Not Just Healthcare.gov: NASA Has 'Significant Problems' With $2.5B IT Contract
schwit1 writes "According to the Inspector General, NASA and HP Enterprise Services have encountered significant problems implementing the $2.5 billion Agency Consolidated End-User Services (ACES) contract, which provides desktops, laptops, computer equipment and end-user services such as help desk and data backup. Those problems include 'a failed effort to replace most NASA employees' computers within the first six months and low customer satisfaction,' the report states (PDF). It adds that NASA lacked the technical and cultural readiness for an agencywide IT delivery model and did not offer clear contract requirements, while HP failed to deliver on multiple promises."
This is what happens when you under fund the IT budget, and put in management positions MORONS that do not have a strong IT background. If the IT director can not build a pc by hand from parts and then not only install the OS, but all the drivers and then configure it completely, then configure a Cisco switch and router, he is not fit to be in a management role of IT.
Yet corporations and the Government instead put people with ZERO clue about IT to begin with in the role of management and upper management.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Those problems include 'a failed effort to replace most NASA employees' computers within the first six months and low customer satisfaction,'
Those problems include 'a failed effort to replace all Slashdot contributors' commenting system within the first four months and low customer satisfaction.
NASA: We want you to make our computers awesome.
HP: How awesome?
NASA: The awesomest!
HP: So how awesome is awesomest?
NASA: As awesome as you can make it.
HP: Okay, that'll be two billion dollars.
NASA: Deal! Yay we get awesome new computers, and an an awesome new software system, that will do all sorts of cool things like be our ERP solution and our CAD software and our entire core infrastructure solution...
HP: Yay, we just made a ton of money! So.... what exactly did they want again?
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
Sorry - I don't understand the article. Too much text on the page confuses me.
Please could you re-print it with double-line spacing and a large bit of generic stock photography of a rocket or something so I know what it is about?
Maybe a big chunk of white-space at the top so I'm not confronted with a whole paragraph of text on the first screen.
Also, the screen appeared too suddenly and made me jump - which is dangerous because today is my first day wearing my big boy pants. Maybe more javascript effects would slow it down?
Yours,
A.N. Audience
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Imagine you're a NASA worker with a nice (albeit old) Macbook computer to do your work on.
Some schmuck walks up to you with a brand new hp laptop with Windows 8 on it to replace your Mac.
I fail to see the scenario where the NASA worker _shouldn't_ enthusiastically shun the "helper" from hp.
When the choice is between something nice and functioning and a crappy os on a crappy piece of hardware, the choice is easy.
The problem with these "one size fits all" contracts is that one size does not fit all situations ever.
If hp wants to make this contract successful they should be forced to offer multiple options through multiple vendors where they take a cut to manage the maintenance and configuration of any of the possible selected systems.
HP FAILED to live up to their contractual obligations and we're blaming government?
FUCK THIS SITE.
Apparently Dice contracted to HP to do the beta site.
This from an organization that, when they recently redesigned their website, *still* didn't get around to forwarding http://nasa.gov/ to http://www.nasa.gov? Who would've thought?
That's kind of unfair. It does not help to rave here anymore. I'm sure that by now the Slashdot crew is perfectly aware of the disaster which the Beta is according to users. Right now we have to wait a bit and see if they actually start fixing stuff, which Timothy just tried to convince us about. They cannot add the new code overnight.
I was reading this review of Slashdot Beta made last October, which shows a variety of screenshots and also has explanations from Timothy in it.
