Website
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 45
Like Tree17Likes

Thread: Website

  1. #1
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,538

    Default Website

    Do you think the creators of the Healthcare.gov website should have to pay back the money they were paid because the website has not worked as planned?

    I have seen several posts on FB saying they should, but I am not sure whether I agree.

    ~Bonita~

  2. #2
    Mega Poster elleon17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    4,200

    Default

    No

    From what I understand the ultimate responsibility for QA and testing was with the Federal governement as the client and since they didn't do that properly, they are the ones at fault. They should have gone through a pretty standard testing process and took back issues to the company they contracted before launching to work out the 'glitches'.
    Lilypie Fifth Birthday tickers
    Lilypie First Birthday tickers

  3. #3
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,597

    Default

    From what I understand there is plenty of blame to go around. Part of the blame goes to the government because it sounds like they didn't have a clear idea of how they wanted the design, and as a developer I know that it is almost impossible to create something for a client that doesn't really know what they want. Especially with the deadline they were given, which was probably impossible in the first place. On the other hand, I think CGI was paid a ridiculous amount of money to build this website and I have a hard time believing that it actually cost that much to pay developers when clearly they didn't hire enough qualified people to do the job. I don't think they should have to pay back all of it, but I also don't think they should be paid the full amount for developing something that doesn't work. Our company develops a website for police departments, and the contract is clear that each step of the way exactly what has to be working or we don't get paid.

    Obamacare Website Programmers Complained About Unrealistic Deadlines
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  4. #4
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,538

    Default

    I do not think it would work to make them pay the money back, but I do think they should loose the ability to do any other work for the Government.

    ~Bonita~

  5. #5
    Mega Poster elleon17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    4,200

    Default

    In my experience working with a developer in IT functions, they are meticulous about what they will or will not do and everything is documented with nothing left up to interpretation of what I would normally think "well it just makes common sense that they should do that."

    If it isn't a part of their pre-project business requirement documents, they don't do it.

    In that sense, I still think it is the federal governments issue.

    I'm speaking off the cuff, but I bet there wasn't an advisor who was used to working with these industries that should have been there to work through the process.

    The fact that they didn't have the foresight to work in testing is crazy to me. You'd be toast if this was a company you worked for and you were a part of a launch that wasn't throughly tested and then flopped.
    mom3girls likes this.
    Lilypie Fifth Birthday tickers
    Lilypie First Birthday tickers

  6. #6
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elleon17 View Post

    The fact that they didn't have the foresight to work in testing is crazy to me. You'd be toast if this was a company you worked for and you were a part of a launch that wasn't throughly tested and then flopped.
    The thing is even when they did test it, the testing failed. Yet they still rolled it out. It was poorly designed, poorly planned, poorly written and poorly tested. Just an all around FAIL. Everyone involved shares the blame.


    Federal officials did not permit testing of the Obamacare healthcare.gov website or issue final system requirements until four to six days before its Oct. 1 launch, according to an individual with direct knowledge of the project.

    The individual, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described the troubled Obamacare website project as suffering from top-level management disarray, changing systems requirements and recurring delays.

    The root cause of the problems was a pivotal decision by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services officials to act as systems integrator, the central coordinator for the entire program. Usually this role is reserved for the prime information technology contractor.

    As a result, full testing of the site was delayed until four to six days before the fateful Oct. 1 launch of the health care exchanges, the individual said.

    Sign Up for the Watchdog newsletter!
    Federal officials were “freezing requirements in time to permit full testing at all levels of the site — integration testing, user testing, performance testing and tuning,” the individual said.

    “Normally a system this size would need 4-6 months of testing and performance tuning, not 4-6 days,” the individual said.

    The source said there were “ever-changing, conflicting and exceedingly late project directions. The actual system requirements for Oct. 1 were changing up until the week before,” the individual said.

    The individual described the project as suffering from a “lack of an end-to-end business and technology vision for the project,” adding that “the hardest part of any technology project is not the technology — it is the business process decisions, what is the system supposed to do and how it will it do it.”

    In addition, “The challenge with this project was that the decisions were made very, very late in the project, and no one organization ... seemed to know how this complex ecosystem of applications, interfaces, user processes and hardware should all work together.”

    Another person, a former employee of CGI Federal — the private-sector contractor hired to build healthcare.gov — said the government’s insistence on being the systems integrator resulted in disastrous consequences for the website.

    The former employee said that “requirements came late, CMS dictated the design, especially the sign-up-before-viewing-plans, and there was absolutely not enough time for testing.”
    Troubled Obamacare website wasn't tested until a week before launch | WashingtonExaminer.com
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  7. #7
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    The thing is even when they did test it, the testing failed. Yet they still rolled it out. It was poorly designed, poorly planned, poorly written and poorly tested. Just an all around FAIL. Everyone involved shares the blame.
    Ok, So then who in your opinion should have to pay for a new website or for that website to be fixed? (I almost think it would be better to start over with a new website.)

    ~Bonita~

  8. #8
    Mega Poster elleon17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    4,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    Ok, So then who in your opinion should have to pay for a new website or for that website to be fixed? (I almost think it would be better to start over with a new website.)
    I agree. Its going to look like patchwork quilt on the backside.
    Lilypie Fifth Birthday tickers
    Lilypie First Birthday tickers

  9. #9
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    Ok, So then who in your opinion should have to pay for a new website or for that website to be fixed? (I almost think it would be better to start over with a new website.)
    Well IMO CGI shouldn't have been paid until they delivered on the what they promised. As I said the company I work for builds scheduling software for police and fire departments and it is built into the contracts at what point in the process we get paid. Each point along the way there is a milestone and when that part is completed we get paid a portion of the contract. I'm not sure how they managed to get to the end of the project to the point it was to be rolled out with such a complete failure and still got paid. If CGI has already been paid then they should be required to fix it for no additional cost. I don't think there is any way you could make them responsible for paying someone else to fix it or build something new. That is why the government never does anything right. There is no accountability. NO ONE has even been fired over any of this.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  10. #10
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elleon17 View Post
    I agree. Its going to look like patchwork quilt on the backside.
    As an aside, I think it would be really neat to have a competition. Invite different companies to design a website and let the Government pick which one is best. The winner gets a Government contract to do websites in the future. You would get the best possible websites out of that situation with no cost other than the future contract.
    elleon17 likes this.

    ~Bonita~

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions