1 / 21

Overview of Data Quality Initiative and Reno Institute

Overview of Data Quality Initiative and Reno Institute. Vickie Schray, Chief Program Analysis Branch Division of Vocational & Technical Education. Presentation Outline. DQI Background Changes for Reno Institute Negotiation Process for 2000-2001 New Approach for Pilot-Testing

luisa
Download Presentation

Overview of Data Quality Initiative and Reno Institute

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Overview of Data Quality InitiativeandReno Institute Vickie Schray, Chief Program Analysis Branch Division of Vocational & Technical Education

  2. Presentation Outline • DQI Background • Changes for Reno Institute • Negotiation Process for 2000-2001 • New Approach for Pilot-Testing • Negotiation Process for Years 3, 4, & 5 • CAR and State Accountability Plans • Team Sessions • State Feedback on New Approach

  3. DQI Background Efforts to Date • Core indicator framework • State pilot projects • Regional TA meetings • State plan review process Need for the DQI • Stakeholder confidence and credibility • Support state Perkins implementation • Managing continuous improvement

  4. DQI Background Goals • Improve student population definitions • Improve selection and implementation of measures and measurement approaches • Improve state systems for assuring data quality Guiding Principles • Federal/state collaboration • Peer networking • Innovative use of technology

  5. DQI Background New Orleans DQI—February, 2001 • Improve population definitions • Improve data quality for Core Indicators 1-3 • Review quality criteria and scoring rubrics • Review peer collaborative resource network Reno DQI—May, 2001 • Improve data quality for special populations • Improve data quality for Core Indicator 4 • Review state baseline and performance levels DVTE Accountability Plan Negotiations—April-June, 2001

  6. Changes for Reno Institute Accuracy of State Information More Time, Fewer States Per Group Improvements in Peer Evaluation Resource Guide More Information on State Systems Peer Review--Group Forms and Evaluation Written State Feedback

  7. Negotiation Process for2000-2001 Phase I: Negotiating Initial Baseline and Performance Levels • Round 1-- Questions and Issues • Round 2-- Proposed Modifications and Levels • Final--Interim Levels (#) Phase II: Negotiating Final Baseline and Performance Levels • Verification, updating, providing missing information

  8. New Process:Proposed State Changes Setting Baseline Levels • Greater state choice in approaches and years Setting Performance Levels • State-by-state negotiation of performance ceilings--not fixed 90%, state negotiated benchmarks • State-by-state negotiation of 3-year and annual levels--not fixed improvement rates of 0.5% & 0.25 %

  9. New Approach for Pilot-testing at Reno Setting Baseline Levels • 2000-2001– most recent year or averaging up to 3 years • New – greater choice of years and use of alternative objective, replicable methods Setting Performance Levels • 2000-2001– fixed 90% ceilings and improvement rates of 0.5% & 0.25% • New -- State-negotiated performance excellence benchmarks and flexible improvement rates resulting in comparable overall improvement

  10. Negotiation Processfor Years 3, 4, and 5 Round 1: Certification of Accuracy and Completeness of State Accountability Plans • Timelines: April 19-May 9, 2001 • Results Used for Reno Institute and Starting Negotiation Process-Rounds 2 and 3 Round 2: Verification and Negotiation of Baseline Levels • Timelines: May 15-June 6, 2001 • Modified Approach from Reno Institute

  11. Negotiation Process for Years 3, 4, and 5 Round 3: Verification and Negotiation of 3-Year and Annual Performance Levels • Timelines: May 10-June 29, 2001 • Modified Approach from Reno Institute

  12. CAR and State Accountability Plans CAR Database • Annual reporting of actual performance for most recent program year. • December 2001 (2000-2001) first year for reporting against agreed-upon performance levels from State Plan • December 2000 (1999-2000) used for first Report to Congress State Accountability Plan • Negotiated baseline levels • Negotiated performance levels

  13. Team Session 1:Overview of State Systems Definition and Size of Student Populations • Implications of definitions for performance Definitions of Measures and Measurement Approaches • Student populations being addressed Data Quality Improvement Priorities • Implications for performance levels

  14. Team Session 2:Non-Traditional Participation and Completion Identifying Non-Traditional Programs • Approach for linking to national/state occupational data Measure Construction • Student populations being addressed Data Quality Improvement Priorities • Student/program coverage--all non-trad programs • Implications for performance levels

  15. Team Session 3:Special Populations Statewide Definitions Procedures for Identifying Students Reliability of Classification Comparable Student Coverage of Special Populations on Performance Measures

  16. Team Session 4:Setting Baseline Performance Levels Selection of Years • Use of most recent data Method for Calculating Baseline Levels • Formal, objective and replicable by others Adjusting to Data Quality Improvements

  17. Team Session 5:Setting 3-Year and Annual Performance Targets Determining Performance Excellence Benchmarks • State approach based on national/state data Setting 3-Year and Annual Performance Levels • “Fact-based” decision-making--gap analysis and expected results from strategies Comparable Improvement • Comparing overall improvement • Justification of lower overall improvement

  18. State Feedback on New Approach Report Out on Peer Review Process and Approach • Determining Performance Ceilings • Setting Baseline Levels • Setting Performance Targets Additional State Feedback • Regional Meetings • Peer Collaborative Resource Network Incorporating Changes into Round 2 and Round 3 Negotiations

More Related