DFE Connect The Classroom : Less than half the submitted Doc3 funding granted!!

[chrisjako]

We just got our response back today from the DFE for two of our secondary schools, they have both been granted less than half of what we submitted on the Doc3 cost matrix.

 

Not meaning to seem ungrateful here but what am i supposed do I do with that!? fit half the school with Meraki Wi-Fi and leave the other half on a 15 year old ruckus system

 

The criteria for the CTC program is:

- an education investment area and have an Ofsted rating of ‘requires improvement’ or ‘inadequate’.

- a priority education investment area

 

One of our secondary’s fits both of these plus it fails on all the current standards for Wi-Fi that the CTC program is set out to achieve. The catchment area for pupils is one of the most deprived in Bradford a lot of students only have access to the internet when they are at school (not to mention it’s a time when some of them are only fed on FSM)

 

I have been informed that other participating schools in the program, were provided full funding even when their existing Wi-Fi standards still passed the criteria prior to the CTC install, which raises concerns about their resource allocation.

 

Our vendor says they never seen anything like this before, with some of their clients receiving triple the amount of what we were granted.

 

My initial impression is that there could be potential bias against our identity as a Catholic Multi Academy Trust

 

With less than half the requested funding granted, I'm at a loss regarding our options moving forward, given that we completely lack the extra capital required to cover the remaining amount needed to complete the install

 

Has anyone else here in the CTC program experience this? Any advice on how to tackle this, I’ve already sent an email to CTC expressing the above points.

[localzuk]

When you say they will only fund less than half - does this mean they won't fund specific APs? Or are they not funding a lot of the switchgear requested?

 

The scheme covers basically 1 AP per classroom for a site, plus a few for non classroom areas, and then any switchgear needed to run it - but not any switches that don't cover that (so, not gonna cover switches for ICT suites etc...). Plus they cover core switches.

 

What is it they've refused to cover?

[Wave9_Lee]

It's looking like they're cutting the funding for any schools not yet approved. You've not been singled out, it seems a matter of timing. There's been no communication from DFE to us as yet - very disappointing. I suspect that they've reviewed where budgets/total spend will be and have a shortfall so are spreading the funding around thinner. We'll have to revisit our live designs with a different manufacturer.

 

I'll update when I find out more.

[chrisjako]

When you say they will only fund less than half - does this mean they won't fund specific APs? Or are they not funding a lot of the switchgear requested?

 

The scheme covers basically 1 AP per classroom for a site, plus a few for non classroom areas, and then any switchgear needed to run it - but not any switches that don't cover that (so, not gonna cover switches for ICT suites etc...). Plus they cover core switches.

 

What is it they've refused to cover?

 

The actual complete WiFi system!

 

I know they do not cover anything that isn't related to WiFi, i've been through this process with 18 of my schools, for my primaries full funding was granted but my secondaries where halved, the DFE systems are practically independent to my main LAN, the only connection it has is a 10gb entry point to my core switch

 

Within my submitted application i've tried to be as scarce with resources as possible, less equipment = less maintenance, less electricity costs, less licencing once the program expires - some areas we where doing 1 AP per 2/3 classrooms - everything is cisco meraki as advised by the DFE themselves in a one-to-one call

 

With the two secondary school plans submitted to the DFE, they basically responded with half of the cost approved, I can't dilute the wifi system anymore than what it already is

[chrisjako]

It's looking like they're cutting the funding for any schools not yet approved. You've not been singled out, it seems a matter of timing. There's been no communication from DFE to us as yet - very disappointing. I suspect that they've reviewed where budgets/total spend will be and have a shortfall so are spreading the funding around thinner. We'll have to revisit our live designs with a different manufacturer.

 

I'll update when I find out more.

