STATE COUNCIL OF HIGHER EDUCATION FOR VIRGINIA AD HOC COMMITTEE ON DATA AND POLICY FEBRUARY 2, 2018 DRAFT MINUTES Mr. Slater called the meeting to order at 9:31 p.m. in the offices of Hunton and Williams, 20 th floor East Tower, 951 East Byrd St., Riverfront Plaza, Richmond, Virginia. Committee members present: Ken Ampy and Thomas Slater. Committee members participating by phone: Stephen Moret and Marge Connelly. Mr. Blake indicated that Mr. Moret was participating electronically, pursuant to SCHEV Bylaws, Section 7, Electronic Participation, which provides that, in the case of emergency, an individual member of the Council may participate in meetings of the Council by electronic means as permitted by Virginia Code 2.2-3708.1 and enumerated in the Council policy regarding electronic participation. Mr. Moret was called to New York by Esther Lee (Secretary of Commerce and Trade) for an urgent, important prospect meeting related to a substantial economic development opportunity for the Commonwealth. This resulted in an unexpected need to participate electronically rather than attend in person. Staff members present: Peter Blake, Wendy Kang, Tod Massa, Tyler Williams, Marina Moschos, and Pam Currey. Guests: Sara Dunnigan, Executive Director, Virginia Board of Workforce Development CALL TO ORDER, WELCOME, AND INTRODUCTIONS Mr. Slater, serving as chair, welcomed committee members, staff and guests and disclosed the locations of those participating by telephone. Telephonic participants introduced themselves. CONTEXT AND CONSIDERATIONS: WHY NOW? At the invitation of Mr. Slater, Peter Blake provided a high-level overview of the history leading up to the creation of this Ad Hoc Committee on Data and Policy, which included the Virginia Plan and its need for valid and reliable data. He emphasized there was no preconceived notion of the outcome. Mr. Blake also referenced the administrative role of SCHEV for the Virginia Longitudinal Data System and the need to receive input from a variety of stakeholders for all the data resources maintained by SCHEV. He said the chair of SCHEV would like to have recommendations, including costs, by SCHEV s October meeting.
Mr. Slater indicated his experience with the Council has illuminated the need for information to be easily accessible to Virginia s citizens and help students, parents and employers know what paths are open to them. He then turned the agenda over to Mr. Massa, who discussed the pre-read articles, pointing out that the articles are largely critical of higher education data and that, while this is true nationally, it is less so in Virginia. However, he said that SCHEV could not answer many of the questions raised by Mr. Moret and others with respect to workforce need. He noted that the effective use of data was more than just availability of data; it is making that data accessible to the variety of audiences SCHEV needs to serve. SCHEV has the ability to make use of administrative data from 11 state agencies/departments, through the leadership role assigned to SCHEV for the Virginia Longitudinal Data System (VLDS). Mr. Massa then used the questions in Agenda Item #2 and other intelligence to lead an interactive discussion. Mr. Massa asked if the data currently compiled is complete and suitable for achieving the goals of The Virginia Plan. He noted that, historically, we try to minimize the amount of data that we collect because it is a burden on the institutions and on our own staff. However, he noted, perhaps we have been too frugal. Mr. Blake pointed out that while we have vast amounts of data on students, we have virtually no information on faculty and staff. Mr. Slater indicated a view that this was a point to be considered, believing there is a need to bring faculty into focus. Mr. Moret noted that the Virginia Economic Development Partnership strategic plan relies on the availability of a more robust labor market data. Mr. Moret said that a poll of national experts would reveal the most common thing they agree on is that strengthening the data to make it accessible and connected has to be a priority. Mr. Moret highlighted three areas, specifically: predictive analytics to better inform decision makers; access to pertinent data; and additional staff to do analytical work on important topics in the labor market. Lastly, he said the questions that should be answered by the data include: What are the labor supply gaps between employment and education/training levels? What are the most important predictors of mal-employment? How can we improve decisionmaking powers? Ms. Dunnigan indicated her appreciation for the work and interest of SCHEV and the creation of this ad hoc committee. She shared some recent work the Virginia Board of Workforce Development has commissioned to better influence current and future workforce programs and policies. Mr. Ampy noted that, as the owner of a staffing firm for the past 20 years, he has seen a transition to people employed outside of their field of study. He said the national information he read noted several laws that prohibited access to some data that would be helpful in building the type of information we are interested in creating. He asked if Virginia had this same problem. Mr. Massa discussed the issues associated with privacy laws and ways in which those laws make the sharing of data across agencies problematic.
