To outsource or not to outsource… that is the question

We recently learned that one of our partner schools is proposing to hire full time staff for their IT, finance, maintenance, and other services, which had previously been contracted out. Okay, at first glance this seems like a legitimate management decision, but is it?

While I cannot speak to other types of services, we experienced this exact scenario once before with respect to IT services at a K-6 charter school and it was disastrous.

Several years ago in Texas, a Vice-Principal was hired at one of our partner schools. He quickly determined that his expertise was sufficient to supplant ours and within a few months found a way to eliminate our contract to provide IT support on one day each week. This was a school that we had built from the ground up and was operating with a high degree of efficiency.

I will spare you the details, but by the following year the Vice-Principal was fired, the school was in financial distress (which led to the dismissal of the business manager), and the technology had pretty much been re-outsourced to the Regional Service Center (the state). And the terminated Vice Principal had so maligned our service model in the process of making the case for our contract termination, that we were not considered in rebuilding the infrastructure.

The whole process diminished efficiency, caused significant service disruptions, cost significant sums of money, and accomplished nothing of value.

So are there times when it is a good idea to hire a full time IT administrator for your school? Maybe, but in the dozen years or so we have been doing this we have found very few. For starters, the numbers (as in cost) just don’t add up. Furthermore, the administrative oversight of personnel is not significantly better. And the level of expertise is greatly diminished.

Restated, these are three reasons why outsourcing IT is normally a better idea than hiring full-time: Cost, Control, and Expertise.

Cost

According to a January 2011 survey by PayScale, the average high school principal in the United States earned a total salary package between $68,167 and $101,560. The Bureau of Labor Statistics validates those numbers, finding that administrators at elementary and high school receive an average annual salary of $85,220.

On the other hand, a similar study by the BLS for computer administrators employed in the highest-paying industries, computer equipment manufacturing and securities exchanges, salaries averaged $89,840 and $89,340, respectively. The number was less in the academic world, but not by a large margin. Granted there is a wide range of qualifications for Information Workers, but even non-degreed, yet certified Network Engineers earned up to $56,000 on average.

When competent Information Workers can earn nearly as much as School Administrators, it is difficult to understand the justification to hire a full-time Technology Director at most Charter Schools. This is particularly true when very few schools need full-time IT administrators. They rarely even need full-time technical support.

Our standard management model provides 1 day per week of onsite Network Administration, supplemented by the daily support required for the particulars of a school, either by a less qualified support engineer or a faculty member assigned to technology. The best scenario is having a faculty member assigned to support technology and serve as the point person in IT matters.

Let’s do the math, assuming a 50 week annual contract. A network engineer charging $65.00/hr. at 8 hours per week would cost $26,000. A desktop support technician charging $15.00/hr. for 20 hours per week would cost $15,000.  The total cost is $41,000. And this provides the full range of technical services required for most freestanding Charter Schools.

This is about half of the cost of hiring one competent Computer Administrator. I emphasize competent, because like in the experience described above, hiring to the level of your budget may in fact cause you to hire an incompetent Computer Administrator. The unintended costs of doing so can be enormous.

Control

Not long ago we had to let one of our desktop support engineers go. We were informed that he was not a good fit for one of our schools and our coaching him on his work ethic was not going well.  We reluctantly terminated this employee, only to find that the school had decided to rehire him as their employee instead of ours.

The situation went from bad to worse. Now, not only did we have the same HR problem as before, but now we had less supervisory oversight.

You will in all probability always need to have entry level desktop administration support. This is where competent Computer Administrators get started. Managing desktops, while getting training on network administration and specific line of business applications is the common pathway for information workers. And there is always an abundance of desktop administration to be done in a school.

But having administrative control of information workers is a tricky business. It is crucial that those so employed are extremely trustworthy and able to work well with others. After all, they control all of the access to information resources in the school and can without much difficulty view sensitive documents and even your email communication in many cases.