 

 

We were told in the DFE online webinars that there is plenty of funding avialable and when they run low, more will be allocated

 

We are being shorted £124k on one school and £324k on another

 

I cant install half a wifi system full of dead spots around the schools, it'll be a worse off user experience then what we currently have

[ultimatepie]

Just like you said don’t want to sound ungrateful, but we have done loads of work preparing contractors sending plans network etc. We need this infrastructure as we are struggling to do the basic IT necessities, DFE are running out of money and the north is having taken a finance hit towards our schools when we have high numbers of fsm students / low student intake and IT budgets getting smaller each year, wish we had the DFE budgets before we had contractors scoping as it has pushed us back as requotes are needed.

[Disease]

We had ours approved in April, 480k the full quote including replacing all my switches, benefits of not investing in Network infrastructure for 10 years I suppose. We are not a trust but we are a VA Catholic school.

[chrisjako]

We had ours approved in April, 480k the full quote including replacing all my switches, benefits of not investing in Network infrastructure for 10 years I suppose. We are not a trust but we are a VA Catholic school.

 

Whats frustrating is that i submitted our first Doc3 in April and it got denied by the DFE due to the equipment being aruba and in short supply, we where told to resubmit with meraki and it took our suppliers 2 months to re-quote - I'm about to point the gun at their heads for taking too long

[Disease]

Whats frustrating is that i submitted our first Doc3 in April and it got denied by the DFE due to the equipment being aruba and in short supply, we where told to resubmit with meraki and it took our suppliers 2 months to re-quote - I'm about to point the gun at their heads for taking too long

 

Man that really sucks, my proposal had 32 switches on it, the only compromise I had to make with the DfE is I had to remove 1 external access point from the 6 we wanted, I don't know if it makes any difference but we are in a PEIA, being an outstanding school mean we are very lucky to be on the scheme at all.

[chrisjako]

Man that really sucks, my proposal had 32 switches on it, the only compromise I had to make with the DfE is I had to remove 1 external access point from the 6 we wanted, I don't know if it makes any difference but we are in a PEIA, being an outstanding school mean we are very lucky to be on the scheme at all.

 

I'm grinding my teeth with jealousy over here reading this lol

 

We where told 2 external max, did you go cisco or meraki or another vendor?

[Asgard]

I’m going to be careful what I post for now - I know that they are looking at these posts as it came up in a conversation I had with them.

 

We have had a school in our trust slashed by 60% despite putting ours in April! And being verbally told it was accepted. Once we get our reduced one signed off I’ll happily post my entire experience with them, I’ll probably get into hot water but I’m at the point now I don’t care.

 

Suppliers like Cisco massively ramping up their prices to take advantage hasn’t helped either and it’s not a supply and demand thing - it’s blatant taking advantage of the DfE and they know it too but there is little they can do.

 

Anyone wants to PM / talk offline I’d happily rant !!!

Edited August 15, 2023 by Asgard

[Disease]

I'm grinding my teeth with jealousy over here reading this lol

 

We where told 2 external max, did you go cisco or meraki or another vendor?

 

We went Meraki, none of our switches were multi-gig capable so hence the need to replace them.

[Wave9_Lee]

It's perhaps not as bad as it first seems.

 

Some may recall that there were complaints about mandated specification being over the top with many network managers saying they would rather have the money and select their preferred vendor to get better value for money. The compliant manufacturers at the time were, unsurprisingly the most expensive, which has led to increased costs, and delivery delays as everyone tries to secure a limited choice of stock - and inevitable price rise too. As well as the specification I think we've all found that ancilliary costs, particularly cabling have been more expensive than expected. I can easily see that what originally was a spreadsheet exercise that said 'for £150M @ £40k for primaries, £90k for secondaries, we can transform 3500 school networks' gets tricky when, due to the above, costs are more like £60k and £150k+. Maybe they've reviewed budgets, listened to complaints and are now trying to make the remaining budget as effective as they can for as many schools as possible.

