According to a recently released progress report, states must still achieve significant progress in collecting data before they have the kinds of data systems that will help drive student improvement. While states have achieved significant progress in building longitudinal data systems (recorded data over time) over the past three years, any momentum built up through that progress could be halted through anticipated budget cuts is this deteriorating economic environment.

The report was released by the Data Quality Campaign, a 3-year old national effort funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to catalyze states to build high-quality, accessible, longitudinal data systems that can track student information and achievement from early-childhood education through college. The campaign identified 10 key components to accomplish this task, from having student identifiers to track academic progress to keeping track of each course a student completed. The campaign created the key components to answer the following policy questions:

1. Which schools produce the strongest academic growth for their students?
2. What achievement levels in middle school indicate that a student is on track to succeed in rigorous courses in high school?
3. What is each school's graduation rate, according to the 2005 National Governor's Association graduation compact?
4. What high school performance indicators (e.g., enrollment in rigorous courses or performance on state tests) are the best predictors of students' success in college or the workplace?
5. What percentage of high school graduates who go on to college take remedial courses?
6. Which teacher preparation programs produce the graduates whose students have the strongest academic growth?

Multiple components need to be collected to analyze thoroughly a certain policy question. For example, all but two states match test records for individual students; there is much progress that needs to be made on monitoring the elements of academic growth (question 1). A measurement of the progress needed is that only 21 states have a teacher-identifier system that can match student achievement with specific teachers, a metric needed to measure progress over time.

A main reason why more states have not been able to collect all the data elements is a lack of financial and logistical resources and political challenges of various interest groups. For example, unions have voiced concerned that the data could be used against them or help determine their salaries. As budgets conditions deteriorate, state data directors will be challenged to continue to make progress in collecting data that fulfills the key components of the Data Quality Campaign and answer key policy questions. This developing need looks like an opportunity for evaluators to develop new tools and strategic planning that schools can use to be able to collect and record data efficiently and accurately for analysis that will present beneficial contributions to policy analysis.