text:
Keep your books organized and easily accessible with the Manhattan ladder bookcase. It has 5 fixed shelves that provide enough space to display all your favorite books and other decorative items such as a flower vase, candles and more. The unique leaning design of this ladder bookcase lends an artistic touch to the room. Made from solid hardwood veneer, this 5-shelf ladder bookcase is durable and sturdy. It comes in a warm espresso finish for an elegant look. The wooden ladder bookcase can be matched with the Manhattan ladder desk to expand the storage space in your room. Maintenance is a snap all it needs is an occasional wipe with a dry cloth.
Features: Leaning
Frame Material: Hardwood
Surface Material: Wood Veneer
Number of Shelves: 5
Maximum Shelf Weight Capacity: 35.000
Maximum Weight Capacity: 35.000
Care and Cleaning: Wipe Clean with a Dry Cloth
Dimensions: 72.200 H x 24.750 W x 13.500 D
Weight: 29.000
Assembly Details: adult assembly required
other Info.
- Online Item #: 11110051
- Store Item Number (DPCI): 249-14-1115
- Imported


text:
This website has been put together to give you an insight into our pub company and, if you're looking for a new business venture, to help you decide whether Trust Inns is the type of company you'd like to do business with. We certainly do hope so!
Trust Inns currently owns nearly 500 public houses across the country that vary in style, size, product offering and customer type. Our range consists of traditional local pubs, eating pubs, city centre bars, gastro pubs, sports bars, student pubs and much, much more!
Trust Inns make it their priority to find the right people to run our pubs. In fact there's nothing more important to us. So throughout this website you'll find help and advice, information and contact details to help you make a considered choice about, not only whether you would like to run a pub, but whether you'd like to run a Trust Inns' pub.
We offer excellent and competitive deals to tempt you and a support package that we believe is second to none. Should you wish to work with Trust Inns you'll find that regular scheduled meetings with your Business Development Manager will ensure that we get to know you and your business from day one, offering as little or as much support as you may need.
Hopefully you will find everything you are looking for within this website, but remember! At Trust Inns you are dealing with real people, so we invite you to contact us by phone too! You will find all our contact details on our Contact us page.
We look forward to hearing from you soon.
Please click here to see our available pubs for lease.
115 The Headrow, Leeds
115 The Headrow is set in an enviable position on one of the busiest streets in Leeds city centre. The pub is the 5th Trust Inns' leased pub of licensee, Keith Flanagan, who recently took over the pub when Trust Inns' refurbished it in November. The end result for both Trust Inns and Keith, is an outstanding and fun trading environment that is proving extremely popular with customers since it reopened in November.
Apothecary, Lancaster
The Apothecary in Lancaster is one of Trust Inns' most exciting investments in recent years. A cool £200,000 was spent in reinventing this traditional late night club, pub and bar into a breath-taking venue offering contemporary cocktails and food. The end outcome is a spectacular looking bar that we believe has all the right ingredients to be a resounding success.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
- About Us
- How We Help
- Events
- Resources
- News & Media
- Get Involved
- Donate Now
Whether you have already enjoyed the rewarding experience of serving as a peer supporter, are still waiting for your first Sharsheret match, or are considering becoming a peer supporter, please join us on Tuesday, June 10, 2014, 8:30-9:30 p.m. (EST), for our free Link Training Teleconference. For more information, please contact Director of Clinical Programs Adina Fleischmann at email@example.com.
To register, click here.
© 2016 Sharsheret: Your Jewish Community Facing Breast Cancer
Sharsheret is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization ID# 13-4198529
Designed by Firefly Partners


text:
Standards & Test Results
SlipNOT® products far exceed ALL standards and recommended guidelines for slip resistance. Certified independent laboratories have tested SlipNOT® products in accordance with various test methods. Please call 800-754-7668 or e-mail us at email@example.com for hardcopy test results.
Click below to view the following agency standards and SlipNOT®'s coefficient of friction results in accordance with specific testing procedures:
The premier testing method approved for both dry and wet testing. The testing method can be used on nearly all surfaces. This method avoids the problem of adhesion by applying the horizontal and vertical forces simultaneously. The English XL is the device used for this method. Operators should be certified to use the equipment.
This testing standard is also approved for dry and wet testing. The method can be used on nearly all surfaces. The method also avoids the problem of adhesion by applying the horizontal and vertical forces simultaneously. The Brungraber Mark II is the device used for this method.
This test method covers the operational procedures for using a portable articulated strut slip tester (PAST) to determine the slip resistance of footwear sole, heel, or related materials (test feet) against planar walkway surfaces or walkway surrogates (test surfaces) in either the laboratory or field under dry conditions.
This covers laboratory measurement of the dry static coefficient of friction of shoe sole and heel materials on controlled walking surfaces and under controlled conditions. This method uses the stationary James Machine. This method is not used to test floor slip resistance.
This method is for the laboratory measurement of the static coefficient of friction of floor surfaces. The James Machine apparatus is not suitable for use on wet, rough, or corrugated surfaces. Because of the leather pad specification and problem with adhesion, this method should not be used for wet testing.
This test method covers measurement of the static slip resistance of footwear sole, heel, or related materials on walkway surfaces in the laboratory and in the field. Note that this method is not intended to test walkway surfaces, but the footwear material. In addition, this method would also result in ashesion problems on wet surfaces.
This method is for measuring surface frictional properties using the British Pendulum Tester (exterior), which is designed primarily for wet and oily testing. This test is a dynamic slip resistant test method.
This test method covers the measurement of static coefficient of friction of ceramic tile or other surfaces under both wet and dry conditions while utilizing neolite heel assemblies. This test method can be used in the laboratory or in the field. This test method uses a large 50 lb. drag-sled that is constructed in accordance with the procedure. The method also would be subject to adhesion problems on wet surfaces, but is approved for this use.
This test method covers the measurement of the traction of footwear on painted walkway surfaces under both dry and wet conditions in the laboratory and the field. The method uses the English XL device. The method is out of date and will likely be withdrawn in the future in favor of ASTM 1679.
This consumer safety specification covers the slip resistance of bathtubs and shower structures or combinations, used for bathing or showering. This consumer safety specification is intended to describe a means to reduce accidents to persons, especially children and the aged, resulting from the use of bathing facilities.
Standards For Design Requirements:
This practice covers design and construction guidelines and minimum maintenance criteria for new and existing buildings and structures. This practice is intended to provide reasonably safe walking surfaces for pedestrians wearing ordinary footwear. These guidelines may not be adequate for those with certain mobility impairments.
This guide is intended to assist in the selection of walkway surfaces where the presence of foreign materials may produce the danger of a slip or a fall.
The A1264.2 sub-committee began writing a standard with the intent of reducing falls due to slippery conditions which in are some way preventable in the workplace. The three basic areas of the standard are:
- Provisions for reducing hazards
- Test equipment
- Slip resistance criteria
The first area constitutes the largest part of the standard and addresses: Footwear applications and considerations, Mats & Runners, Housekeeping, Warnings, Symbols, Controlled Access, Selection and/or treatment. The test equipment portion essentially refers to ASTM standards and test methods.
The National Fire Protection Association standard 1901 entitled Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus has a specification in section 13-7.3 for slip resistance. It states that all external surfaces used for walking and standing shall have a slip resistance of at least 0.68 when wet as tested by the English XL VIT (per ASTM F1679 Standard Test Method for Using a Variable Incidence Tribometer), or at least 0.52 when wet as tested by the Brungraber Mark II PIAST (per ASTM F1677 Standard Test Method for Using a Portable Inclinable Articulated Strut Slip Test). Internal walking and standing surfaces must have a slip resistance of at least 0.58 per the English XL VIT or 0.47 per the Brungraber Mark II PIAST.
- SlipNOT® exceeds the recommended coefficient of friction values set by the NFPA.
OSHA requires the use of slip resistant surfaces in several locations in their standards.
29 CFR 1910.24(f)
"Stair treads." All treads shall be reasonably slip-resistant and the nosings shall be of non-slip finish. Welded bar grating treads without nosings are acceptable providing the leading edge can be readily identified by personnel descending the stairway and provided the tread is serrated or is of definite non-slip design. Rise height and tread width shall be uniform throughout any flight of stairs including any foundation structure used as one or more treads of the stairs.
A proposed standard for Subpart D does make a reference to a 0.5 requirement for coefficient of friction. However, this standard was never promulgated as a final rule. Some product manufacturers point to this proposed standard as a rule to which employers must comply.
The most significant regulation affecting slip resistance can be found in the OSHA construction standards as they relate to steel erection.
1910.68 Subpart F – Powered Platforms, Manlifts, and Vehicle-Mounted Work Platforms
"Surfaces." The upper or working surfaces of the step shall be of a material having inherent nonslip characteristics (coefficient of friction not less than 0.5) or shall be covered completely by a non-slip tread securely fastened to it.
1910 "Walking and Working Surfaces and Personal Protective Equipment; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
This proposed rule issued by OSHA included a non-mandatory appendix specifying a minimum slip resistance of 0.5 as reasonable slip resistance performance. Although they are still on the books, none of the proposed revisions to subpart D has been promulgated at this time.
- SlipNOT® products have a coefficient of friction that is greater than or equal to 0.85, exceeding all OSHA recommendations.
Americans with Disabilities Act (U.S. Department of Justice)
A4.5 Ground and Floor Surfaces.
A4.5.1 General. People who have difficulty walking or maintaining balance or who use crutches, canes, or walkers, and those with restricted gaits are particularly sensitive to slipping and tripping hazards. For such people, a stable and regular surface is necessary for safe walking, particularly on stairs. Wheelchairs can be propelled most easily on surfaces that are hard, stable, and regular. Soft loose surfaces such as shag carpet, loose sand or gravel, wet clay, and irregular surfaces such as cobblestones can significantly impede wheelchair movement.
Slip resistance is based on the frictional force necessary to keep a shoe heel or crutch tip from slipping on a walking surface under conditions likely to be found on the surface. While the dynamic coefficient of friction during walking varies in a complex and non-uniform way, the static coefficient of friction, which can be measured in several ways, provides a close approximation of the slip resistance of a surface. Contrary to popular belief, some slippage is necessary to walking, especially for persons with restricted gaits; a truly "non-slip" surface could not be negotiated.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration recommends that walking surfaces have a static coefficient of friction of 0.5. A research project sponsored by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) conducted tests with persons with disabilities and concluded that a higher coefficient of friction was needed by such persons. A static coefficient of friction of 0.6 is recommended for accessible routes and 0.8 for ramps.
It is recognized that the coefficient of friction varies considerably due to the presence of contaminants, water, floor finishes, and other factors not under the control of the designer or builder and not subject to design and construction guidelines and that compliance would be difficult to measure on the building site. Nevertheless, many common building materials suitable for flooring are now labeled with information on the static coefficient of friction. While it may not be possible to compare one product directly with another, or to guarantee a constant measure, builders and designers are encouraged to specify materials with appropriate values. As more products include information on slip resistance, improved uniformity in measurement and specification is likely. The Access Board's advisory guidelines on Slip Resistant Surfaces provides additional information on this subject.
- SlipNOT®'s coefficient of friction (0.85 or greater) exceeds the recommendation of ADA (0.6 for flat surfaces and 0.8 for ramps).


