Data Governance Model for the Educational Data Decision Support System Kristen Mullaney

2004 Decision Support Architecture Consortium (DSAC) evaluated SOM on: oCurrent & desired capacity for educational decision support & data management oNo Child Left Behind Act 2001 (Prek-12) oLt. Governor’s Commission on High Education & Economic Growth (grades 13-20) June 2005, SOM hired CELT Corp to: oInitiate a collaborative data governance process oPlan the scope of work and RFPs for actual design and implementation for the10 corresponding projects Background

●Agency partners include, but are not limited to: oMichigan Department of Education (MDE) oMichigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth (DLEG) oDepartment of Management and Budget (DMB, CEPI) oDepartment of Treasury oDepartment of Corrections (DOC) oDepartment of Community Health (DCH) oDepartment of Health Services (DHS) oDepartment of Information Technology (DIT) oMultiple Educational Entities (including LEAs, ISDs and Higher Education) Beginning with Data Governance

WHO: oThose who collect or use educational data WHAT – the goal o “Collect Once, Store Once, and Use Many” WHY – the benefits oReducing redundant data collection systems and efforts at the state oAligning collection and reporting timelines to collect data “once” and maximize its use oReducing duplicative reporting of data from educational entities oMaximizing the value of educational data by integrating various sources to provide stakeholders and policymakers with timely, accurate and high-quality data and useful reports Beginning with Data Governance

Three Tiers: oData Policy Committee oData Managers Working Group oImplementation Team Interagency Educational Data Governance

●Strategic level: ocomprises appropriate State agency executive management stakeholders who set the mission and performance metrics of collaborative projects that include new development and enhancements to existing data systems. omembers ensure the active participation of key stakeholders and communicate shared work within individual agencies Data Policy Committee (DPC)

●Tactical level : ocomprises individuals primary responsibility for Michigan educational agency systems of record (a.k.a. source systems), including information about students, assessments, participation in programs, professional certification, finances, human resources and other systems. omembers define data standards and data management best practices for data projects, address issues associated with data standardization and management, and take ownership of data clean-up and performance issues within their respective source systems. Data Managers Working Group (DMWG)

●Operational level: ocomprised primarily of Center for Educational Personnel (CEPI), partner agency staff members as appropriate, and Department of Information Technology (DIT) personnel assigned to agencies who will actually carry out the design and implementation of system enhancements and collaborative projects Implementation Team

Need to be formed from time to time to accomplish work that cannot be effectively done as a large group. oFor example: to develop a strawman or draft to present back to the larger DMWG group for feedback and comments to be incorporated into the final version. oThe DMWG, as a whole, must agree to the final version which will then go before the DPC for feedback and ultimately for approval. oIf agreement cannot be reached by the DMWG, this will be an “issue” that will be brought before the DPC for direction and/or resolution. DMWG Sub- group

Participants : oShould be from different offices, areas, and agencies. It may be a volunteer or assigned position depending on the topic, issues or situation. oActively participate in all the sub-group meetings to the best of their ability and schedule oComplete all work and or action items as volunteered or assigned by the sub-group oSeek input and feedback from their co-workers and managers in their offices, areas and or department oLook for solutions to any problems or obstacles they come across DMWG Sub-group

Data Governance Process Data Policy Committee DMWG Sub-group DMWG Sub-group DMWG Sub-group DMWG Sub-group Data Managers Work Group Implementation Team Escalation Process Communication Process

Communication/Meetings DPC – meetings every two months and monthly dashboards reports DMWG – monthly meetings oSub-group – meet 4 -5 times over a two to three month period Implementation Team – weekly during high activity otherwise monthly