DOI Wired RFP Episode IIIb
Rereading Elliot’s and Gould’s emails puts me in full pain in the ass mode, so I guess I’ll drop a note to the governor’s office.
Hey Joe,
I was reading this RFP on the Insurance Commissioner’s site and it looks squirrely as all get out. It doesn’t say what the work being bid on actually is, there are two closing dates and there is only 24 hours between the closing date and the vendor negotiations.Most people who have read it think that it looks like the DOI is trying to get money to a pre-selected party on the sly. I’d be curious to know what the office of the Governor thinks about all of this.
– Jason
What the heck. Maybe a “what is this bullshit?” call from the Governor’s office will light a fire under the dim wits in the DOI.
Well, hopefully you’ve made your point. I wonder if the scrutiny will be enough to stop the RTP.
In case some of you didn’t follow Mike Matthews’ link in installment IIIa of this thread to what this is all about, here it is:
http://downwithabsolutesblog.wordpress.com/2009/05/22/screw-it/
That story plus a link in it to one of Mike’s older posts about the same thing explains it all. KWS, the lying hypocrite, did the same thing she accused Gene Reed of that cost him the primary win. The RFP is about political payback to a major campaign contributor, although via the Dem party, a state contractor named INS/RIS that’s had a contract with the DOI going back to Donna Lee Williams’ tenure, renewable every four years as new administrations come in. They backed Gene Reed and KWS ratted him out, then turned around and took their money from the party after she caused Gene Reed to lose. Remember the $35,000 she suddenly had after she came back from NYC just before the election? That was no doubt it. And remember how during the campaign she was constantly screaming that she didn’t take money from insurance companies, although it turns out she did from their lawyers and lobbyists, or from state contractors? All lies. Now it’s time to award the contract to INS/RIS again, worth $60 million, in return for their support, disguised as a normal but deficient RFP. Gould and Jacobson are so outraged whenever anyone dares to question them because they fear getting caught redhanded. What swinish conduct even in notoriously corrupt Delaware. KWS would probably sell her firstborn for a buck, had she ever had any children (which she despises). No education, no work experience, screwing people to get ahead (use your imagination), and lying her way into office. I can’t wait to see how this newest pile of dirt plays out.
By law the contract must be awarded within 30 days. I think they plan on awarding it on Wednesday.
So the main thing is to get the award delayed up to 30 days, and during that time we need to get the RFP withdrawn and a new one issued with a real bidding process.
“we need to get the RFP withdrawn and a new one issued ”
… or none at all. It will need to be justified.
I would love to see the DOJ and FBI raid KWS’s office and home. Think of all the bright red dresses they’ll find. This “RFP” stinks. Doesn’t the DOI have an inspector general?
I would just like her to do her work that she is supposed to be doing like approving the various annuity riders that are sitting on her desk considering DE is the only state in the country that these havent been approved in.
Arthur, she doesn’t know how. As I’ve seen with my own eyes, she is nearly illiterate, believe it or not. Amazing where the right political connections will take you, even if you’re an insipid uneducated dumbass.
“Amazing where the right political connections will take you, even if you’re an insipid uneducated dumbass.” – that is what this state is made of…maybe we’ll get lucky and one day KWS will be governor just becuase she is a democrat just like Aunt Ruffie.
If the FBI or the A.G. don’t take her down first. We can only hope.
there is a snowballs chance in hell of that happening. like RAM signing off on her illegal and unconstintutional budget
Who needs the FBI, if we manage to block this RFP the insurance companies will take her down themselves.
Here’s another piece of dirt for your consideration. KWS allowed five life insurers to lower the amounts they have to reserve for claims as an “emergency measure” not too long ago, even though the NAIC opposed it. That made their financial condition look better than it was. These same insurers recently got billions in TARP bail-out funds because thanks to KWS, they looked like they were in a better position to pay them back. You don’t think she did that for nothing, do you? If she didn’t, she sure didn’t waste any time to cash in after taking office on January 6th.