 

The new FAQs seem to introduce some much needed flexibility into the process;

 

"Schools and their suppliers will retain the flexibility to install the most appropriate Wi-Fi and network equipment to meet local need within this allocated budget. Where schools wish to, they can refer to DfE digital and technology standards which provides guidelines around using the right digital infrastructure and technology."

 

"What's included? - Wi-Fi and networking equipment, installation, configuration, and handover. Investment in schools up to the end of the programme in April 2025 will focus on upgrading Wi-Fi with an increased reliance on existing network equipment (switching and cabling), ensuring the proposed solution improves the current Wi-Fi infrastructure in the school. "

 

I think comms could have been better and these are only my assumptions, but it looks like they are trying to make the best of the situation. There are some frustrations I'm sure - we have customer to chose meraki as the preferred holistic eco-system for all schools in the Trust that are now having to re-evalute vendor or find additional budget themselves. But on the other hand, there are perhaps 100's of schools who will now see some improvements who perhaps wouldn't otherwise.

 

As we get more clarification around product choice or any changes I'll update here and here

 

I would say that if you're given the wider choice of vendors, you should still consider long term manufacturer support, lifecycle management.

[localzuk]

Those who had the amount reduced, have you discussed it with your contact at the DfE? Have they provided an explanation?

[Asgard]

@localzuk from the email they sent out with the revised funding figure

 

The official line;

 

As market factors continue to impact technology prices and availability, we are writing to provide information on funding to support your engagement with suppliers.

Edited August 17, 2023 by Asgard

[chrisjako]

Those who had the amount reduced, have you discussed it with your contact at the DfE? Have they provided an explanation?

 

Yes apparently there is a meeting/webinar today and we are to await that for further clarification

[Asgard]

Id hazard a guess its a combination of a few things;

 

1. The cross industry pay settlements will need to be funded from somewhere - and a luxury budget like CTC could easily be sliced - especially as they haven't really pushed CtC in the public domain.

 

2. The initial budget has been blow due to manufacturers seeing CtC as a cash cow.

 

3. The program is far far to rigid and can't be nuanced. For example, we were told that we had to end our Lease for our Trust Wide WiFi - and go and purchase them outright...... basically take out AP Model A and replace with AP Model A - ie the exact same AP. Because a leased WiFi system isnt in scope..... so our initial quote went up by 80K when we had to add the WiFi into it. And whilst they understand and agree with it, at the time it didnt 'fit in scope', now with the changes in the last few days we can keep our WiFi - basically 5 months worth of plans, revisions, meetings - into the recycling bin.

 

3. The DfE is also spending a shed load of money on RAAC surveys (Reinforced concrete) - we have told them that at least one of our sites has NONE, and they are still insisting on sending a commercial surveying company out.

 

4. The DfE is helping out with utility costs

 

I suppose there just isn't an endless supply of pennies and some things need to be scaled back - but it will be interesting to see what happens with the project going forward.

 

These are my personal opinions and by no means reflect that of my employer (as I konw the DfE are reading these!)

Edited August 17, 2023 by Asgard

[TechZonoid]

Unfortunately it looks like we are in the same boat as well.. Budget is no where near the plans submitted, (or any quote we received for that matter!) Hopefully we will get some clarification soon.

[dcwhitworth]

I've been talking to some people who know on this subject. My take on it is that the CTC project is/was running out of money and they've had to reassess. Everything was effectively stopped at the end of June and they've remodelled the way they assess schools and are now setting a budget based on pupil head count rather than just funding what looked like an appropriate design. I'd heard that they were running out of money a while back and had asked the Treasury for more, so I'm guessing either they got nothing or got some money but were forced to reassess how they do things as a condition of this. This has ended up massively reducing the budget per school as people are finding out. Suppliers are now scrambling to try and work out how they deliver appropriate solutions within these budgets.

[speakercon]

Probably an unpopular opinion and without wanting to sound too pessimistic, I personally think this whole scheme has been a terrible waste of tax payers money and has inadvertently (surely not intentionally...) served to line the pockets of both the big equipment suppliers and the major players in education IT systems installation (the same few big named companies seem to have landed the majority of the contracts).

 

The ridiculous over spec on early installations, and then in recent cases I’ve seen, their own ‘digital standards’ rejected and swept under the carpet now the money has run out says allot about the practicality of these standards they try to get schools to comply with, which they themselves have then ignored because they are to expensive.

 

If they had been sensible from the outset, the same real world result could have been achieved for around 25% of the cost and thus many more schools could have benefited.

 

I've also experienced constantly changing and conflicting information being given to schools directly, and information given to the suppliers.

 

It does look like the gravy train has been milked dry, good luck to anyone still hoping to get some scraps from the table.

Edited August 19, 2023 by speakercon

[Asgard]

I think your opinion mirrors mine.

 

As ours is still in a battle I won’t put my full comments public .

However what I will say.

 

1. The initial program was far to rigid and the DfE tick box exercise couldn’t fathom that we didn’t want to replace our APs - because they are less than 8 months old - we lease them.

 

This instantly failed our first submission dispite then agreeing to in the first instance.

 

This is the big one for me.

 

2. A lot of manufacturers need to hang their heads in shame.

 

Price gouging and saying it’s a supply issue, nah your seeing a pot of free money and taking advantage.

 

I’ve got emails from a manufacturer telling me that CTC equipment is on a different SKU this is more expensive i sanity checked this by asking for some pricing for the same

Kit from two different email addresses and the kit list was identical except the one I mentioned CtC the price was a good 25k more expensive.

 

The reseller in question couldn’t explain it when I called the manufacturer out on it.

 

Other comments

 

I think the DFE had the best of intentions but the execution was poor. I know our networks and building better than them and I know the nuances of having a site under PFI.

 

What they should of said is if we give you a pot of money to do X present a proper proposal on why/how. Which is what they seem like they are doing now, after the horse has bolted and Scrooge mcduck’s money pile is empty.

 

I presented a viable option that would of sorted the school for 10 years and they said no and added £60k on - to replace the WiFi which wasn’t needed I said take it out, save the money and allocate it to another school

 

I was slapped down saying I wasn’t saving them money …. Still can’t work that one out

Edited August 19, 2023 by Asgard

[speakercon]

I think you've hit the nail on the head with the box ticking, there was no flexibly from them and so much money has been wasted on hardware/professional services that was simply not needed.

 

Example, I had a 48 port switch rejected because only 22 ports were for waps. Fair enough, so the supplier changed it to a 24 port, but it was a higher spec'd model as this was the only one they could get hold of (apparently) and cost over a grand more than the 48 port which the dfe then approved. So they paid over £1000 extra for a 24 port just so they could tick the 'only ports for waps' box.

 

Its extremely frustrating, when usually doing projects like this myself, ensuring value for money and ensuring every penny is spent wisely is something that I spend allot of time and effort on, but like most publicly funded projects, it seems to be at the bottom of the list with this one and the suppliers knew this and took full advantage.

 

Its tempting to think we should be grateful for whatever we are given, but at the end of the day this is our and every other tax payers money and I think its only right for they way this money has been spent to be open to scrutiny.

 

EDIT

Just to add, I don't believe this scheme was ever intended to have included any real input from the schools IT department, the dfe really just wanted it to be between them and the suppliers.

Edited August 19, 2023 by speakercon

[Wave9_Lee]

Ref some previous comments, just from our perspective - there have 100% been supply issues and the vendor we primarily use, Meraki have a lower price for CTC spec hardware than any other SKU/sector. We have actively tried to get best value for each of our school customers and the final price has been benchmarked against manufacturer and other reseller pricing. We've definitely had an uptick in our revenue due to the project, but it's less profitable and more hassle than any of the other elements of our business. We'll be expending significant time (and costs) of our own to try to mitigate the impact of these recent changes for our customers. Edited August 21, 2023 by Wave9_Lee