Committee forwards RISE data-hub MOU amid staff and counsel concerns over liability and data security

The Finance & Operations Committee of New Haven Public Schools voted to send a memorandum of understanding with the Connecticut RISE network — which would give teachers access to a RISE “data hub” drawing from district records — to the full Board of Education for final approval.

Committee members moved the package to the full board during the Sept. 1 meeting after presentations from district staff and RISE representatives. The MOU would let RISE use district-held student data to produce teacher-facing dashboards and reports intended to help ninth-grade students stay “on track” for promotion.

The measure drew detailed questions about what data fields would be shared, how staff would use the hub, and how families would be engaged. “What we’re trying to do is just put the district’s existing data in the hands of educators soon enough and in an easy enough way to interact with that they can actually support those students before the students are are struggling,” said Chris Lewine, who identified himself as leading RISE’s data work. Lewine said the hub focuses on attendance, marking-period grades and standardized-test indicators and presents them in more graphical, educator-focused views than some district-wide tools.

Sam Purdy, who described his role overseeing RISE’s mentoring and network supports, told the committee the hub can show “who is on track, who is almost on track, who is one course or two courses shy, and what those courses are,” enabling teacher teams to intervene before marking periods close.

District staff described the MOU as complementary to a previously approved RISE coaching program and said it would be funded as a discrete service payment. “This aligns very closely with other RISE supports that the schools are already receiving,” a district presenter said.

Committee members emphasized data security and contractual risk. Dr. Yarbrough said he appreciated language in the memo that said data would not be sold and that the hub would use existing district records, but asked for more detail about the data fields and use cases. “We are really entrusting to you a lot of personal information about our students,” he said. Attorney Alexiannis flagged specific contract language, saying in committee that the limitation on liability in the vendor’s draft (noted on page 45, paragraph 6.2 of the packet) “limits the member’s liability to the contract price” and was likely insufficient given the volume of student data involved; he also pointed to an indemnification paragraph that could trigger a separate approval path with the Board of Alders.

District counsel and staff said those contract issues would be worked out in the usual procurement and legal review steps. Staff explained that if the indemnification language remains, alder approval could be required and that process would add time; removing or revising that clause would allow the procurement to proceed faster through the city’s VOICEO routing and legal review.

Committee Chair Wilcox moved that the committee forward the MOU with the other agenda agreements to the full board. The motion was seconded and carried; the committee voted to send the package to the Board of Education for final action.

The committee also discussed operational details raised by RISE: whether families would get direct access to the hub (RISE said it does not provide family/student logins but the hub can print customized “on-track” reports to share securely with families) and how the hub’s outputs would be paired with RISE’s coaching and on-track mentoring supports.

The committee’s action forwards the MOU to the Board of Education, with staff and legal offices expected to negotiate contract language on liability and indemnification before final execution. Staff also noted that any additional approvals required by the city (for example, alder approval) will add time before the hub can be operational in schools.