LDS SIF Pilot Update

STATS-DC 2012 Data ConferenceJuly 13, 2012

Your Presenters• Dennis Wallace (CPSI, Ltd)• Craig Rhombs (State of Minnesota)

2

About Minnesota

3

Pilot Overview

• One project out of seven that are associated with the MN SLDS grant

• Purpose of the pilot is to: • Allow MDE and districts to get some initial experience with SIF

data exchanges in limited situations• Determine if MDE will recommend using SIF as a protocol for data

exchanges between districts and MDE• Use this experience to inform a long -erm strategy

recommendation for SIF• Also develop experience in inter-state exchange of student

existence data (StudentLocator)

4

District Pilot Grant Selection Process• Selection Criteria• Small and large districts• RMIC organizations considered• Variety of Student Information Systems used in state• SIF-certified agents for district applications• Specify project need, benefit, timeline and budget

• Number of Participant Districts• Round 1: 8; Round 2: 8

5

Intra-state Grant Response• Three periods of testing

1- Initial testing with Anoka-Hennepin2- First grant award with Regional Data Centers• cmERDC – four districts (two types of SIF agent)• TIES – three districts (one type of SIF agent)

3- Second grant award• Eight total applicants (6 accepted, representing nine districts and

three types of SIF agents)• Some involving multiple districts

• Summary•16 school districts•Participating SIS Vendors: Edupoint, Pearson, TIES, JMC, Spedforms

6

Pilot Highlights…• Intra-state• Limited to a few districts and vendors• Data exchanges limited in scope

• Focus is on student identify• Ad hoc testing may include student enrollment• Information is not transferred to MDE production environments

• Inter-state details being worked out with other states in the upper midwest

7

Intra-state Pilot Details• Testing involves a pseudo school• Limited information is exchanged (mainly “StudentPersonal”)• Exchange is with a “test school” of 40 students• Focus is on testing the process with validation of student identify

information and selected SIF fields• Districts can specify a series of ad-hoc tests for a duration of 4

hours to pilot additional information exchange if desired

8

Pilot details continued…• Zone integration server located at the state• MDE has an agent that will speak to any districts that have grant

applications• Districts have agents that are configured to publish information to

MDE• Avoiding the issue of “horizontal” integration• Horizontal SIF integration may already be in place, but the project did not

address local integration of data• A local zone integration server was not a requirement for the grant• ZIS was hosted by the state

9

Security• Normal SIF security• Data housed in a test environment• Relational data base where SIF objects are stored• Separate student repository (but the same student ID validation

“engine”)

10

Pilot SIF Interoperability for the State Student Identifier Automation with Two Districts and the MDE

11

Regional Data CenterSIS with SIF Agent

Regional Data CenterSIS with SIF Agent

DistrictSIS with SIF Agent

DistrictSIS with SIF Agent

Agent And DataValidation Server

And Student Locator Framework

Agent And DataValidation Server

And Student Locator Framework

ODSODSxDStore

ValidationProcess

xDValidatorErrors Clean

Data

InBoundUID DataInBoundUID Data

OutBoundUID Data

OutBoundUID Data

MDE’s UIDAlgorithm

Requires Resolution

Web ServerWeb Server

State xDZISState xDZIS

ZIS for Horizontal Integration

ZIS for Horizontal Integration

ZIS for Horizontal Integration

ZIS for Horizontal Integration

12

Agent And DataValidation Server

And Student Locator Framework

Agent And DataValidation Server

And Student Locator Framework

xDStorexDStore

ValidationProcess

xDValidatorErrors Clean

Data

InBoundUID DataInBoundUID Data

OutBoundUID Data

OutBoundUID Data

MDE’s UIDAlgorithm

Requires Resolution

Web ServerWeb Server

Intra StateUID Crosswalk

Data

Intra StateUID Crosswalk

Data

Other StateOther State Other StateOther State

State ZIS

And Intra-StateUID Web Services

State ZIS

And Intra-StateUID Web Services

Other StateOther State

Pilot Intra-State Interoperability (Proposed)

CPSI Toolset Used at the MDE

13

Why Use the SIF Specification?

14

Why Real Time Collection?

15

SIF Certification and ProfilesOption Description Advantages

SIF Certification Testing of a specification application/agent pairing.

Renewed on a yearly basis.

Known operational program Basic level of certification

Organizational Profile

A specific listing of objects and elements an organization requires and applications must adhere.

Mapping document created by MN DOE.

Ensures specific interoperability needs for organizations (SEAs or other agencies)

Provides common expectations for all within and working with organizations

May include extended elements not currently in the SIF specification

Offers greater out-of-the-box interoperability

16

MN Profile Mapping Document (Interface Control )

17

Data Entry Work Flow

18

Intra-state Costs• Cost was very minimal for districts• District costs are averaging about $12k per district for

hardware, software, and personnel• Infrastructure and personal experience can be used to support

eventual state or district strategy

19

Lessons Learned• Well positioned to make strategy recommendations

• If we decided to recommend SIF as a solution, we would look at a phased approach for adopting any new data submission processes

• Could have implications for inter-state data exchange

• Exchanges seem viable from MDE perspective• Regional service centers would be significant players since

districts mostly lack the required technical expertise• Vendor and district input needed

20