Look here is the thing. NOTHING will happen. Everyone will huff and puff and nothing will happen. electing her was the best thing to ever happen to her. we, the people, can do nothing for the next 4 years. and as long as she does NOTHING in her last year she will get re-elected because everyone forgot what she did the first year (the general electorate)
She’s been preparing for this office since Donna Lee Williams fired her for incompetence in 1992 and she swore she’d be commissioner herself some day because she saw what it did for Levinson financially. That was the only real job she ever had, and only because of her relationship with Levinson who hired her without any insurance experience whatsoever. Right after she was fired she invented a supposed insurance consulting business that existed only on paper so she could join insurance industry associations and make contacts that would support her run for IC, which they have. We know where her loyalties are. Once that becomes obvious, which it already has, people will definitely remember, and if not, then her opponents in the next election will. Count on it.
If Mike Matthews is correct that this is a $60 million/4yr gig, that is a lot of money to put against the deficit, assuming half to a third of it is really not necessary for DOI operations.
Elliot has a hell of a lot of nerve to come here and bullshit that it’s not taxpayer money.
Again, I will state NOTHING will happen and they all know it. I will put up a grand – NOTHING WILL HAPPEN.
I don’t know if the 4 years is right, since I understand this company has had this contract for some time. But it is ALOT of money to award to someone without a rigorous competition.
What I want to know is how all of the folks pushing back on 8% pay cuts aren’t all over this? There are clearly funds — unknown — being awarded for unknown reasons — being awarded to someone very entrenched in the Delaware Way. Here is a part of your government who is working pretty hard to make sure that some firm gets well taken care of while you guys are up for your pay cut. Unbelievable.
It wouldn’t surprise me if nothing happened, arthur.
But who knew that contracts could get awarded Halliburton-style in Delaware?
Elliot gave it all away when he said, in effect, “Don’t worry about it, it’s not your money.”
arthur, since you’re so adamant that nothing will happen to these people, could you tell us who is protecting them and why? Maybe their protectors are getting cut in on the graft. When is anything other than money ever a motivator for someone like that.
Gabriel – i can tell you why nothing will happen. When has anyone ever been held accountable? Time goes by – little things like this are forgotten and the people are more concerned with their own personal lives. It happens all the time. Directors have sexual discrimination suits brought against them. They are shuttled off to an office downstate and next thing you know they are hired at another state agency with a higher salary and more people below them.
“Here is a part of your government who is working pretty hard to make sure that some firm gets well taken care of while you guys are up for your pay cut”
Cassandra, I think you may be understanding why I’m so against the paycuts. Although not nearly as blatant, most state employees have their own stories to tell about stupid wasteful things. Give me a pen and I’ll find you $20 million that won’t effect state services one iota! And I’m not even talking about DOE, which may lead to the same types of savings. Other than John Kolawlko and maybe a few others, there’s really no one listening
“Directors have sexual discrimination suits brought against them. They are shuttled off to an office downstate and next thing you know they are hired at another state agency with a higher salary and more people below them”
Arthur, I worked for that person for a while 🙂 In case you haven’t kept up, he’s divorced again (trying to catch up with me in the marriage dept)
The Department of Insurance budget is about $25 million a year. Not a nickel is taxpayer money. It is the Department’s 25% surcharge on examinations that finances its operations. It seems perplexing that anyone could suggest that a management review of a 70 – 75 person department with a $25 million dollar budget would cost $60 million.
RIS is the firm that does DOI’s financial examinations and INS is DOI’s actuarial firm.
Neither has even thought of submitting a proposal in response to our RFP. How could they? Both are currently under a contract to DOI (executed by the previous commissioner and is up for renewal by the current commissioner).
Elliott Jacobson saying that ‘not a nickel (of the IC’s budget) is taxpayer money’ is like the Delaware Lottery Office saying the same thing.
The fact that these particular agencies happen to generate revenue does not, nor should it, exempt them from fiscal oversight.