Having an outside entity manage your Information Systems can provide an important element of integrity into your infrastructure.

Expertise

You don’t hire a doctor full time to evaluate a medical condition and treat it. Nor do you typically hire a CPA full time to do your bookkeeping. And most schools only retain legal counsel for specific compliance or legal matters where specialized knowledge is required.

There are reasons, both economic and practical why outsourcing Information Technology is wise. Obtaining the requisite technical expertise is the most important reason. Some technical expertise is only required once, as in the design of your network or major system implementations. Other technical specialization may be required only intermittently when upgrading servers or network infrastructure. And much technical expertise is only required infrequently, such as network administration.

So why would you hire full-time to the highest level of expertise for those rare occasions when needed if the bulk of your technical support requirements exist at the entry level? This is a classic misallocation of resources.

Summary

At the risk of self-serving, it seems that outsourcing Technology Management is a pretty common sense approach. It costs less, provides more control, and delivers a higher level of expertise. And these are all good things.

But alas, a wise individual once told me “Common sense is not so common”. 

Please call if you would like to discuss the right mix of Information Management and Technical Support resources.

How To Completely Undo Your IT Management

Truly this is not an article on how to dismantle the technical support mechanism at your school. It is however, a recounting of actual experiences – some of them unpleasant – that you should avoid; that is if you wish to have a better technical management support mechanism in place.

Although it is less painful to consider other’s mistakes, making them yourself has a silver lining. Your mistakes can always be used to point out a bad example, which can be instructive …. to others.

 Here are five of the most common self-defeating behaviors we have seen while managing charter schools:

1.       Paying for advice, then completely ignoring it
2.       Allowing everyone to develop their own agenda
3.       Making significant technology related expenses without involving IT
4.       Expecting short turnaround times for complex projects
5.       Assuming IT management grasps the political and leadership challenges in your school

Paying an expert for advice, then completely ignoring it

Several years ago a generous benefactor came to the religious community where we rented facilities for a small K-4 charter school. He had a terminal condition and was offering a generous gift of money to buy computers for both the school and the religious community (they had educational activities during the week).  I was asked to advise them about the best use of this generosity.

After considering the budget, the stated educational objectives, the current infrastructure, and the cost of managing the resources going forward; we proposed a solution to buy 20 laptop PC’s.   They would integrate seamlessly into the existing infrastructure at the school and add to the collection of PC’s currently used to form a full computer lab.

Unfortunately, at the same meeting, was an individual who had much greater influence with the kindly old gentleman, who was an unflinching MAC user; who, without any of the above mentioned considerations, persuaded the benefactor in the direction of using Apple Macs instead.

Please don’t misunderstand, I liked the MAC’s just fine, but given all of the other considerations it was not a good choice. Three months later I was asked to purchase software for the school/congregation to turn these perfectly good MAC’s into PC’s so they could be used with the existing systems and processes the rests of the school was using.

Presumably you have a relationship with a trusted technology consultant as part of your IT management. If that is not the case, you might consider making some changes. And when you seek advice, carefully consider completely ignoring it.

Allowing everyone to develop their own agenda

Want to stimulate creativity by engaging all levels of your staff in a brainstorming exercise of new ideas? Watch out! If you do this without a mechanism to vet those ideas, debate those ideas, and build consensus around the winning ideas you might be causing more damage than good. Trying to herd cats seems a helpful illustration of this concept, which has at its root great potential, but undirected creates chaos, division, power struggles, and politics.

We welcome creativity, the introduction of new ideas, insight into new discoveries, and the development of improved technology. We applaud all those who keep striving to do things better.

However, when those expressions of creativity become individual agendas, it can be detrimental to the organization as a whole – unless there is consensus building, implementation planning, and adequate training.

Several years ago an ambitious technology teacher determined that interactive white boards were an essential part of the classroom experience. And she was quite persuasive. The school purchased and installed the technology at great expense. The perfectly functioning whiteboards were rarely used by even the supporters of the technology and never used by those who did not want it in the first place.

