[smeg_it]

Lol, I understand Fifo (well the concept) I had an IT career for 20 years, although I was never an expert at much. In theory, if ordering were coordinated better, we wouldn't have test that spent 80%+ of their useful life dying in a warehouse. I love the idea of the program. I just hate that the funding isn't being used well and we are throwing away so much that could have been used. Maybe there is not help for it, but so far even the best answers I had on the other post couldn't explain the only 60 day viability guarantee

[pwg]

The agency running the program is not having tests made as you request one, nor are they having small batches made after some days worth of orders arrive.

Instead, they are guessing how many they might need for the "next 12 months" and placing a single large bulk order one time for that many tests.

If their guess proves to have overestimated how many are actually requested over the "next 12 months" then they end up with a supply of unused tests in their warehouse.

As requests arrive, they ship out the oldest tests first. If demand continues to arrive below their guesses as to usage, they end up with a backlog of tests that are nearing the end of their life.

[smeg_it]

That's news to me. Do you have a link that explains all this? I know about business quarters and yearly budgets but do they have to order once a year, and are you sure about that? I would rather wait a little longer for the test to arrive, and have the test at home and usable for much longer because 60 days isn't much out of 365. I honestly don't know how far apart it is between the times free test were available to order but from what I recall, I won't be able to order them in January when these expire

[pwg]

> Do you have a link that explains all this?

No, and I very much doubt any link exists. I am instead guessing based on experience with other govt. agency budgeting and procurement processes. The procurement process is very likely to have been a single bulk buy based on an estimation of upcoming demand. Then demand for the free tests likely did not meet the estimate, leaving a backlog in the warehouse of aging tests. I.e., they likely encountered a real life example of the "beer distribution game" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_distribution_game).

[smeg_it]

Do you know if they continuously over order or it's rare? Any links to this type of information would be appreciated.

[pwg]

> Do you know if they continuously over order or it's rare?

No idea, but such would not matter. So long as their estimate of future demand was much larger than the actual demand, they will build up a backlog of stored tests whether they bought all at once, or contracted for an even delivery over a given fiscal year. And until they 1) down estimate the future demand to order less on future contracts and 2) use up the backlog built up by the over estimate, the end result will be what you saw, a test that has aged in a warehouse somewhere for much of its claimed "lifetime".

> Any links to this type of information would be appreciated.

None likely exist. You might be able to glean some insights if you can determine 1) which sub-component of which agency handles the procurement of the tests and 2) can find the procurement contracts that were the purchase vehicles. Number 2 is, sadly, potentially likely to end up requiring FOIA requests to locate.