For the past two decades, the Data Quality Campaign (DQC) has been helping states understand the critical role governance plays in establishing, using, and maintaining state data systems, specifically statewide longitudinal data systems (SLDSs) that connect individual-level data over time from early childhood through the workforce. Our experience has taught us that an effective data system—one that is designed to enable access and be useful to individuals, community-based organizations, researchers, and policymakers alike—can make government more efficient, transparent, and effective, reducing reporting burdens on institutions and employers. But it requires leadership and commitment from senior state decisionmakers. And that can only be accomplished through structured, formal cross-agency data governance.
Currently, nine states have statutes codifying their data governance bodies and myriad others have established structures through executive orders, policies, or operating practices. This is because states realize that cross-agency data governance works. But here’s where the problem comes in: the federal government has no equivalent structure. So, if state leaders identify a policy goal that requires sharing data across agencies—like aligning postsecondary programs of value with labor market needs in a state—there is no one place they can get guidance from the federal government.
It’s time for the federal government to take a lesson from states and get its data governance house in order.
State work to address high priority needs by aligning agencies, statewide goals, and practices is of little matter if to get a simple answer to a question such as, “May our state connect dual enrollment data with Unemployment Insurance (UI) wage data?”, requires the gymnastics of approaching the US Departments of Education (ED) and Labor separately, engaging in two conversations, and hoping their program staff and lawyers all come to the same conclusion. Very few pressing questions about economic opportunity and mobility are siloed to just one agency. Rather, almost all require access to and use of data that is collected by multiple agencies and subject to the federal statutes, regulations, and guidelines applicable to each agency.
States and local governments are already doing the hard work of addressing education and workforce priorities, but their efforts are often stymied by federal barriers. Want to inform high schoolers about apprenticeship or other work-based learning opportunities offered outside the school walls? Want to help employers know who is graduating from career and technical programs with the skills they need for job openings? Or, simply want to inform 10th graders from families receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits that they will qualify for your state’s free college program? You probably need approval from Federal Student Aid, ED, the Department of Labor, and the Food and Nutrition Assistance program at the US Department of Agriculture.
Federal leaders can dramatically streamline state efforts that require sharing data across agencies by creating a federal data governing body counterpart that could interact with and support state data governing boards. Such an entity could ensure that:
- The state staff who understand cross-agency data, have identified specific goals for its use, and are sensitive to privacy and security concerns could talk to federal officials with a similar understanding;
- Federal leaders establish strong, consistent privacy and cybersecurity standards, guidelines, and interpretations; and
- Federal agencies work in a joint manner to ensure state leaders have technical assistance and support, including on privacy questions, heading off problems before they arise.
The Chief Data Officers (CDO) Council, an existing federal interagency organization, coordinates on enterprise data and interoperability questions across federal agencies—but the Council is not configured or staffed to be responsive to cross-agency programmatic data and privacy questions from state and local officials. So while coordinating with the CDO Council is critical, there should be a person on the Domestic Policy Council staff who is expert in education and workforce data and privacy and is responsible for cross-agency and ensuring aligned support, technical assistance, and guidance is provided to state and local data users.
This kind of cross-agency data governance puts in place the structure for states to prioritize data access and privacy. Now, it’s time for the federal government to follow suit and create the structure for data governance that ensures federal leaders are equipped to support state leaders in their data work.