When lesson plans and teaching styles have to be adapted to adopt a new technology, the failure rate rises in proportion to the change required. And without significant buy-in, a top down implementation, and significant training these kinds of projects will fail.

If you cannot manage the process of building consensus and properly implementing a project, then at least do it in a pilot program where the technology can be proved, and likely improved upon, without breaking the bank.

Making significant technology related purchases without input from IT

So common is this scenario that you only have to say these two words “Surprise, Surprise!”, and most technicians immediately know they have been handed a poorly specified, often incompatible, or otherwise problematic new piece of hardware or software to install.

“And could you have it installed yesterday?”

Not long ago we reviewed the USAC Form 471 for a small K-4 charter school that had been approved for over $25,000 of servers, switches, wireless controllers, and access points. While the expected reimbursement was exciting and gratifying, the components specified were not appropriate for the size and makeup of the schools infrastructure. It was the equivalent of putting Boeing 777 engines on a Piper Cub.

Granted, there are times when purchasing decisions cannot wait. And perfect scenarios don’t exists in every school where decisions are adequately considered and due diligence provided. And in a large view, this is a process of continual improvement.

Nevertheless, do yourself a huge favor and run technology purchasing past your IT team and avoid the headaches for both of you. There are two benefits in doing this. First, you will have a much greater chance of getting the right equipment and you may also spend less for the solution.

And this is especially germane to new construction or remodeling projects. Finding that you need a dozen new CAT6 network cables installed is exponentially more difficult after that final coat of paint has been applied.

Expecting short turnaround times for complex projects

Whenever I hear the preface of “How soon can you…” I wonder if adequate consideration has been given to a project or purchase. It’s understandable, logistics now make PC’s appear overnight and you can have an entire computer lab sitting in boxes ready for installation in a few days.

But that does not always happen. We recently placed an order for new lab equipment and were given a 10 day delivery notice. Three weeks later part one of two arrived and it was a full month before the final components were delivered.  It was embarrassing for us and understandably frustrating for the school waiting for the project to be completed.

From a cost perspective, rushing a project universally equates to added costs. And inadequate planning is the most common reason for projects to go awry.

Investigate early, specify clearly, and communicate regularly with your provider about order processing, shipping points, tracking numbers, and any known shipping delays.

Assuming IT grasps the political and leadership challenges of your school

Our management model and the model used by many charter schools are to utilize part-time support resources. In fact our most efficient model places support engineers in the school only a few times each week. And presumably that time is spent solving complex technical issues, rather than circumnavigating power struggles, personality clashes, and addressing individual agendas.

In large measure these are the realities of any organization, so one of the most powerful tools we have used to overcome these very normal challenges is to hold periodic (monthly at least) Technology Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings.

TAC meetings are an invaluable source of information for all involved. Problems can be better identified, the merits of proposed projects can be openly debated, and consensus can be built. A well formed TAC will consist of Technology Managers, Administrators, Department Heads, and representatives of other significant stakeholders. Parent and BOD representatives are especially helpful in this exchange and often provide invaluable “end user” insight.

Summary

Placing your technology team into the appropriate organizational level is an important first step in improving your IT management. Consider that most fortune 500 companies now have Chief Information Officers as part of the highest levels of their management team.

Information systems drive so much school activity and management process that you cannot afford to view IT as the guys who fix computers. And tolerating inadequate IT support staff is very costly. If you don't have the level of expertise you need, get it.

For concrete ways to do this, consider making improvements in the five areas listed above. A helpful moniker is “Just do it!”,… not “Let’s undo it”.

Why your technology sucks...

A close friend of mine has a favorite saying, which I hear far too often and goes like this… “It is what it is”. I think about those words on occasion when someone tells me the technology we manage really sucks. Happily those days are relatively few, and an occasional reality check about managing technology in a freestanding charter schools helps put things in perspective.

