Beyond Elements & Actions

In addition to surveying states against the 10 Essential Elements and the 10 State Actions, the DQC also conducted an analysis of the policy questions states have the ability to answer based on their data collection (Table 1). The DQC also surveyed states on other aspects of a state’s longitudinal data system to provide stakeholders a better understanding of other aspects of these systems. For additional information on these areas, see charts below:

SEAs’ ability to link student outcome data to program-specific financial data

Level at which link is made	Number of States
State Level	34
District Level	34
Building Level	11

SEAs’ ability to link student outcome data to program-specific financial data. By linking longitudinal student outcome data to program-specific financial data, states have the capacity to evaluate the return on investments for specific programs.

State Interoperability and the Role of Common Data Standards

Type of Standards	Number of States
SIFA	21
PESC	7
Other	15

Common data definitions and architectural standards across databases , sectors, and systems facilitate the efficient exchange of data.

Types of Interoperability

Type of Interoperability	Number of States
Horizontal: District level	17
Horizontal: State-level across agencies	32
Vertical: Between district and state	44
Vertical: Between state and federal	22
Other	2

Interoperability can occur both horizontally (e.g., across agencies, across district and state lines, etc.) and vertically (e.g., from schools to district, from districts to the state, from states to the federal government, from early childhood to K-12, from K-12 to postsecondary, etc.). With horizontal and vertical interoperability in place, states can more effectively and efficiently share data across traditional silos.

Student Information Systems (SIS) Used By Districts

Student Information System	Number of States
A single SIS provided by the state	8
Different SISs provied by multiple vendors	36
A combination of state and vendor SISs	8