Query regarding Looked After Child laptops

[sat_s]

Hi all,

 

At the school where I am they have been purchasing a number of laptops for Looked After Children (LAC's). These laptops are provided to the LAC's by money (around £500 per laptop) given to the school by the LA to purchase laptops on their behalf and then they are able to keep them after they have left the school.

 

1. Are we allowed to install school software on them? They are not technically school owned laptops, but are used by the LAC's for their education whilst registered at the school

2. If we do install the software, I'm assuming that we need to uninstall the software once they have left

 

The school seem to think that we can install software on the laptops and allow them to take it with them when they leave, as the "school has purchased the licenses". However, we are saying that the software is licensed to the school, on school owned equipment and not on equipment that then goes with the student once they have left

 

What are your thoughts? Any other issues or queries regarding licensing?

[jthompson]

The school seem to think that we can install software on the laptops and allow them to take it with them when they leave, as the "school has purchased the licenses".

 

By that logic, the school can just give them a school-owned laptop to take away and keep. They've got a pot of money to purchase a laptop, but software costs for it should also come from that pot.

[gumbygaz]

We had to do this a couple times, but they were devices for home use. So set them up, kept them off the network and the only software I'd put on was office but purchased a separate home licence for it as part of the LAC money.

I have the same train of thought as you. The software is the schools, the laptops are effectively the Student's device. So any software the needing putting on for ease I would buy a separate licence (again would add to the LAC quote) or recommend an alternative open source.

That saying, never saw them again after being handed out, I hope they're used at home for the right reasons and not sold at local carboot but that's out of my hands I guess.

[jmak]

Different software publishers will have different roles, but...

 

If you buy M$ Office on the normal school agreement (based on staff FTE) you can only install it on shared pupil computers.

 

However, if you have an O365 subscription (including the free tier) pupils can download the full version on up to 5 personal devices. If day as there going to keep the devices, there's a strong argument that there personal devices, not school owned. You need to be aware that they'll need to sign in to a school O365 account regularly to enable it to keep working. Therefore it's likely to stop working when they leave school.

 

If you determine they're school owned but for individual use, you should be able to buy a machine licence from your normal reseller at a discount from retail price.

 

IIRC from July this year you won't be able to buy a perpetual license for M$ Office anyway, so whatever you do it won't be possible to give them a license that lasts beyond their time at school.

 

So that's several solutions for one piece of software from one company! Enjoy your discussions with SLT, you blocker [emoji849]

 

Or "open source all the things" TM @mavhc [emoji6]

[mavhc]

Libre Office does solve all the questions.

 

I treat them as school's computers, we bought them, they don't take them home. Once they leave it's their problem to licence the software. Of course MS doesn't care about individual licence problems, only large organisations.

 

Licences are rarely "you can't have this software installed" but more "you have to be licenced to use it"

[elsiegee40]

We had to do this a couple times, but they were devices for home use. So set them up, kept them off the network and the only software I'd put on was office but purchased a separate home licence for it as part of the LAC money.

I have the same train of thought as you. The software is the schools, the laptops are effectively the Student's device. So any software the needing putting on for ease I would buy a separate licence (again would add to the LAC quote) or recommend an alternative open source.

That saying, never saw them again after being handed out, I hope they're used at home for the right reasons and not sold at local carboot but that's out of my hands I guess.

 

Us too. The laptop was treated as a personal device and the only access it got to the network was the same as any other personal laptop.

 

LAC is Looked After Child, ie those in the care of the local authority, not SEND where the child has a need that means the laptop is needed for their day to day communication in lessons which makes life easier when deciding what to do.

[Koldov]

Sorry for the necro, but this is the first thread I found about the subject...

 

And I'm in a massive quandary...

 

I've done all the work and tested as much as I can and we now have (to the best of my ability and available resources) a fully locked down laptop available for home use by a (possibly vulnerable) child in my opinion.

 

But I just asked the question (maybe I should have asked first, but we've never done this before) about the grey area of who owns the laptop (who is responsible for repairs etc.) and how responsible we are for its use (locking down and filtering etc.) and the answer was....

 

We don't know!

 

This is a 'looked after child' (LAC) and the laptop is being provided with 'Pupil Premium' money, apparently it isn't a lockdown or work from home laptop as far as I can tell. Other 'looked after' children who came from a different school apparently have a laptop, an iPad and a Kindle... I'm not sure what exactly for, it doesn't appear to be for any kind of home working as such, but that they do need access to an 'online portal' of some sort.