After all, it’s a Charter School… it is what it is!

The very essence of the Charter School movement is competition. And in the final analysis, that means producing more, with less; fewer resources across all departments, including technology. In a traditional school, with significantly more resources you will find that on some days, their technology also sucks.

Recently, our performance at a school came under criticism of this nature. My response is this post.

Two years ago we agreed to manage technology at a large K-12 Charter School. On staff was a full-time Network Engineer and regular student aids assisting with desktop management. We estimated that between 50-60 man hours were devoted each week to technology support. Our proposal, based primarily upon budgetary constraints, was a contract to provide the same level of support but doing so with only 8 hours of Network Engineer level work accompanied by 15 hours of desktop technician level work each week. If you do the math, that’s a 70% reduction in man hours.

We started our engagement by suggesting infrastructure improvements to both simplify administrative tasks and allocate some technical tasks to staff members. We made modest system improvements and implemented a help desk solution to track our progress.

Fast forward two years, and you will find that in most objective measures that technology is slightly better, but still lacking. In my opinion, that is a success story. Understandably, from the perspective of several users, the technology still “sucks”. And while this is a reasonable response and we understand occasional frustrations, “ It is what it is”.

Now, don’t mistake my message. There is no excuse for mediocre service and our intent is to always improve upon our processes.  And we continually adopt new management practices as we discover them. But if there is not a slight degree of discomfort with the level of service provided, I submit you are over budgeting for those resources. It would be nice to have sufficient resources to pay teachers what they are worth, buy whatever supplies we want, have gourmet lunches, and have an IT department – but that is not the world in which I live, nor is it the world in which most charter schools exist.

If you regularly have those “our technology sucks” days, here are a few immediate things you can do to make it better.

1.       Have regular technology meetings, or devote regular time in staff meetings to discuss technology support. Get specific details about problems your staff experience, evaluate the commonality of the problem, and decide upon an acceptable level of resolution.  An unresolved issue for a single user is very annoying, but compared to an entire system outage affecting a large portion of the staff, it can probably wait.

2.       Find an objective way of measuring and reporting on the performance of your technology support team. This is most easily measured by a case or service issue resolution report. How many service tickets are created vs. resolved is much more relevant than a list of things that did not get resolved. It is possible that your expectations are mathematically impossible, given your available resources.

3.       Conduct periodic surveys on the subject of technology. Invest sufficient time gathering a broad-based consensus about what works in your organization and what does not. Be willing to accept the fact that your processes and policies may be counterproductive and a barrier to technical innovation. Be open to change driven by well informed and reasoned consensus.

4.       Don’t be unduly swayed by a few vocal users to adopt systems or solutions that don’t align well with your mission and your methods. And be sure to consult with your technology support team about proposed changes to gain perspective about compatibility and ease of implementation. Ideas that work well in a single classroom may not scale to the entire school, but in fact may add unnecessarily to the level of complexity in your organization.

5.       Recognize the inherent challenges of an overbuilt infrastructure. This is a common challenge in charter schools who model infrastructure after traditional schools, only to find that large sized enterprise solutions are not only expensive to install, they are expensive to maintain. Technology scales up quite well (meaning expands), but scales down only with great difficulty. If you have sufficient infrastructure to run an entire district, you’ll be hard pressed to keep it running on a budget for technology that is sized correctly.

There is no “happily ever after” in this story. If you are struggling to keep the doors open, pay for teachers, and maintain or build facilities; chances are you will struggle to keep all of the computers working perfectly all of the time. But finding an acceptable level of support is possible.  

And the next time someone tells you that your technology sucks, just smile and agree with them. Then kindly quote one of my favorite sayings. It goes like this… “Nothing is so bad that it cannot be made worse by complaining about it.”

How much Technical Support do you need?

