Carlos wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 2:49 pm I'm ruining her life she told me today even though she finished at 2.30 and has gone down the beech !

Carlos wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 2:49 pm I'm ruining her life she told me today even though she finished at 2.30 and has gone down the beech !
That's interesting to hear and inline with one of my colleagues son who's in a different school.NotoriousREV wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 2:52 pm @Carlos My Yr10 15 year old gets 3 hours of work per day on average
Scouts suspended face to face activities in the UK before the schools were shut, we’ve been doing meetings on a Tuesday night over zoom for 11 weeks now, as have 90% of groups in the country, and we’ve still managed to set badgework that the kids will receive badges for once we can meet again. Not sure why teachers couldn’t do the same, even if it’s just so kids can ask questions about an assignment or receive feedbackAscender wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 3:42 pm I'm surprised the schools haven't been using Zoom to try and get some virtual class time in small groups though.
Teachers are similarly frustrated that in between needless admin and being defacto wardens to kids who desperately need to be in special needs schools they actual get to "teach" as they are supposed to for a few hours a day.Mito Man wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 3:49 pm I heard some teacher on the radio saying you can homeschool your kid for just 2 hours a day as when you subtract the activities, breaks, lunch, PE etc a kid only gets 2 hours of lessons a day![]()
1) It's one of a series of contract, not all of which have had their value disclosed. Of those which have been disclosed, the total to Faculty alone is £1.6m. I've seen estimate for the total at over £4m. That total doesn't include the value of the data afterwards, which is retained by Faculty.Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:44 pm It says it’s a £400k contract. I can definitely understand not going out to tender though if you have a company you know delivers results. It would end up taking weeks/months to go through a tender process.
As for the other points - yep.
So still not multi million pound contracts, unless you use your magic source estimate.Nefarious wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 4:23 pm1) It's one of a series of contract, not all of which have had their value disclosed. Of those which have been disclosed, the total to Faculty alone is £1.6m. I've seen estimate for the total at over £4m. That total doesn't include the value of the data afterwards, which is retained by Faculty.Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:44 pm It says it’s a £400k contract. I can definitely understand not going out to tender though if you have a company you know delivers results. It would end up taking weeks/months to go through a tender process.
As for the other points - yep.
Nowhere in that report does it mention using credit score reports. It says “credit reference agency data” which can include identity verification. You can see these types of searches showing as “ID Check” on your credit report. For example, Experian provides this service for Gov.uk.
Carlos wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 5:12 pm As a teaching 'professional' do you think the current yr10s can get through the syllabus for 10 GCSEs after losing the best part of half a years teaching ?
ETA- as regards the heart thing, I've had bigger wounds on my foreskin and I'm not banging on about itbut pleased to hear you've made a full recovery.
Not multi-million? Only a fraction have been disclosed yet (we're still waiting for the national audit office report, as the government is failing to follow its own transparency guidelines on publishing the details), but government published documents show a total of 177 contracts awarded since 26 March with a total value of £1.1bn, of which 115 were awarded under the emergency non-tendering process, with a total value of "just over £1bn". We have no idea of the value of the Deloitte, KPMG, Serco, Sodexo, Mitie, Boots or Palantir contracts yet.Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 4:40 pmSo still not multi million pound contracts, unless you use your magic source estimate.Nefarious wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 4:23 pm1) It's one of a series of contract, not all of which have had their value disclosed. Of those which have been disclosed, the total to Faculty alone is £1.6m. I've seen estimate for the total at over £4m. That total doesn't include the value of the data afterwards, which is retained by Faculty.Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:44 pm It says it’s a £400k contract. I can definitely understand not going out to tender though if you have a company you know delivers results. It would end up taking weeks/months to go through a tender process.
As for the other points - yep.
No, I stated in my original post that I have an issue with the widespread practice of dishing out high value contracts to companies with close connections to government without proper tender, of which this is a prime example.Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:55 pm Oh, you’re expanding beyond the article you had an issue with now. Cool.
well it’s inflammatory isn’t it. The article you quoted referenced one £400k contract that was awarded without tender, but you’re saying there’s multi-million pound contracts Being awarded that way. I’m not saying there isn’t but surely If you’re going to reference one, then reference the others too.Nefarious wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 7:21 pmNo, I stated in my original post that I have an issue with the widespread practice of dishing out high value contracts to companies with close connections to government without proper tender, of which this is a prime example.Rich B wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:55 pm Oh, you’re expanding beyond the article you had an issue with now. Cool.
This does seem a slightly strange, nit-picky point (and one largely irrelevant to the issue of awarding a high-value, privicy invading contract to close associates of the current cabinet) to make a stand over.