On the morning of Dec. 4, Rosen sent an email to two Pearson Vue employees asking about AMAP testing. In Pearson Vue's bid documents, it states it will allow AMAP candidates to take the written AMAP exam "via computer only." Rosen asks whether that means Pearson Vue intends to provide the test orally, too.
Later that afternoon, a Pearson Vue representative wrote back to Rosen to say the company would provide the test via computer, on paper and orally.
The morning of Dec. 5, Rosen asked that same Pearson Vue employee whether the company "contemplated providing oral AMAP testing in their original bid submission," calling the question a matter of semantics.
At 4:36 that afternoon the employee responded, stating the company does provide oral exams but the request for proposal did not explicitly ask about candidates who might qualify for oral testing under the Americans with Disabilities Act. In a letter dated Dec. 5 sent from Rosen to Tincher, he states Pearson Vue had met all of the contract requirements concerning AMAP testing.
A temporary cease-and-desist order against Pearson Vue went into effect Dec. 15 in response to the lawsuit, said PHD's attorney, Nick Casey. On Thursday Casey said he had also received a fax from Denise and Mark Cihy, owners of PHD, that stated the DHHR wanted to enter into a 120-day contract with the company to provide the nurse aide testing.
Casey said the state can enter into such a contract when an emergency situation arises, such as the cancellation of a contract. He said he expects the contract to be rebid sometime soon. DHHR spokeswoman Marsha Dadisman said she could not comment due to the PHD lawsuit.
In its lawsuit, PHD asks the court to cancel the current agreement, rebid the contract and prevent Pearson Vue from submitting another bid. It alleges Pearson Vue used inaccurate information in its bid documents - including data suggesting it had entered into a contract with a consultant who denies any official agreement - to obtain the contract, and it shouldn't be allowed to try again.
Marra's letter to Rosen did not specify when the contract would go back out for bid or if there were any restrictions on companies that could participate.
Denise Cihy did not return a message Thursday, but earlier this week the Cihys said they intended to continue pursuing legal action.
The lawsuit, officially filed against Tincher, was assigned to Circuit Judge Charles King. Tincher has 20 days to respond to the allegations from the day it was filed. He had not done so as of Thursday.