Many Charter School administrators have a background in traditional education and in the management practices found there. That can be both good and not so good. One area which doesn’t usually translate well is the size and complexity of technology, which often gets overbuilt.

Now it’s fine to overbuild the infrastructure if money is no object; and there is a certain level of infrastructure that needs to exist for current and future services. But we either see huge investment in infrastructure, followed by a wholly inadequate plan for managing it; or we see technology infrastructure as an afterthought.

If you are considering this subject in advance of build out, do your school a huge favor and enlist some professional help in the area of capacity planning. Many things affect the required capacity: student count, student demographics, campus layout, teaching methods, core curriculum, and business management practices. Doing the planning up front can not only simplify construction, but save tremendous amounts of money.

If you are an operating Charter School, the damage (so to speak) has already been done, but there are a number of things you can do to manage infrastructure more effeciently. But how much technical support do you really need? What drives the requirements for technical support services and what can you do to reduce costs?

Our well established model is to provide weekly scheduled technical support complimented by less frequent, but routine technology management. Our baseline is to provide 6 hours of support one day each week for a typical freestanding Charter School. You might find the following complexity calculator useful. This is not an exact science, just 10 years of experience and nearly all of it on the “too lean” side of support resources, but it will get you in the ballpark.

For our calculations, answer the following questions and add one points for each of the following:

•  Physical Servers  
• One point for each server in your organization
• Software Systems  
• One point for each server based Application (SQL, Exchange, Sharepoint, etc.)
• Desktop/Laptops  
• One point for each 10 desktop and laptop computers
• Network Topology  
• One point for each network type (Wired, Wireless)
• Number of VLANS  
• One point for each VLan or Virtual Network segment
• Physical Facilities  
• One point for each campus buildings connected to the network
• Social Media   
• One point if you have a formal social media campaign
• Virtualization  
• One point if you have cloud based resources or virtual computers
• VOIP On Premise   
• One point if you have an on premise VOIP phone system
• Websites   
• One Point for each actively managed websites

Now tally up your answers and apply them to the table shown below:

Management Models and accompanying Technical Support Requirements  

• FTE    
• Full Time Equivalent Technical Support Staff*    50   >50
• Complex   
• Weekly Management & Daily Onsite Support    25   50
• Median   
• Monthly Management & Weekly Support          10   25
• Simple   
• Quarterly Management & Bi-Weekly Support  >10   10

*Outsourced support technicians would likely cost more than a full time staff member at this level.

Focus less on the specific numbers and more on the concept of applying the right combination of both management level and support level technical assistance. An organization universally needs a management component to guide the acquisition, implementation, and management of projects. It  also needs periodic technical support. The amounts of both depend upon the roles and capabilities of internal staff. Accordingly, the range of support varies from a simple model, to a full time equivalent model, depending upon factors listed above.

While some Charter Schools start with a full-time technician on staff, this tends to be very short-lived for a simple reason. Prevailing wages for experienced information workers generally exceed wages for school principals and administrators. This is not sustainable and the result is constant turnover, which does not lend itself to reliable infrastructure.

Applying the right combination of management and support resources can have far reaching impact on your school, but it is a challenge to balance. And there are factors outside of your control that can completely undo a well-chosen team. Too many resources and the budget won’t sustain it, too little and everyone suffers from system outages, disruptions in the classroom, and frustrations in the front office.

Evaluate your circumstances, map out a rational IT support model, and then get your team to work. Having functional information technology without breaking the bank is possible, indeed it is the natural result of good planning and execution.

It’s time to upgrade your phone system, start saving money, and get better service.

Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) is no longer an emerging technology with the promise of providing better features at lower costs, someday. It is a stable and widely accepted industry with significant hardware, software, and technical service adaptation. And it is much, much, less expensive that Plain Old Telephone Service (POTS). In addition to lower phone bills, you will also enjoy a smorgasbord of features previously found only with very expensive phone systems.

