Guaranteed some asshole is making a back-end buck off of deals like this. There are indeed stupid people in this world but the sharks are always there to make themselves a buck.

Technology assessment seems to be totally beyond the ken of the typical 'manager' or political appointee in charge of such projects. I'll use an example from my home state (that I was involved in - I work in a tech/networking field).

We had a need due to some legislation passed to enable all high schools to offer at least 4 AP classes to each student. The way AP teacher certification works (a single week long training at a college campus - only one!) made that a physical impossibility for nearly 1500 schools to have enough on campus teachers trained to do that. So the decision to go videoconferencing (which was used throughout the higher ed and a number of education regional centers, of which mine was one), but to move from the dedicated H.320 to IP based H.323 systems. I had ensured that our systems would be able to switch over (indeed, we used H.323 for ad hoc/point-to-point connections).

Funding was acquired for this project and a request for proposal was sent out to a number of 'vendors' (which is a dirty word in *my* lexicon, which will become apparently shortly). I had learned to install my own equipment at the sites in order to maximize the amount of money we had (I had some years earlier received a grant to install 6 videoconference room systems in our area, and managed by doing our own installs (let me tell you, those 32" cathode televisions are *heavy*) stretched to 11 schools).

The RFP, which was created by well meaning folks in the dept. of education who had no clue, required installation. Now, my tech and I had developed the routine of installation down to a science: with the network drop in place, we could arrive at the school and have everything installed and functioning within 2 1/2 hours. These were room systems with 4 monitors, two cameras (teacher & student), document camera, audio system, a device to connect a PC into the video codec, and a whiteboard attachment. We installed 23 of these in rural schools in the early 2000s (our project began in the 90s). These systems connect their components using svideo/composite and Cat5 connections, so anyone who can put together a dvd + TV can set up the hardware. This plays into the later narrative...

Well, the statewide project original series of bids came to naught. Only 3 vendors even managed to produce "systems" which met the basic room system requirements, and all of them were over cost; i.e., the acceptable amount per classroom. This was resubmitted and finally a vendor (telco) came into range. BTW, this was for several hundred systems, and turned out to be roughly $27,000 per room.

I started to wonder about the cost; the typical room (of which I described above) cost just over $17,000 per room, and I began to fret over what I had left out. At the same time, our state information systems department decided to outsource scheduling and 'maintenance' (ha!) to a telco (grrrrr). I argued against the idea (this cost a LOT of money, and we had literally no say in control of our system). But 'privatization' held sway (grrrr). Turns out that the vendor charged an extra $9,000+ per system to install them, and hired 'installation crews' off the street to do this. Remember when I said my tech and I had the installation down to a set piece earlier? I got to spend nearly 2 years traveling about helping folks with mysterious ailments in their systems that were results of 'expert' installations. Turns out my rooms were just fine -- and we've suffered less problems (except for old systems dying of lightning strikes and general aging - some date from 2001).

So, I can see part of the issue here -- the lack of expertise at the decision making level, who probably asked the vendor for advice (as usually happens). Of course, just like a used car salesman at Leisure Suit Larry's Car emporium , the vendor took advantage of public trust in order to maximize profit for the Corporation, and damn the taxpayers who bear the expense. I'll wager that the decision makers never asked their IT folks for their knowledge & experience. Sigh.

probably bc i install data, video, and phone services residentially. but also bc a few years back i did do some work for the county schools, fire departments, and police stations installing a parallel system of video conferencing, sort of like a closed circuit tv w special channels for certain meetings. of course, i think i'm really good at what i do, and my work was flawless. that said, what i was putting in, at extreme cost, couldve been done using an IP based system similar to the one you describe. also, i had to have at least 1 county inspector follow me around *at all times*. which was useful for getting into some doors and little else, they just sat around all day watching me work, day after day. i was agast at the inefficiency at times.

Follow the money.

Bake

this is just so they can turn around and talk about inefficiencies in govt, all when it was their fault. but subtlety escapes most West Virginians, and this will be a huge local talking point.

they cost $377 each in quantities of ONE


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833124154&nm_mc=KNC-GoogleAdwords&cm_mmc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-_-pla-_-NA-_-NA


yep, somebody mage a HUGE comission.

for $29 ???

The sort of gross waste (and likely corruption/kick back) really pisses me off.

I bet if anybody investigated they'd find that the these $22K routers and the excessive TSA equipment was bought from some relative of an agency manager. Government officials are so corrupt these days and in bed with corporations. It makes me sick.

What a fucking incompetent idiot.

that Verizon one. Weren't they the same company that is anti union and whos' employees went on strike recently?

Amazing how they could tap into government money so quickly.