text:
ASPEN - Aspen, Lake Tahoe, Park City and Quebec.
All are North American contenders to host ESPN's Winter X Games starting in 2015.
With final preparations for X Games at Buttermilk well under way - the event's 12th edition on Aspen snow takes place Thursday through Sunday - ESPN this week announced that more than 20 cities have qualified as contenders to host the summer and winter versions of the games once existing agreements with host cities Aspen and Los Angeles expire. Aspen Skiing Co. has an agreement to host the winter games at Buttermilk through 2014; the deal to hold summer contests in Los Angeles expires after this year's event.
Not all of the cities, including some winter sites, were revealed in ESPN's announcement, which listed 13 places that have met initial qualification guidelines for the Summer X Games and four that are contenders for the winter event.
Winter sites identified and the host entities include: Aspen/Snowmass (Aspen Skiing Co.), Lake Tahoe, Calif./Nev. (Lake Tahoe Sports Organizing Committee), Park City, Utah (Park City) and Quebec City and Le Massif de Charlevoix, Canada (Quebec Snow Sport Events Inc. and Gestev Inc.).
Prospective hosts submitted letters of intent, according to ESPN. Two cities will be selected as hosts for three consecutive years once the existing agreements expire. The next step in the process involves submission of the detailed proposal to be a host.
The cities that qualified to submit a bid proposal all met four basic criteria, according to Danny Chi, a spokesman for ESPN. They include having the ability to meet the event requirements and having the experience and capability to host the games.
"Obviously, we know Aspen Skiing Co. does," he said.
The overall commitment of the host city and the "marketplace growth potential" for action sports and the X Games franchise also are criteria, Chi said.
"The aim is to explore different options and determine what is best for the progression and growth of the X Games franchise," said ESPN in its announcement of the potential host cities. Official proposals from the qualifiers are due April 2.
ESPN and Skico announced in May that they had reached an agreement to hold the Winter X Games at Buttermilk in 2013 and 2014. When the sports network announced in October that it would seek proposals from other hosts, Skico officials said the company would enter the bidding process in hopes of keeping the event at Buttermilk.
"As of next week, we'll have a 12-year track record of being outstanding hosts," said John Rigney, Skico vice president of sales and events. "I think ESPN has a great partner. I also think they've become part of the fabric of the community at this point."
Last year's games drew an estimated 108,000 people to the base of Buttermilk over the four days of competition, including 45,600 for the Saturday contests, a single-day record for the event. Overall attendance set a record in 2011, with 114,200 people over four days.
For Skico to lure ESPN back to Aspen for 2013 and 2014, it had to get local government entities and the business community to buy in.
"There's a lot that goes into hosting it. We do what it takes to get it done right," Rigney said. "You can just see by looking at the course build - the course and the events themselves evolve every year."
Aspen/Snowmass is the only Colorado area on ESPN's list of qualifying potential hosts, but not every potential host city wanted to be revealed in ESPN's announcement, according to Chi.
The summer group includes Atlanta, Austin, Charlotte, Chicago, Detroit, Fort Worth, Houston, Long Beach, Minneapolis, Montreal, New Orleans, Pasadena and Philadelphia.
ESPN expects to announce the 2014 site this summer and the 2015 location by the end of the year.


text:
How to Keep Sales Easy
You've had difficult sales conversations. They're the ones where you just can't seem to communicate well with your potential customer; the ones in which the deal feels done but is never signed. How do you keep sales easy and make more than you are now?
There's no magic wand in sales. It's hard work, but it can become easier with these three deceivingly simple steps derived from the new release Make Difficult People Disappear.
Get to Know Your Customers
Just as the phrase "it takes all kinds" holds true for life, the same is true for customers. It does take all kinds and you can sell to all of them if you know who you're dealing with and how to communicate in a language they understand. There are four personalities we possess and while each person has them all, one is naturally dominant and comes out more glaringly in a sales scenario. There are Commanders, motivated by "getting it done" who communicate in bullets and see everything not on their list as an intrusion. Make appointments with them and get to the point upon arrival. There are Organizers seeking to "get it right" who analyze every detail twice before making a decision. Give them time to decide and explain why your product or service is of value to them. There are Relaters gifted in empathy and "getting along" who will work to meet the needs of others and avoid conflict at all costs. Socialize with them at first and build their trust, discussing business at the end and recognizing that their "no" will sound more like "maybe." There are Entertainers who live for "getting appreciated" and bring light hearted fun to the office with a flair for creativity and a desire for drama. Catch them in the moment and appeal to their need for popularity and status. Awareness of these distinct differences and how they behave will reduce the frustratingly infuriating perceptions that natural behaviors are designed to pose difficulty for you.
Manage Expectation
Sales become easier when you stop expecting the Organizer to make an on the spot decision or a Relater to directly tell you their objections. You can make difficult sales calls literally disappear with your new found understanding of who you're dealing with and what you expect them to do. Without this, salespeople get frustrated by their own misaligned expectations. It's as if we look at a German shepherd expecting it to act like a Jack Russell and then get mad at the small dog for not acting big and regal. How we expect others to behave guides our reactions and yet it is our own expectations that have fallen short, not the other party, causing you to leave a sales call muttering "well that was a difficult customer".
Great salespeople aren't magical they have and use a set of skills that makes difficult people disappear! With a raised awareness and aligned expectations those difficult customers effectively vanish and your sales become easier…right along with your ability to count on more commissions, bonuses, and referrals.
Monica Wofford
Monica Wofford, MBA, CSP, is an international speaker, trainer, and author who helps managers who were promoted, actually become prepared to lead.
One Response to "How to Keep Sales Easy"
[…] Your Biz: The Trick To Making Sales Easy Contagious Companies Blog: How to Keep Sales Easy Todd Schnick, Intrepid LLC: Hey, This Sales Thing Is Easy. 10 Reasons Why… Mindwhirl Blog: Make […]
Engaging Leadership Speaker
Named one of Meetings and Conventions Magazine's FAVORITE SPEAKERS! She's been seen on CNN and FOX and has spoken in 25 countries! Monica Wofford is an internationally acclaimed leadership development expert who engages audiences and teaches them how to become better leaders. Learn more about how to book Monica as your next keynote speaker.