And cost savings on your monthly phone bills are just the beginning. You can also enjoy an efficient virtual receptionist that provides better call routing and more relevant information based upon whether your school is open or closed. You can take a handset home and appear to be in the office, you can answer and make phone calls from an (internet enabled) airplane at 35,000 ft while traveling to a conference or meeting. And your phone messages and faxes can be delivered to your email inbox and be reviewed on any mobile device. And this is just a very partial list of features. Every possible feature, including call forwarding, conference calling, extension transfer, music on hold, intercom, voice mail, etc. are standard features of currently available VOIP systems.

There are two general types of VOIP systems – on premise and hosted. Simply stated the difference is a function of where your call controller hardware is located. With an on-premise system this hardware is located within your building much like a traditional phone system, with a hosted VOIP system all of your call center hardware is located in a datacenter not in your building. Most of the advantages discussed in this article relate to a hosted VOIP system.

Hosted VOIP requires only two things to operate – a handset on your desk (or software on your computer) and an internet connection. Prices start about $25.00/mo per line and the service is managed completely on line. If you are doing new construction, VOIP significantly reduces both the cost and complexity of installing a new phone system. A VOIP handset can be plugged directly into a network cable, so rather than pulling both phone and network lines, all you need are network lines. And with a hosted VOIP system, rather than having a proprietary and expensive call controller mounted in your server room, you can now outsource that function to a provider that maintains all of the hardware you need, for a low flat monthly rate.

There are several scenarios where a hosted VOIP system is particularly beneficial. If you are leasing space in a building while facilities are under construction it is a tremendous idea. If you are expanding to a new building, it is also very practical. And if your staff routinely has remote work assignments or a use a satellite campus, a hosted VOIP system will greatly simplify your phone configuration.

The reason a Hosted VOIP solution is so flexible is because there are no physical space limitations to the system. You can literally install your office phone any place in the world that has a reliable internet connection. I recently relocated to temporary office for a few months. And my only action to transfer phone service was to unplug my handset, transport it to the new location, and then plug it back into the internet. At power-up, the phone was routed onto the internet and into my VOIP server and within minutes, my office phone system was relocated.

If you are managing e-Rate reimbursement properly, a hosted VOIP system is particularly beneficial, because the monthly service fees are always reimbursable as a priority one expense, regardless of your discount rate. The only priority two expenses are handsets, which can be reimbursed two of each five years, conditioned upon your discount rate.

Take a closer look at the cost of your telecommunication service and features, then compare available VOIP services. You will be surprised at potential money savings and service improvements available. Just think, you could have enjoyed time at home with the family this holiday while appearing to be in the office!  

 

Why you need an e-Rate consultant (and why it cannot be me)

Imagine receiving a coupon in the mail that was redeemable at any grocery store which offered you 70% off of all bread, milk, eggs and meat. Eligibility for the coupon was conditioned upon stating your house had a refrigerator to store the items and completing a few forms before your first shopping spree. In these resource constrained times, few of you would pass up such an opportunity!

Now imagine driving to the store intending to use your coupon to find that only bread and milk were available to you, because of your income. Imagine further that it would take you several hours if not days, to complete the forms required to redeem your coupon, and that the store providing the groceries was prohibited from talking to you about how the coupon worked or how to use it. Additionally, imagine being scheduled for training meetings to learn how to complete the forms which have very time sensitive windows for completion and a long list of approved uses for the discounted groceries. And finally imagine being required to plan your menu 3 – 5 years in advance for your most costly groceries, which of course had to be approved by a complete stranger.

Your coupon suddenly becomes not quite so appealing.  Yet giving up a 70% discount (or more) on items you use every day is very appealing, and for some, quite necessary! What do you do?

