Recovery.gov redesign costs public $9.5 mil.
Naomi Parikh
Issue date: 7/31/09 Section: News
The Obama administration could spend up to $18 million to redesign and maintain Recovery.gov, the government Web site dedicated to transparency on spending, according to a General Services Administration press release.
The administration will pay Smartronix, Inc. $9.5 million to redesign Recovery.gov through January and may increase the payment up to $18 million over the next five years.
Smartronix released a statement saying the company would offer "24x7 operation and maintenance" after redesigning the Web site.
Kenneth Blackney, the associate vice president for Core Technology Infrastructure for Drexel University's Information Resources and Technology, said $18 million "might be reasonable" since the contract includes all-new infrastructure, including Web servers, storage and firewalls.
However, Cheau-Erl Lam, second vice chair of the Drexel College Republicans, said redesigning a Web site is not worth $18 million and the government should spend carefully.
"Given the deficit, the government should try to spend money more cautiously," Lam said. "Posting up the amounts the government is spending to show who can be held accountable is a good idea. Spending $18 million for a private sector to do this, however, is not."
Lam also said it is not clear how the initial payment of $9.5 million will be spent, and the Web site is currently simple enough to use as is.
"The layout of the Web site is well designed, and the interactive interface is easy to use," Lam said. "If the goal of the Web site is to show the public where their money is going, I think the Web site should include, or at least ask the government to release, what the money is being spent on, not just who it's going to."
But Blackney said running a Web site is very different from building one, and both have specific tasks that could increase the cost.
"[Building a site] includes defining specifications, building and testing an information architecture, designing and testing a graphical look and user experience, writing both the back-end and front-end programs and databases," Blackney said. "[Running a site] includes running the database and Web servers, providing Internet connectivity and securing the application against hackers trying to break into the site."
Blackney added that the project requires more than "drawing a pretty picture and wrapping HTML around it."
Giancarlo Stefanoni, president of the Drexel Democrats, said the Web site is the best way to display the allocation and spending of the money from the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
"I think the more it can be redesigned better, made more interactive and better organized, would allow people to better understand how the stimulus is working," Stefanoni said. "Additionally, creating a functional Web site is keeping with President Obama's vow to engaging people and having a transparent administration."
The GSA announced the deal with Smartronix July 8.
The administration will pay Smartronix, Inc. $9.5 million to redesign Recovery.gov through January and may increase the payment up to $18 million over the next five years.
Smartronix released a statement saying the company would offer "24x7 operation and maintenance" after redesigning the Web site.
Kenneth Blackney, the associate vice president for Core Technology Infrastructure for Drexel University's Information Resources and Technology, said $18 million "might be reasonable" since the contract includes all-new infrastructure, including Web servers, storage and firewalls.
However, Cheau-Erl Lam, second vice chair of the Drexel College Republicans, said redesigning a Web site is not worth $18 million and the government should spend carefully.
"Given the deficit, the government should try to spend money more cautiously," Lam said. "Posting up the amounts the government is spending to show who can be held accountable is a good idea. Spending $18 million for a private sector to do this, however, is not."
Lam also said it is not clear how the initial payment of $9.5 million will be spent, and the Web site is currently simple enough to use as is.
"The layout of the Web site is well designed, and the interactive interface is easy to use," Lam said. "If the goal of the Web site is to show the public where their money is going, I think the Web site should include, or at least ask the government to release, what the money is being spent on, not just who it's going to."
But Blackney said running a Web site is very different from building one, and both have specific tasks that could increase the cost.
"[Building a site] includes defining specifications, building and testing an information architecture, designing and testing a graphical look and user experience, writing both the back-end and front-end programs and databases," Blackney said. "[Running a site] includes running the database and Web servers, providing Internet connectivity and securing the application against hackers trying to break into the site."
Blackney added that the project requires more than "drawing a pretty picture and wrapping HTML around it."
Giancarlo Stefanoni, president of the Drexel Democrats, said the Web site is the best way to display the allocation and spending of the money from the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
"I think the more it can be redesigned better, made more interactive and better organized, would allow people to better understand how the stimulus is working," Stefanoni said. "Additionally, creating a functional Web site is keeping with President Obama's vow to engaging people and having a transparent administration."
The GSA announced the deal with Smartronix July 8.
is a member of the 
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Luis
posted 7/31/09 @ 12:05 PM EST
$9.5 million to design and run a web site? I'm in the wrong business. Recovery.org has a very good web site for tracking stimulus spending. Although not all encompassing, I'll bet they aren't spending $9. (Continued…)
Chris Love
posted 9/30/09 @ 12:00 PM EST
As a web developer I know this is way out of line, even for a government contract. After a quick run through the site I think $500k for dev and around $100k-200k a year for servers and bandwidth. (Continued…)
Post a Comment