Finance committee narrows student-data sharing with vendors; requests data-policy review

The New Haven School District Finance & Operations Committee on Wednesday reviewed several memorandum-of-understanding drafts that would allow outside vendors to use district student and staff data, and directed staff to narrow what fields are shared before the items go to the full board.

Committee members said they want the district to provide only the minimum data necessary for vendors to deliver and evaluate their programs, and asked staff to bring the district—s data-sharing policy back for review. The committee did not adopt an ordinance or vote to authorize broad data release; instead it agreed on follow-up steps and to send the revised MOUs to the full board.

Mr. Nguyen, who presented the I‑Ready proposed data agreement to the committee, said the vendor had agreed to receive de-identified student records for the proposed effectiveness study but that the draft still included teacher email addresses. "I could strike the teacher email address," Nguyen said, and agreed to remove that field before the packet is published for the full board. President Yarbrough and Dr. Negron pressed for tighter limits on what the district shares and for clarity about how vendor reports will be used by the district.

Members repeatedly raised the risk of sharing unnecessary personally identifying information, the potential for secondary uses of the data, and the possibility of data breaches. President Yarbrough asked the administration to identify what the district expects to get back from each vendor—s research and to push vendors to accept narrower datasets. Dr. Negron recommended convening a follow-up discussion so the district can define the specific analytic questions it wants vendors to answer, which would let the district limit the fields it shares.

Committee members also noted the district—s internal review process. Mr. Nguyen said the I‑Ready submission has gone through the district—s institutional review process and that removing teacher email addresses would make the file set "pretty de-identified." Committee members agreed to place the district data policy on the next meeting agenda so governance can review whether existing guidance sets clear minimum-sharing standards.

The committee asked staff to: remove teacher email addresses from the I‑Ready agreement before public posting, prepare a short memo identifying the specific fields each vendor would receive, and return a revised data-sharing policy for committee review before the full board votes on the MOUs. No formal contract award was made at the meeting; the committee moved the revised items to the full board for approval.

The committee discussed similar language for MOUs with Scholastic, Boundless Literacy and Perkins Eastman. Scholastic representatives explained that student names are often included to roster students into third-party instructional platforms; committee members asked staff to determine whether student IDs could be used instead and to clarify which fields are required for program operation. For Boundless Literacy, staff said the tutoring provider would receive de-identified assessment measures but that, because the vendor tutors students directly, the vendor also maintains identifying information in its own systems.

The committee emphasized three safeguards it expects in the final MOUs: (1) the district will share only the minimum fields needed for the stated purpose; (2) teacher email addresses and other easily re-identifying fields will be removed unless strictly required; and (3) the district will require vendors to describe how they will secure, limit and, where required, dispose of data. Staff committed to returning a revised packet to the committee ahead of the full-board meeting.

Looking ahead, committee members asked the administration to compile a short, plain-language memo that lists the data fields each vendor will receive and explains why each is necessary. That memo should be included in the packet when the board considers the MOUs.