This is the “stranger than a reality show” world of e-Rate at a large majority of Charter Schools. Does this sound familiar? Here is the corollary:

• E-Rate is the coupon, USAC controls who gets them, and the relative prosperity of your student’s families is part of your eligibility
• CIPA (Child Internet Protection Act) compliance is your refrigerator, which you must have to even be considered for eligibility
• Your technology service provider is the grocery store who is prohibited from assisting you in obtaining your coupon
• The groceries for which you seek the coupon are your telephone, internet, email, website, and related technology equipment bills

So how do traditional school districts do this? It usually boils down to economy of scale (which most Charter Schools don’t have). Traditional districts are sufficiently large and the funds so significant, that they can afford to hire full-time e-Rate staffers.  Such is not the case with most freestanding Charter Schools.

Is it any wonder that the Charter School Community has difficulty obtaining their fair share of e-Rate funding? With few exceptions what I observe is a complete disaster; in one case the financial losses exceeded one hundred thousand dollars (yes that is six figures worth) in a single school year. And this even happened at a school where financial management was outsourced by supposed professionals, which is truly perplexing.

Here are the most common mistakes I observe regarding e-Rate:

• Attempting to do this without a significant investment in training and time. This is not a good second duty for a principal or math teacher.
• Assuming you are ineligible for reimbursement. Certain expenses are always eligible for reimbursement, regardless of your free and reduced lunch count.
• Failing to utilize a family survey to get a more accurate e-Rate discount. This is especially important where “free lunches” run counter to social norms..
• Structuring technology resources in manner that is ineligible for reimbursement or incorrectly classifying the expenses as priority two.
• Believing (erroneously) that the money is too insignificant to justify the effort 

For most charter schools, this is simply not a task that you should attempt on your own, unless you belong to a consortium of schools that can afford a full-time professional. If you doubt my advice, all that is needed to prove my point is a simple search at the official USAC website which maintains a complete database of e-Rate reimbursement. For example, in the State of Utah in FY 2010 fewer than a dozen charter schools received any e-Rate reimbursement that was not filed by an e-Rate professional.

In states that have a large population of freestanding Charter Schools, an e-Rate consortium is an excellent idea. It essentially brings the economies of scale to individual Charter Schools by filing e-Rate as a group. However, this requires a high degree of co-operation and may provide fewer benefits for some within the consortium than others. Getting independent and highly individualistic charter schools to co-operate seems to be a challenge.

For these reasons, we strongly encourage the use of e-Rate professionals, but it is important to do your homework when selecting an e-Rate professional. There are no formal credentials in the world of e-Rate consultants, although the e-Rate Management Professionals Association is attempting to change that. In our experience, fees range widely, as do the personal interaction with your staff. Some companies provide a mostly web-based do-it-yourself interface; others have a very personal and accountable approach. Our recommendation is Kellogg & Sovereign, LLC located in Ada, Oklahoma.

Now for the “not me” part of this article. By statute, technology service providers are restricted in many aspects of the e-Rate process, especially in the pre-bid time frame. This is to prevent undue influence and fraud associated with contracting procedures, and rightly so. E-Rate fraud has been problematic in the past, which is inexcusable, but understandable as the amount of money involved is significant.

So what’s the bottom line? Decide now to get some professional assistance for your e-Rate process. We are well into the FY 2012-13 e-Rate program year. In the worst case scenario you will be dollars ahead for telephone, fax, email, and web hosting costs each month; and in the best case scenario you will receive a huge discount on those expensive technology upgrades every few years.

In these resource constrained times, you simply cannot continue to ignore this important funding mechanism.

Why you need a Help Desk

A help desk is a resource which provides information and assistance to troubleshoot problems with information technology equipment or services. It provides a single-point-of-contact for users within your school to report and resolve technical problems.

Our experience demonstrates a dramatic improvement in technical support function when a Help Desk is implemented, because it allows you to prioritize and track support requests, focus your limited support resources, and apply expertise at a level matching the issue at hand.

