ESS SIMS 3 Year Contracts

[ABR82]

When we asked if SIMS 8 was being binned, our SIMS Account Manager confirmed this and told us that SIMS 8 was not the direction the new owners were going to go in, and therefore it was not what their future offerings would be based on.

 

I would not have a problem with a change in renewal terms from 1 to 3 years had it been communicated clearly a year in advance. But to do it with 6 weeks notice is just dishonest and underhand, and can only be construed as an attempt to prevent users from being able to assess alternatives and make informed choices in a reasonable timescale. Do I want a continuing relationship with a company that treats it's customers in this way? No. Would I sign their take it or leave it 3 year contract if it was the best thing for the school? Yes.

 

However I have to answer the question of what is the best thing for the school. My original plan had been to shift MIS at the end of the next academic year, and we'd been looking around at alternatives for some time. Had I been allowed that timescale and SIMS had released a better product or elements of a better product by then (ie. released, in the wild, actually working. Not promised or shown on a demo video), then I would have been able to compare whatever they will deliver to the alternatives. However, given their actions I cannot make any decision based on what progress they may or may not make in the next year, on what the new owners intend to do, I can only look at their creaking and backwards existing product and then at their competitors now.

 

Which is the best choice for the school? It doesn't feel like locking ourselves into a 3 year contract with a company who clearly intend to treat their customers like dirt and have an inferior product.

[Boredguy]

Fair enough, point well made.

 

I suppose I am hopeful for the future and see that now they are not part of Capita their horizon is a very different view than before. I know they have been on a massive transformation drive and separation process. They have a lot to prove to the market I suppose and I remember being at BETT when SIMS8 was launched.

 

The new management (I hear Andy Bennett is not longer around?) are being brave and doing things they could not have done under old management at Capita. Is it like pulling a plaster off really quickly, they will feel the pain for a while, but there are some things that simply needed doing?

 

I don't know, based on the experience of moving from Schoolcomms to ParentPay, I don't hold much hope for what functionality they might put into a cloud version of SIMS, since the ParentPay product seems to be a huge step backwards in functionality than it's sister company of Schoolcomms.

 

But anyway it wouldn't have been so bad had ESS said, that this will be the last 1 year renewal you can do, then switching to 3 years from 2023 as that at least gives time for looking at options and tendering etc, and not just a couple of months out of the blue.

[Rob_D]

I thought he was being ironic when posting 'it sounds like a good idea' because it sounds fraught with potential issues for me when you are operating a system partially in the cloud and partially on your iron with SQL.

Correct, I was being a touch sarcastic. Trying to work with different modules across different software generations sounds like a recipe for "unexpected features".

[supportman]

For anyone thinking of moving MIS, the end of the acadamic year is a not a great idea

 

Make sure you plan any move in the middle of the year, its much easier and far less stress.

[thomsm86]

it sounds fraught with potential issues for me when you are operating a system partially in the cloud and partially on your iron with SQL.

 

Hmmm, is this not how all the 3rd party systems that link with SIMS work? They extract data from SIMS -> Do some activity (better user experience than SIMS -> Put the data back into SIMS which then allows the school admin to do their thing with the data...? Is their approach not the same or am I missing the point?

 

SIMS -> Data extract, do something in say Class Charts | Take Register -> Put the data back in SIMS for CENSUS, reporting, 1st day absence calling.

 

If it's good enough for schools to use all the 3rd parties interacting with SIMS7, why is that not a good approach for ESS to evolve out their NextGen.

 

I am not technical and may be missing a big point here...

[paulkerton]

If it's good enough for schools to use all the 3rd parties interacting with SIMS7, why is that not a good approach for ESS to evolve out their NextGen.

 

I am not technical and may be missing a big point here...

 

How many do that live on the fly and instantly? Most do that overnight, and also do it one way, leaving your MIS as the single source of truth.

For example, I have my secondary school MIS push data in Google (Users/Calendars/Groups) overnight. I can manually trigger one if I need to. Doing so every time a change is made instantly would be a huge resource drain and send SIMS to a grinding halt.

Are these parts they're talking about also going to write back, or are they going to be read-only? If you're writing back, you really don't want two interfaces to place the same data into your database, because you're asking for accidental data overwrites and edit clashes. If you're switching between a web interface and the SIMS 7 interface, you're basically going to upset staff with all the switching.

