Data Governance

Our Data Governance program provides support and processes to all parts of the education data life cycle. We have a Data Governance Manual that describes the process and overall goals and groups used to properly collect, check, use, and dispose of education data.

We have four major data domains:

• Directory
• Student
• Fiscal
• Educator

Each data domain has a data owner, data stewards, and data analysts who manage their data. The Director of Data Governance manages the policies, forms, and processes that these staff use to do their data work. OSPI also uses various internal and external stakeholder groups to provide feedback and recommendations on changes or new reporting.

Data Governance Documents

• OSPI School and District Directory - Annual Review Webinar
• High School and Beyond Plan Universal Platform Data Q&A
• Race and Ethnicity Materials
• Course Data Quality
• Data Governance System for K-12 Data: Policies and Procedures (2023)
• Washington State K-12 Education Data Gap Analysis (June 2010)
• Washington State K-12 Education Research and Policy Questions Analysis (March 2010)
• OSPI Open Data Plan (RCW 43.105.351)
• WaTech Open Data Planning

Legislative Reports

• K-12 Education Data Governance: Preliminary Report to the Legislature (November 2009)
• K-12 Education Data Governance and Statewide K-12 Longitudinal Education Data System Report to the Legislature (September 2010)
• Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2261

Data Modernization

In 2025, OSPI commissioned a feasibility study to assess the costs, benefits, risks, and opportunities of modernizing the agency’s IT and data systems. The study was funded by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and conducted by Integrated Solutions Group NW (ISG). Over five months, it examined:

• current challenges (such as siloed legacy systems, manual reporting, and performance issues)
• key reasons for modernization
• expected outputs (including use cases, technical requirements, skills analysis, budget inputs, and roadmaps)
• governance and oversight findings
• program constraints, such as schedule and budget

To support a future state that includes a cloud-based data lake, the study compared three market options using major cloud platforms: Microsoft Azure, Amazon Web Services (AWS), and Google Cloud. The AWS and Google options assumed support from third-party consultants. The Microsoft option could be implemented and maintained mostly by in-house staff, but at a higher cost.

The study also reviewed the agency’s current IT staffing and capabilities. It identified the additional skills, capacity, and training needed to support any selected approach.

In all cases, the estimated cost to fully implement these options exceeded available funding, even under favorable budget conditions. However, the findings are being used to guide ongoing discussions about which high-value recommendations can move forward within typical government budget limits.

Documentation from this study is available in the files listed below.

• Part 1 - Feasibility Study Pre-work
• Part 2 - Data Modernization Feasibility Study
• Part 3 - Roadmap for Coud Transition
• Part 4 - Skills Gap Analysis for it and Data Teams
• Appendix 1 - Cost Benefit Analysis
• Appendix 2 - OSPI Workforce Capabilities Matrix