Help desks can be configured in various ways, but as a minimum should offer these 5 features:

1. Centralized system used throughout the entire school
2. Simplified interface for adding, updating, and tracking requests
3. Prioritized to effectively allocate resources and escalate support requests
4. Separate from you key infrastructure to eliminate your Help Desk from failing
5. Accountable to you in order to report and review technician effectiveness

What does your help desk look like now? Here are some we have observed first hand:

• Sticky notes handed to your IT person as they walk down the hall
• An interruption while in the midst of another support request
• An "oh by the way" mentioned at lunch
• A complaint in a meeting related to another subject

Although very common, none of these improve the performance of your IT staff. And in some cases these informal help desk habits can be very counter-productive.

Take the case of handing a sticky note to your technician as he walks down the hall (presumably on his way to another support request). Your interruption causes a lack of focus on the issue at hand, and the issue at hand causes a lack of attention to your request. This is a double dumbing down of the process.

An orderly help desk system is much more rational. User's generate support requests and are required by the system to categorize, prioritize, and then provide sufficient detail for the technicians. Technicians are notified much more efficiently and an accounting begins for that issue. Both parties, and others, can update information about the request and track the issue to resolution. Administrators can measure the rate and number of support incidents and have a better sense of the value a support mechanism is providing.

A byproduct of a robust Help Desk is the ability to archive resolved issues into a Knowledge Base which in turn provides a growing body of support information for your school. As this body of knowledge grows, the ability of users to self-help increases.

Most schools we observe, and all that we manage (by definition) have no full-time IT staff. A Help Desk in this scenario becomes a necessity. And we have found it very helpful to identify one or two gatekeepers in the school to take the responsibility of entering in technical support requests.The advantages of this arrangement are significant; a full-time support component, a better perspective about priorities, and a single point of contact for clarification and reporting.

Whether your school is large or small, simple or complex with respect to technology, or supported by internal or outsourced technicians you will benefit from a Help Desk.

In these resource constrained times you would be foolish to operate without one.

Managing Technology Resources

Too often we think about technology in terms of acquiring it and fixing it, with only secondary consideration to how it is managed as a powerful asset.

Once the technology infrastructure is in place, it requires ongoing oversight and administration. This is the most significant challenge facing charter schools, which tend to inadequately staff the infrastructure, for good reason.

The level of complexity demands much more than a part-time staff member or a part-time parent volunteer. And prevailing rates for competent network engineers typically exceed the compensation for charter school administrators or principals —a situation that is not sustainable.

We suggest a different management model to addresses this dilemma. It starts with competent technical support using consistent (weekly) scheduling, automated monitoring systems, a robust help-desk system, simplified integration, and unlimited 8 X 5 support.

Most freestanding schools can be managed in one day per week, unless you are working on new projects or on major upgrades. This keeps the annual costs of managing your infrastructure in line, yet provides the level of expertise required to manage these complex systems.

Let's get started - Charter School Technology

Managing technology in a freestanding charter school is fundamentally different than most public schools for two compelling reasons.

First, reduced funding in all areas limits the resources for technical innovation. Second, staffing is problematic because the breadth of technical subject matter is equivalent to a district-level organization. This combined effect, without proper management, can lead to an environment where neither the resources nor expertise required to manage the school is viable. This can leave the school in a continuous break-fix or reactive mode, rather than a proactively managed model.

After a decade of managing technology in freestanding charter schools, we have learned a good deal both from our mistakes and from mistakes made by the schools we manage. There are many ways to manage technology. And we don’t pretend to have all the answers to all questions. But by experience, we have learned a great deal about what works and what does not work as it pertains to managing technology in this unique environment.

This blog outlines the principles we have found to be consistently useful and, to the extent possible, we have implemented these practices in the schools we manage. These ideas are general in nature and may not apply directly to your organization.

For a specific proposal that addresses your individual school, please contact us. Not only can we help you address the technology infrastructure of your school, but we can also help you draft a technology plan or assist you in grant writing to receive funding for your school.

Best wishes in your important endeavor!