Oct 23, 2005 at 10:21 PM by Political Chase
The New York Times reports Fitzgerald may hand down indictments by no later than Friday. It also says Republicans will rally for the boy that has done no wrong.
As the White House braced for a decision by Mr. Fitzgerald, Republicans began suggesting that they would pursue a strategy of minimizing any charges as technicalities or the product of an overzealous prosecution.
What happened to the day when politicians distanced themselves from other politicians that were criminals? I know the comeback all to well that all politicians are crooks, but it has not always been birds of a feather…
Late Update: The Post indicates Fitzgerald is expected to give final notice to those facing charges as early as tomorrow. The special prosecutor is expected to convene the grand jury on Tuesday, a day earlier than the regular scheduled time.
—–
Oct 23, 2005 at 9:52 PM by Political Chase
The Washington Post has a front page piece about a contractor, Unisys, over billing the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). The article is ambiguous and for the majority of readers, misleading. The Post alleges Unisys grossly over billed, incorrectly classified employee job categories, negligently kept records and other items, which gives the reader the perception that Unisys is another Halliburton.
Unisys is not another Halliburton.
I have read the article only once and need to review it again. The Post is trying to stick it to somebody: Unisys, the administration or possibly both. I will sort that out as I review the article further.
There are a couple of notable items in the piece that I want to point out, which I will get to later in this post.
So, what qualifies me to make these statements? The level I have taken this blog to (intent, focus, commitment, personal satisfaction, etc.) is considerably different than when I started. I initially jumped into the content and have not taken (had) the time to publish my bio – shame on me, that’s a disservice to readers. The priority for a proper bio must be elevated.
I have more than 20 years professional experience in the information technology industry, most of which is in outsourcing. Until I started my own business approximately four years ago, I was in senior management of one of the top three providers of information technology services in the world. Unisys is not in the top three – no allegiance there. Furthermore, I know very well and have worked with some of the former and current senior managers at Unisys – individuals with titles of either president or vice president. More about me later…
The requirements and issues (good, bad or indifferent) of any technical outsourcing contract that is the magnitude of the agreement between Unisys and the TSA cannot be adequately conveyed or summarized in an article of 1, 816 words. Furthermore, when significant problems arise, as the Post reports, both parties will have contributed to creating problems. That doesn’t necessarily mean they equally contribute, but never is one party completely at fault.
The two most important factors in a technical outsourcing arrangement are the contract and appropriate vendor management – the two commandments. Deficiencies in either area generate problems exponentially.
Procurement specialists said the Unisys contract illustrates the pitfalls of relying on corporations to manage ambitious homeland security contracts with little oversight from a thinly stretched federal procurement force.
TSA officials acknowledged that they were initially not well-prepared to manage the contract but were able to identify problems and refer them to auditors. The officials say they have since hired more staff members and improved oversight. They declined to comment on the findings of the audit.
Now, we can see there were problems directly related to the two commandments, but the most significant points are these:
In early 2002, TSA officials decided to launch a competition for the contract by using a little-known Transportation Department program begun in the 1990s to ease the purchasing of information technology. But the program, which speeds the process by pre-qualifying contractors and abbreviating competition, has had documented problems with oversight.
Both the competition and the contract would require extra vigilance by the government. But the TSA did not have the necessary procurement staff, according to government officials. "I frankly have to agree that the government is sorely lacking in that area," said Schambach, the former TSA chief information officer.
What you have now, is a partnership that was doomed from the beginning to have substantial problems. All the “gotchas” the Post points out: over billing, incorrect employee classification, etc, are on the periphery and are deeply subordinate to the actual problem. But, what stands out when someone reads the piece are the gotchas.
I do not know the facts specific to this case, but it is just like being a doctor. You have seen the same symptoms countless times – diagnosing the flu does not require a battery of tests.
The issues of over billing, etc. I will cover later. Bottom line – think about it a bit before you render a summary judgment.
—–
