A new report released by the State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO), which examined 59 data systems in 44 states and the District of Columbia, has found that not all postsecondary data systems are alike. Data systems are not comprehensive, and not all share the same data elements. Even more alarming is that only eight states have the capacity to link their K12, postsecondary, and workforce data systems.  Strong Foundations: The State of State Postsecondary Data Systems describes existing state postsecondary student-level data systems and provides examples of how they have been used. Among the report’s key findings:

• Forty-four states and the District of Columbia have at least one student unit record system (for a total of 59 systems), while 29 states have between two and five systems.
• Nineteen states collect data from independent, nonprofit institutions.
• Seven states collect data from for-profit institutions.
• All 45 states collect student demographic and postsecondary enrollment data.
• Thirty-nine states link, share, and/or exchange data with other state agencies/entities.
• Of the 23 states that collect K–12 data elements, 20 have access to that data via a relationship with the state education agency (K–12); the other 3 collect these data directly from the students.
• Of the 26 states where the postsecondary agency/entity has a relationship with the state labor/workforce agency, 23 have access to workforce data elements and 3 provide postsecondary data to the workforce agency.
• Most states release aggregate data, and 27 states consider and approve requests for unit record data that are compliant with FERPA.

Shortly after taking office last year, President Obama announced that “by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world,” thrusting the spotlight on postsecondary accountability. A new report from the American Council on Education, College Graduation Rates: A Look Behind the Numbers, explores the complexities of measuring college graduation rates and finds that existing databases do not give a full picture of student outcomes and success at the postsecondary level.

The report details the most commonly reported graduation rates and the databases used to calculate these rates, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each database. The report also suggests several factors for policy makers to consider before using graduation rate data from existing databases. What this report does not do is focus on disparities in graduation rates, or on how to improve graduation rates, or how to fix graduation rates calculations. Rather, the goal of this report is “to help policy makers better understand the challenges inherent in using current graduation rate data to determine or inform federal or state policy decisions regarding postsecondary education institutions.”

As the President and other policymakers advance their goal of improving postsecondary completion rates, it will be important for them to take into consideration all the caveats and work to capture all of the missing information in the current system.