+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 53 of 53
General Chat Thread, HT Grant cut again! in General; ...
  1. #46

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,529
    Thank Post
    527
    Thanked 2,648 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    925
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook View Post
    @Torledo

    Look at it like this. There is a pot of money called Capital which contains £10k for your school. The schools in general (schools forum) have agreed that they will be billed for connectivity and services. The LA send you your £10k. They then send you a bill for £10k and this comes back into the LA in a pot called revenue. It is the same money! It is a waste of everyone's time.

    The problem is that some LAs do this for some, most or all of the funds ... giving a very mixed approach. The sophistry that goes on is stupid.

    If an LA sorts out a VLE contract for 3 years (the HT grant timescale) then the setup, running and training can be put as a capital investment. After that it is revenue and you put the choice out to schools to buy it. Or you do the capital for one year and then bill schools for the other two as revenue?

    And I know there will be those that say 'well, once we have the money the LA is not getting it back!' ... but the LA will just cut the other monies by the required amount if they need to. There is a careful balance between schools collectively agreeing something and each school only looking after number 1. They tend to want to all be treating equally unfairly as they never know when they will take a big hit and need support.
    Surely using a HT Grant in this way is poor accounting and misuse of it? If schools ARE using their HT grant to pay for their internet connection, and not what it was originally planned for, or if LAs are top-slicing it (with agreement from schools) and using it for non-capital expenditure, then that is proof that the HT Grant has done its original job - there aren't the level of capital expenses requiring that grant any more. That will be precisely why the government is slashing it.

  2. #47
    Pottsey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nottinghamsire
    Posts
    770
    Thank Post
    3
    Thanked 52 Times in 42 Posts
    Rep Power
    30
    john said “All secondary schools are on 10mb and no plans to increase this over the next few years was the last conversation on that I had, and tbh for the size of my establishment”
    I wish we were on that much. Our secondary school is on 2meg and often capped out. What I find crazy and never really understood is why schools internet connection are so slow. I can get a 50meg download at home for a fraction of the price of what our school pays. Why can EMBC and others not offer schools similar packages to what you can get a home. I would love something like a 10, 20 or 50meg download and 2 or 5 meg upload at work.

    Is it the upload speed that costs so much? Filtering software, something else? Why not cut the price down by only boosting download speeds. Do we really need upload speeds to match download for every school?

  3. #48

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    10,074
    Thank Post
    1,384
    Thanked 1,889 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Surely using a HT Grant in this way is poor accounting and misuse of it? If schools ARE using their HT grant to pay for their internet connection, and not what it was originally planned for, or if LAs are top-slicing it (with agreement from schools) and using it for non-capital expenditure, then that is proof that the HT Grant has done its original job - there aren't the level of capital expenses requiring that grant any more. That will be precisely why the government is slashing it.
    I honestly thought it would take forever for someone to raise the largest part of the problem with Govt grants. Once capital grants have been established, used and the results are embedded, then you have to establish replacement revenue grants (notably smaller usually) to cover the running costs. That is why the HT grant (along with many other capital grants) cover capital *projects*, not just purchasing kit. Most people expected to see the revenue grants for next year increase to cover the drop of this capital grant ... and that is not happening from what anyone can see.

    So ... no matter how you look at how the HT grant is used / has been used the running costs for many things is no longer there.

  4. #49

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    10,074
    Thank Post
    1,384
    Thanked 1,889 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by Pottsey View Post
    john said “All secondary schools are on 10mb and no plans to increase this over the next few years was the last conversation on that I had, and tbh for the size of my establishment”
    I wish we were on that much. Our secondary school is on 2meg and often capped out. What I find crazy and never really understood is why schools internet connection are so slow. I can get a 50meg download at home for a fraction of the price of what our school pays. Why can EMBC and others not offer schools similar packages to what you can get a home. I would love something like a 10, 20 or 50meg download and 2 or 5 meg upload at work.

    Is it the upload speed that costs so much? Filtering software, something else? Why not cut the price down by only boosting download speeds. Do we really need upload speeds to match download for every school?
    Most of our secondary schools hit their 10 meg cap each day pretty early on. Those who have had their upgrade to 20 meg are also starting to hit their cap ... the few very large schools with 30 meg are also hitting their cap already.

