Building Washington’s Postsecondary Data Strategy

Building a postsecondary data strategy that measures what matters in Washington State 

State longitudinal data systems can provide a fuller picture of how people move through education and into the workforce. But connecting records across institutions and sectors is only part of the challenge. States must also decide which questions their data systems should answer, which outcomes matter most, and whether those outcomes can be measured consistently. These choices become more complex as states seek to understand not only whether learners enroll, persist, earn credentials, and increase their earnings but also whether education and training pathways lead people to quality jobs, economic mobility, and broader well-being.

Washington State’s Education Research and Data Center (ERDC) is addressing this challenge as it strengthens its postsecondary data strategy. ERDC already has data and reporting capabilities related to postsecondary persistence and retention, transfer, and dual credit. In 2025, it also expanded its capacity to connect postsecondary information with workforce data, including wage records and occupational codes. As this work evolved, ERDC sought a higher-level structure to complement its technical postsecondary data model—one that could connect individual data elements and specifications to broader research questions, policy priorities, and future infrastructure investments. 

Using the Education-to-Workforce Indicator Framework to map current capacity and future needs

Many traditional postsecondary outcomes—such as credit accumulation, persistence, transfer, credential completion, employment, and earnings—can be studied through existing administrative records. However, research shows that other factors—such as a sense of belonging, cultural competency, digital skills, growth mindset, and quality of life— also play an important role in shaping students’ longer-term economic security and mobility. Incorporating these indicators in analyses can provide a fuller picture of students’ experiences and capacities than administrative records alone may capture. Yet these measures present a challenge for postsecondary institutions because they are often more difficult to observe and may require supplementing existing data sources with surveys, qualitative research, or other data collected in partnership with institutions and communities. Rather than treating these less readily available indicators as outside the scope of a statewide data strategy, ERDC recognized them as important dimensions of student success and as aspirational measures that could guide future data collection and research.

With this broader vision of student success in mind, ERDC used the Education-to-Workforce (E-W) Indicator Framework’s postsecondary essential questions and indicators to assess how its existing administrative data could measure that vision. To do so, ERDC mapped its existing data to the framework, distinguishing between measures it could examine with current data and measures that may require additional data sources or strengthened partnerships with organizations that already collect that data.

This distinction between what the state can measure now and what it may want to measure in the future has helped ERDC think beyond individual analyses toward broader infrastructure and research priorities. ERDC staff described this as especially useful when working with community-led or regional research partners. When partners request a specific dataset or set of measures, the E-W Framework gives ERDC a way to consider those requests alongside additional indicators or disaggregates that could deepen the analysis. For example, data-requesting partners may actually be interested not only in whether students persist, transfer, or complete credentials, but also in qualitative measures that capture how students are experiencing postsecondary institutions or disaggregates that support a critical equity lens. While these questions may require data ERDC still does not currently collect, this process has encouraged broader reflection about who determines what information is collected, who owns the data, and how those data are made available. 

ERDC has also used the E-W Framework to broaden conversations about the value of postsecondary education. Public discussions of degree value often focus on completion, student debt, earnings, and financial return on investment. While those measures are important, the E-W Framework also pointed ERDC toward broader outcomes that matter for education-to-workforce success, such as quality jobs, job stability, upward mobility, quality of life, and civic and community engagement. As ERDC continues to build on its use of wage data and occupational information, this broader definition of learner success can serve as a north star for developing an education-to-workforce data ecosystem that captures a more complete story of students’ postsecondary trajectories.

Strengthening dual credit data to answer statewide questions

ERDC’s work with dual credit illustrates how a strong measurement strategy depends not only on having data, but also on establishing consistent definitions, reporting approaches, and data quality standards. Because institutions often define and measure dual credit participation differently, ERDC established standardized definitions and reporting approaches to support consistent statewide analyses. ERDC produces dual credit reports and maintains a dashboard using data from Washington’s K-12 agency and public two-year and four-year institutions to identify students who participate in and earn credit through six types of dual credit programs (Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate, Cambridge International, College in the High School, Running Start, and Career and Technical Education Dual Credit.). These approaches allow ERDC to examine how dual credit participation and access vary across programs, schools, regions, and student groups, as well as how participation relates to postsecondary enrollment and credential attainment. ERDC’s 2026 Annual Report on Dual Credit also documents the quality and completeness of the underlying data, making it possible to track improvements and identify remaining limitations over time. 

ERDC’s experience demonstrates that a postsecondary data strategy is not simply an inventory of available information. It is also a road map that connects current data assets and measurement gaps with a broader research agenda, partner needs, and strategy for future infrastructure improvements. The E-W Framework has provided ERDC with an accessible strategic layer above its more technical data model, helping its team assess what they can answer today while maintaining a broader vision for what its own data system and partnerships with other organizations and researchers—could support over time. As ERDC continues to expand its postsecondary and workforce data capacity, this approach positions Washington to ask not only whether learners complete their education and earn a living wage but also whether their pathways lead to a high quality of life, economic stability and mobility, and meaningful opportunity.