text:
— Cincinnati Reds third baseman Scott Rolen had two cortisone injections to relieve pain and stiffness in his left shoulder and neck and was not in the starting lineup.
Rolen had the injections on Thursday before flying to St. Louis for the start of a three-game series against his old team, the Cardinals. Rolen said Friday he had issues with the shoulder for a week to 10 days before consulting team medical personnel.
Rolen first injured the shoulder when he collided with Los Angeles Dodgers first baseman Hee-Seop Choi running out a grounder in May 2005.
Rolen is not certain when he'll be back in the lineup.


text:
Yesterday Microsoft held yet another press conference, however this time they weren't announcing new Surface Tablets. Instead this time they were revealing Windows Phone 8, the latest Windows Phone version that will ship with the next generation of Windows Phone devices.
Microsoft are really struggling to break into the smartphone market, Windows Phone 7 was really meant to get them in the door, but sales are still pretty sluggish. However Microsoft is showing no signs of giving up, and Windows Phone 8 is yet another big leap for them, proving that they can keep up with the big players, Apple and Android.
So in case you missed the Windows Phone 8 announcement, here's a round up of what's new.
New Start Screen
Windows Phone has always had a pretty cool and unique start screen, but Microsoft have still continued to improve on it. As you can see from the screenshot above, the start screen now spans the width of the screen. There's now support for more color themes and the live tiles can be adjusted in size.
New Hardware Support
NFC (Near Field Communication) support is the lasted big hardware change this time around. There is now also support for multicore processors, new screen resolutions (including 1280 x 720px) as well as support for MicroSD cards.
New Software Features
Windows Phone 8 will now support in-app purchases which is already found on both Android and iOS. Microsoft have also added in a new "wallet" which you can store personal info securely.
Windows Phones will now also be able to get over the air updates, instead of having to be connected to a PC and Microsoft have started bringing a lot of Windows 8 into Windows Phone 8, such as ways that the OS's handle security, gaming and networking.
Microsoft recently acquired Skype and now there's a new app for Windows Phone 8. Skype will be closely integrated throughout Windows Phone 8 and you'll have the option to make calls via Skype or through your carrier once you install the app.
One final major feature that Microsoft introduced was "TellMe", which allows you to speak commands to an app. For the demo Microsoft showcased Audible. You're able to launch, pause, stop and resume media simply with your voice which is pretty cool.
So Who Gets It and When?
Well first off, current Windows Phone users probably feel a little hard done by, as they won't be able to get the upgrade. However Microsoft has softened the blow a little and announced that Windows Phone 7.8 will be available as an upgrade. This will bring the new start screen along with a few other changes.
Microsoft didn't give a specific date for Windows Phone 8 to be released, but they just said that phones running it will ship in the fall. They also mentioned the "Holiday Season" so it could be anytime between August and Christmas! I'm sure we'll get a few more hints closer to the time.
Overall Windows Phone 8 is another big improvement for Windows Phone, which is already proving to be a great operating system. However Android and iOS are still leagues ahead of it in terms of market share and I'm sure this is something Microsoft are working hard to change.
What do you think of Windows Phone 8?
Let us know in the comments below
Image Credit: The Verge


text:
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Build.com, Inc. at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
Get it today!Shop Now
OrAdd to Wish List
24" Tub Risers from the Chesterfield and Fairfield Collections Since 1989, Newport Brass has developed, designed and delivered classically constructed versatile suites of timeless kitchen, bath and shower products for the discerning customer. With 20 years of commitment to well engineered solid brass designs and an undisputed reputation for performance and durability, Newport Brass continues to handcraft the finest fixtures with strict testing and quality assurance measures. Features: Solid brass Finish Features: Available in 25 beautiful finishes New Industry Leading lacquer Finish Process Long Life Finishes - 10 Year Warranty Durable, color protected, scratch resistant Green, low VOC, energy efficient finishing process Specifications: Height: 24". Price: $438.60
© Copyright 2016 - Christmas.com. All rights reserved and protected by Christmas Spirit


text:
Philippe Courtot is more than just Chairman and CEO of Qualys, Inc. He's one of the pioneers of the IT industry. Philippe has repeatedly turned innovative companies into industry leaders while creating significant customer and investor value. Prior to Qualys, Philippe was the Chairman and CEO of Signio (acquired by VeriSign in 2000 for more than a $1 billion); President and CEO of Verity (a company he took public in November 1995); and CEO of cc:Mail (acquired by Lotus in 1991).
I had a chance recently to chat with Philippe and thought I might share that here:
Q. As a thought-leader for a long time on the Software as a Service industry, you must be pleased that many of your predictions have seen the light of day over the last couple of years?
PC: Since 1999, I have been advocating that the Software as a Service model (delivering complex enterprise software applications) will be very disruptive to the high-tech industry. This is so for a number of reasons: a) it reduces costs drastically for organisations, and, b) it flips the balance of power between the high-tech vendors and their customers. It is certainly always nice to be right, but what really matters is to try to continue anticipating what's next and it is now very clear that the Web 2.0 evolution will drastically change the way we interact and do business.
Q. You've been recently quoted as saying that you believe Vista will be the last operating system that Microsoft develops. What prompts this belief?
PC: The simple facts are that we are clearly now, and quite quickly, moving from a desktop environment to a Webtop environment. With a very good secure browser that could do caching, windowing etc, and with AJAX technology, the only thing missing is a more ubiquitous and cheaper access to broadband wireless – and then we will be always on.
Furthermore technology like Google GEAR demonstrates disconnected usage. All of this is coming fast and Vista is around 60 million line of code which is obviously more than what we need for a Webtop.
Q. What are your predictions for SaaS in the next couple of years?
PC: The burst of the Internet Bubble in 2001 halted a lot of investment by the venture community. This explains why there are still only relatively few large SaaS companies at the moment despite the power of the model. Only the likes of Salesforce.com, Postini, NetSuite and Qualys could find the required capital to build the necessary infrastructure. Given the model, this is most critical but it also takes time and sizeable funds to build data-centres to a scale to leverage the Internet delivery model.
However, there is now a second wave coming, and we will see in the next couple of years a flurry of new companies and mergers between companies.
Also every "traditional", (previously non-SaaS) established player is now touting their SaaS strategy. Interesting given they opposed these models initially but realise that to survive now, the must adopt such models themselves.
The old high-tech industry, like the mainframe industry did, is now consolidating, and only a handful of those companies will survive. Google is looking more and more everyday like the company Bill Gates was afraid would be the next technology leader supplanting Microsoft.
Q. QualysGuard has established itself as the world's leading Vulnerability Assessment and Management solution. How tough was it in the early days to battle the likes of ISS, Retina, Foundstone and Nessus with not only being a new competitor but also coming from what was then a radically new way to deliver a solution to the client?
PC: Indeed it was very hard, but, the battle was not so much against the Foundstones and the like. Rather, it was against the engrained mentally at the time, that security should not be outsourced, and that security was all about securing the perimeter to protect the data which was kept inside.
Now we all know of course, that this mentally was quite primitive, especially at a time when the challenge is to open up the network so the data can better flow. Because of the increased business need of sharing data, the real security challenge in front of us is to protect the data at the "data level itself" and not at the perimeter. This is very difficult to do with the current computing infrastructure, but, much easier to do with SaaS solutions.
We were fortunate to find many early adopters who understood the value our model could bring. They helped us, and encouraged us to continue building our model, at a time when companies like Foundstone abandoned their On-demand solution for the "safer grounds of enterprise software". Today, at a time when you need to secure your entire network and not just the perimeter and a few critical servers, the SaaS model is the only model that can achieve this cost effectively, and with the degree of scanning accuracy required.
We are now performing more than 150 million IP scans per year with more than 3,000 customers. 30 of the Forbes global 100 have deployed QualysGuard. Our largest single client that we provide the service for has 180 appliances in 52 countries, scanning over 500,000 IPs – all connecting back to the Qualys Secure Data Centre across the Internet.
Q. Did you find it funny or frustrating that organisations were adopting the likes of Salesforce.com with relatively little question about corporate security, yet Qualys was continually having to battle the question of company information being stored offsite? I assume that shows the difference between a business decision and one made by the IT Department?
PC: Not really. In fact Salesforce.com had to overcome the resistance of both IT and IT security people. It had IT people feeling threatened by the fact that there was no need for anymore to install and manage software. It had IT Security asking questions, and rightfully so, about the security of such a model. The normal human attitude is to resist something we do not understand but I always knew that it was just a question of time. We knew we had a better model and we knew that we had to be persistent and relentlessly continuing to make our application better. This would win new advocates.
Q. QualysGuard is seen as the industry benchmark now by most. Is that (from last question) still a battle for Qualys?
PC: We never looked at it as a battle except for being a battle against ourselves i.e;making sure that we understood what our customers wanted and to make sure we were delivering it.
Q. What's the future hold for QualysGuard and what can existing and new clients expect?
PC: We still have a lot of work to do. On the Vulnerability Management side, our application has very high scanning accuracy (six sigma) and non-intrusiveness. It is as you know the easiest also to use and to deploy. We are working to provide better and more actionable reports.
Now that we have delivered our new Ajax based user interface, we have the ability to create a more powerful application and working with many of our customers, we are well on the way of achieving this. Our next frontier is to bring security and compliance together through our Policy Compliance solution at the end of the year. We are also working at delivering a Web Application certification service and a few other cool things. You'll like what you see!
Since the talk with Philippe, it's been interesting see a few stories like this one: http://www.softwareexpo.com.au/content/view/80/45/