 

I've read this thread, but it raises as many questions and appears no less 'grey'... I wish there was a simple black & white answer/guidance to these things.

 

Taking some of these answers though about licensing, it would mean even the Windows 10 OS version I have installed (after wiping the original bloated home version of course) is licensed to the school and isn't for 'personal' devices... The Office version, the Sophos AV, Malwarebytes, the Meraki SM, even joining to the Domain and enforcing restrictions (yes, even the wallpaper) on Windows and Chrome, refining the GPOs to be as 'home' friendly as I can, seems to have been a massive waste of time....

 

I don't even really understand why it is funded through the school, if the laptop doesn't actually have anything to do with the school (apart from the channel is set-up this way) and the fact that we will actually purchase a laptop with the money.

 

They should just give the money to whoever is looking after the 'looked after child' (which I presume is LEA > LEA anyway?) and tell them to go down to PC World/Currys/Dixons....

 

And lastly, with things like the 'lockdown laptops' from the DfE, or a school owned device that we provide to a pupil for a specific reason purely to enable them to do schoolwork, I get that we have a responsibility, but if this is essentially going to be a 'personal' laptop that the LEA are pouring money into, why should I even care...?

 

[/rant]

[Boredguy]

It depends on who is providing the equipment.

 

When lockdown started, the Councils were providing the LAC students with devices, and unless otherwise stated they were the responsible body for them and not the school.

 

Now if you as a school are providing a device to a LAC, you would be the responsible body and it is entirely up to you how you facilitate the request as a school.

The Pupil Premium should be going for assisting in their education, and in which case the laptop in our view would be provided as a standard loan device with VPN connectivity back in for filtering etc the same as we have been doing since lockdown.

As it is school property, damage is reported to us, and it is down to the powers that be to decide if any repair costs should be funded entirely via the school, or if the family will have at least a nominal contribution.

 

Also when the student moved off our role either to another school, or end of education, the device is returned unlike the council provided devices which remained with the student.

Edited March 18, 2022 by Boredguy

[mavhc]

At least here the council gives the school money to buy a laptop, or buys a laptop, then I reformat it to be a school device. Only difference between that and any other device is when the child changes school, the laptop goes to their new school.

 

They don't take them home any more than any other child does. It's a laptop for their education, not a personal laptop.

[Koldov]

It depends on who is providing the equipment.

 

When lockdown started, the Councils were providing the LAC students with devices, and unless otherwise stated they were the responsible body for them and not the school.

 

Now if you as a school are providing a device to a LAC, you would be the responsible body and it is entirely up to you how you facilitate the request as a school.

The Pupil Premium should be going for assisting in their education, and in which case the laptop in our view would be provided as a standard loan device with VPN connectivity back in for filtering etc the same as we have been doing since lockdown.

As it is school property, damage is reported to us, and it is down to the powers that be to decide if any repair costs should be funded entirely via the school, or if the family will have at least a nominal contribution.

 

Also when the student moved off our role either to another school, or end of education, the device is returned unlike the council provided devices which remained with the student.

 

I see the logic behind this, as in at what point is 'Pupil Premium' money given to a school used to buy a personal device for a child and if it is why give the money to the school. Therefore the presumption is that it will be a 'school device'? If not why doesn't the LEA just keep on supplying the laptops?

 

This is essence what I am trying to get my head round... I don't want to get too caught up in the DfE device or lockdown scenario, as this is completely separate although it seems this device will be going home with the child, even though we do minimal online teaching/homework.

 

Pupil Premium money is given to the school for 'assisting the education' of the child (in general?), then the LEA tell us that out of that money a laptop is to be provided.

 

Now we 'provide' the device and this is where it starts to get murky... As usual everybody seems to have their own take on what it means... The Pupil Premium money is given to us, for us to decide what to do with it, but now (we are told) a portion of that money must be used to buy a laptop. I'm trying to drill down into at what point does 'provided' become 'responsible'..?

 

But essentially you believe the money is more for the 'lease' of a device (managed by the school and to be used for 'education') that is returned to the school as it is the school's property (not owned by the child as the 'Pupil Premium money is actually given to the school for their education whilst at the school)?

