I hope you all enjoy this test post. Not all post get to be real posts, and sometimes you have to fill space with useless information to make a test post. I will now fill this post with bits of text that don’t seem to go together.
Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom Vet tee just released and we have free shipping available until Tuesday (2 JUN 15).
This paper will cover some of the issues surrounding the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2010 Field Data Collection Automation (FDCA) project, and steps that can be taken to control the risks associated with developing new technology on a national scale. According to the Government Accounting Office (GAO) the cost of collecting the United States Census data has increased by 56% from $8.1 billion in the year 2000 to about $13 billion for the 2010 census (“Decennial Census: Additional Actions Could Improve the Census Bureau’s Ability to Control Costs for the 2020 Census,” 2012) . To help save costs the US Census Bureau contracted with Harris Corporation “to implement handheld devices that make census participation as simple as signing for a package” (Laudon & Laudon, 2009). Numerous issues plagued FDCA, including, but not limited to: inadequate testing procedures, poor communication, lack of executive oversight, and the inexperience of the contractor assigned to implement the mobile technology required. In 2006 when the Harris Corporation was contracted by the US Census Bureau to implement a mobile computing solution, the handheld market was still in its infancy. US Census Bureau did not adequately inform the Harris Corporation of the requirements for the mobile platform, according to this week’s readings, there were 600 initial requirements and the Census Bureau added 814 more. Most if not all of the requirements for the mobile computing platform should have been laid out at the beginning of the program. In this way, the contractor would have adequate information to procure the necessary technology.
To implement a successful mobile platform for the Census Bureau to use the FDCA project should have been assigned an oversight person or committee. By having an executive level oversight issues with the project could have been answered in a timelier manner, thereby alleviating cost overruns. Another spot that could have been improved to help alleviate issues before they arise would have been a detailed Request for Proposal (RFP) from the US Census Bureau two available and reliable US government contractors.