 

Also, if its the people who created the ParentPay UI doing this work, then I don't hold out much hope of getting a modern interface that has continual tweaks and changes. ParentPay has been stuck with the same look and design and confusing menus for a decade.

Edited November 19, 2021 by paulkerton

[sefton]

Hmmm, is this not how all the 3rd party systems that link with SIMS work? They extract data from SIMS -> Do some activity (better user experience than SIMS -> Put the data back into SIMS which then allows the school admin to do their thing with the data...? Is their approach not the same or am I missing the point?

 

SIMS -> Data extract, do something in say Class Charts | Take Register -> Put the data back in SIMS for CENSUS, reporting, 1st day absence calling.

 

If it's good enough for schools to use all the 3rd parties interacting with SIMS7, why is that not a good approach for ESS to evolve out their NextGen.

 

I am not technical and may be missing a big point here...

 

The expectation is that these are not both showing live data, they are synchronised overnight, but if you've got Sims on SQL on site and then some Sims in the cloud then you can't not have them both showing live data and you have an API constantly polling SQL then you're going to bring Sims to a grinding halt on the local installations.

[localzuk]

SIMS already have a part cloud setup with Teacher App. So, I think people may be overthinking that aspect of it - the hybrid setup is already proven tech.

[thomsm86]

SIMS already have a part cloud setup with Teacher App. So, I think people may be overthinking that aspect of it - the hybrid setup is already proven tech.

 

Very good point, if Teacher App is good enough (from a tech point of view) to get the job done, then that process can be built on to scale for their NexGen slice(s) to a point where schools don't need certain parts of SIMS7 anymore, a gradual phase out of old SIMS7 functionality. Just like another user said on the forum, how they did it from SIMS Launcher (dbase) to Version 6 and .net (SQL) but without Core Integrator!

[enjay]

SIMS already have a part cloud setup with Teacher App. So, I think people may be overthinking that aspect of it - the hybrid setup is already proven tech.

 

The other possibility is they will move discrete modules, e.g. Nova, Exams Organiser, Personnel, FMS, etc., into the cloud one at a time. Somewhere along the line, they'll release a predominantly read-only feed from the student details section (let's face it, 90% of what teachers do in SIMS is review-only anyway) with some write-back content such as registers and behaviour points, much like their own Teacher App or Go4Schools, then once we've been running SIMS .Net and "next gen SIMS" alongside each other for a bit, they'll turn off the link to our SQL.

[mthomas08]

Well, today the contract hit our finance team and even they can't believe how it has been not just worded but locked in their words. Unlike us, they have no feeling towards SIMs until now.

 

They've responded wanting a single year.

 

Adds a serious amount of petrol to the fire when our HT and SBM see that.

[Net_Man]

I received an email from Scholarpack today which seems to say that schools who are pushing back are not being forced into the 3 year deal

 

https://blog.scholarpack.com/options-for-your-upcoming-3-year-sims-renewal?utm_campaign=Blog&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=184795805&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_LOeejgzSzfTbVsrq0_qKgKiOMSnFMRWV-zKcSNMb2fDS9eCeF1yT3SJFKpUu4YmAesfWhWNF8FtE-61FnBOOn_Llw4As5AFRaMvq8twDKWUCRX9o&utm_content=184795805&utm_source=hs_email

[mavhc]

If they're scrapping SIMS 8 then they're already 10 years behind everyone else who started with a web app.

[localzuk]

Gotta say, its a bold move. Buy a company with a customer-base which is using an already legacy system. Scrap the new product they've been working on for a decade, then tell everyone that the future means they're locked in to that legacy system for 3 years, pending hopeful releases of new modules that will be cloud based at some point in the future.

 

Whilst expecting those customers to just say "oh, ok"... Not "what on Earth are you thinking?"...

[thomsm86]

If they're scrapping SIMS 8 then they're already 10 years behind everyone else who started with a web app.

Indeed, hope other providers are scalable in their solutions to handle the influx of converting customers from SIMS and those already with that MIS don't see degradation of service or other issues with the possibility of some MIS providers total customer base increasing significantly by percent. Hope they have the infrastructure right which SIMS clearly didn't achieve in the past.

