patio11

@[email protected]
0 Followers
0 Following
3 Posts
Howdy. I'm Patrick. I work for the Internet. Previously: Stripe, Starfighter, Appointment Reminder, Bingo Card Creator.

site: https://www.kalzumeus.com
financial infrastructure writing: https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com
podcast: https://www.complexsystemspodcast.com

My best email is patrick@ the top domain. Open invitation: if you're reading this, I'm happy to receive email about any software/startup/etc topic from you at any time. I generally reply to about 60% of unsolicited email from HNers, and if I don't reply to you, it is only because I got busy, not because of anything you said.

I write a lot. What I write here is unless otherwise stated in my personal capacity, and opinions expressed may not be shared by employers, clients, friends, etc.
This account is a replica from Hacker News. Its author can't see your replies. If you find this service useful, please consider supporting us via our Patreon.

Officialhttps://
Support this servicehttps://www.patreon.com/birddotmakeup
Show threadpatio11Feb 6

The thing which is beyond intellectually serious dispute is industrial-scaled fraud.

You keep wanting to make me "own" the CCAP's estimate. I will not reciprocally try to make you "own" $5 million, because I am charitable and because history has been unkind to the officials who made it.

I do ask you to own: "Minnesota HAS NOT suffered industrial-scale fraud across several social programs." Otherwise this is judging a high school debate competition, and I've had better.

Show threadpatio11Feb 6
FoF claimed to supply meals at the same physical locations as CCAP and paid the same owners. As mentioned, one of nine of the operators profiled, who was previously raided in an investigation into alleged overbilling of CCAP, received $1.5M from FoF. FoF is in fact not a federal nutrition program but actually the name of a non-profit which received grants from a federal nutrition program for forwarding to third parties. CCAP is also funded by federal block funding.
Show threadpatio11Feb 6

The Swanson memo memorializes the consensus of his investigatory group and, put to question by OLA and legislators, they stick with that story:

Page 14 of PDF:

[The OLA] did not find evidence to substantiate Stillman’s allegation that there is $100 million in CCAP fraud annually. We did, on the other hand, find that the state’s CCAP fraud
investigators generally agree with Stillman’s opinions about the level of CCAP fraud, as well as why it is so pervasive.

(Stillman is a line level investigator who gave a media statement which was explosive. Swanson, who authored in the internal memo, was his manager.)

I do mention that other officials only agreed to characterize as fraud fraud which had resulted in convictions. We now, years later, have nine figures just from the convictions (and guilty pleas). These officials pointedly refuse to put any number on fraud other than the number incident to convictions.

Moreover: you should be very clearly correct if you accuse someone of citing a document as making claims it does not say. That is a serious accusation. BAM's citation of this piece is "the state’s own investigators believed that, over the past several years, greater than fifty percent of all reimbursements to daycare centers were fraudulent." This is _absolutely true_ and _is in the report as claimed_.