BSF ICT Disaster Bail Outs

[GeneralDreedle]

Does anyone know of any schools who have either rolled back their BSF ICT implementation or fought their way out of the contract following the customary "teething troubles" (only a creature of the devil could have that many teeth)? I would also like to hear about any schools who have tried to do this and how they were thwarted...

 

I realise that LA and MSP pressure in this area is such that folks may not wish to post a public response here. Please feel free to message me if that is the case.

[GeneralDreedle]

Well, there we go, folks, that's all there is to say:

Greed, fear and stupidity have once more won the day.

And when you shrug and say the builders spent,

All that hard-earned money that the public sent,

And at least I'm still here, and I'm doing my best

You'll wish before the end they took you off with all the rest.

[jason2234]

No replies GeneralDreedle or just not happy with the replies you got? I haven't replied to you as i'm not really allowed but our schools got out of a bad deal for a better one. I don't think there truely is a way out of bsf for ICT, one company will just replace another.

[Dos_Box]

It is quite hard this one. We have received more than a few 'take down' requests from members who have commented on problems with BSF projects. Thsi isn't helped with the effective gagging of TUPED staff. As I've always said about BSF. Some will be good, some will be excellent, and some will be complete and total failures. The problem is that people witnessing the failures cannot talk about it. In fact we (EduGeek) were approached by certain interested parties earlier this year with the aim of settign up a BSF whistleblowing facility, where overpricing, shoddy work and straight fraud within the ICT aspect of BSF projects could be reported with complete anonymity. The complaint would not be published or made visable in anyway, just sent to people who could do something about it. It never happend of course, but it would have been intersting if it did.

I just thank God that BSF has been canned. It should have been planned and costed and managed approipriately, instead it allowed may suppliers and contractors to run rough-shod over contracts and planning.......I'll stop there. I've just boiled the glass of water I was holding!

[Theblacksheep]

In one regions price list I may have seen 100% markup was common.

 

At least they can milk it no longer.

[broc]

Remember the fallen, and those yet to fall.....

[CapEnd]

What is this gagging of TUPED staff about? We are to be TUPED over to a BSF supplier and I am curious about the gagging of staff.

I certainly wont be gagged!

[DrCheese]

What is this gagging of TUPED staff about? We are to be TUPED over to a BSF supplier and I am curious about the gagging of staff.

I certainly wont be gagged!

No one is legally gagged, but no one wants to risk their job ranting about their employeer online who likely monitor forums like this like a hawk.

[CapEnd]

And how would my employer know who I am???

[Dos_Box]

Simple, they'll monitor the internet logs. You better belive it happens. This isn't all BSF IT providers, just some with things to hide or embarresments to cover up, of which there are a few.

[webman]

CapEnd: Often, certain information is only made available to certain parties. You may think one such piece of information is "common knowledge" within your domain, so you feel safe in passing that on (even anonymously); but in reality only you and perhaps a select handful of others are aware. It won't take much for them to find out "who dunnit". And as Dos_Box mentions - logs.

[NikChillin]

But what about the end user? They haven't been tuped but are on the receiving end so would be in a position to report on how things work/don't work.

[PiqueABoo]

We have received more than a few 'take down' requests

 

As in real ones from legal folk? [Not that they're necessarily any more legally credible than the amateur variety]

 

So how many have you taken down?