Post on 27-Dec-2015
transcript
2013 MIS Conference 1
MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING (MOUS):
INTERSTATE AND INTRASTATE AGREEMENTS
Jan Kiehne, Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (ConnSCU)
Connie Brooks, Iowa Department of EducationBaron Rodriguez, AEM Corporation
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
2013 MIS Conference 3
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to enable Perkins reporting• 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
2013 MIS Conference 4
MOA FOR PERKINS
Connecticut Department of Labor (DOL)
Connecticut Board of Regents
for Higher Education (BOR)
Community Colleges & State
Universities
Data Disclosed by BOR Data Returned by DOL
First Name First Name
Last Name Last Name
PIDM PIDM
SSN SSN
Employed: Y/N flag
2013 MIS Conference 5
• Gathered information on Perkins reporting
requirements
• Reviewed relevant FERPA sections – again
• Utilized the PTAC document Guidance for
Reasonable Methods & Written Agreements
• Drafted MOA
• Contacted PTAC
• PTAC read and provided feedback via conference
call
• Reviewed by in-house counsel
• Circulated for signatures
PROCESS FOR PERKINS MOA
2013 MIS Conference 6
MOA to enable data linkages for P–20W system• Goal:
o Create a solid template for participating agency attorneys to modify
• Challenges:o Agency attorneys’ lack of familiarity with new
FERPA guidelineso Wary State Assistant Attorney Generalso Lack of in-house counsel
BACKGROUND
2013 MIS Conference 7
MOA FOR P–20W SYSTEM
UCHC* data matching process & software located on Main Server at
BEST**
SDE BOR (ConnSCU***)
UConnDOL
* UCHC: University of Connecticut Health Center ** BEST: Bureau of Enterprise Systems and Technology (DOIT)****Connecticut Conference of Independent Colleges (CCIC)
ED166
CEDaR
Other
Remote Server Remote Server Remote Server
CC IRDB
CSU Repository
PKIS COSC
CCIC****
Remote Server
UCHC* data matching process & software located on Main Server at
BEST**
Early Childhood
data source
State Department of Education
(K-12)
Board of Regents
(Community Colleges &
State Universities)
unit level data without key identifiersfor audit/evaluation of
educational programs
UConn
Department of Labor
(DOL)Early
Childhood data source
Remote Server Remote Server Remote Server
CCIC***
Remote Server
2013 MIS Conference 8
• Read relevant FERPA sections
• Utilized the PTAC document Guidance for Reasonable Methods & Written Agreements
• Gathered example MOUs through Grads360
• Created a draft
• Asked SST contact for review and was referred to PTAC
• PTAC read and provided feedback through conference call
• Made adjustments
• Circulated to participating agency attorneys
• Scheduled meeting to review/adjust … finalize …
PROCESS FOR P–20W SYSTEM MOA – PHASE 1
2013 MIS Conference 9
• Agency attorneys reviewed and developed own versions
• UCHC Assistant Attorney General got involved and raised larger issues regarding impact of FOIA
• Discussions revealed that our model was not entirely accurate in its representation of where PII would flow
• More questions to PTAC
• More revisions to data sharing agreements
• Communicated changes among agency attorneys and Data Governing Board members
• Bundled documents for review by State Attorney Generals Office
• Status now ….
PROCESS FOR P–20W SYSTEM MOA – PHASE 2
2013 MIS Conference
Main Memorandum of Agreements (MOAs): - One MOA for each participating agency - Each MOA includes the participating agency, UCHC and BEST- Enables the participating agency to participate in the system
and share PII only for the purpose of conducting a data match based upon approved data queries
- Meets written requirements under FERPA for “Audit/Evaluation” exception
Query Management Document/Agreement (QMD):- One QMD for each data request/query- Each QMD will meet the written requirements under FERPA for
data sharing agreements that use the “Audit or Evaluation” exception
- Identifies the “Authorized Representative” to conduct evaluation using the matched data
- Each agency whose data would be included must sign that they approve before the request can be fulfilled
P20 WIN DATA SHARING AGREEMENTS
10
2013 MIS Conference
Jan R. Kiehne, P20 WIN Program ManagerConnecticut Board of Regents for Higher Education39 Woodland Street, Hartford, CT 06105860-493-0236; kiehnej@ct.eduwww.ctregents.org
FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME
12
2013 MIS Conference
2012 Grant creates a collaborative team
• K–12 (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
14
2013 MIS Conference
• Written Agreement
• Designate “authorized representative”
• Specifyo Purpose (audit and eval. exception to
consent)o PIIo Destruction dates and procedures
• Policies and procedures to ensure privacy provisions of all state and federal laws will be followed
FERPA REQUIREMENTS
15
2013 MIS Conference
• The *magic* template that only requires search/replace didn’t exist
• Identify parties and legal provisions for the different parties
o IDE and Regents = FERPA to FERPA
o IDE and Workforce = FERPA to State Laws
• Start with “their” template for the “other” verbiage, e.g., severability, termination, etc.
PROCESS HINTS
16
2013 MIS Conference
• Paranoia and Paranoia?
• Iowa Exceptionality: State law REQUIRES postsecondary institutions to STORE state-generated educational IDs ()
REGENTS AND IDE: FERPA AND FERPA
17
2013 MIS Conference
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 AND AUTHORITY
18
2013 MIS Conference
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
19
2013 MIS Conference
One-time reports (e.g., remediation, C11, C12)
Process: Replace one-time data with new
Original longitudinal storage (enrollment, transfers, awards)
Destruction Date = Contract Termination Date
Revised longitudinal storage: Replace each year and request full set each year
DATA DESTRUCTION
20
2013 MIS Conference
• Original expectations are limited to legally mandated data elements
• Preliminary discussions for High School Feedback Reports
• Do not currently support long-term storage
• 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
21
2013 MIS Conference
• 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
22
2013 MIS Conference
1. Shared ownership of linked datasets
2. May be stored for duration of contract (three years) 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
23
2013 MIS Conference
• Fully executed within a few weeks once specifics agreed to; 11 months total
• Process:o IDE provides name, DOB, and 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)
• New attorney revisiting
WORKFORCE POSTSCRIPTS
24
2013 MIS Conference
• 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
25
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
2013 MIS Conference 27
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
2013 MIS Conference 28
• 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 verbiage, may not be necessary
DETAILS
2013 MIS Conference 29
• Attorneys have approved final details
• Not yet signed, but in the process
• All working from the same FERPA law
• Relatively straight-forward
INTERSTATE POSTSCRIPT
2013 MIS Conference 30
• 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 and exchange details
• Have each lawyer oversee his/her piece
• Interstate, have a facilitator if possible (eScholar)
CONCLUSIONS
2013 MIS Conference
Contact information:Jan R. Kiehne, kiehnej@ct.edu
Connie Brooks, Connie.Brooks@iowa.gov
Baron Rodriguez, Baron.Rodriguez@aemcorp.com
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 AND ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
31