Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Yes and I'm not unaware of the issues - schools keep telling me.

 

Just to confirm ...

 

You are aware that some of your request is flawed around the question on numbers for parents.

 

You are aware that the model by which you demand a response does not allow schools to point you to where information may already be published

 

You are aware that the method of response creates additional work for the school to save you time on your analysis.

 

If you can confirm the above and also point out any actions you are taking to rectify these it would be appreciated.

Posted
You are aware that some of your request is flawed around the question on numbers for parents.

I am aware many schools don't record this.

You are aware that the model by which you demand a response does not allow schools to point you to where information may already be published

No, there is a free text field where they can give the location.

You are aware that the method of response creates additional work for the school to save you time on your analysis.

I don't agree it creates additional work. Numbers and yes/no answers are the same however you provide the response.

Posted

I don't agree it creates additional work. Numbers and yes/no answers are the same however you provide the response.

 

You don't see the difference between being able to submit a spreadsheet that could be generated from a report or collated from multiple sources and having to retype all that data into a webform? You especially don't see the irony of this as this is exactly the reason you have given for wanting to use your form?

Posted

Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook

You are aware that some of your request is flawed around the question on numbers for parents.

 

I am aware many schools don't record this.

 

But you also said

 

One of the reasons for using a form is so the entry can be automatically checked. You wouldn't believe the number of schools who can't add up, for example their responses to questions 3, 4 and 5 add up to more than the total number of pupils they have in 2. The form prevents you submitting invalid numbers so I don't have to explain to each school how their addition is wrong!.

 

So which is it? Schools can't add up or schools don't record the information? 3+4+5 does not have to equal to 2 ... it could be more or it could be less. Do you accept this?

  • Thanks 1
Posted

Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook View Post

You are aware that the model by which you demand a response does not allow schools to point you to where information may already be published

 

No, there is a free text field where they can give the location.

 

Is this available for each and every question and each and every part of the question?

Posted
Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook

So which is it? Schools can't add up or schools don't record the information? 3+4+5 does not have to equal to 2 ... it could be more or it could be less. Do you accept this?

 

No it can be less, but it cannot be more. That would be like saying if we count all the boys and all the girls in the school separately and add up the total we get more than the number of pupils in the school. Some parents may be missing, but you should only count a pupil once in each of 3, 4 or 5, so 3+4+5 <= 2

Posted
Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook

Now here is a very rough estimate, based on some example figures sent over to me ... 10 additional minutes, 23,000 schools. 230,000 minutes. 3,833 Hours. Then considering the people doing this will be admin staff in general and working an 8 hour day ... that makes 479 working days.

That would suggest it's much better for me to do the 10 minutes work for each of these schools, so I take 479 working days to transcribe the data. Well I don't actually have over 2 years of free time. I would estimate no more than 1 minute to fill in the form, I think you're exaggerating the amount of work required.

 

It does bring me to another point and this is more significant, many schools (schools in Kent come to mind, but there are others) are refusing on the grounds of cost because it will take them too long to access each individual pupils records. They seem to pick a time which results in a total exceeding the £450 appropriate limit, but this means some of them are quoting over 10 minutes to access each pupils file. When you look at the ambulance response times for some of these schools, they could get an ambulance before they could access the pupil's file and find out if they had any allergies or who the parents were.

 

That might be something schools want to look at and consider getting better information systems.

Posted
I would estimate no more than 1 minute to fill in the form, I think you're exaggerating the amount of work required.

 

1 minute?... 1 minute?... So what's your superhero name? Quicksilver?

Posted
This kind of attitude is childish and unprofessional in my opinion.

 

If you hate FOI requests so much then you're working in the wrong industry.

 

Just following the letter of the law. At this point your going to spout on about the publics need to know etc etc.....

 

However, LA's could employee more people to look after childrens/adults social care than having to respond to the drivel below.

 

I am contacting you to request some information on your plan in the emergency case of a zombie apocalypse attack.

 

I am very concerned with the state of the country in the emergency case of a zombie attack, we are all at risk and we are very interested in hearing what your plans are and how we can survive a zombie attack.

 

Yours faithfully,

  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 minute?... 1 minute?... So what's your superhero name? Quicksilver?

 

Collecting the data takes longer, but the form itself doesn't, really.

 

Just following the letter of the law. At this point your going to spout on about the publics need to know etc etc.....

 

However, LA's could employee more people to look after childrens/adults social care than having to respond to the drivel below.

 

I am contacting you to request some information on your plan in the emergency case of a zombie apocalypse attack.