text:
Computer giant Hewlett-Packard said Thursday that it plans to close its longtime campus in Cupertino, while transferring several thousand workers to its Palo Alto headquarters over the next two years.
The announcement is a blow to the city of Cupertino, said Mayor Kris Wang, who added that the city gets tax revenue from HP's operations in her city.
The 100-acre campus has been home to some of HP's personal computer division as well as some of HP's commercial software and hardware units. It's also the site of a high-tech "customer briefing center," where HP holds meetings and shows off some of its wares to corporate clients.
"Closing the Cupertino site is a big change, and we recognize that the transition will touch all Bay Area employees in some way," said Pete Bocian, HP's chief administrative officer, in a memo sent to employees Thursday.
By consolidating operations in Palo Alto, he added, HP "will create a more productive, flexible, ecological and highly energized work environment."
HP, which has more than 300,000 employees worldwide, has gone through several waves of consolidation and has laid off thousands of employees in recent years, while adding others through new hiring and acquisitions of other tech companies.
Bocian's memo said the Palo Alto and Cupertino campuses are each about 60 percent occupied, and that HP hopes to reach 90 percent capacity in Palo Alto after the consolidation is completed. The transition will occur over two years.
HP declined to say how many employees work at the Cupertino campus, but Cupertino City Councilman Barry Chang estimated the number at 3,000 to 3,500. Wang agreed that it is probably "several thousand."
"It's bad news, no doubt about it," Chang said.
Wang said she believes HP is the biggest corporate landowner in Cupertino, and probably the most prominent business in the city after Apple, whose world headquarters is located nearby.
She said HP notified the city of its plans Thursday and officials had not yet calculated the financial impact. But she added that she's optimistic the city will find another tech company to move onto the HP site.
"We're sure that we can work with their real estate team to position the land for future revenue generation," she said.
Some of the HP buildings at both campuses are decades old. Bocian said in his memo that HP will make "substantial investment" to improve several buildings in Palo Alto.
In a brief statement Thursday night, HP said the move is part of a broader strategy "to improve efficiency across the company. This effort allows HP to better use space, continue to reduce our carbon footprint and provide employees with a more collaborative work environment."
Contact Brandon Bailey at 408-920-5022; follow him at Twitter.com/BrandonBailey.


text:
sun 30 jun 2002 12:00:00 allston, ma
my friends listened
my friends listened patiently to me during much of yesterday (saturday). finally last night i had to go talk to her. it was killing me. we figured some things out i guess. instead of goodbye forever, it was more like, make sure when you see me it's because you really want to see me.
[note 2007 -- it was in the next few months after this that i began investigating leaving the US and moving to amsterdam. i made a trip to amsterdam in late october 2002. i stayed at the "old tulip" aka NH amsterdam city centre hotel on spuistraat. while on that trip, by complete coincidence i offered to wait for someone to deliver a futon to hg's apartment, because he had to go out of town on the delivery date. the doorbell rang while i was waiting, but it wasn't the futon guy, it was lgf, who had come to pick up his wallpapering tools from hg. mgas was there too, and invited me to dinner out in osdorp. at dinner they told me they were moving to new york as soon as possible, and were looking for a renter for their flat at vätternkade 40. i thought about it in my hotel room that night. the next day i phoned lgf to say i would like to take his flat for six months, starting in january. and i picked up the phone book looking for an immigration lawyer in amsterdam. i earned a fair amount of money on a job for IBM software, with which i was able to finance the trip, legal fees, and my first six months' rent. oddly enough i haven't found any journal entries on my computer relating to this time, so i thought i should write this in. sgc]


text:
Saturday, May 14, 2011
6 comments:
- Kathleen Grace said...
Well it would be fun and I hope you do make a BIG pile of money:>) Happy birthday to the boy, a watergun fight sounds like the perfect party!
And oh my goodness I ♥ kittens so much!
- May 14, 2011 at 12:09 PM
- Ocean Breezes and Country Sneezes said...
That watergun fight sounds like fun! Who won!
I'm waiting for your "Other Self" post!
Math is fun!
- May 14, 2011 at 7:44 PM
- blessedmom's simple home said...
Oh, those sweet photos are making me sorry I got our cats fixed!! How precious those babies are.
Happy Birthday to your baby too. They grow up way too fast, don't they? :-)
- May 14, 2011 at 10:40 PM
- see you there! said...
How did the water fight go? What did you sell at the flea market? I'll bet a basket of those kittens would sell right away. So adorable!
- May 16, 2011 at 4:33 AM
- Pearl Maple said...
Aren't they darling little creatures, thanks for sharing pics of your little treasures
- May 17, 2011 at 2:20 AM
- Jojo Caramel said...
Awww how sweeeeeet!
Blogger still doesn't work correctly for me :(
- May 18, 2011 at 12:34 AM


