Check out these articles found on the web, also!
New and old articles.....you might learn something you didn't already know.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Privitization/Texas_Inc.html
Texas, Inc.
Taking privatization to extremes, a new law ends the public sector as we knew it
by Kim Phillips-Fein
The Nation magazine, January 5, 2004
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-callcenters_10tex.ART.State.Edition1.1872d64c.html
Quick fix to call center woes urged
08:17 AM CDT on Wednesday, May 10, 2006
By ROBERT T. GARRETT / The Dallas Morning News
http://rhetoricrhythm.blogspot.com/2006/05/privatization-debacle.html
Rhetoric & Rhythm
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
Privatization debacle
Houston Chronicle: Privatization Role Reveals Ethics Gap in State Law
Submitted by Fred on Tue, 01/04/2005 - 2:03pm.
Human services deputy stood to gain from changes
By R.G. RATCLIFFE
http://www.washingtontechnology.com/news/20_21/outsourcing/27267-1.html
10/24/05;
Vol. 20 No. 21
Texas auditor blasts HR project
By ETHAN BUTTERFIELD
Thursday, May 18, 2006
ACCENTURE: A Short History
The Texas Health and Human Services Commission recently signed a contract with Accenture, a Bermuda-based company, to operate eligibility call centers. HHSC hopes Accenture’s call centers will replace local health and human services offices, where people needing food stamps, Medicaid, and other services now go to get help.
Here’s a short history of Accenture, which touts itself as a high performance company, whose employees adhere to the highest ethical standards.
The Beginning
Accenture started out as Andersen Consulting, a division of Arthur Andersen, a giant accounting firm, later implicated in the Enron scandal.
During the 1980s, the partners at Andersen Consulting and Arthur Andersen feuded over sharing profits. In 1989, Andersen Consulting broke away. It changed its name to Accenture in 2001 before the Enron scandal broke. When Accenture changed its name it also incorporated and established its headquarters in Bermuda.
Good Enough for Gov’t Work
Accenture has been aggressive in seeking government contracts, especially the outsourcing of social services. Here are examples of its high performance work.1991 Accenture, then known as Arthur Andersen, signed a contract with the TX Attorney General to design a child support computer system. Six years and two missed deadlines later, the cost of the project had ballooned to more than $100 million.
When the new system came online, child support productivity plummeted and customer complaints skyrocketed.
Service was so bad that the legislature considered moving the program out of the AG’s office. It took four years of work primarily done by state employees to fix the system, restore productivity, and reduce customer complaints.
Ontario
Accenture contracted with the Canadian province of Ontario to redesign its welfare system. The Toronto Star called this business transformation project “the mother of all sweetheart deals” (November 8, 1998).
The original deal would have allowed Andersen to make $180 million. By 2002, the cost of project had swelled to $246 million. The provincial auditor criticized Accenture because its “billing rates were substantially higher than the corresponding amounts charged by the (Ontario) Ministry (of Community, Family and Children’s Services)” (Auditor’s Report: Ontario Works, 2002).
In 2004, Ontario decided to overhaul Accenture’s work to restore integrity to its welfare system. As part of this overhaul, Ontario closed its Accenture-designed call centers because they were “frustrating for applicants.”
Is this stuff legal?
In 2001, Ohio fired Accenture from its Ohio Works project. Accenture designed Ohio Works, a computer system to help people find jobs.
But Ohio Works didn’t work. In fact, some dubbed it Ohio Doesn’t Work because it was overpriced and difficult to use (Cleveland Plain Dealer, December 12, 2001). Arnold Tompkins the former head of the agency that contracted with Accenture for Ohio Works pleaded guilty to violating the state’s revolving door law. After pushing through the $60 million, Ohio Works contract without competitive bidding, Tompkins went to work for Accenture as a $10,000 a month consultant (Columbus Dispatch, November 2, 2001).
In 2005, the Pentagon launched an investigation into 15 Air Force contracts tied to Darleen Druyun, a former procurement official convicted of conflict of interest charges. One of the contracts under investigation, an information resource system worth $82.5 million, is with Accenture. (Dow Jones Newswire, July 12, 2005).
Taxes? We don’t pay no stinkin’ taxes!