Nor should anyone buy the straw argument that the $25 mill in generated revenue may be used however the bleep the IC’s office wants to.
It should be obvious that some agencies, by dint of their statutory mandates, generate revenue, while others, due to their statutory mandates, do not.
That does not give carte blanche to a highly-suspect management team which, like it or not, the current team at the IC’s office is, to piss away taxpayers’ $$’s on an undefined and quite possible unnecessary management review. Especially when the contract could well go to a politically-connected vendor, based on the lack of specificity in the RFP.
The $$’s the IC proposes to spend on this would otherwise go to the General Fund, so they are taxpayers’ $$’s being spent.
And, while Mr. Jacobson is so forthcoming, and since he apparently is the only person authorized to actually ‘communicate’ with the public on behalf of the IC, would he please be so kind as to tell the public just why an “Advisor to the Insurance Commissioner (Mr. Gould)” is on the public payroll, how much he is being paid, and just what he does?
Elliott… shouldn’t you get busy drafting an RFP amendment that states the time and location of the public bid opening, and the date of contract award?
Methinks the rush job on the RFP is to get the contract signed before the performance review and reengineering promised by the Governor gathers steam.
Perhaps the “it’s not taxpayer money” mindset has prevailed in the past, turning DOI into a dark little corner where oversight never ventured. But of course, the Internet changes everything.
The “wired RFP” is the hallmark of Harris McDowell, but we are onto it now.
RFPs are supposed to ensure integrity and fairness in bidding for public contracts, but the process obviously can be abused to remove all fairness while retaining the outward appearance.
‘Bulo – Thank you for saying what I would have said with a lot fewer swear words. My ‘F’ key on the keyboard has been acting up and I would hate to use it too often.
Neither has even thought of submitting a proposal in response to our RFP.
Now this interests me.
How would you know, Elliott, that these firms are not bidding on this RFP? Notwithstanding the fact that no one can tell what this RFP is for , exactly, why would these firms tell you they weren’t bidding? And does their current contract actually preclude them from getting more contracts with the State?
It strikes me that perhaps we ought to let Elliott just keep posting on the IC office’s entitlements to the revenues they generate. This is going to make some interesting campaign literature, I think.
Cass… Elliott claims they are prohibited from bidding, so that would be one explanation of how he knows.
Alternatively, I don’t know about DE but it is customary for interested firms to submit a No Bid letter if they are not bidding, but want to remain on the eligible bidder list for future bids.
It would be truly interesting if Elliott knows what is in the sealed bids to be opened on Tuesday.
In any case, the bidders are supposed to remain sealed until the public opening, which is not stated in the RFP. But we can assume the bids will be opened behind closed doors somewhere, sometime Tuesday afternoon.
(I kill myself… actually I think the bid has already been opened, copied, and emailed to insiders).
He is claiming that they are not bidding — not that they are prohibited, which was why I asked my question.
You send No Bid letters to bids that have a specific bidder’s list inviting a small pool of firms to bid OR if you had somehow indicated that you would submit a bid. As far as I can tell from the mess that is that RFP that there is no specified bidders list and there are no instructions to communicate no bid decisions.
Good point. I thought the implication was that they were prohibited, but perhaps not.
A lot of questions have been raised and I will respond tomorrow. However, keep the following in mind.
1- The Insurance Industry, not the taxpayer, finances the department. That money from the exams does not go to the General Fund unless the Commissioner gives it to the General Fund. (see below)
2- While the budget process is a complicated one there is a proper balance between legislative oversight, OMB oversight and the Commissioner’s discretion. We welcome the collaboration.
3- This discretion was demonstrated when the previous commissioner voluntarily proposed and Commissioner Stewart voluntarily executed a return of $100,000 to the General Fund.
Who funds the Insurance Industry — oh yeah, the public.
That money from the exams does not go to the General Fund unless the Commissioner gives it to the General Fund.
