BSF Wave 6 - How long until I get the chop?

[Guest hathor]

I only found out about BSF at the end of last week, and have been quite anxious about it since

 

My school is in wave 6, so I am told. My line manager tries to assure me that I don't even need to think about doing anything for another 4 or 5 years, and that nothing will actually happen in terms of my termination for approaching ten years.

 

However, what I have seen online, and it is very sketchy indeed, suggests that I need to look for a job soon, and move along after a couple of years from now.

 

Does anyone have any idea of the likely timescale and how it will affect a school in a reasonably socio-economically OK area of wave 6?

 

How long from first warning/stirrings until reduncancy/TUPE?

[conehead]

You indicate you are in a "better" school so I think you personally don't need to worry, I think the Government will be spreading the jam thinner and the only the worst 4 schools in each LEA will get BSFed by wave 6 and the rest will carry on as they are.

 

The present consultation period may mean the BSF steamroller may come quicker to your area than you expect though if your own LA tries to get in there sooner that planned because they have a fear the BSF money will run out or be reconfigured before they can get a slice.

 

This is just my personal crystal ball reading though, and others may well think I'm too optimistic/pessimistic.

[GrumbleDook]

It is not *worst* schools ... but schools in teh *worst* areas. You may be in a successful school and get chosen ... in fact that might be a preferred option of some LAs to give something back to schools that have done well but with rubbish buildings.

[conehead]

I would agree, it's most likely to be the schools in the worst structural condition, or with the higest repair and maintenance costs that get chosen, and how that correlates with the academic standards would be an interesting study in it's own right.

 

My suspicion though is that the "failing schools " will get priority as the waves were chosen in the order of percieved greatest need first.

[broc]

Don't forget the Govt are very 'keen' on Academies too, and will go out of their way to try and convince LAs.

 

Of course LAs who are not so keen as the Govt about Academies can find their progress with BSF somewhat hampered until they come round to the Govts way of thinking

 

Originally, the Academies program was intended to target under-performing schools, now it is cynically used to 'top-up' BSF funds so that more schools can be rebuilt. Even schools which are high-performing get targeted to become Academies.

[GrumbleDook]

High performing schools are usually targeted so that they 'support' under-performing schools as part of the deal into becoming an academy.

 

The cynic might also say that when the stats are coming out about the performance of Academies it doesn't hurt to have those high-performing schools in there and that they offset the poor schools they 'support' (ok ... read take over instead of support!)

[Bridit]

I'm in the East Riding of Yorkshire and have just been informed that the LA is applying for BSF funding, I too have been watching the forums about BSF with some trepidation, what I would like to know is why we never see input from TUPED members about life on "the other side" do they have their keyboards taken away with their innovation?

[CyberNerd]

hat I would like to know is why we never see input from TUPED members about life on "the other side" do they have their keyboards taken away with their innovation?

 

probably just a big fat clause in their contract about posting to public forums.

discussing company info isn't to be encouraged, it could lead to competitors (other schools) improving.

[Heebeejeebee]

I just found out that although we are not in wave 6 (some of our schools in the LA are and some are not), the mangled service will still apply to ALL schools in the LA - not just those in wave 6.

 

*sigh*

 

HBJB

[browolf]

probably just a big fat clause in their contract about posting to public forums.

discussing company info isn't to be encouraged, it could lead to competitors (other schools) improving.

 

we need a whistleblower

[Grommit]

I just found out that although we are not in wave 6 (some of our schools in the LA are and some are not), the mangled service will still apply to ALL schools in the LA - not just those in wave 6.

 

*sigh*

 

HBJB

 

If you are not a BSF school then you are not forced to accept the managed service...

 

You need to do some work now and make a successful business case Against the outsourcing and scare the crap out of the Governors and Head Teacher on how it will adversely affect the school and the School ICT Community...

 

Costs against service will be a good start...

[Grommit]

I'm in the East Riding of Yorkshire and have just been informed that the LA is applying for BSF funding, I too have been watching the forums about BSF with some trepidation, what I would like to know is why we never see input from TUPED members about life on "the other side" do they have their keyboards taken away with their innovation?

 

 

As i said before RM had a silence clause if you purchased some of their products... you were not allowed to discuss RM issues outside of the controlled RM forums.. (as per terms and conditions)

[Heebeejeebee]

If you are not a BSF school then you are not forced to accept the managed service...

 

You need to do some work now and make a successful business case Against the outsourcing and scare the crap out of the Governors and Head Teacher on how it will adversely affect the school and the School ICT Community...

 

Costs against service will be a good start...

 

Our Head is already dead against it and has assured us that we're safe (not in writing though). I'm sure though that if it came to a choice of keeping us and rejecting the managed service or loosing the BSF re-build/refurbishment we'd be out the door as fast as we could be pushed.

 

I had heard that if a school wanted the benefit of a re-build/refurbishment then they have to take the managed service. Has anyone seen anything official about this? No matter how hard I google I can find nothing much to say about the ins and outs of BSF - only how 'good' it'll be for everyone. The Partnership for Schools website is full of dead links and our LA has nothing about it on their website at all despite wave 6 having already started.

 

How does BSF apply to school that are not so tied in with the LA (Trust schools, foundation schools etc)?

 

HBJB

[Heebeejeebee]

As i said before RM had a silence clause if you purchased some of their products... you were not allowed to discuss RM issues outside of the controlled RM forums.. (as per terms and conditions)

 

I wonder why that is! Perhaps they don't want to make the rest of us jealous.