 

I am very concerned with the state of the country in the emergency case of a zombie attack, we are all at risk and we are very interested in hearing what your plans are and how we can survive a zombie attack.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

But you could already reject this FOI as obviously frivolous.

Posted
That would suggest it's much better for me to do the 10 minutes work for each of these schools

 

From the schools' and taxpayers' pov it most certainly is.

 

I would estimate no more than 1 minute to fill in the form, I think you're exaggerating the amount of work required.

 

Fortunately The Mountains of Madness don't seem to have been part of your sample, but generally FOI request procedure goes something like this:

 

 

  1. Request received
  2. Panic while trying to remember who has to deal with this (due to so few of them being received)
  3. Wait to get hold of highest-ranking person in the school at the time/appropriate person
  4. Wait for them to look up what to do/determine if the scope of the request is valid (see 2)
  5. Try and find out who has access to the necessary information
  6. Get that person (or, more likely, those people) to gather information - in the case of "spending on commodity x" this may well be quite a job
  7. Possibly request further information from sender (which in your case sounds difficult) and if necessary then repeat 5 & 6
  8. Get suitably highly-ranked member of SMT to sign off
  9. Reply to request

 

That might be something schools want to look at and consider getting better information systems.

 

Hmmm.. because schools are rolling in cash.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
but this means some of them are quoting over 10 minutes to access each pupils file. When you look at the ambulance response times for some of these schools, they could get an ambulance before they could access the pupil's file and find out if they had any allergies or who the parents were.

 

Your questions aren't just about opening the student record though.For questions 3-5, you want us to open the student record, check to see whether we know if they are natural or adopted parents, identify how many parents are listed, then if one is missing check to see whether we know if that parent is dead or voluntarily absent. That is time-consuming and would involve lots of people, as - in my school anyway - no one person would know that for every student. At best, we'd need to involve each Head of House, probably each tutor - presumably at that point, we could count my time and the time of the person I'm speaking to.

 

Questions 1, 6 and 8-13 would also require input from several people, when again presumably we could count their time and mine simultaneously.

 

In all this, note there is no one person in this school would could answer all of your questions, so completing this would need one person either coordinating responses or going and discussing it with the relevant people (at which point again we would be counting two people's time)

 

I can easily see how completing this would take more than 18 man hours.

Posted
1 minute?... 1 minute?... So what's your superhero name? Quicksilver?

 

That's to transcribe from data you've already gathered in a report or spreadsheet, not to collect the data. We're talking about putting 4 numbers in for pupils, and 6 numbers for staff. Even if that was 24 digits at one character a second you'll take less than half a minute to transcribe the numbers.

Posted

[*]Panic while trying to remember who has to deal with this (due to so few of them being received)

 

In fairness, that's your problem not the requester's. You should have an FOI procedure.

 

[*]Wait to get hold of highest-ranking person in the school at the time/appropriate person

[*]Wait for them to look up what to do/determine if the scope of the request is valid (see 2)

 

I don't think you can count that towards the 18 hours. I think the clock only relates to actually responding, not in discussing whether or not to respond

Posted
In fairness, that's your problem not the requester's. You should have an FOI procedure.

 

I don't think you can count that towards the 18 hours. I think the clock only relates to actually responding, not in discussing whether or not to respond

 

The point is, it's all still time that has to be paid for. There probably is an FOI procedure (above my pay grade) but as (fortunately) so few are received it's not something that is familiar. Most of the members here probably know a lot of command line functions that they use regularly, but they still have to look up the ones they don't.

Posted (edited)
In fairness, that's your problem not the requester's. You should have an FOI procedure.

Agreed

 

That would suggest it's much better for me to do the 10 minutes work for each of these schools, so I take 479 working days to transcribe the data. Well I don't actually have over 2 years of free time. [/Quote]

And in fairness, this isn't the problem of all the schools asked to complete a FoI request.

 

If all the information for a FoI request was on their website, they could perfectly legitimately point you to it and ask you to get the data from there. They are not required to save you their share of two years of data entry. They simply have to provide the data. You cannot dictate the method. You can provide a preferred method, but if using it actually makes things slower then it could be counterproductive. This data is drawn from more than one source. It's not as simple as running a standard report on SIMS.

Edited by elsiegee40
Posted

Should have only asked half the schools, then it'd only be 1 year of data entry.

 

What we need to write is a FOI responder, a website where schools can click to run a report on their mis to auto generate responses and upload them for the latest data gathering requests.

