Q&A
Discussion on contract termination and vendor performance improvement
1:32:20
·
65 sec
Council Member Brewer inquires about a previously mentioned bus contract termination for poor performance. Glenn Risbrook explains that instead of termination, they resized the vendor's operation, which led to improved performance. This approach of pressuring vendors with the possibility of contract loss proved effective in enhancing service quality.
- The DOE chose to rightsize a problematic vendor rather than terminate their contract
- Reducing the vendor's routes at the beginning of the year prevented service issues
- The pressure of potential contract loss motivated the vendor to improve performance
Gale A. Brewer
1:32:20
First of all, I know how hard a job you have.
1:32:23
And a couple of years ago, we did have a hearing on this same topic and they off oversight in investigations.
1:32:28
And I think at that point, you mentioned that there were at least one bus contract that was being terminated for poor performance.
1:32:37
I know you couldn't mention it then.
1:32:39
I didn't know if it was terminated and what you learned from it.
1:32:44
I know you've talked about the contracts, but is that true?
Glenn Risbrook
1:32:47
Yes.
1:32:47
I remember that in a testimony that we talked about, 11 vendor that we were having problems with and that we were starting the process of of of removing the contract, but what had happened subsequent to that.
1:32:59
We wound up rightsizing that vendor meaning that we removed routes from them at the beginning of the year.
1:33:05
So therefore, they wouldn't run into that same issue, not servicing routes.
1:33:09
And since we re since we resize that bus company, they've been a better performing vendor.
1:33:15
So I think the pressure that we put on them with the possibility of them losing a contract actually serve the purpose.
1:33:22
So right now, we don't have any vendors that are in that circumstance and that worked.
Gale A. Brewer
1:33:25
Alright.
