Monroe Review

A Democratic political consultant, who has been tied to a canceled no-bid contact-tracing agreement, is refusing to cooperate after being "primarily in charge of contact tracing," according to The Center Square.

"Contact tracing" is a method used to find out where and how someone might have been infected with COVID-19.

Rep. Ann Bollin (R-Brighton Township) had asked the Auditor General's office to look into a contact tracing contract, which had been canceled. The contract was canceled one day after the agreement between the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) and Great Lakes Community Engagement was made public.

Rep. Ann Bollin | Michigan House Republicans

The Auditor General has answered questions on the agreement in a report, stating, “We do not consider it typical for a vendor to develop the scope of work," The Center Square reported. 

The contract, which MDHHS owned the data for, didn't go through the typical means of approval, meaning it didn't go through the State Operations Center. MDHHS said it didn't know this was a requirement.

Bidding on the contract wasn't competitive either.  

“K2K Consulting, LLC, was the only firm considered,” the report said, the Center Square reported. “The MDHHS Director of the Bureau of Grants & Purchasing stated that normally employees would need to follow the procurement process and solicit bids; however, since Michigan was under a state of emergency, there was an exemption from soliciting bids.”

While health officials said the company was chosen for the tracing process, there were several questions still remaining. 

One MDHHS Senior Advisor on Opioid Strategy chose not to cooperate with the probe. The advisor, Andrea Taverna, declined to comment on the issue. 

However, questions will continue to be answered about the investigation. 

“I’m grateful to the Auditor General for investigating this issue and finding answers to my questions,” Bollin told The Center Square. “The information the Auditor General’s office has uncovered sheds important light on the decisions that were made by Gov. Whitmer’s administration. It also generated additional questions, which their office has agreed to continue investigating.”