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/33368/slashdot-launches-redesigned-website-in-beta-form-we-check-it-out/index.html
Honestly, I was impressed by at least some of the reasoning, and I can see how some changes would actually be positive. The problem, though, is that not all the changes are good, and it's far too much at once. There is a potential to lose what is special about Slashdot including its moderation system. They need to examine Beta and see and what needs to change for it to be accepted by the Slashdot community. Off the top of my head:
Here's a real and serious recommendation for Timothy if he wants Beta to eventually succeed without disrupting the Slashdot community: do redirections one day out of the week, and on that one day, have a story posted by Timothy asking the community for feedback -- one day each week for experimentation ("Slashdot Labs Day"). Then for the next 6 days, they can fix the site, while readers continue to use the classic interface. Keep doing that until the big problems in Beta are ironed out and the community is halfway satisfied with it. That is seriously a simple and reliable way that they could fix this and make people happy again. You can take that one to the bank. Unfortunately I don't know if they have the sense to do so because they haven't accepted feedback very well and they haven't kept in contact with the community.
Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
I'm pretty sure that the Inherent Superiority of the Private Sector is an axiom, not an empirical conclusion open to reevaluation in light of new data...
(Plus, even outside of the kool aide drinkers, is someone who would feel rewarded if you gave him a job, rather than a big, cushy, contract going to make a worthwhile campaign donor?)
Not to worry fellas. They're LISTENING to us (and greatly value our input). Timothy PROMISED!
Just like they've been listening to us for months now, as exactly NOTHING has changed with the beta.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
And I'm sure it wasn't Timothy who modded this thread "0 off-topic." No, he's far too busy listening to us and implementing our suggestions to have time to do downmods.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
In a sense, this is "look how incompetent the government is at implementing tech" story, but in another this could be interpreted as an attempt to trivialize what happened with healthcare.gov. "Oh gosh, nothing ever goes right for the government so what happened with healthcare.gov is par for the course (shrug)."
Except the healthcare.gov disaster was LEGISLATIVE, the constant, ongoing, still-unresolved tech catastrophe was only the impact-crater.
The fact that NASA's computer-replacement program was a boondoggle was meaningless, compared to the tech-failure of a program whose use was MANDATED by law.
-Styopa
Audience is the wrong analogy. This is like the bee keeper thinking the bees are his Audience.
Bees make honey. You can set up bee boxes and have bees live in the boxes and make honey that you can harvest. But the bees are free to leave at any time. They only reason they stay is because it is attractive to be there. Try making the bee box unusable and the bees will just go build a beehive elsewhere. Don't believe it? They've been building beehives for a lot longer than bee boxes have been around.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
The only really big problem that I've encountered is that I can't just jump to the comments I posted by going to my comment history. The only link on the comments goes directly to the entire article, not to the specific comment I posted, making it difficult to tell if someone was replied to my post. Perhaps it can be done, but I can't find the functionality anywhere.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
And I'm sure it wasn't Timothy who modded this thread "0 off-topic." No, he's far too busy listening to us and implementing our suggestions to have time to do downmods.
As someone who's been hit by an editor downmod(I suspect a certain slashvertisement poster), 0 is a bit high for that. Getting dropped from a +5 to a -1 without seeing anything in-between is a pretty clear sign. Some people with mod points are tired of beta complaints, and it's not unreasonable to assume that they're starting to act.
I don't think malice is required to explain that moderation.
Though that will only mean something to a few of us, that was the comparison I immediately made, too.
I think NMCI (and possibly this NASA system) works just fine if you're a headquarters admin/management type and all you need is email/web apps/power point. If you actually have to produce something and require more than those tools, you're going to have a bad time.
Is it weird in here, or is it just me?
Right now we have to wait a bit and see if they actually start fixing stuff, which Timothy just tried to convince us about. They cannot add the new code overnight.
They don't need to add any new code, they just need to delete all the Beta code.
I think you may be one of the few people getting "news" from slashdot. The rest of us come here *specifically* for the commentary, and yes, that makes us NOT an audience but a community. The "news" submissions are nothing more than a vehicle for things to discuss and that's how it has always been.
To be honest I'm surprised someone with a 6-digit UID such as yourself wouldn't have realized this by now.
I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable
Maybe Dice can hire HP Enterprise to update/cleanup/rewrite the Beta ? Guarantueed we can enjoy the classic another 5 years or so ...