Elliott is technically correct. Except that the law REQUIRES the Commissioner to give the money to the General Fund:
“(c) Except as otherwise expressly provided, the Commissioner shall promptly deposit to the credit of the General Fund all fees, charges, administrative fines, taxes and other funds collected by him/her for the use of this State…”
(the exception noted is a set-aside earmarked for police pensions)
More law… Elliott may have half a leg to stand on, at least with respect to the examination fees. The exam fees are deposited into a special account to be used for DOI operations subject to legislative appropriation.
Didja get that?
1. This RFP is presumably being funded out of the Revolving Fund.
2. The contract is subject to appropriations, so you could theoretically get the GA to cut it out of the budget.
3. But the last clause prohibits the savings from reverting to the General Fund after the first year, because in the following year the IC is required to reduce the fees to reflect the lowered expense.
Of course it is still in the public interest to examine this RFP and stop it if it is found to be corrupt.
“Who funds the Insurance Industry — oh yeah, the public.”
I’ve been waiting for days for someone to make this point on this thread. It IS taxpayer money. It’s just not TAX money.
This point has been made to Elliott before — he will persist on this line of argument because in their minds the fact that the DOI is a revenue center should absolve them from any accountability or competence.
This excuse is also a centerpiece of his correspondence with us off of the blog too.
But where the money comes from is not material to the fact that this RFP is defective, and while Elliott seems to know who won’t be bidding, apparently those who do have to devine both SOW and contract terms by investing in a tarot reading.
Elliot is arguing that they could blow the money on a race horse and everyone should shut up about it.
From “Down with Absolutes” on May 22:
“34. AnotherAnon – May 24, 2009
If it’s true this RFP is about IT then it should be cancelled immediately. Because the RFP does not mention IT at all, so there is no way in hell potential IT vendors have been sufficiently notified and given the opportunity to bid competitively.
Why would an IT vendor bid on this RFP, which doesn’t mention IT, unless they already had been told they would win?”
Is this RFP in fact about IT? Didn’t they claim it was for evaluation of “financial management” and “reengineering” thereof? It doesn’t say either or state any other purpose, so it should clearly be withdrawn. As Nancy Willing claims, a junior staffer wrote the RFP as his/her first try, like she would know. Yeah, right. Let’s not even go there. Nothing like blaming the underlings. Lacking any kind of statement of purpose, there is no alternative conclusion than that the RFP is rigged for a predetermined recipient.
Tuesday will be interesting.
The IT thing was based on a comment by Nancy, so take with salt to taste.
Reengineering and IT are co-joined. To do reengineering you would hire a business expert who would analyze the current process, recommend changes, and maybe recommend new technology. Then you would go to an IT vendor.
So the winner of this RFP potentially has the opportunity to influence DOI processes, the level of enforcement, and the future award of a technology contract.
That is why, among other reasons, the impartiality of this RFP is so critical and has been called into question.
Gee (edited)
I was referring to Mr. Gould. Elliott happened to mention that Gould is new to government work and wrote the RFP on a template he was familiar with. I don’t doubt that he’ll adjust.
What is silly is that Elliott offered to have DLers come to the IC office and he intended to make the staffers available to answer their questions.
I also know Elliott and staffers are accomodating via the telephone. Why aren’t you guys picking up the phone? FBI anony tips without even a hint of confirmation is the ultimate bullshittery that gives bloggers everywhere a black eye.
In contrast, I fully agree with the great work on this thread to pick apart this RFP. It has significant problems that raise appropriate questions.
I guess that you’ll all finally resolve this in person on Tuesday. yippee~!
What is silly is that Elliott offered to have DLers come to the IC office and he intended to make the staffers available to answer their questions.
For the record. The first meeting offer (May 16) was extended prior to me even reading the RFP (May 18) in question, so it might have ben tough for him to have staff address questions that had yet to be raised. He did re-extand the offer to meet after the 18th, but there was no indication that he was going to make the staffers available to answer the legitimate questions that were raised about the RFP.