[TechMonkey]

Gotta say, its a bold move. Buy a company with a customer-base which is using an already legacy system. Scrap the new product they've been working on for a decade, then tell everyone that the future means they're locked in to that legacy system for 3 years, pending hopeful releases of new modules that will be cloud based at some point in the future.

 

Whilst expecting those customers to just say "oh, ok"... Not "what on Earth are you thinking?"...

 

I imagine the thought process is, it could take us up to 3 years to get this squared away. Let's lock them in to try and stop the customer leakage (which looks bad to investors) and then when they come up for renewal we will have this fantastic product to migrate them to and everyone will clap. It is about giving themselves breathing room. It is a hell of a gamble but if they can pull it off there really will be some hat doffing.

 

@thomsm86 - the thing you are overlooking is that the other providers have been working with scalable infrastructure for as long as their products have been available, and are used to adding on resources as they need it each year or during demand periods. The real question is, will the Next Gen SIMS be able to handle not only the first dump of new customers and prove itself to be stable, but also prove it can handle those big crunch times, like results week or when reports are being produced or even that 9am crunch when the register is done. They have no track record with that (unless you take ParentPay as the track record and how that copes with start of term) and schools are being asked to effectively trust a new comer who is claiming to be the old, stable hand in the market.

[Ditto]

The big difference there is their competitors use 3 year contracts with NEW customers who then go to 1 year contracts after that, not their existing ones. Also, suppliers who do offer longer contracts do so for a price reduction compared to 3x 1-year contracts rather than an agreed capped increase.

This is a valid point. I used to get 1, 3 and 5 year quotes for Progresso as it was then and the 3 and 5 year discounts were significant. Progresso internally could plan future investment based on those contracts, but unfortunately their marker share has dropped off so much, their not in many schools long list, let alone short. Perhaps ESS should look to buy them out and invest in that as their solution! Progresso had a stinker of a start, but when I finished using it just under 2 years ago, it had stabilised and was a better product than it's reputation.

[Ditto]

I have to say what a fantastic read this thread is. I'm 90+% in-line with most of what has been said, but I wanted to note a slightly different perspective. Most of us here are tech savvy, a good number of us data protection savvy and clearly a significant number also business savvy. But, invariably the decision makers, the likes of 'educational sector only' experienced heads and SLT don't have the collective knowledge we have. Some of those decision makers are smart enough to take the expert advice beyond their knowledge, but as too many of us know, plenty aren't. Larger MATS perhaps have don't have this issue to the same degree and I believe @bringmoredata has shown that MATs are more likely to churn from SIMS. Having worked with four MIS operationally, and working very closely with SLT, SBMs and heads in parallel, along with approaching 8 years of school governance, I believe I have a broad perspective.

 

Something that I don't think has been considered, is there are a significant number of schools sufficiently happy with SIMS as-is, that they would have most likely renewed for the next three years anyway. As an example, my governance school is part of growing primary only MAT. It's still in single figures and unlikely to change from that in 3 years. As a governor I raised the idea at looking at SIMS alternatives; it was a non-runner. Firstly, the original SBM used to say when questioned on this after we acadamised, 'Don't want to through the baby out with the bath water'. The same was true when we joined the parent trust. Ultimately, the SBM was anti-change and feared it. As a governor, it's a little tricky keeping the topic strategic, and non-operational. But it was 100% clear nothing would change. The SBM is now retired and the trust moved the role centrally so we don't have one now. I have touched on the topic at trust level, but no appetite for change currently there either. The bottom line is they use the product so lightly, they just don't need to change and obviously feel the expense is OK. I also believe their focus is very much on other priorities. I still disagree with them and I will use this hot potato to once again try to get them to open the eyes to other products.

 

In terms of PR, ESS could not have got it more wrong! I believe the pressure will mount to a degree they will backdown and 1 year renewals will be available, but the reputational damage will have been done. How much better would the PR be if ESS said, 'Hey, here's a discounted rate if you renew for a three year period. We're looking for the commitment to help fund massive investment programme to improve the product you currently use, including moving to a cloud based MIS'. I suspect the current approach will cost them dearly, but it might only show up in 3 or 4 years when they fail to match the current cloud market, but a lot more decision makers will become more aware of the competition due to the heat created by the current underhand approach.