text:
Review of the financial data collected from higher education institutions for 2015/16
This circular sets out a number of proposals for revision to the Finance Statistics Return (FSR) for implementation for 2015/16. Colleagues should respond to this consultation by email to [email protected] using the consultation response template by no later than 1 July 2014 to respond to specific proposals. Please provide one response for your institution, consulting with all necessary colleagues.
The documentation includes an overview aimed at senior colleagues setting out the principles of each of the proposals. There is also some additional technical information and some questions for a number of these proposals aimed predominately at those responsible for completing the FSR. Click on the plus buttons in the text below to see the technical details.
HESA has coordinated a fundamental review of the financial data collected from higher education institutions. The intention has been to look at streamlining requirements and aligning definitions across collections currently made by a range of organisations, thereby improving efficiency and reducing the burden for institutions. Additionally the review has addressed the implementation of FRS 102 and a new FEHE SORP (Statement of Recommended Practice: Accounting for Further and Higher Education Institutions) which will be introduced for 2015/16.
An initial strategic discussion was held with relevant stakeholders (Funding Councils, government departments and other organisations that have an interest in finance data) to discuss the scope of the review and assist in setting the agenda for the review group. This was followed by a number of technical review group meetings which worked on the details. A further strategic discussion considered the emerging proposals. Following this sector-wide consultation the announcement of changes to specifications and data collection arrangements will be made in summer 2014. Detailed guidance notes will follow.
The FSR is collected annually from all UK institutions by HESA, in December. It is submitted in an Excel workbook, along with the Higher Education – Business and Community Interaction (HE-BCI) Survey. Currently the FSR provides the primary financial statements from published accounts (Tables 1-4), cost centre-based data (Tables 5a, 5b, 6b and 7), tuition fees (Table 6a) and capital expenditure (Table 8). The figures recorded in the FSR must be consistent with those recorded in the audited published accounts.
All institutions prepare their annual financial statements in accordance with the FEHE SORP, and comply with the financial reporting requirements contained in any UK legislation relevant to their constitution. The FSR uses the principles in the SORP to analyse the financial statements in greater detail than is required for published accounts.
The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) collects two returns from institutions in England. The Annual Accountability return, collected in December, includes data for the latest two years of actuals (the prior year being restated figures if appropriate) and one year of forecasts. The second return in July requires an update to the December forecasts and collects another three years of forecast data.
Until recently HEFCE has collected finance data from institutions in Northern Ireland, but this will now be collected by Department of Employment and Learning Northern Ireland (DELNI).
The Scottish Funding Council (SFC) collects an Annual Accounts return from institutions in Scotland in December, and the Strategic Plan Forecast in June. The Strategic Plan Forecast contains the current year plus three years forecast data, and is in a similar format to the Annual Accounts return.
The Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW) collects Financial Forecasts from institutions in Wales in July; which includes data from the current year and subsequent four years forecasts. HEFCW also receives the institutions' financial statements in December each year to check against the original forecasts.
HEFCE also collects the Transparent Approach to Costing (TRAC) return on behalf of all UK Funding Councils. This is collected from all UK institutions in January each year. TRAC is the standard method now used for costing in higher education in the UK. TRAC aims to provide high-level aggregate information for government.
TRAC includes three separate but related costing processes: Annual TRAC (an annual retrospective attribution and reporting of costs), TRAC fEC (the forecast and accounting for full economic costs at a project level) and TRAC(T). TRAC(T) is a separate return submitted in February each year which includes total teaching costs as reported in Annual TRAC re-analysed to produce SUBJECT FACTs.
A SUBJECT FACT refers to the Subject-related Full Average Costs of Teaching a Student and is a categorisation of cost that is used in the TRAC(T) process. It is defined as the subject-related average annual cost of teaching a FTE funding council-fundable student in a HESA academic cost centre based on TRAC costs. The cost totals are those attributed to HESA academic cost centres, excluding those for Non Publicly Funded Teaching provision, non-funding council fundable provision and non-subject related activities (i.e. costs that would otherwise have been incurred irrespective of and separate to the costs associated with teaching the subject).
An outcome from the consultation during the TRAC review, announced in April 2013, was to work with HESA and others to secure harmonisation, efficiencies and utility from TRAC and HESA datasets. This is the subject of continuing work.
The stakeholders in the collection and use of financial data about the higher education sector, are many and varied. In many cases each stakeholder is collecting its own data to a timetable and set of definitions to suit its own requirements.
The demand from all stakeholders, including higher education institutions themselves, are broadening as the desire to make best use of resources, identify efficiencies and understand impact of changes increases. This review has considered opportunities for streamlining current collections (definitions, timing etc.) and addressing new requirements so as to make the data more useful and powerful for all while reducing the burden of collection on institutions.
The proposed FSR template for 2015/16 is available for reference.
Content of record: Tables 1 - 4 and 8
Tables 1 to 4 (the primary statements) have been redesigned in the same format and using the same headings as the model financial statements in FEHE SORP. In a few cases Tables 1 to 4 require additional detail that is usually disclosed in notes in the financial statements. More details on the specific changes are available on the SORP website. These changes are reflected in the new template, and will be consistent with institutions' published accounts from 2015/16.
All HESA outputs (publications, heidi etc.) will change to report on the new data formats. One expected consequence of the changes to the SORP is that year on year comparisons will be more volatile than before.
Funding Council returns
This review has explored ways to reduce the burden on institutions. One are discussed was the possible opportunity to align the FSR and Funding Council returns thus reducing the requirements for return of data on institutions, and the need to cross-check between returns which currently takes significant effort and time. The majority of content returned to HEFCE, DELNI and SFC in December is the same as the first four FSR tables (HEFCW does not require a December return). Following discussions with the review group and Funding Councils it has been agreed that:
- The Funding Council returns and the FSR should be combined into one return. Institutions will be required to send in one single return in December which will be sent to HESA with data being shared with the relevant Funding Council. This return will need to be made on 1 December to satisfy all Funding Council requirements, which is earlier than any current requirements for institutions in Scotland and Wales. The current FSR return date is 13 December, and the SFC and HEFCW return dates for approved financial statements is 31 December.
- The FSR template to be submitted to HESA will output a sheet of Key Financial Indicators (KFIs) to assist institutions in quality assuring the data. Institutions in Scotland will be required to provide commentary on significant variances as currently collected in the SFC return.
- Funding Councils will still require forecasts, which they will collect directly from institutions in June (SFC) and July (HEFCE, HEFCW and DELNI). No forecast data will be collected in December.
Q 1.1 Colleagues are invited to comment on the intention to combine the FSR and Funding Council returns and any likely issues.
Q 1.2 Colleagues from institutions in Scotland and Wales are invited to comment on any issues they foresee with moving to the earlier submission date of 1 December.+ -
There has been a change in the way joint ventures should be recorded in the FSR. Institutions are now required to report only their own share of the income and expenditure for joint ventures or as part of a collaborative project. This has resulted in removal of rows in Tables 5a, 5b and 6b.
Funding Council returns
Various items have been added to the FSR to reflect Funding Council requirements in existing annual returns such as:
- two columns have been added in the capital expenditure table (Table 8) to record "Leasing" (which includes all assets funded by finance leases) and "PFI" (which includes assets funded by the private finance initiative or similar arrangements which are on balance sheet)
- additional breakdown in the Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income
- additional breakdown in the Consolidated Statement of Changes in Reserves
- additional breakdowns in the Consolidated Balance Sheet
- additional breakdown in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows
- details about borrowing (institutions in Scotland only)
Seperate tabs have been added to the FSR template for each administration to record specific information that each Funding Council requires. This was intended to allow consistency in the main tables and allow easy identification for the administration specific items. The Funding Councils may add or remove items from these tables in the future depending upon changes in government policy and requirements. These changes would be introduced in the same way and with the same degree of consultation as the Funding Councils would have done with the tables in their own return.
Q 1.3 Colleagues are invited to comment on the additional items required from amalgamating Funding Council returns into the FSR template.
Content of record: Tables 5 - 7
Cost centre-based tables
Currently the HESA Student, Staff and FSR records all contain a cost centre dimension which is intended to allow meaningful comparisons between different types of data at a more granular level than the total institution. Historically, the specification of academic cost centres was considered a part of the FSR and the definition of a cost centre was driven by the notion of grouping together of staff whose activities had a similar cost.
In the Student record, cost centres are recorded in the Module subject entity to capture cost centres for the member of staff most closely associated with the module. In the Staff record cost centres are collected to identify where a staff contract is assigned. In both cases these are used by the Funding Councils. In the FSR the income (research) and expenditure tables are split by cost centres. The Institution Profile now collects academic cost centres, mapped to local academic departments to provide contextual information for cost centre analysis.
HESA performs cost centre checks across records – for example checking that the cost centres in which institutions have indicated they have staff also have money spent in them. However the differences in timing of collection of the records means this can never be perfect.
Currently, cost centre expenditure data in Table 7 are used to inform the cost factors in HEFCE's research funding methodology. In the absence of an alternative data source HEFCE requires that cost centre information in Table 7 be retained in the FSR.
The alternative data source that is being investigated is the TRAC Research Cost Relativities (RCR) return. HEFCE need to give further consideration to the outcomes of the TRAC RCR returns before deciding whether to introduce TRAC RCR across the sector on a periodic basis (e.g. every five years) to inform the cost factors for research funding methodologies or continue to use the FSR Table 7 data for this purpose.
If Funding Councils were to decide not to continue to use the FSR Table 7 data then there no longer would be a statutory requirement for cost centre-based expenditure data in the FSR. There is a statutory requirement for cost centre-based research income data (Table 5) for institutions in Scotland as the information is used by SFC for the purposes of evaluation and monitoring of research. SFC would therefore prefer to retain this table.
During the review group meetings there has been discussion about whether or not the current cost centre-based expenditure tables are useful to the sector. Although Funding Councils currently require this data for funding as set out above, they are keen to understand if the reporting of data by cost centre creates significant burden on institutions, as it may be that this does not justify the costs of collection.
What are the arguments for and against collection of data disaggregated by cost centre?
Representatives from some institutions have stated that the cost centre-based tables are used internally; mainly by planning departments and predominantly for benchmarking. This benchmarking feeds in to the assessment of performance at the institution, faculty and department levels. Typically the FSR is used for benchmarking performance in research funding, assessing spend by student, assessing total spend per staff member and assessing academic and non-academic staff costs as a proportion of total expenditure.
Many institutions will be setting targets for approval by their governing body that explicitly refer to a position relative to others in the sector. In order to design appropriate objectives towards the achievement of these targets, it is important for institutions to be able to identify which of the constituent parts of an institution are performing well relative to peers and which are not. Being able to access comparable data for peer institutions at a more granular level then the whole institution is critical.
Representatives from some institutions have stated that they do not find cost centre-based data useful. For some institutions, mapping local departments to the cost centres and allocation of expenditure is not straight forward which means that comparisons are not necessarily meaningful although the data is used, for example, in league tables. Others institutions have no interest in comparisons set out above and would prefer to concentrate available resources on other benchmarking activities.
The academic cost centres were reviewed ahead of the 2013/14 HESA collections and updated to reflect more accurately current academic structures though it is recognised that a centrally defined list will never match those of all institutions.
What would happen if cost centre-based data were to be removed?
While there continues to be a statutory requirement for cost centre-based data for 2015/16 this may not be the position further into the future.
If the decision was to be taken to remove cost centre-based data from the FSR, then Tables 5 and 7 would no longer be collected in the current format.
It has been suggested that the Research Excellence Framework Units of Assessment (REF UoA) which are very similar to HESA cost centres, could be used to benchmark research income (and costs), replacing the current Table 5.
Removing Table 7 would mean less FSR preparation time for institutions, but would also mean a loss of data used by some institutions for benchmarking purposes. Many institutions already undertake more detailed analysis in addition to Table 7. The accuracy and the relevance of all benchmarking data would need to be considered.
Currently the TRAC(T) return collected by HEFCE also splits out costs by cost centres. The future structure of the TRAC(T) return would need to be considered. Currently cost centres or some other subject dimension would continue to be required for TRAC(T).
There also needs to be consideration about to whether or not cost centre-based data should continue to be recorded in the other HESA records - Staff and Student. Should HESA continue undertaking checks across records? If cost centre-based data is no longer collected then the related part of the Institution Profile could also be removed.
What would be the options for continued collection of cost centre-based data?
HEFCE require the cost centre data for the time being to inform the cost factors in the research funding methodology. However Table 7 could be improved so that it becomes more useful to institutions, whilst maintaining the data required by the Funding Councils. There are a number of proposals for improvement to Table 7 which are listed in the technical detail of this documentation.
Q 2.1 Colleagues are invited to indicate whether or not cost centre-based data should continue to be included in Table 5 of the FSR if there was no longer a statutory requirement.
Q 2.2 Colleagues are invited to indicate whether or not cost centre-based data should continue to be included in Table 7 of the FSR if there was no longer a statutory requirement.
Q 2.3 Colleagues are invited to indicate whether Table 7 should be kept as it currently is, or whether Table 7 would be more useful if it was different in some way.
Following the outcome from the HEFCE Review of TRAC, the FSR review group have discussed the options for aligning the TRAC return with the FSR. Whilst good practice options were identified for compiling some of the FSR return on a TRAC basis, the group concluded that currently there is not substantial overlap between the two returns and therefore combining them may not provide significant benefit to all institutions in the sector. The group also acknowledged that there are some concerns with the timing of the submission of the FSR relative to the submission deadline for the TRAC return.
However, the group has noted that the sector is making greater use of a wider range of data and information and therefore anticipate that there may be a need to revisit the scope for combining the TRAC and the FSR returns in due course.
One suggestion was that there could be some pre-defined populations extracted from the HESA Staff and Student returns that institutions could use to validate the cost driver data used in the TRAC return. This is being explored separately to the FSR review process.
Q 2.4 - To reduce the time taken to finalise historic data returns and provide enhanced opportunities for greater utilisation of TRAC data, colleagues are invited to consider whether a process of transition to an earlier submission of TRAC should begin with voluntary submission alongside the submission of the FSR?
Procurement data - institutions in England only
Universities UK has been undertaking some work relating to procurement. The Diamond review of efficiency in the higher education sector set a challenge for 30% of non-pay-spend to be addressed through collaborative purchasing. This would help to increase efficiency savings by maximising the purchasing power of the sector. The review estimated the level of collaborative spend to be 10-12%. However, this estimate took as the baseline total non-pay-spend. Working with the regional procurement consortia and other representative bodies it has been established that a more robust measure would assess the level against a baseline calculated from a sub-set of total non-pay spend. This revised measure would remove legitimate elements of institutional spend that cannot be addressed by procurement professionals.
It has been proposed that if the "Other Operating Expenditure" figure (in Table 7) in the FSR was split between items that are or are not influenced by procurement, a more accurate baseline figure could be calculated. A single figure for Other Operating Expenditure influenceable by Procurement would be included in the return. A number of items would need to be split out and the taxonomy for this has been provided by Universities UK.
Institutions in Scotland would not be required to complete this part of the FSR as data is already collected by Advanced Procurement for Universities and Colleges (APUC). Institutions in Wales also already complete this as part of a return to HEFCW.
Q 2.5 Colleagues are invited to comment on the principle of returning the "Other Operating Expenditure" figure split by items that are or are not influenced by procurement.
Cost centre-based tables
What would be the options for continued collection of cost centre-based data?
If your institution has indicated in question 2.3 that it would prefer to collect cost centre-based data in an alternative way, there are a number of proposed approaches for how Table 7 could be structured. These are:
|i) As currently in Table 7 - Split the Research Grants and Contracts spend by individual income sources
|Allows comparison of research income and expenditure by source of income
|ii) Analyse the Research Grants and Contracts figures across cost centres
|Allows comparison at cost centre level between research income and expenditure
|iii) Analyse the Administration Support costs across academic cost centres
|Allows more meaningful comparisons where institutions have different approaches to centralisation or devolution of administrative arrangements
|iv) Split out the Staff costs by 'Teaching', 'Research' and 'Other'
|Allows more meaningful comparisons between research or teaching-based institutions
Mock-ups of these options are available in the proposed FSR template for 2015/16
Q 2.6 Colleagues are invited to indicate which of the above suggestions (i – iv) they would find useful to include in Table 7 of the FSR and why, or suggest any alternatives?
Procurement data – institutions in England only
It has been proposed that if the "Other Operating Expenditure" figure (in the Type of expenditure Table 7) in the FSR was split between items that are influenced and are not influenced by procurement, a more accurate baseline figure could be calculated. A number of items would need to be split out and the taxonomy below has been provided by Universities UK:
- Costs associated with University subsidiaries
- Payments to other institutions, charities, schools, NHS (e.g. franchises, placements)
- Payments to banks, interest charges, etc.
- Payments to individuals (e.g. staff costs included under the Op Ex category)
- Payments in relation to research council grants, doctoral training, research bodies etc.
- Provisions relating to pension costs and bad debts
- Payments to HMRC
- Depreciation
- Membership and affiliation fees (including payments to professional bodies)
- Conference fees
- Rent and rates and planning fees to local authority
- Payment to students' union and trade unions
- Cost of student placements
Q 2.7 Colleagues are invited to comment on the items included in the list above, and whether or not they see any issues with returning the procurement split of "Other Operating Expenditure"?
Residences and catering operations
The "Residences and catering operations (including conferences)" figures in the FSR currently feed directly into the Estates Management record (EMR). It is proposed that these figures are split into "Residences" and "Catering operations" to allow a more accurate figure to be reported in the EMR. This figure is reported in the income and expenditure tables.
Q 2.8 Colleagues are invited to comment on whether or not they would be able to return this split of "Residences" and "Catering operations", and whether or not they would find this helpful.
Other sources in Table 5
In the Research grants and contracts – breakdown by research grant and cost centre tables (Table 5) the column heading "Other sources" has been renamed to "Other UK sources". It was assumed that anything being included here should be of UK origin only, as there are "EU other" and "Non-EU other" columns already.
Data collection and timescales
Timing of collection
Currently institutions in England and Northern Ireland are required to make returns to HEFCE for 1 December, much (but not all) of the content of which is repeated in the FSR. Institutions in Scotland do similarly but to a 31 December deadline. Institutions in Wales do not provide an additional return but submit financial statements to HEFCW by 31 December.
One of the areas HESA has been exploring is how to reduce burden on institutions. As part of this work it is proposed that Funding Council returns be amalgamated into the FSR and the return date moved forward so that it aligns with HEFCE's return date of 1 December. Moving the FSR return date earlier means that institutions would no longer be required to submit another year-end financial data return to Funding Councils (other accountability information such as a commentary on significant variances, and internal and external audit reports would still be required by the Funding Councils).
Data collection processes
HESA was asked to explore alternatives to Excel for data submission; there is an application of XML for finance data called IXBRL, which is already used for tax returns, and will shortly become mandatory for Companies House returns. However institutional representatives in the review group do not consider this to be possible for the sector at the moment but this may be reconsidered in the future.
HESA has also been asked to consider ways to streamline the data quality process. This could be achieved by providing templates pre-populated with the previous year's data. This would enable greater checking to be undertaken locally, before data is submitted to HESA, thus significantly reducing the number of validation checks and queries usually raised in the post-submission phase. HESA pre-populates the EMR web forms. Each institution would be required to download their personalised copy of the FSR template for completion prior to submission.
Q 3.1 Colleagues are invited to comment on the proposal to pre-populate the FSR template.
Timing of collectionThe proposal is to move the FSR return date forward. The following data collection schedule is proposed for 2015/16 onwards:
From August 2016
|Institutions' local preparation
|September 2016
|C15031 preparation guide
|1 November 2016
|C15031 data collection opens
|1 December 2016
|Institutions send electronic copy of signed published accounts to HESA
|1 December 2016*
|Return date for HESA Finance Statistics Return
|1 December 2016 to very early January 2017
|Data quality checking period
|Early January 2017
|Late submission
|Early January 2017
|Sign-off deadline
|Mid-January 2017
|Delivery of full data to Statutory Customers
* HEFCE would receive the data from 1 December to start using, on the understanding that this data had not yet undergone data quality checking by HESA. HEFCE would be kept informed as HESA completed its own checks and institutions signed off their data.
A diagram showing the new data flows and timescales has been produced.
Q 3.2 Colleagues are invited to comment on the above timescales proposals.
Currently the FSR uses data from Staff and Student records to perform checks across the cost centres. However if the collection timescale is moved forwards, HESA would have to use the Institution Profile to perform checks across cost centres.
Q 3.3 Colleagues are invited to comment on the proposal to use the Institution Profile to perform checks across HESA records.
Data collection processes
HESA will be reviewing all the data quality checks it and Funding Councils perform, particularly to avoid duplication, and would welcome any comments from institutions relating to this process.
Q 3.4 Colleagues are invited to comment on the data quality checks.
Other items
Currently the HE-BCI Survey is collected in parallel with the FSR. This was implemented at the time when HESA became responsible for this return as it was hoped that the linking of the financial data contained in both returns would allow for significant cross checking between them. However, in practice the cross-checking has been quite limited and the staff preparing the two parts of the return are normally in different parts of the institution, creating an adidtional overhead. Furthermore, there is no pressure to collect HE-BCI data earlier than currently and so it may well make sense to divorce the returns as part of these changes.
As SFC will be using HE-BCI data to inform the allocation of the Knowledge Transfer Grant an earlier submission data would be welcomed.
Q 4.1 Colleagues are invited to comment on the proposal to split HE-BCI and the FSR, and to indicate their preferred date to return HE-BCI between 1 December and the current date.
One-off implementation issues
In addition to the on-going impacts of change set out above, there will be significant change management issues in implementing the proposed changes in preparation for the first collection.
In order to meet the requirements for the new FEHE SORP it will be necessary to collect the opening balance for 2014/15 as a one-off. HESA will also need to collect a converted set of statements for 2014/15.
Q 4.2 Colleagues are invited to indicate when they would be in a position to return the restated 2014/15 accounts and opening balance sheet. Suggested dates have been 30 June 2016, 30 September 2016 or 1 December 2016.
Income for research studentships and fellowships
The current guidance states that:
- Income for research studentships associated with a research grant or contract should be returned as research income, but income for general research studentships should be returned as tuition fee income.
- Income for research fellowships should be returned as research income whether they are associated with a research project grant/contract or not.
HEFCE's preference is for all income for research studentships returned as tuition fee income, and would like to know whether institutions will find it difficult to split out income for research studentships that is allocated as part of a research project grant or contract.
Q 4.3 Colleagues are invited to indicate any issues they foresee with returning income for research studentships awarded within a research grant or contract separately.
Following this review HESA is planning to rewrite the guidance documentation for the FSR generally, and would welcome comments on any specific items which institutions feel needs to be addressed.
Q 4.4 Colleagues are invited to comment on areas for improvement within the guidance documentation.
Key Financial Indicators
Due to the changes in the FEHE SORP and within the FSR template, HESA may need to amend or recreate the Key Financial Indicators (KFIs) and Ratios. This work will start once the FSR template has been agreed. If institutions would like to contribute to these discussions please indicate as part of your response.
Q 4.5 Colleagues are invited to comment on the current KFIs.
If you have any queries regarding this circular please contact the Institutional Liaison team on 01242 211144 or email [email protected]


