ComplaintsforConverus, Inc

• Initial Complaint

  01/29/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  The eye detect exam equipment from Converus failed during my test. As a result I had to take the test 2 times. This should not happen during an eye detect exam.

  

  Business response

  01/30/2024

  To research the issue, we need to know where and when this test was taken, and who administered the test. Our company does not administer tests. We are a software developer. We have dozens of authorized testing centers on the East Coast.

  Most of the time, test takers' names are not included or associated with the details of the test. In other words, most tests are taken anonymously. With additional information just mentioned, we can provide a response. How can I get those details? 

  There were three parts to the question posed. With additional information we can discuss what happened during the test. However, we can address the question now that referred to personally identifiable information (PII) as it relates to privacy laws. As a general statement, the ************** of ********* tests does NOT require any type of PII. The minimum amount of information required for an ********* test is described below, and cannot be used as a biometric or to identify a person.  

  Specifically, when a test is administered, there are two participants in the use or interaction of test taker data. The data controller is the entity that determines which data is processed. In this case, that would be the test administrator or organization that performed the test. That entity controls which information is input into our system when administering a test. If the test administrator entered the test taker's name, then it would be in our system.

  The other party in the testing process is the data processor. That is the entity that performs analysis or processing of data on behalf of the data controller. Converus falls into the category of data processor because our web servers process information that authorized testing centers send to the cloud for scoring after a test is administered.
   
  Per privacy laws, the data controller has the most responsibility when it comes to protecting privacy and the rights of the person for whom the data is controlled. The data controller controls the procedures and introduction of PII during testing, if any.
   
  Now, there are two sets of data REQUIRED to score an ********* test:
   
  1- Eye movements and pupil diameter measurements - gathered by the eye tracker at 60 measurements per second (60 Hz); these are not photographs and cannot be used as a biometric. The measurements look like GPS coordinates. They are measurements along the ** Y, and Z axis.
   
  2- Test responses the  test taker's answers to the true/false questions, which are also timestamped. Answers to questions cannot be used to identify a specific person.
   
  Generally speaking, if the data controller (test administrator) wishes to protect the identity of any test taker, during registration prior to taking a test, the test administrator can use an identifying number rather than a person's name. No photographs of the test taker are required. Most of the time, test takers can only be identified by the organization that administered the test. Converus does not have that information in our systems.

  I look forward to receiving additional information so I can provide specific feedback about this particular case. Thank you.

  Customer response

  01/31/2024

   
  Complaint: 21218139
  
  I am rejecting this response because: I am not necessarily rejecting the response. Just providing back the information requested to look into my complaint further.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *********************

  Customer response

  02/01/2024

   
  Complaint: 21218139
  
  I am rejecting this response because:The eye detect examination in question was done at the ****** of *************** in **********, ** on January 18, ****. The examiner is ****************** De La ****. He was the administrator for the eye detect examination for *************** **** in **********, **. I expect The Connection would likely be who Converus contracted with for the ** ****** of ***** Probation. As far as I know the test was administered under my name and not an anonymous number. Thank you for your prompt reply back to me.
  Sincerely,
  
  *********************

  

  Business response

  02/02/2024

  I have been in contact with the Program Director at ******************** which is a third-party vendor that conducts testing for the Judicial Branch of the ********************. It was this group that conducted the test for ************ in January. As part of that service, The Connection uses EyeDetect to meet that requirement.

  When the test was administered to ************, the EyeDetect software failed, and the test had to be restarted. As you probably know, software is not perfect, and occasionally has issues which cause the program to shut down. This is no different than software such as ********* Word or ********* Windows, for example. I checked with our technical support group, which responds to issues for customers around the world. I found that in approximately 1 out of 1000 tests, the software fails. That is a failure rate of 0.1%, which is significantly below many standard rates of failure in the industry. Unfortunately, that rare failure occurred during the administered to ************. If we could prevent software from failing, we would certainly do that. However, that is not practical. We apologize for that inconvenience.

  When the software fails, all testing data is erased. Therefore, there was no data from the first test taken by ************ that was saved. Our system does not process testing data that is incomplete as it may impact test scoring.

  ************ also mentioned to a contact at The Connection, that during his test, the digital voice stopped reading (audibly presenting) information. For the type of test administered to ************, which was a multi-issue comparison test, the computer uses a digital voice to audibly read and simultaneously present the pre-test instructions on the screen. After the pre-test instructions, there is a practice test. Once the practice test ends, and the actual EyeDetect test begins, the digital voice discontinues to audibly read the information; at that point, the test taker (************) must take the remainder of the test reading the questions on the screen. That portion of the test takes more than 20 minutes. That is by design and that is how the testing protocol was developed by a team of scientists.

  When personnel at The Connection administer tests, they do not provide any personally identifiable information when registering the test taker in the EyeDetect software. For this reason, we cannot search our system to find a test taken by ************. His data is completely confidential. We don't know which type of test he took, nor do we know his test score.

  I hope that I have responded to each of the issues raised by ************. If not, please let me know. Thank you.

