class: center, middle, inverse, title-slide .title[ # Using Data to Identify and Address Housing Instability ] .author[ ### Michael LaClair ] .institute[ ### Guilford County Senior Data Analyst Interview ] --- #The Objective ##Determine whether better use of data can help identify housing instability early enough to connect students and families with effective support. --- # Phase 1: Define the Problem Meet with Guilford County Schools leadership to initiate the project at the institutional level and establish a shared understanding of the problem. Convene a working group that includes relevant departments and staff who support Students in Transition to better understand the nature and scope of housing instability, existing supports and referral processes, current gaps, and unmet needs. Engaging GCS partners early is critical to ensuring that the project addresses a meaningful problem and an actionable response. Their input will help establish shared ownership of the work and provide essential context for developing the Theory of Action and Logic Model that will guide the project. The working group will define anticipated outcomes, and determine what would need to be true for an early-identification strategy to result in meaningful support for students and families. ###Milestones - <strong>Theory of Action</strong> — Define how earlier identification is expected to lead to meaningful support and improved outcomes. - <strong>Logic Model</strong> — Define inputs, activities, outputs, and anticipated outcomes. - <strong>Problem Definition</strong> — Establish a shared understanding of the problem, current processes, gaps, and unmet needs. - <strong>Decision Criteria</strong> — Define what would need to be true to justify moving into data exploration and design. --- #Phase 2: Assess Data and Feasibility Assess potential data sources for privacy, availability, quality, validity, equity, and actionability. - Establish privacy, security, and data-sharing requirements - Assess availability, quality, timeliness, and level of detail - Determine whether data provide a meaningful signal of housing instability - Identify potential bias and equity concerns - Determine whether identified concerns can lead to appropriate action - Use community-level sources such as ACS and HUD CHAS to provide context without requiring PII ###Milestones - <strong>Governance:</strong> Approved data-use and access framework - <strong>Data Model:</strong> Sources, relationships, definitions, and quality requirements - <strong>Data Assessment:</strong> Evidence of usefulness and limitations - <strong>Feasibility Decision:</strong> Proceed, modify, or redirect --- # Housing Vulnerability in Guilford County (Illustrative Example Only)
--- # Phase 3 — Operationalizing the Project The Theory of Action and Logic Model can be refined based on what was learned during the previous phases. The Logic Model can then be translated into an operational process that defines inputs, activities, outputs, and expected outcomes such as: - Who is responsible for each part of the process - What data will be collected, analyzed, and shared - How requirements translate into technical specifications - What interventions or supports are available - How families will be connected to appropriate supports - What outcomes will be monitored - How information will be protected throughout the process ###Milestones - <strong>Refined Theory of Action and Logic Model</strong> - <strong>Business Requirements and Technical Specifications</strong> - <strong>Operational Workflow</strong> - <strong>Data and Reporting Processes</strong> - <strong>Intervention and Referral Processes</strong> - <strong>Evaluation and Monitoring Plan</strong> --- # Phase 4 — Evaluate Once the project is operating, it can be evaluated for both **implementation and effectiveness**. Evaluation would examine whether the process is being implemented as intended, whether the data and indicators are supporting timely and appropriate action, and whether the project is producing the outcomes identified in the Logic Model. This phase would assess: - <strong>Implementation:</strong> Is the process being carried out consistently and as designed? - <strong>Data and Indicators:</strong> Are the indicators timely, reliable, and useful for informing appropriate action? - <strong>Intervention:</strong> Are identified students and families being connected to appropriate supports? - <strong>Outcomes:</strong> Are the anticipated short- and long-term outcomes being achieved? - <strong>Equity:</strong> Are the benefits and potential risks distributed equitably across student populations and communities? - <strong>Unintended Consequences:</strong> Is the process creating unintended harms, burdens, or privacy concerns? - <strong>Iterative Design:</strong> What does the evidence suggest should be refined, expanded, redirected, or discontinued? ####Evaluation findings would be used to determine whether the project should continue, be modified, expanded, or stopped.