 

At least here the council gives the school money to buy a laptop, or buys a laptop, then I reformat it to be a school device. Only difference between that and any other device is when the child changes school, the laptop goes to their new school.

 

They don't take them home any more than any other child does. It's a laptop for their education, not a personal laptop.

 

So essentially you believe the money is more for the 'purchase' of a device (managed by the school and to be used for 'education' whilst the child is at the school) but that it is not returned to the school (and is therefore the property of the child as the LEA bought it with the Pupil Premium for that child)?

[Boredguy]

Looking at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pupil-premium/pupil-premium, if the child is LAC, then the LEA would have received the funding so I would be expecting them to provide the equipment and not the school budget allocation (unless your a LEA maintained school and not an Academy).

 

It is certainly a head scratcher

[Koldov]

So, as far as I can work out...

 

The 'Pupil Premium' is paid to us and 'absorbed' into our budget (we are an LEA school).

 

Not only a head scratcher, but quite possibly way over my pay-grade to worry about (and I don't actually know why I am).

[mavhc]

I'd say it belongs to the LA, who are acting as legal guardians for the child. The LA then designates responsibility for the operation of the device to the school they're currently at.

[Scifigirl]

Special school -

If we buy something from Pupil Premium (which many of our Children get because of FSM) the item reverts to the school after use. Pupil Premium itself can also be pooled to buy things like Education city which not only benefit the child in question but many other children. If a child receives PP and leaves the next school will receive the same amount in the next budget year unless circumstances have changed.

 

If the item is bought via LAC money (usually bid for during a PEP or a CHIN) we are happy to supply and set it up. If for school use our licenses go on and such, but as the device belongs to a child it is wiped and handed back when child leaves. If for home use only, an appropriate license purchased or 365 put on but then access is revoked when leaves.... if possible still taken in and wiped.

 

iPad is a whole different ball game with apps and such... but again wiped before leaving the premises.

[Koldov]

Ah, maybe I have a fundamental misunderstanding of LEA child funding then (not suprisingly)...

 

I thought Pupil Premium was mentioned, but this is definitely a LAC 'thing' so I'm unsure if there is an overlap here.

 

We don't have many LAC pupils or FSM and this is the first I've had to deal with providing a device for.

[Scifigirl]

For a LAC device, the damage would be reported to the Social worker, and they may be able to bid for repairs/etc or agree a budget for repairs to be completed by the school... (sometimes easier because of VAT), or just get a new one next PEP round.... as in PEP's/Chins are yearly and will ask teachers for the impact of anything bought, so you just say "They broke it... need another, with a better case etc."

 

We had a child who alternately every year got a laptop or an iPad....

[Garacesh]

To my knowledge (although now I'm wondering if we were 'doing it wrong'), LAC laptops have never been school property and we've never accepted any liability for them. IT Support operates only in an advisory capacity ("We would recommend any of these laptops, they would be suitable for the use case.") and provides basic setup (debloating Windows, mostly) and support as a best-effort venture, carrying with it no guarantee, assurance or warranty, nor is it any indication of any contract or agreement of any future support being given.

 

As for software licenses, etc, I've always tended to give the kids freeware (VLC, Audacity, Chrome, 7Zip, Foxit, Notepad++, Google Drive File Stream etc) and instructions on how to download and install Office via the school's Office 365 subscription.

We do not install any software that the school has paid for, or that is subject to a license agreement between a company and the school.

 

Whilst the child is in the building (e.g. under our duty of care) we encourage using school resources, which thanks to G Suite is reasonably pain-free most of the time. This way they're using a computer operating our safeguarding and security softwares, are filtered properly (traffic bound to an actual user rather than being anonymous), they're able to access specific software that would be unavailable to them on their LAC laptop (eg Adobe or Serif), and they have access to on-site file shares that aren't available externally.

Edited March 23, 2022 by Garacesh

[Koldov]

To my knowledge (although now I'm wondering if we were 'doing it wrong'), LAC laptops have never been school property and we've never accepted any liability for them. IT Support operates only in an advisory capacity ("We would recommend any of these laptops, they would be suitable for the use case.") and provides basic setup (debloating Windows, mostly) and support as a best-effort venture, carrying with it no guarantee, assurance or warranty, nor is it any indication of any contract or agreement of any future support being given.

