+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 29
MIS Systems Thread, Local Authorities 'top slicing' School funds for MIS! in Technical; ...
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0

    Local Authorities 'top slicing' School funds for MIS!

    Our bursar says that as a school we are currently having our funds ‘top sliced’ by our Local Authority for our MIS software and maintenance-support. That part of our budget retained by the Local Authority is paying for the software in use which is SIMS. We want to move to away from SIMS and use alternative MIS software but are unable to because the LA will not rebate the 'top sliced' funds (i.e. the part retain by our LA from our budget). I am interested to find out whether other schools are also experiencing similar problems due to this method of ‘top slicing’ by Local Authorities, and if any school succeeded in getting their funds for MIS released. Surely the schools should be able to have free choice in their MIS software. Do you agree??

  2. #2
    apoth0r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Northants
    Posts
    1,221
    Thank Post
    151
    Thanked 180 Times in 132 Posts
    Rep Power
    52
    On a similar note, Northamptonshire schools had their Harnessing Technology fund used for the cost of EMBC county wide, although some people may say its not great for independance to quality of service has improved no end because not only are you having a county wide support service but the money is paid by the county so they have a level of involvement too.

    What are the main reasons you want to move away from SIMS and would it be cost effective in doing so if you have already paid? Have you tried other systems to see if it is any better? Unfortunately no MIS system is perfect and usually the one you have is the best because people have already trained to use it.

  3. #3

    matt40k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ipswich
    Posts
    4,433
    Thank Post
    368
    Thanked 646 Times in 528 Posts
    Rep Power
    159
    I would image the moneys been spent. What MIS package are you looking at?

  4. #4

    FN-GM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    16,057
    Thank Post
    888
    Thanked 1,730 Times in 1,493 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    Rep Power
    454
    Our LEA took a cut from some funding all schools (Primary and secondry) got to pay for Uniservity, not one High School in the area uses it.

  5. #5

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,951
    Thank Post
    1,345
    Thanked 1,800 Times in 1,118 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    597
    Quote Originally Posted by apoth0r View Post
    On a similar note, Northamptonshire schools had their Harnessing Technology fund used for the cost of EMBC county wide, although some people may say its not great for independance to quality of service has improved no end because not only are you having a county wide support service but the money is paid by the county so they have a level of involvement too.

    What are the main reasons you want to move away from SIMS and would it be cost effective in doing so if you have already paid? Have you tried other systems to see if it is any better? Unfortunately no MIS system is perfect and usually the one you have is the best because people have already trained to use it.
    It is worth mentioning that for Northamptonshire to retain the schools portion of the HT grant it went to Schools' Forum (reps of schools including headteachers, bursars and governors) who agreed and supported it.

    It would be worth the OP finding out if this was the same for them with DSG and what exceptions / options were made available.

    Steve also makes darn good points about MIS in general.

  6. #6
    apoth0r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Northants
    Posts
    1,221
    Thank Post
    151
    Thanked 180 Times in 132 Posts
    Rep Power
    52
    On a side note Tony, did you check you Ning mail? Cheers chap

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by apoth0r View Post
    What are the main reasons you want to move away from SIMS and would it be cost effective in doing so if you have already paid? .
    Well our ICT Manager wants to move to a Browser based system because he is fed up with SIMS.Net installation on every work station. Browser based would be more cost effective because of a lower cost of ownership. As to having already paid - we want to opt out from having our funds 'top sliced' so that we can buy our choice of MIS.

  8. #8

    matt40k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ipswich
    Posts
    4,433
    Thank Post
    368
    Thanked 646 Times in 528 Posts
    Rep Power
    159
    It seems rather foolish in my opinion. You'll be making a lot more work for yourselves.

    Capita are releasing SOLUS3, which although is pretty limited at the moment (IMO), it is still really is powerful. This should allow you to deploy SIMS upgrades internally to your workstations.

    If you really are going to look at other MIS packages, I would suggust you look at SLG, it'll work out cheaper then moving to a new MIS package. SLG might not be able to do everything, but it'll give the teachers etc the access what they need. Generally this cuts it down to a few workstations in offices that'll be able to done via SOLUS3, which is in the Autumn release (ETA 9th Nov).

    If you really want to go the other way, look at thin client, either RDP into a central server or using remote apps.

  9. #9

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,951
    Thank Post
    1,345
    Thanked 1,800 Times in 1,118 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    597
    Pros and Cons ...