In 2004, Accenture landed a $10 billion contract with the US Department of Homeland Security to design a border security system. But the US House Appropriations Committee blocked the contract because Accenture had incorporated in Bermuda to avoid paying US taxes.
Accenture protested. It stated that it “has never been a U.S.-based or U.S.-operated organization” and did not base itself in Bermuda to avoid paying taxes (Forbes.com June 10, 2004).
After intense lobbying, Congress bought Accenture’s “we’re not tax dodgers” argument and allowed the contract to stand. But it subsequently passed a law that took away the tax breaks enjoyed by offshore companies. Accenture, however, convinced Congress to grandfather in its tax breaks.
In 2005, IRS considered an interpretation of the law that threatened Accenture’s offshore tax breaks. Accenture’s lobbyists asked Congress to pass technical amendments to shield Accenture. But this time, Congress balked. “Clearly, this is not considered fair . . . in a time of war for people to be looking to avoid taxes,” said Rep. Charles Rangel (The Asian Wall Street Journal, July 15, 2005).
In 2005, The US General Accounting Office identified Accenture as one of the four largest federal contractors that incorporated offshore in tax havens as a way of lowering their corporate tax liability (Washington Technology, Feb 26, 2005).
Note from Blogger: This information obtained from TSEU website:
http://www.cwa-tseu.org/
Thank you to TSEU for all of your research!
Here’s a short history of Accenture, which touts itself as a high performance company, whose employees adhere to the highest ethical standards.
The Beginning
Accenture started out as Andersen Consulting, a division of Arthur Andersen, a giant accounting firm, later implicated in the Enron scandal.
During the 1980s, the partners at Andersen Consulting and Arthur Andersen feuded over sharing profits. In 1989, Andersen Consulting broke away. It changed its name to Accenture in 2001 before the Enron scandal broke. When Accenture changed its name it also incorporated and established its headquarters in Bermuda.
Good Enough for Gov’t Work
Accenture has been aggressive in seeking government contracts, especially the outsourcing of social services. Here are examples of its high performance work.1991 Accenture, then known as Arthur Andersen, signed a contract with the TX Attorney General to design a child support computer system. Six years and two missed deadlines later, the cost of the project had ballooned to more than $100 million.
When the new system came online, child support productivity plummeted and customer complaints skyrocketed.
Service was so bad that the legislature considered moving the program out of the AG’s office. It took four years of work primarily done by state employees to fix the system, restore productivity, and reduce customer complaints.
- 1996 Accenture billed Nebraska $24 million more than its original proposal to build a unified welfare computer system. The state treasurer called it the most wasteful project he ever heard of and said that paying Accenture was like “pouring money down a deep dark hole” (Dallas Morning News, May 17, 1997).
- 1998 New Brunswick, Canada canceled a welfare-redesign contract with Accenture after the original project cost mushroomed from $60 million (Canadian) to $144 million.
- 2003 The New York state comptroller described child welfare system designed by Accenture as “a high-cost, incomplete system that did not meet the needs of [its] users” (Correspondence from the New York State Comptroller to John A. Johnson, New York Office of Children & Family Services, Sept 18, 2003).
- 2004 Florida canceled three information technology contracts with Accenture worth more than $250 million. One of the contracts was for help desk services that the state’s chief information officer said “weren’t addressing the needs of the various agencies the way they should have been” (Tallahassee Democrat, Aug 20, 2004).
Ontario
Accenture contracted with the Canadian province of Ontario to redesign its welfare system. The Toronto Star called this business transformation project “the mother of all sweetheart deals” (November 8, 1998).
The original deal would have allowed Andersen to make $180 million. By 2002, the cost of project had swelled to $246 million. The provincial auditor criticized Accenture because its “billing rates were substantially higher than the corresponding amounts charged by the (Ontario) Ministry (of Community, Family and Children’s Services)” (Auditor’s Report: Ontario Works, 2002).
In 2004, Ontario decided to overhaul Accenture’s work to restore integrity to its welfare system. As part of this overhaul, Ontario closed its Accenture-designed call centers because they were “frustrating for applicants.”
Is this stuff legal?
In 2001, Ohio fired Accenture from its Ohio Works project. Accenture designed Ohio Works, a computer system to help people find jobs.