Edited November 20, 2021 by Zoom7000

[mavhc]

But the less you use SIMS the easier it is to move off it to something you will use because it's not terrible

[Ditto]

But the less you use SIMS the easier it is to move off it to something you will use because it's not terrible

 

Very true, but that line would hold no persuasion with the decision makers I'm working with. Another point to add, I believe the top competitors to SIMS offer a better experience for MATS where you want a collective view.

[vikpaw]

How many do that live on the fly and instantly? Most do that overnight, and also do it one way, leaving your MIS as the single source of truth.

For example, I have my secondary school MIS push data in Google (Users/Calendars/Groups) overnight. I can manually trigger one if I need to. Doing so every time a change is made instantly would be a huge resource drain and send SIMS to a grinding halt.

Are these parts they're talking about also going to write back, or are they going to be read-only? If you're writing back, you really don't want two interfaces to place the same data into your database, because you're asking for accidental data overwrites and edit clashes. If you're switching between a web interface and the SIMS 7 interface, you're basically going to upset staff with all the switching.

 

Also, if its the people who created the ParentPay UI doing this work, then I don't hold out much hope of getting a modern interface that has continual tweaks and changes. ParentPay has been stuck with the same look and design and confusing menus for a decade.

The offering from TASC gives a clean cloud based interface to live interact with SIMS in real-time. That's tried and tested. The difficulty will be if they're trying to move that data to a new structure / system. So it won't just be two interfaces, ideally, it's also two datastores. That will need some kind of live sync to ensure the data is the same in both places.

The other possibility is they will move discrete modules, e.g. Nova, Exams Organiser, Personnel, FMS, etc., into the cloud one at a time. Somewhere along the line, they'll release a predominantly read-only feed from the student details section (let's face it, 90% of what teachers do in SIMS is review-only anyway) with some write-back content such as registers and behaviour points, much like their own Teacher App or Go4Schools, then once we've been running SIMS .Net and "next gen SIMS" alongside each other for a bit, they'll turn off the link to our SQL.

I don't think it will be that easy to move modules over discretely. They inevitably link to something else, somewhere else. If anyone has ever looked at the tables will know, it's a mess, with horrible add-ons and fixes all over.

 

SIMS is slow at the best of times, without having to manage 2 database schema simultaneously. I just can't see how they can incrementally deliver a new system without major interruption to the end-user, or it being sluggish.

 

When third parties provide add-on services, they have a fully working self-contained system. It can take a data feed, process and send it back. I think that's what NextGen SIMS needs to do, but rather than just one module, it needs to be the whole MIS if it's going to be a coherent system.

It needs a full ground up re-write. I'd want to treat it like a switch to a new MIS, you port the data over to new system for testing, and then do a top up of data when you're ready to go live. The destination system needs to be fully working and ready with all modules. I don't think we're going to see this.

 

The approach seems flawed don't you think?

[mavhc]

The main reason they can't do it is they don't know how the program works. There's 10 people in India who know how it works, it's it. You can find their names in the patch code and they're on linkedin.

[localzuk]

To anyone looking at G Cloud - be very careful with how you do it. Make sure you read the accompanying documentation on how to use G Cloud 12 - ie. you are not allowed to run mini competitions, ask for quotes/special pricing etc... The prices listed are the prices applicable. You can ask for clarifications and demos, but you must be fair to all suppliers you long and short list etc...

[paulkerton]

Something that I don't think has been considered, is there are a significant number of schools sufficiently happy with SIMS as-is, that they would have most likely renewed for the next three years anyway..

I think you're also under-estimating the number of schools who aren't necessarily happy with SIMS, but either know no better or do not have the confidence to switch and have members of SLTs who are change averse.

 

Or perhaps have a lot of support from a former LEA IT Unit that are all-in on SIMS, so will FUD scare them from changing or even looking at changing.

Which is ultimately why they've scrapped SIMS 8 in favour of this "recreate what they know" attempt.

Edited November 22, 2021 by paulkerton

[Theblacksheep]

To anyone looking at G Cloud - be very careful with how you do it. Make sure you read the accompanying documentation on how to use G Cloud 12 - ie. you are not allowed to run mini competitions, ask for quotes/special pricing etc... The prices listed are the prices applicable. You can ask for clarifications and demos, but you must be fair to all suppliers you long and short list etc...

 

This is so important and cannot be understated.