SWG 2021-09-09 Meeting

Participation

Support

Nancy Wilson, Ann Su - Ed-Fi Governance Support

Meeting recording LINK

Refer to the PPT  for additional details on the meeting minutes and discussions.

The meeting was held on 2021-09-09 1:00Pm -2:15pm CT via WebEx

Agenda

• Overview of SIS Vendor Cost Research
• Implementation Fidelity Planning
• Priorities and requests for 2022

Meeting Notes

Agenda Item 1: Overview of SIS Vendor Cost Research

• Key Findings:
  • Traditional SEA reporting specification practice – which has carried over into Ed-Fi practice – asks for data elements which often requires complex business logic.
    • Categories of business logic
      • Offloading calculations from state to SIS
      • In a significant number of cases these are aggregate values that free the state of having to request the data necessary to derive these aggregates (see examples on subsequent slides)
      • Aligning internal data model complexity to Ed-Fi’s model
      • Not infrequently, this data model complexity is due to a SIS state edition
      • Simple field filtering (e.g., “don’t send field X”)
      • Simple mappings ​​
  • This logic is a significant cost burden on SIS systems, and the large reason they must customize heavily.
  • SISs are successfully resisting similar complexity in LEA support, but it is early and there are open questions to resolve
  • Differences in SIS approaches and architectures are likely affecting SIS experiences; there is likely opportunity for mutual benefit from sharing
  • More minor cost drivers possibly worth considering

• Vendor asks for business logics examples
  • Enrollment date tied to other systems (e.g., transportation system). SIS vendors have to look at multiple systems before sending the data to States. 
  • Complex logic for sending attendance.
• WI
  • If not handled by SIS, then handled by districts using the SIS. There are three places that the business logic can be handled, districts, vendors and states.  States are not in a position to collect all the data.  In those scenarios, states can collect aggregate numbers for accountability and compliance reasons.
  • States unable to handle to logic as we don’t have all the data in the SIS
  • Who should be responsible?
    • Sayee - 3 places to collect data
      • SIS, district state
      • Aggregate value done as a business logic

• • WI - Doesn’t need to collect daily attendance, but SIS needs to provide an account date.
  • Need to know more specifically what the calculation is about.
  • Simple mapping for some use cases to get vendors to standardize at SEA level is challenging, but productive.
• Maureen
  • State and local policy requirements
  • Sayee
    • Separate business elements
• IN
  • Is there a recommended best practice? We need to have another process for us to have better conversation with the vendors. What would the process look like?
  • IN wants to check with our vendors on how IN’s implementation is. Ed-Fi encourages states to have a conversation with their vendors to hear the feedback about their implementation. 

Agenda Item 2:  Implementation Fidelity Planning

• Proposed Direction for the SEA community - Design and vet a framework to affirm implementation fidelity including:
  • Audit – Self-serve survey tool
    • States are expected to review their extensions and business logic to stay aligned to the standard. Alliance did the same work for DE and it was time consuming. 
    • Design to have ready to use by end of 2022
    • Utilize the framework
  • Accreditation – Peer engagement process every 5 years
  • Vendor Forum/Workgroup
• Feedback
  • NE - Interested to move away from extensions, would be interested to see what the differences are and the best way to do it.
  • Sayee shared work done with DE 2019 POC
    • Review implementation and provide community best practice to support interoperability at scale
    • State self auditing of implementation
  • IN - hearing directly from vendor is helpful on where state is off track
  • WI - can we work as an SEA group to come to some agreement?. WI said that going back and reviewing the extensions and business logic will need a lot of time. Instead they would prefer to come to an alignment on the new use cases using the SEA WG.
  • Sayee - For emerging use cases we are doing this but for we also need to take a step back to review what we have done in the data model
  • Sayee - extensions have been reviewed in the past
  • AZ
    • Good opportunity for us to provide feedback
    • Change on vendor side - integrity rule for validation check need a rule created
    • Would be interested in working with their leadership to pilot this
  • Maureen - we will review feedback and send out recommended plan moving forward
  • WI - there will be times when we formalize the process by working together when an SEA releases an RFC; this is what we’re planning for the new school year and sending out six weeks ahead of time - ask peers and vendors for input on what they have done in the same area; does Ed-Fi have the ability to host that sharing for comments
  • MI - Getting it ahead of time would be really helpful. That way I can share with coworkers and stakeholders for more feedback.
  • AZ - other topic: about digital equity, I need edfi implementation details. Arizona needs to implement it this year. Thanks!
  • Sayee - Alliance can create a SEA Data Requirements Forum on TechDocs to host the specifications from States. The audience for this document are other states, vendors and the Alliance.  The community can review and provide a feedback mechanism.  How do we let the community enter feedback?  Should this be in a ticket? 
  • NE - newest OMB for Ed Facts should be coming up before too long and should be discussed here for common feedback from our SEA WG.
  • WI - having Ed-Fi in the process is helpful for multiple reasons and support

Agenda Item 3: Priorities and requests for 2022

• DE
  • State and local mapping
  • Roster server troubleshooting
  • Continuing with Pearson with better data set
• SC
  • Working through Initial SIS integration with common statewide SIS we have with PowerSchool for 10+ years; finding customizations that are challenging
  • Issued RFP to bring in Longitudinal Assessment Data
  • Will do RFP for IEP data
  • EScholar - identify solution for sourcing data tool to Ed-Fi
  • Assessment Roster work - looking to move roster out of legacy system into Ed-Fi
  • Appreciating input from other SEAs that are further ahead and provide their lessons learned
• Nebraska
  • Moving into the cloud for 22-23; had a great conversation with Wisconsin on that. There won’t be any new extensions for SY 2023. 
• Wisconsin
  • Azure Cloud migration and performance challenges
  • Working with vendors trying to integrate immunization solution - working with Public Health including Covid vaccinations
  • People count - leveraging system with accountability reporting, now using for membership
    • Sayee offered to connect WI with AZ to discuss the changes/solutions they needed to make on the performance side; a 30 minute call would be good for WI
    • Sayee will bring tech team to look at WI performance ticket and have continued dialogue on this
    • WI has Microsoft consultant checking to see if they are on the right Azure data connection plan - anyone have experience with this?

Action Items:

• Sayee to schedule call with AZ and WI to discuss the changes/solutions 

Next meeting: Thursday, 10/7/2021, 1:00 - 2:15 pm CT

Last Update: 14 Sep 2021