 

As for software licenses, etc, I've always tended to give the kids freeware (VLC, Audacity, Chrome, 7Zip, Foxit, Notepad++, Google Drive File Stream etc) and instructions on how to download and install Office via the school's Office 365 subscription.

We do not install any software that the school has paid for, or that is subject to a license agreement between a company and the school.

 

Whilst the child is in the building (e.g. under our duty of care) we encourage using school resources, which thanks to G Suite is reasonably pain-free most of the time. This way they're using a computer operating our safeguarding and security softwares, are filtered properly (traffic bound to an actual user rather than being anonymous), they're able to access specific software that would be unavailable to them on their LAC laptop (eg Adobe or Serif), and they have access to on-site file shares that aren't available externally.

 

Ultimately as all these answers prove, it all appears to very grey and with not even a scrap of at least guidance for the matter (which would also be subject to interpretation anyway), it seems there is no definitive answer as to 'right or wrong'...

 

However, imho to me, the fact that you are touching it at all, does in fact imply some liability/responsibility and whilst you say you don't actually install software 'that is subject to a license agreement between a company and the school, I'd question if the O365 subscription isn't exactly that? So, technically provided by the school for educational purposes (whilst attending said school just like other software) and I'm wondering what the difference is (apart from being able to end the O365 subscription when necessary). Just a question, not an argument...

 

Otherwise, just advise a suitable laptop and point them to Currys/Dixons and be done with it. However, somehow and for some unknown reason the money is funnelled through the school**, which also seem to infer that it is the school's responsibility to, a) provide the laptop and so, b) therefore to be a school laptop for education with all that entails...

 

Also, I'm still wondering why they get laptops, Kindles, iPads at all? As noted in a previous post these are not specifically SEN children and from what I gather, for the most part are only LAC with no 'other' special needs to cater for. I know plenty of our children do not necessarily have these things at home...

 

**Which begs the question... if they are being being given 'personal' devices purely as an effort to a achieve a certain perceived 'quality of life', why is the school involved at all (surely that is a local Gov. > local Gov. issue and not a matter for LEA if it is not purely for education)?

[Face-Man]

I worked in a LA who gave out laptops to their LAC these were personal devices new out of the box for the child to use as they saw fit a bit like a parent buying a laptop for their child. There were some filtering and an aup but if they wanted to play games or use facebook that was up to their foster carers to discuss with the child.The schools were not involved one bit and they should be treated as boyd if brought into school. Certainly any school software licences small print would be tested if found on this kind of device.

[Garacesh]

However, imho to me, the fact that you are touching it at all, does in fact imply some liability/responsibility

I always make it clear that what I'm offering, and the terms, and I usually express in no uncertain terms that once the laptop leaves my office, free of bloat, I will refuse to touch it, as would be the case with a pupil's personal laptop (because from that point, that's basically what it is, after all). The only reason I offer to debloat them is because I know they're fresh-from-factory and won't have any potential naughties on them.

The only real exceptions to this has been when I've completely reset a device from the shift-reboot menu.

 

and whilst you say you don't actually install software 'that is subject to a license agreement between a company and the school, I'd question if the O365 subscription isn't exactly that? So, technically provided by the school for educational purposes (whilst attending said school just like other software) and I'm wondering what the difference is (apart from being able to end the O365 subscription when necessary). Just a question, not an argument...

Valid point, though perhaps just a scenario of bad wording than bad conduct.

 

The vast majority of software licensed to the school is licensed to the school as a business entity, and is only installable on school devices etcetera.

The Office 365 license does allow for users to install products on personal, non-school devices, so it's not in violation of any agreement (whereas giving them the Serif packages, or our SEN software, etc would be, which is why I give them instruction on how to do that, rather than dumping our copy of Office on with a MAK activated)

Edited March 23, 2022 by Garacesh

[Koldov]

I worked in a LA who gave out laptops to their LAC these were personal devices new out of the box for the child to use as they saw fit a bit like a parent buying a laptop for their child. There were some filtering and an aup but if they wanted to play games or use facebook that was up to their foster carers to discuss with the child.The schools were not involved one bit and they should be treated as boyd if brought into school. Certainly any school software licences small print would be tested if found on this kind of device.

