1. EDFacts Shared State Solution (ES3) An Open Source Approach to doing EDFacts An Update 26 th Annual MIS Conference February 13, 2013 1

2. Original EDFacts Data Flow 2

3. ES3 Architecture/Data Flow 3

4. Why a Third Party Had To Do This States have been more than willing to share their efforts –State Specific Codes or Assumptions Built into the Routines –Documentation is “Spotty” –Most Solutions not Designed for Easy Customization ESP Had To Do This –Multiple Clients –Multiple Approaches –Each a “Work for Hire” with Public Funds –Deep Understanding of the Pain 4

5. State Customization State Config (each Reporting Year) –State Name, Postal Code, State Agency Number –Root Path to File Storage Directory –Email Notification “From:” Address State Characteristics –Charter Schools –Grade 13, Ungraded Allowed State Code Translation Table –Reporting Period –Code Set Name –State Code –EDFacts Code 5

6. State Customization (con’t) Submission File Characteristics –EDFacts Settings: Header Record File Name, Header Record File Type, Data Record Table Name –Submission File Subdirectory –Zip File Password (optional) –Invalid Records File Name SSIS Configuration –Database Locations –Reporting Period –Success and Error Email Recipients (To and CC) 6

7. Consistent and Robust Template 7

8. Web Front-end Being Developed 8

9. Features Standard Microsoft Stack Very Modular Customization for a Specific State Compartmentalized Lots of “Eyes” Email Notification of Processing Results Attachments are Zipped and Can be Password Protected System Logging Validation Reports Management and Operational Reports 9

10. Progress 70 submission packages developed off of 15 unit record staging tables Additional submissions from state aggregate data sources Success with multiple data source types: –SQL Server –Oracle –Excel –Access –Text Files 10

11. Lessons Learned Directory Code Sets –Inconsistent across state systems –Translation is one-way Core EDFacts from far fewer staging tables SLDS may not be ready on our schedule Getting coordinator support in heat of submission cycle –Next few months will tell us if better off cycle Need to be better at collaborating with state partners –The source queries –Staging designs Not everyone does what they are “supposed” to –Added staging flags for “include” at each level, submission 11

12. Plans and Schedule Finish Final 17 Files Due Now through June Back-fill Files Skipped Over in the “Heat of the Moment” Expand and Install UI at States Build Review and Validation Reports Build Management Reports 12

13. Benefits Based on CEDS and Other National Standards Shared Risk with Other States –MO, SD, ID, TN, USVI Minimized and Shared Maintenance You Own and Can Manage Multiple Users and Development External Coordinator Back-up Distributable File Creation 13

14. ESP EDFacts Experience Ground Floor EDEN/EDFacts Design Support to USED Designed and Built the EDFacts XML Validation Schemas and XSLT Transform system EDEN State Site Visits (2003 and 2004) Multi-state EDFacts Reporting –(DE, LA, NC, NH) SEISS Team Nobody Has More Experience 14

15. Contact Information Tom Ogle Missouri Dept of Elementary and Secondary Education tom.ogle@dese.mo.gov Judy Merriman South Dakota Dept of Education judy.merriman@state.sd.us Joyce Popp, Idaho State Dept of Education Jpopp@sde.Idaho.gov Steven King ESP Solutions Group sking@espsg.com 15