matt40k

I personally don't like Securus, I don't get it's purpose in a primary school. For me it rings alarm bells. Why would a primary school need to prove pupils are safe using the computers, surely in a primary school a member of staff would be supervising at all times? Don't we trust our primary schools? Am I missing something? It just feels like someone trying to answer a procedure\policy with technology and it in this case, it just doesn't work, it's reactive not proactive. Smoothwall is proactive and I agree with that. It stops the bad things happening, all Securus does is reports it. You still need to act on it and normally it's too late anyway. I wonder if someone is using the OfSted fear to sell a product.

You might want to update your site:- School MIS technologies compared - not aware of anyone charging per user or being DOS based! Not sure certain people would like a No next to "Hosted in secure data centre"

I believe Paul supports a school that has a Magicard Enduro ID card printer. He's been told that there is a SIMS .NET template they can use rather then expensive badge maker software. Assuming they don't have a magstrip or something, I'd assume it's just a question of creating a standard SIMS report that outputs to Word Document with the correct "paper". Sound possible @localzuk - master of the ID printers? Are you away of a SIMS report that does this already?

Just tested it and it's working ok. SIMS .net - Pulsar.exe - 7.156.31.0 SIMS Bulk Import - SIMSBulkImport.exe - 1.7.22.0 OS: Win8.1Pro Send me the log file if your still having trouble.

I think that's good. No point wasting time, either you do or you don't. I hope we get more of that in @GREED #MISChallenge

Not sure, I'll test it tonight. I assume your running 1.7.22 and SIMS is working on workstation ok?

Cheers, just curious really. It's nice to have it confirmed that Schools are thinking how to improve and not because a supplier prompted them. By the way, @Schoolcomms only works with SIMS, so that's out.

Is the email from the LA?

No, they changed the ruling on that. It caused too much hassle from what I've heard. I think the idea was they didn't want hand over historic data that could be used for commercial bases. It basically falls apart when you can't run a school without data and extract bits of data doesn't really work. SIMS at least, is all or nothing.

Your overworked mate, if you scroll up, @pcstru has already posted a link to the 'Data Retention Toolkit for Schools' which is chapter and verse.

@InspireICT are they using SIMS .net? If so, do they have Dinner Money? Also, do you know if it was spurred after a certain company was marketing their new product - perhaps one that starts and ends with A?

If it's a Suffolk school you need to contact their helpdesk (if you haven't already) - contact details > https://www.schoolsurf.suffolkcc.gov.uk/docs/contactus/information_technology.aspx

Nope, unless your using trusted logins. You've picked up on the docstorage issue (ie servername changing)

Use the SIMS reporting engine. I'm pretty sure what your asking for has been done, over and over again. If you be a bit more specific I'm sure someone will pop up with a more detailed answer then opening SIMS and going Reports > Design report and then scheduling once your happy with (.csv) export.

The way you'd do it is to group them together, so Capita vs the rest of the market - then the rest of the market split up - then you might compare the new entries separately with each other - ie in the first year, how many did they get vs other providers. The problem is your now putting your own spin on the data and your making it user specific - the key to remember is Graham has put the raw data forward. That's step one, step two will be getting a good method of adding your spin on the data and something that is accessible. It's no good me building something in BI tool if the only people who can use it are suppliers!

I think you're hitting the same issues I'm hitting, how to best present the data. The growth fact is correct and although it appears to be ridiculous it isn't worth completely overlooking - the point of it is to show growth or decline.

SOLUS3 needs the workstation to be able to resolve the server and the server to resolve the workstation. I don't see relying on DNS as a problem. It's a critical component after all. I've found the common problem I've had is the workstation gets a set as the LA DNS server and they have a HOST file entry for the admin server, so the workstation can contact the admin server, but the admin server has no idea how to contact them. Renaming the computer should result in a reboot, the reboot will cause the workstation to re-register with the DNS. Which S3 will use. @DMcCoy raises an interesting one - ie it selects the wifi and that drops out. I think allowing the server to push the GUID would allow you to deploy the agent more flexibly - ie simple msi via gpo, via image (remove any guid first). It shouldn't be an issue one it's deployed anyway. PS: You need to re-deploy the release I believe once you've added it as a target.

Just be aware the tool will only set the backup folder for that database - so if you have other databases, like FMS, you'll need to do it for each one. Also this does mean you'll find the odd MASTER backup still going to the old folder, just something to watch out for more then anything.