text:
$5 flat rate | orders $70+ ship free
» Additional 10% Off Every Order - Subscribe to Our eNewsletter at Checkout!
The Safer® Brand Garden Fungicide utilizes the effectiveness of our popular sulfur-based fungicide. This organic fungicide is an effective, economical and convenient solution to the wide array of fungal blights that consumers face every day. OMRI Listed® and compliant for use in organic gardening. This organic fungicide is ideal for organic vegetable gardening and as an effective solution for rose care and tomato fungicide.
Garden Fungicide controls powdery mildew, black spot and rust. Effective rose care and organic vegetable gardening care begins with Safer® Brand Garden Fungicide.
Are insects your issue?? Safer® Brand EndALL can eliminate up to 45 different insects in any stage of their life cycle.
You can use Safer® Brand Garden Fungicide RTU on roses, flowers, foliage plants, ornamentals, beans, peas and strawberries.
Spray at first sign of infection. Spray plants thoroughly to wet upper and lower surfaces of foliage.
Roses, Flowers, Foliage Plants and Ornamentals:
Apply at first sign of disease infestation. Spray at 7-10 day intervals following rain, or as needed to control powdery mildew, black spot and rust. Be sure to treat new growth and buds.
Beans and Peas:
Apply at first sign of disease infestation. Spray at 7 day intervals following rain, or as needed to control powdery mildew. Can be used up until the day of harvest.
Apply at first sign of infestation. Repeat at 3 week intervals to control powdery mildew. Do not use on strawberry fruit used for canning. Can be used up until the day of harvest.
Safer® Brand is the leader in alternative lawn and garden products. Safer® Brand recognizes the growing demand by consumers for these products, offering a wide variety of natural and organic solutions for lawn, garden, landscape, flowers, houseplants, insects and more!