Posted
Collecting the data takes longer, but the form itself doesn't, really.

 

But you could already reject this FOI as obviously frivolous.

 

You can't and it wasn't. It has be sent out across the teams at the LA to see if anyone has anything to add, responses are then collated, and then the LA responds to the request.

 

Some Council's have more time on their hands than others.....

 

Bristol City Council

 

Top Secret

 

Contingency Plan For Handling Zombie Outbreaks in Bristol

 

Following advice to local authorities from [redacted, on grounds of national security] Bristol City Council has adopted the following contingency plans.

 

 

Alert states

 

Be aware of the following possible alert states.

 

• Ambient zombie level – business as usual, but be on the lookout for tell-tale signs

 

• Enhanced activity level – confirmed zombie attacks on the populus

 

• Major outbreak – zombie infection level in excess of 1%, multiple sightings across the city

 

• Zombie pandemic level – concentrated outbreak, with infection levels over 30%

 

 

High risk areas in Bristol

 

Intelligence from [redacted, on grounds of national security] indicates that certain parts of the Bristol area have an enhanced zombie prevalence, including Whitchurch Park, Shirehampton, and Totterdown. False positives have been found in Stokes Croft, which are subject of under-cover investigation through use of [redacted, on grounds of national security].

 

 

Mobilisation

 

To avoid widespread panic, codewords are in use to mobilise these contingency plans. All staff should therefore be on the look out for references on TV or Radio to [redacted, on grounds of national security], and then proceed to their pre-assigned emergency stations.

These coded references will be broadcast on nation & local radio and television networks

 

 

 

Health and Safety Implications

 

Remember the correct zombie killing proceedure:

 

1 – Fully disconnect the brain-stem from the body through either blunt force or full head removal

 

2 – Avoid all unprotected contact.

 

3 – Zombies are extremely aggressive. Do not approach unless adequately armed.

 

 

Procurement implications

 

The Council has entered into a multi-agency procurement contract for appropriate equipment – where possible in line with our buy-local policy.

 

A catalogue of standard issue equipment – cuffs, stun guns, protection suits etc. – is available on the staff intranet.

 

 

Customer service implications

 

Due to urgent operational considerations, it is acceptable to suspend some elements of normal best practice in customer service standards when dealing with a zombie outbreak.

 

 

Training opportunities

 

An annual training schedule for designated officers is in place. To avoid public panic, this is billed as a gaming festival, codename project igfest. Use your standard issue decoder ring to reveal hidden details concealed in the website at http://igfest.org/headline-game . A range of refresher videos are also available such as

 

Top tip for personal development: Staff fully qualified in zombie handling may qualify for partial exemption and accreditation in the training for handling pirate outbreaks, and for spotting the difference between genuine hot air balloons and evil giant floaty space aliens. Speak to your departmental Learning Development Partner for more details.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
Neither do schools.

 

It's not 2 years per school, perhaps that wasn't clear? With 20000 schools and say 10 staff each school (I think it's actually a lot more than that, but hey, let's be conservative) you're talking about 200000 staff years each year. If the cost is 2 years, that's 0.001% extra effort. Look at it another way, 10 minutes per school when there's 39 working weeks a year, that's 10 minutes in 900,000 per school? Again 0.001%.

 

Remember this is to comply with the FOIA which is to show that you comply with other laws.

Posted
After all this time, have you had a chance to reflect and think perhaps there is another way to help schools fulfill their legal responsibilities? Having experience as a school governor, a school parent and a school employee across a number of schools, I can say from first hand experience that the effort, energy and passion staff put in for doing the right thing for the pupils is immense. I'm convinced your motivations in this respect are the same. I'm equally convinced the vast majority on this forum, and their colleagues, share your motivation in that respect.
  • Thanks 2
Posted

Remember this is to comply with the FOIA which is to show that you comply with other laws.

Again, you have not complied with the FOIA by following the rules to submit a valid request as judged by the ICO. A fact that you have studiously ignored.

 

It is irrelevant how many schools have answered or how government websites collect information. The ICO is the authority here and has made a judgement.

 

If you are as supportive of the FOIA as you claim then please amend your request to comply. It’s very simple. The rules are there for a reason and anybody who believes in it should understand why the rules are important. I await with trepidation [emoji3]

Posted

 

Schools have to teach this and allow their pupils to access the internet. They must be able to do this safely, why can't they click on a link in an email? How is it schools can claim they won't click on a link in an email when I can show they have clicked on the link?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...