Postsecondary Data for Action Network Convenes in Washington to Turn Evidence into Policy Change

Nearly 50 higher education professionals from 12 institutions and campus systems gathered in Washington, DC on July 15 and 16 for a convening of the Postsecondary Data for Action Network (PDAN). Launched by the Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) and the Association for Institutional Research (AIR) in late 2025, PDAN participants gain access to support and expertise to inform projects focused on using data to shape institutional decision making. PDAN teams were selected from a competitive applicant pool, convened virtually over the last few months, and in July, met for working sessions to make progress on their data projects and sharpen how they connect evidence to policy change.

Plenary speaker Dr. Archie Cubarrubia, Vice President of Grants at ECMC Foundation, framed the stakes by calling this work a “policy superpower.” He emphasized that those closest to the data are often best positioned to identify what students need and what systems must change. In each PDAN project, a team takes on a specific campus challenge and works to solve it using their own data.

PDAN Teams Tackle Shared Challenges

Teams were paired with peers tackling similar challenges including improving transfer pathways to closing completion gaps. These pairings created space for candid conversations about what is working, remaining challenges, and how institutions can learn from one another. Many of those discussions occurred in Project Labs where participants shared progress, surfaced roadblocks, and received real-time feedback from subject matter experts. As Gina Johnson from Data EmpowerED Consulting put it, the value of PDAN is “having a room full of people who understand the complexity of this work and can help you move it forward.”

From Campus Data to Policy

Across sessions, teams explored how to connect campus-level data to broader policy conversations. A key insight emerged early: quantitative data alone is not enough. Rigorous data analysis must be paired with qualitative insight and narrative that resonate with decision-makers.

Teams learned from peer institutions applying this approach. Institutional researchers at Wayne State University used data to pinpoint where students were struggling and target fixes that nearly doubled the graduation rate. The university paired this quantitative progress with compelling narratives about student classroom experiences and took both to state legislators and a national audience. Similarly, Macalester College dug into their already-high completion rates to investigate how to do more for students by collecting qualitative data that revealed new insights about classroom environments and basic needs support, then implementing new campus policies to address identified gaps. The Massachusetts Association of Community Colleges team put this into practice immediately by committing to, “work with student organizations to gather qualitative data as a starting point for these conversations.”

These examples also illustrate that sustaining data-driven work requires more than strong analysis. It requires partnerships and data infrastructure to connect information across institutions and systems. One panelist, Cory Biggs of myFutureNC, highlighted North Carolina’s ambitious 2030 attainment goal—2 million residents aged 25 to 44 holding a degree or high-quality credential—as an illustration of how aligned state-level targets paired with longitudinal data systems can catalyze institution and statewide progress.

PDAN teams discussed significant obstacles as well. Data governance challenges and disconnected state and federal data systems create real barriers. One shared challenge is accurately tracking students who cross state lines or students in non-credit programs, who often fall outside data collection entirely since their enrollment data sits in separate systems from degree-seeking coursework and isn’t captured in federal reporting.

The Communication Challenge

Connecting data to policy requires more than infrastructure, it also requires skillful communication. In a fast-moving information environment, data is often filtered, summarized, or interpreted—sometimes by AI tools or the media—before it ever reaches its intended audience. Dr. Holly Zanville and Matthew Arrojas of the Learn & Work Ecosystem Library offered PDAN teams practical strategies for navigating this landscape. Teams learned how to simplify their findings without losing nuance, lead with meaningful comparisons, and be transparent about strengths and challenges. Participants discussed how quickly information can be condensed or reframed before reaching decision-makers, so shaping clear, accessible narratives from the start can help ensure key insights are not lost or misinterpreted along the way. Oakland University’s team saw this insight as central to reaching wider public policy audiences and plans to create more digestible data-informed insights for broader public consumption.

What’s next for PDAN

PDAN teams will convene again in October to reflect on their progress, share lessons learned, and continue building strategies to translate data into action. With ongoing IHEP and AIR support, teams will refine their projects and work toward sustaining their momentum beyond the current cohort.

This post captures a snapshot of insights from the PDAN convening. To learn more about one team’s work, read our spotlight on the University of Northern Iowa.

Photos courtesy of Vinny Sheu Photography.