text:
DENVER " U.S. District Court Judge Robert Blackburn sentenced a man to 330 years in prison Tuesday for his role in a $56 million investment scam from which proceeds were used to buy the Redstone Castle.
At 72, it's unlikely Norman Schmidt, of Denver, will ever be released.
An order of financial restitution hasn't been entered, but Blackburn entered an order of forfeiture totaling $38.41 million, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office.
Investigators believe Schmidt obtained tens of millions of dollars from hundreds of investors for his own personal gain.
Schmidt was found guilty of conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud and securities fraud, plus other counts and a money laundering count. He and his wife, Jannice Schmidt, plus five others were indicted in 2004. Jannice Schmidt was recently sentenced to nine years in prison. George Beros, of Shaker Heights, Ohio, was previously sentenced to a year and a day in prison and $286,739 in restitution. George Alan Weed, of Benton, Ill.; Charles Franklin Lewis, of Littleton; and Michael Duane Smith of Colbert, Wash., all await sentencing. Lewis was scheduled for sentencing today. Peter A.W. Moss, of London, England, remains at large.
"These people took a lot of people for a lot money, unfortunately, and a lot of them were good, honest, local valley people," said Cynthia Lange.
Lange managed the castle for 15 years and now lives in Parker. She was a victim of the scam and testified against Schmidt last summer. She left the castle in 2000 shortly after the new owners took over, saying that she knew it wouldn't work out for her and that the new owner was a drunk.
"It was like raising a child for 15 years then all of a sudden having someone coming in and saying, 'You know what, we're going to take this 15-year-old child and we're going to do what we want with it,'" Lange said.
Schmidt worked with the others from 1999 to 2003 to defraud investors with a purportedly high-yield investment program. The group used "corporate alter-egos" named Reserve Foundation Trust, Smitty's Investments, Capital Holdings, Monarch Capital Holdings and Fast Track. They promised investors returns of 2 to 400 percent per month and even sent out false monthly statements, authorities believe.
All the while the money was being used for things like purchasing the Redstone Castle, eight NASCAR race cars, a race truck and other race items. Investigators also seized 60 bank accounts and other property. The scam touched more than 1,000 victims.
Lange said the scam duped even seasoned investors who made their living by investing.
"It worked for a long time and it worked for millions and millions of dollars," Lange said. "I can only speak for myself personally - what a traumatic effect it had on me - but I can only imagine what it did for everybody else. People were furious."
Leon and Debbie Harte headed up the $6.5 million purchase of the castle. Leon Harte died before the 2004 indictments were handed down. Investigators believe Debbie Harte, who had been divorced from Leon before his death, was not a participant in the scheme.
Lange said it was unfortunate Harte died and avoided any repercussions because he seemed to be the main player.
"Leon was a bigger part of that than Norm," she said. "Norm was just Leon's good-old-boy."
Built around the start of the 20th century by coal magnate John Osgood, the castle was sold by the IRS at auction in 2005 for $4 million to Ralli Dimitrius, a part-time Aspen resident. He reopened the castle for public tours last year. Redstone, a former coal-mining town, is located south of Carbondale on Highway 133.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service and Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies said they conducted more than 800 interviews, reviewed close to 100,000 pages of documents and spent tens of thousands of hours over 2 1/2 years investigating the scheme. They also requested assistance from seven foreign countries.
Lange said she's recouped only about half the money she lost in the scam but has moved beyond feeling upset about the ordeal.
"It was eight years ago," she said. "If I worry about it now I'd be in a mental institution."