But Ohio Works didn’t work. In fact, some dubbed it Ohio Doesn’t Work because it was overpriced and difficult to use (Cleveland Plain Dealer, December 12, 2001). Arnold Tompkins the former head of the agency that contracted with Accenture for Ohio Works pleaded guilty to violating the state’s revolving door law. After pushing through the $60 million, Ohio Works contract without competitive bidding, Tompkins went to work for Accenture as a $10,000 a month consultant (Columbus Dispatch, November 2, 2001).
In 2005, the Pentagon launched an investigation into 15 Air Force contracts tied to Darleen Druyun, a former procurement official convicted of conflict of interest charges. One of the contracts under investigation, an information resource system worth $82.5 million, is with Accenture. (Dow Jones Newswire, July 12, 2005).
Taxes? We don’t pay no stinkin’ taxes!
In 2004, Accenture landed a $10 billion contract with the US Department of Homeland Security to design a border security system. But the US House Appropriations Committee blocked the contract because Accenture had incorporated in Bermuda to avoid paying US taxes.
Accenture protested. It stated that it “has never been a U.S.-based or U.S.-operated organization” and did not base itself in Bermuda to avoid paying taxes (Forbes.com June 10, 2004).
After intense lobbying, Congress bought Accenture’s “we’re not tax dodgers” argument and allowed the contract to stand. But it subsequently passed a law that took away the tax breaks enjoyed by offshore companies. Accenture, however, convinced Congress to grandfather in its tax breaks.
In 2005, IRS considered an interpretation of the law that threatened Accenture’s offshore tax breaks. Accenture’s lobbyists asked Congress to pass technical amendments to shield Accenture. But this time, Congress balked. “Clearly, this is not considered fair . . . in a time of war for people to be looking to avoid taxes,” said Rep. Charles Rangel (The Asian Wall Street Journal, July 15, 2005).
In 2005, The US General Accounting Office identified Accenture as one of the four largest federal contractors that incorporated offshore in tax havens as a way of lowering their corporate tax liability (Washington Technology, Feb 26, 2005).
Note from Blogger: This information obtained from TSEU website:
http://www.cwa-tseu.org/
Thank you to TSEU for all of your research!
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Opinion: Social Services Privatization Merits Scrutiny by Strayhorn
Staff Editorial
Houston Chronicle
5/14/2006
With its $899 million plan to outsource the screening and certification of welfare and child insurance applicants off to a troubled start, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission needs all the help it can get sorting out the problem.
State Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, an independent candidate for governor, has missed few opportunities to bash incumbent Gov. Rick Perry, who appoints the board members of the HHSC. Her decision to audit the HHSC contract with Accenture might have a political motive, but it is justified by the pressing need to reverse the erosion of families access to vital assistance. After inviting state lawmakers to request an audit of Accenture's performance as manager for a consortium, the Texas Access Alliance, Strayhorn quickly acted on three such appeals. According to the comptroller, "the Accenture contract appears to be the perfect storm of wasted tax dollars, reduced access to services for our most vulnerable Texans and profiteering at the expense of Texas taxpayers."
Since Accenture began operating four call systems and a Web site to screen applicants for the child insurance program, nearly 30,000 children have lost certification. Between November and February, nearly 80,000 individuals were dropped from Medicaid rolls. Under the new system, processing of applications has been delayed and phone lines to call centers clogged. After announcing plans to replace state workers with private personnel, Health and Human Services officials have had to reverse course and give bonuses to keep state employees on the job.
In requesting the audit, three state lawmakers asked Strayhorn to look into hidden costs in the Accenture deal to see if legislators were given an accurate picture of the contract's projected financial benefits.
It's unfortunate that despite warnings from employee union representatives and journalists that the privatized system of call centers might make it more difficult for Texans to qualify for Medicaid and CHIP, Health and Human Services proceeded to implement a contract that has done exactly that.
If successful, the comptroller's audit will answer questions about how the state got into this mess and how it can get out of it. Instead of belittling her motives, the governor should join in the effort to prevent further harm to the neediest Texans.
Houston Chronicle
5/14/2006
With its $899 million plan to outsource the screening and certification of welfare and child insurance applicants off to a troubled start, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission needs all the help it can get sorting out the problem.
State Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, an independent candidate for governor, has missed few opportunities to bash incumbent Gov. Rick Perry, who appoints the board members of the HHSC. Her decision to audit the HHSC contract with Accenture might have a political motive, but it is justified by the pressing need to reverse the erosion of families access to vital assistance. After inviting state lawmakers to request an audit of Accenture's performance as manager for a consortium, the Texas Access Alliance, Strayhorn quickly acted on three such appeals. According to the comptroller, "the Accenture contract appears to be the perfect storm of wasted tax dollars, reduced access to services for our most vulnerable Texans and profiteering at the expense of Texas taxpayers."
Since Accenture began operating four call systems and a Web site to screen applicants for the child insurance program, nearly 30,000 children have lost certification. Between November and February, nearly 80,000 individuals were dropped from Medicaid rolls. Under the new system, processing of applications has been delayed and phone lines to call centers clogged. After announcing plans to replace state workers with private personnel, Health and Human Services officials have had to reverse course and give bonuses to keep state employees on the job.
In requesting the audit, three state lawmakers asked Strayhorn to look into hidden costs in the Accenture deal to see if legislators were given an accurate picture of the contract's projected financial benefits.
It's unfortunate that despite warnings from employee union representatives and journalists that the privatized system of call centers might make it more difficult for Texans to qualify for Medicaid and CHIP, Health and Human Services proceeded to implement a contract that has done exactly that.
If successful, the comptroller's audit will answer questions about how the state got into this mess and how it can get out of it. Instead of belittling her motives, the governor should join in the effort to prevent further harm to the neediest Texans.
Opinion: Texas's Privatization Disaster
John Young
Waco Tribune-Herald
5/14/2006
AUSTIN - It's one of Texas' biggest stories in years. Too bad few Texans know about it.
It's the great Texas Push-Button Bureaucracy-Eliminating Paper-Pusher Massacre (TPBBEPPM). I made that name up but not the debacle that state policymakers now face. It's a mess they're hoping will slide right past your nose.
It came with an understated announcement last week: that 1,000 employees that the Texas Commission on Health and Human Services said it wouldn't need are needed still.
The state was prepared to send the jobs through a corporate shredder. It was part of a massive privatized effort to change how Texas grants food stamps, Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
Texans were told in 2003 that privatization of social services not only would save taxpayers money but serve more needy people.
This came under a massive restructuring of social services and a creature called TIERS - Texas Integrated Eligibility Redesign System.
The concept dates back to the '90s and George Bush's time in the governor's mansion. The objective: to hand state services en masse to private contractors. They would use computers and distant call centers to do the jobs that a community-based state workforce has done in eligibility centers around Texas.
TIERS was derailed for a while in part by the Clinton administration, which was skeptical that it would get the job done. Most of these are federal benefits after all.
In 2003, no such obstacle remained. Bush was where Clinton had been. And the GOP controlled Texas government. Promising big savings to taxpayers, lawmakers went whole hog on privatization.
The big winner from all of this was Bermuda-based Accenture LLP.
Having won contracts elsewhere, including a voter-purge list in Florida used in the 2000 presidential elections, Accenture led a consortium which won an
$899 million contract to replace Texas' system of determining eligibility for state services.
Last week, after massive backlogs and interminable waits for people needing help at pilot sites in Travis and Hays counties, state Health and Human Service Commissioner Albert Hawkins told Accenture to clean up its act.
Meanwhile, affected eligibility centers were returning to pre-Accenture procedures. Under privatization, applications routed through a clearinghouse in Midland were backing things up like hair down a drain.
The state advised 2,000 state eligibility workers that their jobs either were going away or they would need to reapply, in many cases requiring them to relocate.
Now, with all the delays, and with some applications that appeared to vanish after reaching Midland, the state has said "Not so fast" to at least 1,000 of the previously unneeded employees.
We all like to deride paper pushers and bureaucracy, but when it comes to administering state services, paper-pushing is what it takes - or at least sufficient numbers of human hands to keep things straight.
This state realization is too late for many valued workers. Seeing the writing on the wall, and seeing morale and working conditions decline, they quit. One Austin eligibility office lost a third of its employees to resignations.
Now the state is wishing they had stayed.
Expect this to be an issue in the 2006 governor's race. It should be. State comptroller and gubernatorial candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn, announcing an audit of the Accenture contract, called it "the perfect storm of wasted tax dollars, reduced access to services for our most vulnerable Texans and profiteering at the expense of our Texas taxpayers."