 

Yeah and I get that, at least that makes perfect sense to me and how it should be done if an LA gives the LAC a laptop (akin to a family buying their child a laptop) to be used as a 'personal' device, there's no issue. Unfortunately, somehow these devices are making their way to the child via funds provided to the school and so, I feel this changes the dynamic and the expectation of responsibility/liability...

[synaesthesia]

This appears to differ massively from LEA to LEA, regardless of whether the school is an academy or LEA controlled.

Firstly, absolutely separate PP from LAC - very different. Pupil Premium funding is designated to the school for a particular child and the money can be spend on whatever the child is in need of - could be tech, could be manual implements, extra books etc.

LAC funding at least for us is directed by the LEA, although purchased by us. The devices are handed straight to the pupil via the LAC coordinator, we provide advice on them and nothing else. Repairs, issues etc via home insurance first and foremost, but they would be directed to a 3rd party for repairs, likely via the LEA contact. There is no filtering or monitoring as the devices does not and never has belonged to the school, it is a personal device, even if used in school (here it should be treated as any other BYOD)

[Boredguy]

Like Garacesh, we don't install any school software on any device that is not the property of the Trust (which also includes any kit the LA provides our SEN students via their statements, never mind anything for the LAC students).

 

In face your licence precludes it. Now if the LEA are insistent the school purchase it, I would be very tempted to treat it as a full school device just in a 1:1 situation and add it fully to the domain and have the same security/VPN configuration as all our other laptops, and if they are to keep it when moving to another school/LEA, then they need to return it to us on the last day for it to be reinstalled with stock Windows (hopefully it's not a 10S device) with the version of OS it came with.

 

Think the big grey issue is the directive from your LEA. They get the funding for the LAC, they should purchase the unit to give to them

[Koldov]

I always make it clear that what I'm offering, and the terms, and I usually express in no uncertain terms that once the laptop leaves my office, free of bloat, I will refuse to touch it, as would be the case with a pupil's personal laptop (because from that point, that's basically what it is, after all). The only reason I offer to debloat them is because I know they're fresh-from-factory and won't have any potential naughties on them.

The only real exceptions to this has been when I've completely reset a device from the shift-reboot menu.

 

 

Valid point, though perhaps just a scenario of bad wording than bad conduct.

 

The vast majority of software licensed to the school is licensed to the school as a business entity, and is only installable on school devices etcetera.

The Office 365 license does allow for users to install products on personal, non-school devices, so it's not in violation of any agreement (whereas giving them the Serif packages, or our SEN software, etc would be, which is why I give them instruction on how to do that, rather than dumping our copy of Office on with a MAK activated)

 

Yes, I do see your point, honestly though I don't touch any personal devices (not even staff - long story), but that's an individual choice and not something I really feel I'm being given here (if it is to be a 'personal' device), the Headmaster has told me to provide the laptop (due to the fact that we receive the funding - I'm still not getting any closer to the reason for that though)... As in the previous post, they wouldn't get even the service you provide if any other family bought it straight from the shop and it's not a condition of my employment (possibly different to an ethical responsibility) to do that for them...?

 

Yes, I was aware of the Office 365 for student/teacher personal use scenario, we haven't looked into it here (since HUP for Office) as it seems that as it's therefore dependant on a school license it would only be valid for the term of employment/attendance at the school (?), the possibility of me then having to support it (and their devices) and the management of hundreds of staff and students outweighed the benefits. It therefore has never been advertised and I've only ever had one person ask about it in all the years I've worked here...

[Garacesh]

as it seems that as it's therefore dependant on a school license it would only be valid for the term of employment/attendance at the school (?)

Correct. Assuming you're using Azure AD Connect, if they log in to 365 and download and install Office, then that local install of Office is bound to their Office 365 account, which in turn is bound to your AD. Disable/delete them from AD? License invalid and (AFAIK) Office products will start haranguing them to purchase it.

 

I can't say I've ever had an issue with management when I've explained why I don't want to support pupils' personal devices. I do usually support staff devices in a very minor capacity (again, usually this is debloating brand new devices, but we allow staff devices on our wifi so they often need the filter certificate for SSL inspection applying) but that's an entirely personal choice, not something I'm mandated to do, and I absolutely wouldn't begrudge anybody who chose not to, I can entirely sympathise with the reasoning behind it.

Edited March 23, 2022 by Garacesh