EARLY CHILDHOOD DATA SYSTEMS: ESTABLISHING A POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT

1. EARLY CHILDHOOD DATA SYSTEMS: ESTABLISHING A POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT October 2011

2. Background • Child and Youth Readiness Cabinet • Cabinet and Public Consulting Group Data Analysis and Resource Mapping Project • Early fall of 2009: EEC engaged an early childhood consultant • The National and Federal Context for Early Childhood Data Systems Development

3. The National and Federal Context for Early Childhood Data Systems Development Early Childhood Data Collaborative released a white paper • The 10 core elements of ECE data system: • A unique statewide child identifier for all children • Child-leveldemographic and program participation information • Child-level data on development • The ability to link child-level data with K-12 and other key data systems (e.g., child welfare, public health, social services, B-3) • A unique site (i.e., program) identifier with the ability to link with child data and the ECE workforce

4. 10 Core Elements (cont.) • Program site data on the structure, quality and work environment • A unique ECE workforce identifier with the ability to link to program site data and child data • Individual ECE workforce demographics, including education and professional development information • A state governance entity to manage data collection and use • Transparent privacy protection and security policy and practices.

5. Improving Outcomes through Data • In taking action to improve child outcomes, program effectiveness and public accountability, states often turn to public policy and legislation for authority. • A request was made to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) this summer to provide the Massachusetts Department of Early Education and Care (EEC) with a sample of other states legislation used to authorize aspects of their Early Childhood Information Systems (ECIS), along with related efforts to improve service effectiveness.

6. National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) Data • Review of states where recent legislation authorizes more effective early childhood data processes and systems. • Resulted in summaries that were included in a policy brief from the following states: • Connecticut • Rhode Island • Illinois • Colorado • Minnesota

7. Connecticut • Legislation (2009) specifically authorizes an Early Childhood Information System. • Includes specificchild, program and workforce data. • Requires the assignment of unique child identifier to all children in any early care and education/school readiness program that either receives public funding of any kind and/or is licensed by the Department of Public Health.

8. Rhode Island • KIDSNET statute designates the assignment of a unique child identifier at birth, used to assure that all Rhode Island children have access to prevention and public health services, and care coordination.

9. Colorado • Legislation requires development of a report outlining options for assigning a universal child identifier across state agencies and developing a universal early childhood application for services. • The new universal application crosses many programs across state agencies and would, de facto, promote the standardization of child and family data.

10. Illinois • Legislation lodges the development of early learning data within the state’s emerging P-20 Education Data System, anchored in individual student records with data to be shared, according to state and federal privacy requirements, on any early learning program.

11. Minnesota • State law creates a State Early Childhood Council with responsibility to develop a data system and provides new requirements for a school readiness assessment and a school readiness report card.

12. EEC STATUTES FOR DATA SYSTEMS AND USE • Legislative charge to EEC provides broad authority to plan for, fund, develop, deliver, regulate and evaluate services and programs serving young children. • Explicit references to the department’s authority and responsibility to establish and maintain a comprehensive database of children, providers and educators (that is, workforce) compatible with other departments. • EEC is also directed to collect, analyze and report on data obtained by measuring child and program/service outcomes

13. Massachusetts Law: Policies • There shall be a comprehensive database that includes child/family, program and workforce information • The database shall be “compatible with relevant databases at the department of elementary and secondary education and the executive office of health and human services” • The department shall “collect and disseminate information to assist parents in nurturing their children's development and education” • There shall be a five-year strategic plan and a comprehensive system for “measuring the performance and effectiveness of programs…”

14. Massachusetts law: Projections • Enrollment and expulsion projections • Utilization of existing facilities, the need for new or modified programs, elimination of programs

15. Massachusetts Law: Outcomes and Measures • Outcomes of kindergarten readiness assessment • Outcomes of “additional educationally sound, evaluative tools or developmental screenings...adopted by the department to assess developmental status, age-appropriate progress and school readiness of each child” • Evaluations of overall program performance

16. Key Issue: Mismatch • The Governor’s intent is for information to be tracked and mapped on all children and from birth. • EEC is now authorized to include only children in those programs that are defined as “early education and care” in statute and licensed, funded or regulated in some way by EEC. • Not all children and not all programs are specifically included in the current statutory authorization, thus, there is a mismatch between the intent of data development and use, and the sources from which data can now be gathered.

17. Key Issue: Compatibility • The department’s statutorily-mandated data system must be compatible with “relevant databases at the department of elementary and secondary education and the Executive Office of Health and Human Services.” • This will require development of data extraction, matching and analysis tools or structures not now in place across state agencies.

18. Key Issue: Identification and Structure • In order to avoid costly and time-inefficient data matching processes, a comprehensive system will require the agreement on: • A unique child identifier • A unique program identifier • A unique workforce identifier. • It will also require a cross-agency data governance structure to guide the development of interagency data access and sharing agreements that are aligned with state and federal privacy protections.

19. Key Issue: Real-Time Data • Authorization related to real-time cross-agency data sharing, particularly with regard to children and families being served by multiple agencies at the same time, or over time, must be addressed. • This issue has implications for establishing an “early warning system” for the state’s most vulnerable young children. • It will then be possible to use that information to more effectively provide cross-agency case management and intervention services. • It can also serve to advance the delivery of preventive services in a more cost-effective manner.

20. Department of Early Education and Care Statutes: Chapter 15D, Section 2(q) • “…establish and regularly update: (1) a comprehensive database of early childhood educators and providers, hereinafter referred to as the educator database, for the purpose of enhancing the workforce development system; and (2) a comprehensive database of children both waiting for and receiving early education and care services, in this chapter called the student database, that is compatible with relevant databases at the department of elementary and secondary education and the executive office of health and human services;”

21. Department of Early Education and Care Statutes: Chapter 15D, Section 2(r) • “…collect and disseminate information to assist parents in nurturing their children's development and education. This information shall be made widely available in written form and accessible through the department's website, in English and other commonly spoken languages in the commonwealth.”

22. Department of Early Education and Care Statutes: Chapter 15D, Section 3(c)(7) • “Following consultation with the board, the commissioner shall prepare and submit to the secretary, for the secretary's review and approval, a 5-year master plan for achieving such a coordinated system. The master plan along with an annual progress report shall reflect the goals and standards established by the board and the secretary. The master plan shall include, but not be limited to: enrollment projections; identification of measures for age appropriate child development and school readiness; expulsion rate projections; utilization of existing facilities; promotion of research; programmatic excellence; recommendations for construction or acquisition of new facilities; program distribution; the addition of new programs; the elimination of existing programs; and the need for program revisions.”

23. Department of Early Education and Care Statutes: Chapter 15D, Sections 12(c) • The department shall establish a comprehensive system for measuring the performance and effectiveness of programs providing early education and care and services. This system shall include, but not be limited to, outcomes of the kindergarten readiness assessment system and additional educationally sound, evaluative tools or developmental screenings that are adopted by the department to assess developmental status, age-appropriate progress and school readiness of each child; outcomes of evidence-based intervention and prevention practices to reduce expulsion rates; and evaluations of overall program performance and compliance with applicable laws, standards and requirements.”