  5. #50
    Disease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,110
    Thank Post
    120
    Thanked 72 Times in 49 Posts
    Rep Power
    57
    Cuts are what happens when a previous government spends shed loads of cash it does not have.

    We are currently getting a BB throug our LEA at a cost of 18k rising to 24k next year, for 100mb to the LEA and then out through their 100mb pipe, which is shared with all schools. I can however get now from BT 100mb true 1:1 contention direct to internet pipe with free install and 100% uptime SLA for 20k, we are talkingabout it at the moment.

  6. #51
    monkeyx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    365
    Thank Post
    8
    Thanked 52 Times in 41 Posts
    Rep Power
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by gaz350 View Post
    I agree, but we don't need to procure 20 other services we don't want at the same time just to get it
    I agree with this, we have a similar situation in that we have to buy into loads services that we don't want or didn't ask for.

    Can I ask how schools have managed to stop an LA top slicing broadband funding, as our LA used to make it a charge back system, they now top slice so that the school never sees the money. Never mind gets asked which sub services we actually want.

  7. #52

    sparkeh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    7,231
    Thank Post
    1,446
    Thanked 1,859 Times in 1,252 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22
    Rep Power
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by monkeyx View Post
    I agree with this, we have a similar situation in that we have to buy into loads services that we don't want or didn't ask for.
    This is part of the issue for us as well and I can't see that this can be argued as being good value for money in the current climate, i.e. money going towards services that schools never use (I can see the headlines now).
    Is there an RBC that works in this way as I would be surprised if this is financially viable from the RBC point of view.

  8. #53

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    10,074
    Thank Post
    1,384
    Thanked 1,889 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    614
    @sparkeh
    What you are talking about is more like a framework agreement. One or multiple suppliers produce a framework of services which can be mixed and matched by the RBC / LA / School. The services will range from the school connection to the WAN, The WAN itself, the central server farms, the kit in the exchanges, the kit in the CSF, the internet feeds in and out of the WAN (non-JANET feeds that is), email filtering, email hosting, web filtering, video conferencing, website hosting, online storage, DNS, IP Management, Firewall and security, authentication service (including LDAP, AD integration, UKAMF IdP - Shibboleth, etc) ...

    The problem with framework agreements is that you tend to have a pricebook ... a fixed price for everything and it is done by unit (by user, by school or by LA) and because there is no guarantee of numbers for this the supplier will give a fixed price. There may be some scope for banded pricing ... ie the first 20 schools get x, the next get y and so on .. but this makes it a bit of a financial nightmare to reconcile ... especially if each school has to pay up front in the year and the 21st school comes online 3 months in ... do they get a lower price than the others?

    The other problem is that once you start looking at the costs of services which some people may not want such as videoconferencing (not that expensive to be honest) is by the time you have paid for 20% of your schools to have it then it is actually the same price as making it available to all schools!

    There are times when aggregated purchasing is clearly a big winner ... if you take email filtering (if you are not on an RBC line and running your own mail server then I presume you do have mail filtering) then the cost of the filter as an LA is far cheaper than buying it for each school individually.

    The introduction of Public Sector Networks will mean that you will see more and more councils, police forces, Primary Care Trusts, etc share chunks of their network and if they do it over an existing WAN then all the better to drive down costs. It is a shame it is only just starting out ... if it had been pushed 3-4 years ago then we might be in a different picture.



SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Harnessing Technology grant going?
    By Mr.Ben in forum General Chat
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 19th January 2011, 11:27 AM
  2. Sun Matching Grant
    By linescanner in forum Hardware
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 21st October 2009, 12:35 AM
  3. Sun Matching Grant
    By linescanner in forum Hardware
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 19th May 2009, 09:27 AM
  4. Lost our Harnessing Technology Grant?
    By SimpleSi in forum CLEO
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 3rd March 2009, 04:02 PM
  5. grant temp admin rights
    By mtupker in forum Scripts
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 8th September 2007, 08:55 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •