It is hard to give an update for process that is secret, but the very fact of the secrecy is the whole point. Yesterday, March 29, the University of Louisville review committee for submissions to its Request for Proposal for a new medical center partner was supposed to have been held. Perhaps it even was. Claiming a magic invisibility cloak granted by the Commonwealth, very little information related to the RFP has been made available, and none promised until a deal with the preferred partner is finalized and signed. The lesson the University chose not to learn following its failed merger debacle last Fall (and several scandals) is that secrecy, changing stories, and lack of accountability are not the way to gain the trust of the community. If anything, University leadership has chosen now to double down on their bet that secrecy will win the day. That would be sad. Are these the lessons we want taught to our children?<\/p>\n
I reported earlier that the University would not reveal<\/a> how many submissions it received in response to its RFP. In justification, I was sent Kentucky’s regulation on Competitive Negotiations<\/a> and a confidentiality statement<\/a> that the RFP evaluation committee members are required to sign. I then asked for the names of the members of the committee and copies of the conflict of interest statements that are also required by UofL. To my reading, responding to these latter requests is not prohibited by Kentucky law. The University has not responded at all. In my opinion the University has simply chosen of its own accord not to make public the committee membership. What good are statements of conflict of interest that are not open and verifiable? What do you think about all of this?<\/p>\n