He’s had plenty of time since them to address the questions and his consistent position is that the IC’s office makes money so it can spend it all on cotton candy and gummie bears if it so desires.
When Elliot wants to pretend that his offer to meet exculpates him from presiding over this cluster fuck – I say, “whatever.”
Nancy’s comments are now going into moderation since she continues to violate one of our most basic rules.
In the past I’ve intervened to keep her here as a commenter, but she doesn’t seem to appreciate my efforts.
Why not ditch her altogether. No great loss.
Jason,
So why not meet now? Sounds like the invite’s still open.
Because there still isn’t any agenda or purpose to this thing, other than to get some cover. We are also talking about process here — we submitted written questions to this RFP that have not been answered, except to ask us to meet additional requirements not asked for from other bidders. If they aren’t going to answer questions via the standard process, why expect they’ll answer them in person? Besides, this thing closes either Monday or Tuesday. At that point it is done and they will have gotten though all of this without answering a single question.
I think that we all appreciate that the invite is open, but if I’m taking time off from work for something like this, I’m going to want to know what we plan to accomplish.
What Cassandra said.
This meeting BS is a red herring. The fix is in. I think we can all agree on that point. What is ameeting going to do? Make Elliot feel better? I’m not real concerned with Elliot’s feelings.
I don’t understand the purpose of a meeting, either. What will he say in private that he can’t say right here in a public forum?
All of this “The IC is funded by non-taxpayer money” story is bullshit by the way.
The IC is funded by the insurance companies, which get their money from the people they insure. It just doesn’t come from nowhere. We are paying it through our premiums.
It’s good fucking tactics. If he’s offered to meet, and you idiots turned him down or ignored him, he’s going to come out smelling like roses. He can always whip out the “These bloggers don’t know what they’re talking about – hell, they wouldn’t even meet with us” card, and boom, your credibility as critics just got blown to shit. Nice job.
Whatever anon dipshit. Like I care about “tactics.” Like I care about making Elliot feel better.
Look at the timeline. Read the questions that have been posted here. If you think the IC”s office has any credibility, then I say “Good day to you Sir.”
For the rest of you:
Today marks the original RFP close date as noted on the cover of the Microsoft RFP template wizard (or watever) Gould used to create that half-assed pile of crap.
SO have your “management consultant” RFP in by COB today for God knows what work, or your firm is out of the running.
And he didn’t offer to meet about this RFP.
The only way they get to come out smelling like a rose is to put answers up on their web site to these questions. It isn’t as though these questions need a meeting and there were likely bidders who would have been interested in that. The ICs office could have demonstrated a fair bit of good will here by just answering these questions instead of working out their slow roll.
We still have lots of questions and they still have a defective RFP and defective process for spending taxpayer monies. I’d say that the bad smell is all on their side, but perhaps commenter “feces” can’t tell that with his current moniker.
The only way they get to come out smelling like a rose is to put answers up on their web site to these questions.
Morally, yes. Technically though, they don’t have to respond to bidder questions received after the May 1 deadline for posting the answers.
Hey, you know one thing weird about this whole RFP thing? The silence of the Republicans. They are the dog that didn’t bark.
And why are no “republicans” weighing in over here about how the “free market works, no need for additional oversight?”
Why do you guys and gals always assume that anyone who criticizes you is on the Dark Side?
All I’m saying is that you’re idiots not to have met with him, because now he has the moral high ground. The general public can understand an in-person meeting a hell of a lot better than questions posted on the Web.
Well, if you have time to spare for a face-saving meeting (and the only people saving face here would be Elliott), you are welcome to go. What criticism of us do you think we are responding to? All we want is answers to our questions. If you’ve been reading us for awhile, you know that we aren’t much interested in government that ignores the people who employ them.
The general public gets writing to ask questions and not getting those questions answered. Add insurance to the mix and it is a slam dunk. This gets worse if they waste our time, which is exactly what is on offer right now.