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

1
Data Governance Model for the Educational Data
Decision Support System Kristen Mullaney
2
Background

• 2004 Decision Support Architecture Consortium
  (DSAC) evaluated SOM on
• Current desired capacity for educational
  decision support data management
• No Child Left Behind Act 2001 (Prek-12)
• Lt. Governors Commission on High Education
  Economic Growth (grades 13-20)
• June 2005, SOM hired CELT Corp to
• Initiate a collaborative data governance process
• Plan the scope of work and RFPs for actual design
  and implementation for the10 corresponding
  projects

3
Beginning with Data Governance

• Agency partners include, but are not limited to
• Michigan Department of Education (MDE)
• Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth
  (DLEG)
• Department of Management and Budget (DMB, CEPI)
• Department of Treasury
• Department of Corrections (DOC)
• Department of Community Health (DCH)
• Department of Health Services (DHS)
• Department of Information Technology (DIT)
• Multiple Educational Entities (including LEAs,
  ISDs and Higher Education)

4
Beginning with Data Governance

• WHO
• Those who collect or use educational data
• WHAT the goal
• Collect Once, Store Once, and Use Many
• WHY the benefits
• Reducing redundant data collection systems and
  efforts at the state
• Aligning collection and reporting timelines to
  collect data once and maximize its use
• Reducing duplicative reporting of data from
  educational entities
• Maximizing the value of educational data by
  integrating various sources to provide
  stakeholders and policymakers with timely,
  accurate and high-quality data and useful reports
  

5
Interagency Educational Data Governance

• Three Tiers
• Data Policy Committee
• Data Managers Working Group
• Implementation Team

6
Data Policy Committee (DPC)

• Strategic level
• comprises 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.
• members ensure the active participation of key
  stakeholders and communicate shared work within
  individual agencies

7
Data Managers Working Group (DMWG)

• Tactical level
• comprises 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.
• members 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.

8
Implementation Team

• Operational level
• comprised 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

9
DMWG Sub- group

• Need to be formed from time to time to accomplish
  work that cannot be effectively done as a large
  group.
• For 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.
• The DMWG, as a whole, must agree to the final
  version which will then go before the DPC for
  feedback and ultimately for approval.
• If agreement cannot be reached by the DMWG, this
  will be an issue that will be brought before
  the DPC for direction and/or resolution.

10
DMWG Sub-group

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

11
Data Governance Process
Data Policy Committee
DMWG Sub-group
Data Managers Work Group
DMWG Sub-group
DMWG Sub-group
DMWG Sub-group
Escalation Process
Implementation Team
Communication Process
12
Communication/Meetings

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