Gov. Rick Perry, she said, "implemented this plan in haste. He fired state employees before he knew if the company could handle their jobs."
Whatever you do, Governor, don't ask Donald Rumsfeld for advice.
In some ways, this mess has the look of another rush-into-the-fray, go-with-your-gut, on-the-cheap endeavor: like Operation Iraqi Freedom.
How appealing it is to put our trust in a hunch and think that government can do something massive and fundamental with minimal investment, particularly of the human kind.
Governing - whether administering food stamps in Texas or remaking a war-shattered country - is a lot more complicated than awarding bids.
Waco Tribune-Herald
5/14/2006
AUSTIN - It's one of Texas' biggest stories in years. Too bad few Texans know about it.
It's the great Texas Push-Button Bureaucracy-Eliminating Paper-Pusher Massacre (TPBBEPPM). I made that name up but not the debacle that state policymakers now face. It's a mess they're hoping will slide right past your nose.
It came with an understated announcement last week: that 1,000 employees that the Texas Commission on Health and Human Services said it wouldn't need are needed still.
The state was prepared to send the jobs through a corporate shredder. It was part of a massive privatized effort to change how Texas grants food stamps, Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
Texans were told in 2003 that privatization of social services not only would save taxpayers money but serve more needy people.
This came under a massive restructuring of social services and a creature called TIERS - Texas Integrated Eligibility Redesign System.
The concept dates back to the '90s and George Bush's time in the governor's mansion. The objective: to hand state services en masse to private contractors. They would use computers and distant call centers to do the jobs that a community-based state workforce has done in eligibility centers around Texas.
TIERS was derailed for a while in part by the Clinton administration, which was skeptical that it would get the job done. Most of these are federal benefits after all.
In 2003, no such obstacle remained. Bush was where Clinton had been. And the GOP controlled Texas government. Promising big savings to taxpayers, lawmakers went whole hog on privatization.
The big winner from all of this was Bermuda-based Accenture LLP.
Having won contracts elsewhere, including a voter-purge list in Florida used in the 2000 presidential elections, Accenture led a consortium which won an
$899 million contract to replace Texas' system of determining eligibility for state services.
Last week, after massive backlogs and interminable waits for people needing help at pilot sites in Travis and Hays counties, state Health and Human Service Commissioner Albert Hawkins told Accenture to clean up its act.
Meanwhile, affected eligibility centers were returning to pre-Accenture procedures. Under privatization, applications routed through a clearinghouse in Midland were backing things up like hair down a drain.
The state advised 2,000 state eligibility workers that their jobs either were going away or they would need to reapply, in many cases requiring them to relocate.
Now, with all the delays, and with some applications that appeared to vanish after reaching Midland, the state has said "Not so fast" to at least 1,000 of the previously unneeded employees.
We all like to deride paper pushers and bureaucracy, but when it comes to administering state services, paper-pushing is what it takes - or at least sufficient numbers of human hands to keep things straight.
This state realization is too late for many valued workers. Seeing the writing on the wall, and seeing morale and working conditions decline, they quit. One Austin eligibility office lost a third of its employees to resignations.
Now the state is wishing they had stayed.
Expect this to be an issue in the 2006 governor's race. It should be. State comptroller and gubernatorial candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn, announcing an audit of the Accenture contract, called it "the perfect storm of wasted tax dollars, reduced access to services for our most vulnerable Texans and profiteering at the expense of our Texas taxpayers."
Gov. Rick Perry, she said, "implemented this plan in haste. He fired state employees before he knew if the company could handle their jobs."
Whatever you do, Governor, don't ask Donald Rumsfeld for advice.
In some ways, this mess has the look of another rush-into-the-fray, go-with-your-gut, on-the-cheap endeavor: like Operation Iraqi Freedom.
How appealing it is to put our trust in a hunch and think that government can do something massive and fundamental with minimal investment, particularly of the human kind.
Governing - whether administering food stamps in Texas or remaking a war-shattered country - is a lot more complicated than awarding bids.
ACCESS HR
Anyone know why Access HR was evacuated today? Based on the time they were out, the fire dept being called and the fact that they were let back in shortly after....I'd say it was a bomb threat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