    1 - Server / Client systems are sometimes a pain to update due to frequent patching and trying to do things like pulling down updates on a monday morning, before registration over a saturated wireless network!
    2 - Server / Client systems are often more efficient and allow for greater scope of integration with other systems (eg SchoolComs, Groupcall, VLEs, AD, etc)
    3 - Web-based solutions reduce technical overhead of management of servers and local devices.
    4 - Web-based services lock you into a single supplier for all functions of management of information at this time.

    Changing MIS does not get rid of problems ... it just gives you a different set of problems, but perhaps ones that your school is better placed to cope with.

  10. #10

    sparkeh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,806
    Thank Post
    1,298
    Thanked 1,659 Times in 1,112 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22
    Rep Power
    507
    Quote Originally Posted by apoth0r View Post
    Northamptonshire schools had their Harnessing Technology fund used for the cost of EMBC county wide, although some people may say its not great for independance to quality of service has improved no end because not only are you having a county wide support service but the money is paid by the county so they have a level of involvement too.
    Leicestershire too, though I believe the reason the LA retained the grant was to pay for the broadband upgrade. This has caused a fair bit of anger among SMTs of school who are no where near using their bandwidth and had earmarked the money for things that would have an immediate impact.

  11. #11


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    4,692
    Thank Post
    352
    Thanked 797 Times in 716 Posts
    Rep Power
    347
    Quote Originally Posted by sparkeh View Post
    Leicestershire too, though I believe the reason the LA retained the grant was to pay for the broadband upgrade. This has caused a fair bit of anger among SMTs of school who are no where near using their bandwidth and had earmarked the money for things that would have an immediate impact.
    Can't please everyone though, and the county would have been slated for leaving 'schools behind' later on when the funds + associated economies of scale weren't available any longer.

  12. #12

    SimpleSi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    5,822
    Thank Post
    1,476
    Thanked 593 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    168
    It is worth mentioning that for Northamptonshire to retain the schools portion of the HT grant it went to Schools' Forum (reps of schools including headteachers, bursars and governors) who agreed and supported it.

    Remember - Tony seems like one of us but he's really one of them

    I had a very similiar answer (just replace the word Northamptonshire with Lancashire) when I asked what had happened to our HT grant this year.

    @OP
    Its just them and us and they usually win.

    regards

    Simon

    PS Pick your battles (and make sure the volunteers who said they'd stand with you haven't taken 1 step back when you wern't looking (e.g headteacher )

  13. #13

    SimpleSi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    5,822
    Thank Post
    1,476
    Thanked 593 Times in 445 Posts
    Rep Power
    168
    This has caused a fair bit of anger among SMTs of school who are no where near using their bandwidth and had earmarked the money for things that would have an immediate impact.
    Ours decided to increase bandwidth as well to all primaries when IMHO what we need now is improvements in uptime (e.g diverse feeds) not faster speeds.

    regards

    Simon

  14. #14

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,951
    Thank Post
    1,345
    Thanked 1,800 Times in 1,118 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    597
    Quote Originally Posted by sparkeh View Post
    Leicestershire too, though I believe the reason the LA retained the grant was to pay for the broadband upgrade. This has caused a fair bit of anger among SMTs of school who are no where near using their bandwidth and had earmarked the money for things that would have an immediate impact.
    The funny thing about schools saying that they are not using all their bandwidth is that when things are slow and you check the logs you see they are maxing out, but only certain times of the year.

    You just can't win at times.

  15. #15
    apoth0r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Northants
    Posts
    1,221
    Thank Post
    151
    Thanked 180 Times in 132 Posts
    Rep Power
    52
    I don't knock the decision in Northamptonshire, it gave everyone a better service and the problems EMBC had a year or two previous was a disaster area. These appear to have been resolved now, I'd rather have something that works than something new that could work.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Top private school to drop GCSEs
    By tech_guy in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 5th March 2009, 11:34 AM
  2. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12th December 2008, 07:42 PM
  3. Free MIS: TS School 2008
    By DaveP in forum MIS Systems
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 13th November 2008, 12:10 PM
  4. 8 local authorities fast-tracked into BSF
    By sahmeepee in forum BSF
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24th June 2008, 11:17 PM
  5. What do you think of your school's MIS system?
    By schoolzone in forum MIS Systems
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 8th August 2007, 02:15 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
  •