Liked the battlefield theme then, bet you can't guess what I've been playing lately If we step away from tender point - I'm just very aware this is something that can go very south, very quickly if we're not careful, particularly if we're saying particular frameworks are selected over others simply to ensure the "correct" result. I hope we agree, regardless of if this practice actually occurs or not, the whole process it is done for the right reasons and outcome is the result of pure belief that it is the correct solution and is, if it does happen, done to save money\time and is not because of a back hands or anything? I just want to be clear that issue is more education of options then something more serious. I think we agree, its is perhaps too late when it hits the tender level for supplier engagement. Based on my own experience, my son's school was looking at a bolt-on, I suspect after a marketing push by a certain supplier and I suspect they had more success then other suppliers because of who they are and I would say they are not aware of the full scope of their options - so at this point I'd fully support what is being said here - thing is, they asked (because they have a moral and legal responsibility) and they now know the options. It happens on here all the time. So I'd say keep you feeding us information - we do pass it on the information when we can - both good and bad. I think this approach, although more long winded is the best way forward. Forcing schools into sales pitches may work, but mostly it'll just annoy everyone and back fire on the supplier. Assuming this is more a question of engagement of suppliers with the marketplace (such as LAs), perhaps a new topic with slightly less legal undertones. May I suggest in the context of someone looking for a solution, how they would seek advise or recommendations (bias I know as most will say Edugeek). Also, how they would put a new product forward for recommendation - perhaps after visiting BETT and being inspired. Just please don't turn it into a name and shame exercise - I've already lost enough people from the whole tender "issue".

I was wondering whether of not you'd post @scholarpack. I appreciate you're in a difficult situation, you want to enter the LA market and your hit with the same problems @Bromcom-PR have listed, however you don't want to be seen to be attacking the same people your trying to get onside, so well done\thanks for posting. Sure @Bromcom-PR is pleased that you have. I'd be interested in that raw list of which LA do\don't dictate what MIS they recommend - be very useful from a research point of view. If I can be blunt, I suspect the biggest problem is money. Dealing at the school level is childs play - no offence - the school comes to you, says what they want, you have a clear list of objectives you need to meet and bingo, you're in. With a LA is like crossing a battlefield. You need to keep playing until you become a veteran (which costs money and time) and hope you don't get your legs blown off or you need a get a veteran in and I suspect Capita will be paying 2-3 times what you're likely to offer. Even with your veteran, you need to listen to them and it's going to take time to cross the battlefield and unfortunately this is going to vary battlefield, to battlefield. My advise would be remember who your allies so don't start shooting at them. I won't expand on this, I think it's pretty clear. Pick your battles, simple example, LA tend to fall into one of two categories, outsources and in-house. If your support is geared towards you doing the support, go for the outsourcers and prove that once they sign on the dotted line, the problem goes away. If you want to go for the in-house folk, you have to accept they will be re-using staff so they will be multi-skilled and dealing with other things so you need to prove that you can provide them with the correct training and they will in effect become an extension of your company. Accept that your allies have other battles to fight and although you want to rush in and become a veteran, you need to wait. I was talking to a friend about how it's taken her 2 days to adjust an admissions letter because of the quirks - I might have taken the mick a bit and offered to export the data and produce it using pretty much any other reporting tool as it'll be quicker My only other piece of advise for people attempting the battlefield would be to look at what the successful people are doing. If they are being snipers and sending their allies rushing forward whilst providing coving firing from the safely of the building at the back. Either join them and sit in the building at the back of the battlefield or as a community say, no, we're not using the those building at the back - ok, some will let the snipers continue on some battlefields, but eventually the buildings will disappear. What I mean by this is, IF pricing is the sniper and IF masking the price is the building at the back of battlefield, you need to stop using the buildings or you need to get in those building and own them. So IF this is what is happening, as a community, you need to push towards G-Cloud, you need to say, hey, we only bill via the G-Cloud because we believe in transparency and we believe that is the future and when 1 of the major players isn't on it, but everyone else is, then the government will remove those buildings at the back. @GREED, I believe what you are suggesting would be illegal, my understanding is you can't entering the tender process having selected a solution before hand.

It's defined by who you get SIMS support from, not by internet connection. When you run SOLUS2, look at the top, it should have a URL - can you post a screenshot? I wouldn't rush setting up SOLUS3, you need to take your time otherwise you end up with a load of problems. If your despite see if you could get the ISO.

Sounds like your LA\support team haven't updated their mirror site. If you where on S3 it would auto-update itself you wouldn't get this problem - just saying!!

Might be worth posting in the MIS section. Have you contacted their support desk?

That's a bit blunt! Perhaps DNS scavenging would help @zag, to be honest if it's a real problem I'd just ask someone to pop over. It's worth getting set up right but you won't do it often enough to warrant really learning so it's worth outsourcing the task.

Yes, it's a regkey something like... HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microsoft SQL Server\ Sure Google will help you if you get stuck.