project. Even if HHS/CMS had assigned a single person to be full time in charge of Healthcare.gov, it's vanishingly unlikely they would have had the authority to take such measures and make them stick, refuse requirements changes from above past a certain point, etc. etc., even if they'd known to do so, or were smart enough to listen to the contractors. Oh, yeah, Deloitte was the general/prime/whatever contractor, CMS took on that role until "fired" in the 3rd week in August. CMS simply didn't have the skills to do that (in the Federal government we're told only the Pentagon does, and only for "medium sized" weapons projects).

by nhebb 13y ago

hga 13y ago

It took a bit more than that. The person in charge and Deloitte agreed on the ruthless simplicity you've outlined, and which we can also judge by the short timelines, 6 months to design and build, 3 months for system testing and fixes. Implicitly, your summation also tells us requirements were frozen early enough in the project. Even if HHS/CMS had assigned a single person to be full time in charge of Healthcare.gov, it's vanishingly unlikely they would have had the authority to take such measures and make them stick, refuse requirements changes from above past a certain point, etc. etc., even if they'd known to do so, or were smart enough to listen to the contractors. Oh, yeah, Deloitte was the general/prime/whatever contractor, CMS took on that role until "fired" in the 3rd week in August. CMS simply didn't have the skills to do that (in the Federal government we're told only the Pentagon does, and only for "medium sized" weapons projects).