Mr. Slater viewed these data access issues as having two sides the output side (wages, employment) and the input side (what do we need from the employers perspective). He said the input side does not really have restrictions. He shared a College Scorecard article, and members discussed limitations of the scorecard and the need to get information to consumers. Mr. Blake reminded the committee that an exclusive attention to labor market data would not fulfill the charge to the committee and noted other information needs that need to be accessible in support of the goals of the Virginia Plan e.g., access to education and affordability. The chair noted the need to determine impediments to information and if we need to make a case to legislators. Mr. Ampy asked why the information such as the College Scorecard is only available on students with federal aid. Mr. Massa discussed the process and preconditions necessary to making the data available. CHARGE TO THE AD HOC COMMITTEE Mr. Blake introduced the discussion of the development of a mission statement for the Committee, noting the language in Agenda Item #3 was provided as a straw person for the Committee s consideration. The committee discussed the resolution. Ms. Kang asked the Committee members if they would like to amend the mission statement to include an explicit reference to communication. Mr. Slater recalled the value proposition of higher education and discussed the need to communicate this effectively. Ms. Kang discussed the mission of SCHEV and noted the need to differentiate between communication and advocacy, and the need convey the data in meaningful ways. Upon completion of discussion and consensus on a mission statement, Mr. Slater asked for a motion. Mr. Ampy moved the approval of the amended resolution; Mr. Moret seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. WHEREAS, the State Council of Higher Education (the Council) adopted the Virginia Plan for Higher Education in October 2014, and WHEREAS, the Council, pursuant to 23.1-203.9 and 23.1-203.30, Code of Virginia, has responsibilities to develop and maintain a comprehensive data information system and administer the Virginia Longitudinal Data System, and WHEREAS, the chair of the Council appointed the Ad Hoc Committee on Data and Policy to develop a data and policy blueprint, now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED that the Committee adopt the following as its mission statement: To develop a blueprint to guide the use of data and data systems maintained by SCHEV as strategic assets in transforming the lives of Virginians and the
Commonwealth through higher education. Through this blueprint, the Council shall: Provide leadership to ensure that Council s data assets, including the Virginia Longitudinal Data System (VLDS), meet the ongoing needs of the Commonwealth, are used effectively to communicate with various audiences and are adequately funded and staffed. Ensure that Council s data support the alignment among education, workforce, and human capital needs of the Commonwealth, and that the Council makes information on the alignment readily and easily available to the public. Promote data governance and the protection of individual privacy as a fiduciary duty of the Council and its staff. Ensure alignment with The Virginia Plan for Higher Education. ALIGNMENT WITH THE VIRGINIA PLAN Mr. Slater asked Ms. Kang to put the actions of the Committee into the context of alignment with The Virginia Plan. Ms. Kang referred to The Virginia Plan and walked through the various stakeholders considered in The Virginia Plan and the need to balance the four elements of the plan when considering the prioritization of the work of the committee. Ms. Dunnigan observed the need to have a matrix of the various stakeholders as being illustrative of how to prioritize. Ms. Kang noted that work has been initiated at the suggestion of Ms. Connelly. TIMELINE AND PROCESS Mr. Slater asked Ms. Kang to walk through the timeline and process proposed in Agenda Item #5. Ms. Kang kicked off a discussion of potential stakeholders using those included in Agenda Item #5. Mr. Slater suggested we include GO Virginia, the Virginia Business Higher Education Council, Growth4VA, and the Virginia Chamber and asked for feedback from the members. Additional suggestions included: Partners for College Affordability and Public Trust; representatives from boards of visitors; Virginia Economic Development Partnership; Virginia Board of Workforce Development; Virginia 21; Young Invincibles; Joint Legislative and Audit Review Committee; Virginia Parent Teacher Association; Virginia Department of Education; regional chambers of commerce; Bridging Richmond, Virginia Manufacturers Association; Northern Virginia Technology Council; and, direct candid conversation with employers. Mr. Blake discussed methods to get information (via a broad survey and smaller groups). Mr. Slater asked staff to prepare a concise questionnaire soliciting initial input, which will also be a gauge of their interest. Mr. Blake said we would do that
and manage it over the next couple of months, with the plan to have results at the May meeting. Mr. Slater will report out at the March Council meeting. Ms. Kang walked through the timeline and deliverables. The committee approved the proposed timeline and process. Upon completion of the discussion, Mr. Slater asked Mr. Blake to offer some options for committee meetings in May and put a placeholder on the date of May 7 with a place to be determined later. Motion to Adjourn Mr. Slater asked if there was any further discussion. There being none, the meeting adjourned at 10:56a.m. Thomas Slater Ad Hoc Committee co-chair Pamela Currey SCHEV staff