 

HBJB

[russdev]

As i said before RM had a silence clause if you purchased some of their products... you were not allowed to discuss RM issues outside of the controlled RM forums.. (as per terms and conditions)

 

I will say again grommit which product sorry you can't make claims with out backing it up we have number of rm products I am allowed to take about everyone and not been asked not to talk about them.

 

Only time i have been asked not discuss a product is when I have signed a nda as it was pre-release version which is fair enough.

 

So either provide the product name (can be pm'd to me if wish) or stop making the claims which you can't prove.

 

Russell

[broc]

I had heard that if a school wanted the benefit of a re-build/refurbishment then they have to take the managed service. Has anyone seen anything official about this? No matter how hard I google I can find nothing much to say about the ins and outs of BSF - only how 'good' it'll be for everyone. The Partnership for Schools website is full of dead links and our LA has nothing about it on their website at all despite wave 6 having already started.

 

How does BSF apply to school that are not so tied in with the LA (Trust schools, foundation schools etc)?

 

HBJB

Strictly speaking, schools are under no obligation to accept the managed ICT service. Electing not to take the service will result in the school losing capital ICT investment of around £1450 per student unless they can prepare & win a business case to bid for the money directly. Unfortunately Partnership for Schools has made it very,very difficult for schools (or 'in-house' LA bids) to succeed and most schools won't even try. Schools thinking of opting out will be under a lot of pressure from their LAs & Partnership for Schools as it will undermine the size & scope of the managed ICT service making it less attractive for potential bidders so it will take a seriously determined HT supported by the Governors to defend any decision to opt-out and lose the investment.

 

Trust & foundation schools (as well as LA schools) that are well funded and can afford to lose £1m+ ICT investment can choose to do without BSF ICT funding if they wish.

[Heebeejeebee]

Strictly speaking, schools are under no obligation to accept the managed ICT service. Electing not to take the service will result in the school losing capital ICT investment of around £1450 per student unless they can prepare & win a business case to bid for the money directly. Unfortunately Partnership for Schools has made it very,very difficult for schools (or 'in-house' LA bids) to succeed and most schools won't even try. Schools thinking of opting out will be under a lot of pressure from their LAs & Partnership for Schools as it will undermine the size & scope of the managed ICT service making it less attractive for potential bidders so it will take a seriously determined HT supported by the Governors to defend any decision to opt-out and lose the investment.

 

Trust & foundation schools (as well as LA schools) that are well funded and can afford to lose £1m+ ICT investment can choose to do without BSF ICT funding if they wish.

 

Yeah - that's what I figured. We're boned!

 

HBJB

[GrumbleDook]

Trust and foundation schools are actually still funded b the LA and the money they presently use for IT and so on is actually devolved from by the LA to schools. One of many reasons why LAs tend to do chunks of top-slicing already, to gain greater control when you have a number of schools that are rather 'independent' of the LA (typically these are the former GM schools).

 

The schools that are outside of this are Academies (unless the BSF project is specifically looking at Academies) and where funding is also from another source (eg the church). Even these are having limited say in things.

[broc]

The schools that are outside of this are Academies (unless the BSF project is specifically looking at Academies) and where funding is also from another source (eg the church). Even these are having limited say in things.

 

 

Even though Academies are outside of BSF as Grumbledook has pointed out, a number of LAs who were previously totally resistant to the idea of Academies have been 'persuaded' by central government to go down the Academy route as a means of 'enabling' their BSF funding.

[farmerste]

what i don't think people are 'getting' about BSF is that when you have an outside company running ICT in a school, the school has 'to fit the ICT' and not the other way around, as it is now with in house techies.

 

it really makes me sick, instead of pumping loads of money into ict why dont the government just re-intstate discipline into schools, then NONE would be failing.

 

IF it ain't broke don't fix it, schools have gone down hill since they removed discipline, and now they are messing with school support, so ict, etc will go down the pan too.

 

[GrumbleDook]

BSF is *not* just about IT and ICT ... it really isn't. It is being used as a convenient shoe-horn to address a number of problems at once, IT and ICT being just two of them.

 

So far most contracts have been won by a company to provide what the contract says ... the contract is drawn up by the LEPs / LAs and if your school wants a say in it then get in there now!

 

Unfortunately we have good evidence that even when a school gets involved and has a good amount of input, the communication of it all breaks down, again at the LA end rather than the school or contractor.

 

There are lots of schools out there that already have managed services in one form or another ... whether it is a preferred company that does all their cabling, CCTV, thin clients ... I have said that this is a poor arguement before, and I will say it again.

 

If you are determined to fight this and not take part in it at all then the common arguements of 'we know best', 'the school won't know what to do without us', 'there will be no tech support on site and you have to ring [foreign country]', 'Teachers will have to do everything themselves' ... this is FUD.

 

If you are going to put together an arguement you *have* to put in how you make a difference to the school ... the innovations you have put in place have helped dept x raise their results by z amount, your role in gaining ICT Mark, how well you meet and go beyond the Technical and Functional Specifications for IT infrastructre, show a good model for sustainability for IT over 5 years, how you have implemented FITS (or even ITIL v3!) ... these are your targets ... this is what the Govt has been looking for for the last few years and too few schools have been getting there.

 

Even if you do all of the above ... unless you have the support and understanding of your senior leaders ... unless they are on board to what you do ... then yes, the managed service company will come in and tell the school what it is getting and how it will run.