text:
shoppers recently viewed this!
Ruby & Multicolor Sapphire Triple Drop Earrings
- Color:
- sapphire
Qty: 1
- 1
Description: Oxidized silver, 14K yellow gold, faceted ruby, and multicolor sapphire triple drop earrings with pave champagne diamond "S" shaped details
- Total ruby and multicolor sapphire carat weight is 73.33
- Total champagne diamond carat weight is 2.40
- 4 inches long
- ¾ inches at widest point
- Post back closure
- Please note: Each piece uses unique, naturally flawed stones. All inclusions or imperfections are intentional and are a desirable aspect of this product.
Material: Oxidized silver, 14K yellow gold, ruby, sapphire, and diamond
Brand: Amrapali
Origin: Imported


text:
Plaque at Highland Park High honors 'Hometown Hall of Famer' Doak Walker
Staff writer Mia Castillo reports:
A football legend was honored Tuesday at the place where his legacy began in Highland Park.
Doak Walker graduated in 1944 from Highland Park High School, where a plaque was installed in memory of the "Hometown Hall of Famer."
"We are so grateful to have the opportunity to be a part of this award, to honor Highland Park High School, and the Highland Park community," said Walker's son Russell.
During a ceremony sponsored by the Pro Football Hall of Fame and Allstate, the Walker family helped dedicate the new marker in the school's gymnasium.
Walker graduated from Highland Park High in 1944 and went on to play football at SMU, where he received the Heisman Trophy in 1948. Drafted by the Detroit Lions, he was named All-Pro four of his six seasons in the league and led the team to two NFL Championships.
Walker, whose statue now stands between Gerald Ford Stadium and SMU's Dedman Center for Lifetime Sports, passed away in 1998 at the age of 71.
"Hometown Hall of Famers" is a national program that honors the hometown roots of sport's most recognized coaches, players, and contributors.
"I am privileged to help honor the legacy of Pro Football Hall of Famer Doak Walker, and to recognize Highland Park High School with this hometown plaque," Allstate agent Hugo Valdes said Tuesday.
This is the third year Allstate and the Pro Football Hall of Fame have teamed up to honor hall-of-famers, said Valdes.


text:
Definition of Iberian in English:
Relating to or denoting Iberia, or the countries of Spain and Portugal.
Example sentences
- The Russian countries and the Iberian countries - Spain and Portugal - are both into it in quite a big way.
- In 1580 the two great Iberian sea-faring nations, Spain and Portugal, united.
- Long used to dishing out opprobrium on their Iberian neighbours, Spain could hardly be viewed skipping next summer.
1A native of Iberia, especially in ancient times.
Example sentences
- Its original inhabitants were Iberians and Celts who were later conquered by the Romans and the Moors.
- As usual, the field at the home of Catalan tennis is populated by Spaniards, with nearly half the draw made up of Iberians.
- This means that, unlike the interior of the island, which is populated only by Tyrians, the coast is held by both the Tyrians and the Iberians.
2The extinct Romance language spoken in the Iberian peninsula in late classical times. It forms an intermediate stage between Latin and modern Spanish, Catalan, and Portuguese. Also called Ibero-Romance.
Example sentences
- After all, no one calls Polish Polish Slavonic or Portuguese Portuguese Iberian.
- Maman taught her not only the Latin and French that were the basis of her education, but Sanskrit and ancient Iberian.
3The extinct Celtic language spoken in the Iberian peninsula in ancient times, known only from a few inscriptions, place names, and references by Latin authors. Also called Celtiberian.
Words that rhyme with IberianAlgerian, Cancerian, Chaucerian, Cimmerian, criterion, Hesperian, Hitlerian, Hyperion, Liberian, Nigerian, Presbyterian, Shakespearean, Siberian, Spenserian, Sumerian, valerian, Wagnerian, Zairean
For editors and proofreaders
Syllabification: I·be·ri·an
Definition of Iberian in:
What do you find interesting about this word or phrase?
Comments that don't adhere to our Community Guidelines may be moderated or removed.
= trending


text:
Once again, the BBC report confirms what we all know already; that the Catholic Church, that bastion of anti-gay sentiment, is teeming with homosexual priests. Not only are there gay priests galore serving up sanctimonious homilies all over the world, they also understand that, contrary to what their head-in-the-sand octogenarian leaders in Rome would have you believe, the only thing that doesn't stop for any man is change.
"He was visibly shaken and flustered," said the parents. "He gave no explanation or apology to the group and bolted out of the room.
So, the priests have changed with the times and, like everyone else, are getting their sexual kicks from porn they keep on their computers and flash drives. Alas, Father Martin McVeigh came a-cropper when the porn on the memory stick he happened to be using popped up instead of the PowerPoint presentation he was supposed to be showing parents and some of their children.
Oops! I must say that had I been in the venerable father's shoes, I, too, would have bolted like a bat out of hell from the room, and perhaps from the priesthood, too.
Ha, Ha, Ha.
Related articles
- Andrew Sullivan makes the case for gay priests to come out (sebaspace.wordpress.com)
- India Knight voices my very thoughts


text:
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon.com Books at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
Get it today!Shop Now
OrAdd to Wish List
Big, colorful pictures of your favorite driver displayed each month. Deluxe calendar measures 12" x 24" when open.. Price: $10.08
© Copyright 2016 - Christmas.com. All rights reserved and protected by Christmas Spirit


text:
There is no denying that Twitter is an exceptional social media platform, but how many organisations really make the most of the 140 character window of opportunity it offers and how much impact can it really have as a business tool?
Well, let's look at the numbers. With an estimated 200 million registered users generating over 340 million tweets every day and all of us spending around 20%* of our online time on social networking sites, the answer is that given the right approach Twitter can become an immensely powerful sales channel.
And that really is the essence of the Twitter debate – how to take the 'right approach' when selling your business, its products and services on a social network.
Firstly let's look at the DON'TS:
1. DON'T treat Twitter as you would any other sales channel. It's a social media platform with the emphasis on 'social', so think why people are there before deciding how you are going to speak to them. Understanding the mindset of your Twitter audience will enable you to develop a more effective engagement strategy with them as a precursor to selling.
2. DON'T expect that if you build it they will come. It can be tempting to see those who have effortlessly achieved a following of tens of thousands on Twitter and think that you will too, but those who achieve this nirvana of audience adoration have done so either through immense effort, celebrity status or intelligent social media planning. You too need to put in the time and effort into building your own Twitter audience of potential customers/clients, or instruct someone who can do this for you.
3. DON'T fall into the trap of believing that Twitter is just about brand awareness. Yes, Twitter is an exceptional tool for bringing you closer to your audience and for telling the world about your business, its product launches and resolving customer issues, but that's not all it is. Twitter is also a sales channel and as traditional media advertising is increasingly being mentally 'blocked out' by the viewing public, the social media sales channel is becoming ever more important across all sectors.
This is what you should be doing:
1. DO aim to engage with followers and those you wish to follow you. Success on Twitter is all about offering up interesting information, exciting facts, talking about topics that the people you wish to attract are also fascinated by. Basically you need to act as a 'thought leader' at the centre of the conversation. Getting to know what those who follow you are interested in, excited by or need, allows you to establish a relationship with them where sales can be considered supportive rather than intrusive.
2. DO listen. Nobody likes being talked at – just a few minutes finding out about someone from their tweets, or listening to what those in your potential customer arena are interested in can give you material for a far warmer introduction. Step it up a notch and you can develop a listening/monitoring strategy, supported by a suitable tool, of which there are many to choose from, that will allow you to keep up with the numerous conversations and leading voices in your sector.
3. DO take every opportunity to convert all of your traditional contacts to Twitter followers.
4. DO link back to your business site where applicable and relevant. Using tools such as bitly you can shorten URLs so they can easily fit within the 140 characters that you have to play with. While you should not do so with every post – or you run the risk of looking too 'salesy' – you should regularly include links to blogs, social media deals, and so on that will improve awareness, SEO linking and sales.
5. DO adapt according to your insights. The point of gathering all this information about those you wish to sell to is so that you can adapt your strategy to better suit their needs and your sales aspirations. Learn from their conversations, buying habits and the times they are most active on Twitter, then create more relevant and interesting content for them, focused offers and the soft sell that offers support to solve an issue they have expressed.
It is important to always keep in mind that social media selling is all about respecting the medium, building trust and engagement, and then, once you have developed a comfortable relationship with those in your audience, finding the targeted supportive way to offer up your products and services.
If you are interested in finding out a little more about how to get the most from this social media platform, check out more Twitter tips at SoMazi resources.
*According to the annual Nielsen's Social Media Report 2012