   

  Customer response

  02/08/2024

   
  Complaint: 21218139
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  To I or me,

  What is your name? How do you represent Converus? I have been contacted personally by *****************************, Quality Improvement Specialist/PREA Coordinator at The Connection by email and by phone. I was also able to write the President and CEO of The Connection, **************************************** about my complaint. My impression is. The Connection took my complaint seriously. Converus on the other hand not so much. As I have yet been unable to communicate with anyone directly from Converus. The only reply back I have received from Converus is through the BBB portal by 'I' or 'me' whose name remains anonymous to me. You said you don't know what type of test I took or my score. Yet in the reply you said I had taken a multi-issue comparison test? So you don't see any problem with giving a score to someone subjected to an immediate retest after the 1st test was disappeared? Wouldn't taking back-to-back identical tests skew the results of the 2nd test? That and the test and retest process caused me to be overwhelmed due to an exaserbated severe anxiety disorder. This wouldn't also skew the results? The Connection was able to get the detailed results from Converus (which are excluded from my copy of the report). It seems more improbable to me that Converus cannot access a report it sent to The Connection. In any case, the report generated by Converus is available, in the least, from The Connection. As far as the software is concerned and the 'failure' during the exam it appears to me you are indifferent in an oh-well reply. Unless you can show me otherwise, when keys are hit on a keyboard they do not just disappear from the computer. Can you tell me how that data, those key taps are completely disappeared from that software and computer? I acknowledge the fact that a software 'failure' is very rare (as you said 1-1000). I feel however that a failure during an exam just shouldn't even be possible so long as the computer doesn't lose power. The digital voice did speak into my headphones into the actual exams. Only being disappeared when the 1st test failed and during the 2nd exam. So no, my test experience was the digital voice did stop at the end of the practice exam. I was clearly in the middle of the 2nd test when the digital voice disappeared in my headphones. BTW. The person I chatted with on the website said to send an email complaint to ******************************** I have since received a message that the email message was not delivered. Seems to be there is no ********************************'.

  Sincerely,
  
  *********************

  

  Business response

  02/09/2024

  ************,
  To respond to your latest message:
  
  My name is *********************, Chief Operations Officer at Converus. In the BBB portal, I included my name on previous responses. It's a required field.
  
  We are interested in take your complaint very seriously. I did some research after responding to the first message to determine where and when you took the test. In your first message, you did not indicate who administered the test. Given your location in CT (which you indicated), I was able to research and determine the test was given by an examiner at The Connection. To keep things confidential, I had to formally request information from a manager at The Connection in order to get more information about the test administration process before I could respond. I did not look at the test topics, but only at the overall score.  And I also spoke with the person at The Connection (*******) who administered the test to discuss the process. After that, I responded to the second message in the BBB portal with more knowledge. That is why I had more context in the second respond.
  
  Before we release our product to the public, we conduct lab studies. Unfortunately, we do not conduct lab studies on situations where the software fails during the test and it has to be repeated. Thats not a standard laboratory practice and given that we cannot predict when software might fail, its not done. Most of the challenges we have related to the proper functioning of our software are due to ********* Windows updates. As I mentioned in the previous message, we have very few software failures. And, unfortunately, you were taking a test when that occurred. For that, we apologize.
  
  Some test takers can become sensitized to test questions and some test takers can habituate to the test questions. If you feel the test results were skewed by having to repeat part of the test, I recommend retaking the test. We have offered to pay for that test administered by The Connection. 
  
  Unfortunately, writing responses via a portal doesn't convey emotion. We are concerned that the software failed during the test. We are interested in the outcome of each test administered. We monitor tests on a daily basis to determine proper function. We have technical support personnel on standby to answer questions from test administrators if there are any issues. We consistently monitor the quality of the experience.
  
  The software did not fail because of any keys you pressed on the keyboard. Internal processes cause failure. When taking the test, there is nothing the test taker can do to cause the software to fail. Thus, it was not your fault that the software crashed. Just as a Windows PC crash is occasionally, the end-user is not at fault.
  
  The test that you took was a multi-issue comparison test. During that test, the digital voice speaks to provide the pretest instructions and practice questions. When the real questions begin, the digital voice ceases to speak, and the test-taker must read and respond to all of the remaining questions. That part of the test could last between 20 to 24 minutes. So, most of the time, the digital voice is silent.
  
  If you want to email me directly, my email is ********************.  For purposes of following the BBBs process, I have only responded in this portal.
  
  I want to apologize for your bad experience with the test taking process. It is a rare occurrence that the software fails, and we do take it very seriously. We are sorry that it occurred during your most recent test.
  

  Customer response

  02/09/2024

   
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

  Thank you **************** for your last reply. Your name did not appear anywhere in my BBB communication feed that I can see. I do not need to retake the Eye Detect Exam. I noticed your email address *********************** I suspect it is rather *********************************** Not converse.com. I will send you an email separate from this reply through the BBB portal to *********************************** Thank you
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *********************

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