2012 SLDS P-20W Best Practice Conference 1 MOU S : I NTERSTATE AND I NTRASTATE A GREEMENTS Tuesday, October 30, 2012 Jan Kiene, Connecticut Board of Regents.

2012 SLDS P-20W Best Practice Conference 1

MOUS: INTERSTATE AND INTRASTATE AGREEMENTS

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Jan Kiene, Connecticut Board of Regents for Higher Education

Connie Brooks, Iowa Department of Education

2012 SLDS P-20W Best Practice Conference

• Connecticut Overview

• Iowa MOU Overview

o Regents MOU at Final Edit

o Workforce MOU Signed

o Inter-State MOU in Progress

OVERVIEW

2


CONNECTICUT


MOA to enable data linkages for P20W system• Goal:

o Create a solid template for participating AG’s to modify.

• Challenges:o Agency lack of familiarity with new FERPA

guidelineso Wary State Attorney General o Lack of in-house counsel

BACKGROUND


MOA FOR P-20W SYSTEM

Data matching process

EC data source 1 State

Department of Education

(K-12)

Board of Regents

(Community Colleges &

State Universities)

De-identified unit level data for research

UConn

Department of Labor

(DOL)EC data source 2

EC data source 3

CCIC


• Read relevant FERPA sections• Utilized the PTAC document Guidance for

Reasonable Methods & Written Agreements

• Gathered example MOU’s through GRADS360

• Created a draft• Asked SST contact for review and was

referred to PTAC• PTAC read and scheduled conference call

to provide feedback• Made adjustments• Circulated to participating agencies• Meeting scheduled to review/adjust…

finalize

PROCESS FOR P-20W SYSTEM MOA


MOA to enable regular reporting – Perkins• Goal

o Create MOA specifically for Perkins reporting

• Challengeso Lack of in-house counselo No existing agreement to build upono Running out of time for analysis

BACKGROUND


MOA FOR PERKINS

Connecticut Department of Labor (DOL)

Connecticut Board of Regents

for Higher Education (BOR)

community colleges & state

universities


• Reviewed relevant FERPA sections - again• Utilized the PTAC document Guidance for

Reasonable Methods & Written Agreements

• Revised draft P20W MOA • Contacted PTAC• PTAC read and scheduled conference call

to provide feedback• Circulated for signatures

PROCESS FOR PERKINS MOA


IOWA


2012 Grant creates a collaborative team

• K12 (part of IDE)

• Community Colleges (part of IDE)

• Regents Universities – MOU needed

• Workforce – MOU needed

Each area has a team member and a Steering Committee member

IOWA IN CONTEXT

11


• Written Agreement

• Designate “authorized representative”

• Specifyo Purpose (audit & eval exception to

consent)o PIIo Destruction dates and procedures

• Policies & procedures to ensure privacy provisions of all state and federal laws will be followed

FERPA REQUIREMENTS

12


• The *magic* template that only requires search/replace didn’t exist

• Identify parties and legal provisions for the different parties

o IDE & Regents = FERPA to FERPA

o IDE & Workforce = FERPA to State Laws

• Start with “their” template for the “other” verbage, e.g., severability, termination, etc.

PROCESS HINTS

13


• Paranoia & Paranoia?

• Iowa Exceptionality: State law REQUIRES post-secondary institutions to STORE state-generated educational IDs ()

REGENTS & IDE: FERPA & FERPA

14


This Agreement is entered into to exchange data needed for Iowa’s Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS) in order to comply with the:

• America Competes Act (ACA) of 2007 (P.L. 110-69)

• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 (P.L. 111-5 and 11-8), and

• State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) programs of 2009 and 2011 (34 CFR Subtitle B, Chapter II)

These initiatives require the IDE to include Regent universities’ data “in the evaluation of K-12 education policy and practice in order to better align state academic content standards and curricula with the demands of postsecondary education, the 21st century workforce, and the Armed Forces.”

PURPOSE & AUTHORITY

15


1. The number of students enrolled in postsecondary institutions within 16 months after high school graduation (ARRA/SFSF indicator C11) and

2. The number of those enrolled students who complete at least one year’s worth of college credit within 24 months of enrollment (ARRA/SFSF indicator C12)

3. The IDE also plans to analyze and report findings related to remedial coursework, graduation rates, and transfers between community colleges and Regent universities (ACA).

