future_doc Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 The highly paid President of eHealth gave out millions of "consultant" jobs without public tenders, thereby leaving the impression (and distinct possibility) of patronage appointments to friends whether qualified or not. There will be an audit at the end of the year. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Assuming much of this money has been squandered, how it could have been better used for patients or expanding even more the no. of available places for med students, thereby increasing the availability of physicians. Sarah Kramer, President, earning a salary of $338,000/yr and awared a bonus of $114,000 after a few short months, has been interviewed at noon May 29th on CBC. She claims ehealth did nothing wrong in giving non tender contracts, that they want to get things on stream quickly even though there is a deadline of 2015, and the sole source contract given were due to urgency, a rush of the benefit of all stakeholders. She claims that the $5M in untendered contracts are exceptions that fall under the rules and urgency was the reason for these contracts. She says there is open procurement for the large majority of what they are doing, that transparency and public accountability is essential to maintain public trust. She claims ehealth is an acquisition, new company and merger all happening at the same time and that she put a strategy in place in record time. Altho government procurement policy alows non competitive contracts to be awared when an unforeseeable emergency esists, she claims she was looking for meaningful solutions soon, there is a new Board, the old management style is out and she claims that there was the need to spend money appropriately for the needs of patients. An example given was moving quickly with electronic prescribing now that can cut down the number of deaths due to problems existing with prescriptions, so this is of grat value. Kramer claims money is well spent, what she needed to get done was done on time and on budget, that there is room for improvement, that she looks forward to the commments of the Auditor General, that there is probably room for improvement and is in discussions with the Auditor General how to do a better job, not every 'i' was dotted or 't' was crossed, and she is aware of the obligations on disclosure and non competitve bidding. She justifies her bonus as a Board decision that was the result of negotiations in hiring her on short notice. She claims that she is accomplishing a turnaround very quickly and that people in leadership in healthcare are very pleased. And the beat goes on....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted May 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 Thread has been updated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smile Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 Speculatory at best... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smile Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 She has been fired. Good riddance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMmd Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 who gave her the bonus??? i mean why dont they fire the person giving out bonus to stupid ppl instead... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEastMountGuy Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 Fired with a huge severance package as well I might add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted June 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 who gave her the bonus??? i mean why dont they fire the person giving out bonus to stupid ppl instead... I believe the bonus issue was a consideration in the firing, I did not listen intently enough on CBC when the news came out. Apparently, her previous employer came out and said at his firm, her bonus was $40,000. So, I guess, she was given a bonus to compensate her for what she would be losing. But, she would be losing just $40,000 and not over $100,000 - so somethig may not have been entirely kosher in regard to how her bonus figure at eHealth was determined in the first place. Smoke and mirrors is not just for magicians! So, yes why don't they fire the person who authorized the bonus and the person who entrusted that person to make that decision. There is so much incompetence, passing the buck, it does not end. Who are the watchers, how are the picked, who picks the pickers who hire the watchers who don;t do their job? Everybody rises to their level of incompetence, and so we have incompetents responsible for the public purpose. Nobody cares, except investigative reporters. The fortune paid out in Lottery payments to lottery vendors who stole from their clients their tickets, etc. and Lottery Ontario allowed scandalous activivties for a long time, presumably we will learn more after the fact when then next scandal erupts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted June 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 Fired with a huge severance package as well I might add. There is a supposed reason why she was entitled to a payment equivalent to 10 mo. pay. We just don;t the reason, nor does the person who made the deicison, and on what authority? And who hired this guy, and who hired the guy who hired the guy, etc.? It never ends. For those of us to don't make it to medicien, perhaps we can go into govt service and obtain positions of authority so that honesty and competence will be the rule of the day. We could accomplish much for medicine if we were to do this, leaving more funds available for worthy medical purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted June 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 UPDATE: As of 6 PM, June 9th: Raitt is accused of shameful and disgraceful behaviour, referring to cancer as sexy. People are demanding her resignation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMmd Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 UPDATE: As of 6 PM, June 9th:Raitt is accused of shameful and disgraceful behaviour, referring to cancer as sexy. People are demanding her resignation. haha i watched the parliament debate today on tv and couldn't understand why they were all saying "sexy" non stop, but now i know... yeah the cons are gone. good riddance. oh yeah and she talked about that too.. she said she gave her resignation to Harper but he rejected it. haaaa so maybe Harpeux should resign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted June 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 who gave her the bonus??? i mean why dont they fire the person giving out bonus to stupid ppl instead... (10 characters) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted June 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 This is Contracts 101 For Dummies. They also came ot the brilliant decision that consultants should no longer be able to bill them for food they eat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 This is Contracts 101 For Dummies. They also came ot the brilliant decision that consultants should no longer be able to bill them for food they eat. I was curious about that - when I go on a business trip the food I buy is expensed, even when I am a consultant for another company. Granted I don't get payed 2500 a day mind you, but I don't think this is particularly unusual business practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted June 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 I was curious about that - when I go on a business trip the food I buy is expensed, even when I am a consultant for another company. Granted I don't get payed 2500 a day mind you, but I don't think this is particularly unusual business practice. eHealth have had to deal with significant "integrity" and "abuse" issues coming all the way to the top. We do not know, therefore, if Consultants were charging for food when not on a business trip, but perhaps being in their home town. We do know already they charged and were reimbursed for newspapers they read! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ploughboy Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 I was curious about that - when I go on a business trip the food I buy is expensed, even when I am a consultant for another company. Granted I don't get payed 2500 a day mind you, but I don't think this is particularly unusual business practice. Having travelled for business, I concur. The ironic thing is, the consultant who billed for the Timmies Tea probably thought (s)he was providing good value-for-money by only buying a cup of tea, instead of spending his/her entire per-diem. Law of unintended consequences, and all that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ploughboy Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 I regularly disagree with what Andre Picard writes, but I think he's hit the nail on the head this time, especially these three paragraphs: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/the-real-ehealth-ontario-scandal-isnt-over-choco-bites/article1195611/ The true scandal in Ontario is the utter failure of the Ministry of Health to create electronic health records, which will ultimately lead to better and more efficient patient care. Alberta has done it. Nova Scotia has done it (under the skilled guidance of Ms. Kramer, by the way), and most other provinces are well on their way. The reality is the best young talent in the health sector has been drawn to consulting agencies. The Courtyard Group, the consultancy at the centre of the eHealth Ontario “scandal,” is a prime example. By all accounts, it does great work. Yes, the consultants are paid well for it, but governments sign these contracts knowing full well the costs. Instead of the faux outrage about consulting fees, we should be asking ourselves why the young hotshots at Courtyard, with their master's degrees in public-health administration and PhDs in computer science, are not drawn to public service. I dunno. Somewhere along the way "civil servant" became a pejorative, and I don't think that it should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 eHealth has just enaged a new interim President to remain in office until year end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 His name is Robert Devitt, president and CEO of Toronto East General Hospital. He is the third CEO in just 3 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted August 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 EHealth Ontario awarded $11 million more in untendered contracts than previously revealed. Read the article, it is an eye opener. It is found at: http//:http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/673928 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 See http://www.auditor/on.ca/en/reports_en/ehealth_en.pdf Special Report October 2009 – Ontario’s Electronic Health Records Initiative By Office of the Auditor General of Ontario Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.