Yes... the beta sucks
I work as a consultant in both the public and private sector, so my perspective on this is a bit different. I've worked for the big firms, but now work through a network of other boutique consulting firms to deliver larger projects. Each of your points has a counter argument and counter evidence. I will say that I don't think anyone gets their money's worth from the big firms. Their rates are too high and while they may have access to the right expertise, after the first week of the engagement the specialists are all gone and the client left with the B team. I've been approached many times to subcontract under one of the big firms and I've so far turned them down because they are so arrogant. They usually don't want to actually use my specific industry expertise, they just want my CV to bolster their bid. They trust their endless pool of resources and standardized methodologies to make up for their lack of expertise.
I'd also like to point out that the failure rate of IT projects in general is very high (close to 70%) with little to no difference between in house and out sourced projects. I would add that a sizable portion of my work is refocusing (or replacing / undoing) projects that were started in house and went off the rails. I also know the flip side is also true - failing external projects are brought in house just as often.
There are several good (and some bad) reasons to bring in consultants.;
When you don't have the skills in house, or when your in house skills are fully utilized on other projects it makes sense to hire contractors. Contrary to popular belief, most IT staff do not spend most of their day playing Minecraft or streaming episodes of The Big Bang Theory at work. Most IT staff I'm familiar with work 50 - 60 hours per week and have weeks of backloged operations support and in house projects. Expecting them to add yet another major project off the side of their desk is a strategy for failure. Contractors (can) bring focus. I usually only work on 1 or at most 2 major project at a time.
Hiring staff for projects is not easy and not always the best idea. When you hire someone you invest in recruiting, training, benefits, pension, etc. because you expect that person to be with you, and productive for at least 3 - 5 years. If you hire people just for a project, at the end of the project you can end up with staff who are either under utilized or under motivated because their skills and/or ambitions are no longer what you need. Alternatively, you could end up creating projects with shaky business cases just because you have some in house resources. As a consultant, while I love to be re-engaged for subsequent work, I have no expectation of such. My best marketing is to get the job done. I usually include a post implementation review 2 - 3 months after the project. For me, this is a sales opportunity, but it is also an opportunity for the client to evaluate and learn from the implementation. This is something that doesn't always happen with in house projects.
When people say contractors get paid more than in house staff they are not seeing the whole picture. The things I mentioned above - recruiting costs, training costs, benefits, pensions, health insurance, vacations, paid breaks, statutory holidays, office space, admin support and HR support are all costs for internal staff that are either paid by or not applicable to contractors. Additionally, I carry errors and omissions and liability insurance - where the client company is entirely on the hook for the errors, omissions and liability risk of its employees. Finally, contractors can only bill hours actually worked on the project (or in some cases, a fixed price) where staff are paid regardless of utilization. When you factor all of those things in, experienced staff with equivalent expertise are often paid/cost more than contractors.
The biggest problem with outsourced projects is often in procurement. I haven't seen very many good procurement departments. They are often eith
If you aren't part of the solution, then there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
"There are four ways in which you can spend money. You can spend your own money on yourself. When you do that, why then you really watch out what you’re doing, and you try to get the most for your money. Then you can spend your own money on somebody else. For example, I buy a birthday present for someone. Well, then I’m not so careful about the content of the present, but I’m very careful about the cost. Then, I can spend somebody else’s money on myself. And if I spend somebody else’s money on myself, then I’m sure going to have a good lunch! Finally, I can spend somebody else’s money on somebody else. And if I spend somebody else’s money on somebody else, I’m not concerned about how much it is, and I’m not concerned about what I get. And that’s government. And that’s close to 40% of our national income."
I think this beta has done some good things though.
It has brought together all ranks of Slashdot into a common cause. Libertarians are holding hands with Greens, web devs are joining with hardware hackers, emacs users and vi users are hugging, bitcoin and dogecoin users are singing in unison, the racist guy and the goatse guy are friending each other. All of our mutual dislike of each other has been put aside in united solidarity against BETA.