SPECIFY PII DATA ELEMENTS

16


One-time reports (e.g., remediation, C11, C12)

Process: Replace one-time data with new

Longitudinal storage (enrollment, transfers, awards)

Destruction Date = Contract Termination

Date

DATA DESTRUCTION

17


• Original expectations are limited to legally mandated data elements

• Preliminary discussions for High School Feedback Reports

• Do not currently support long-term storage – will need to use National Student Clearinghouse

• 30 days to provide acceptance or rejection of any additional data needed for reporting, or for any new data required for new or different reports

REGENTS POSTSCRIPTS

18


• Different agency, different laws, different needs, different tone

• Started with recently signed MOU for skeleton

• Asked for governing laws = State specific

• IDE FERPA side:

o Authorized Representative may store our educational State IDs

o Audit and Evaluation purpose

WORKFORCE

19


1. Shared ownership of linked datasets

2. May be stored for duration of contract (3 yrs) and then destroyed unless new contract

3. Reports aggregate–level data only or de-identified for other parties

4. Veto power: 30 days to accept or reject reports before release

5. Interpretative caveats with any released reports and data sets

WORKFORCE MOU SPECIFICS

20


• Fully executed within a few weeks once specifics agreed to; 11 months total

• Process:o IDE provides name & DOB & education

IDo Workforce matches to DMV/DOT data

for SSNo Workforce stores education ID with their

SSN• Workforce has not asked for any specific

education indicators (ITBS, ACT, Grad Status)

WORKFORCE POSTSCRIPTS

21


• Purpose is to find dropouts across state lines

• State-level users only to start with

• Some interest in opening up for district-level users

• State would notify district when found so transcripts could be sent

• Iowa + Nebraska + Kansas + Missouri

• All eScholar customers

INTERSTATE MOU

22

A

ESCHOLAR INTERSTATE ID EXCHANGE

DeXs Server Cert

DeXs Cert

NE Server Cert

IA Server Cert

KS Server

Cert

MO Server Cert

NE Cert

KS Cert

IA Cert

MO Cert

eScholar Data eXchange Service

Server (DeXs)

Server Certificate

IA UID

MO UID

NE UID

KS UID

Internet Access

Search Result

Search RequestDeXs

Database

SSL

SSL

SSL

SSL

DeXs Cert

DeXs Cert

DeXs Cert

Security


This exchange of information between authorized representatives of state educational authorities intended for the enforcement of or compliance with Federal legal requirements that relate to Federal or state supported education programs, specifically the accurate calculation of a party’s graduation rate under 34 CFR 200.19(b) and state reporting requirements under 34 CFR 76.720

PURPOSE


• PII - Data List Attached

• Destruction - Absent extenuating circumstances, this will be within ________ of the receipt of the information. The method of destruction shall be ________.

• Wrangling over ability to re-release to districts – may require specific verbage, may not be necessary

DETAILS


• Not yet signed, but appears imminent.

• Attorneys are meeting to get final details

• All working from the same FERPA law

• Relatively straight-forward

INTER-STATE POSTSCRIPT


• Just jump in

• Key components are the same for “our” FERPA side

• Accommodate non-FERPA partners’ legal requirements

• Start with partner’s template if possible

• Work out the data & exchange details

• Have each lawyer oversee their piece

CONCLUSIONS


Contact information:Jan R. Kiehne, [email protected]

Connie Brooks, [email protected]

Baron Rodriguez, [email protected]

For more information on MOUs:Resource 1: Guidance for Reasonable Methods and Written Agreements (Nov 2011)

Resource 2: Checklist: Data Sharing Agreement (Apr 2012)

CONTACTS & ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

28

mailto:[email protected]



http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/pdf/reasonablemtd_agreement.pdf



http://ptac.ed.gov/sites/default/files/data-sharing-agreement-checklist.pdf

2012 SLDS P-20W Best Practice Conference 1 MOU S : I NTERSTATE AND I NTRASTATE A GREEMENTS Tuesday, October 30, 2012 Jan Kiene, Connecticut Board of Regents.

Documents

slds p

w best practice conference

p erkins moa

scheduled conference

w system moa

ferpa ferpa

signatures p rocess

ferpa o ide workforce