Why Data Practitioners Are Central to Improving College Completion: Early Insights from the Postsecondary Data for Action Network

Postsecondary institutions have long relied on data to understand student outcomes and institutional performance. Today, data play an even more central role in shaping institutional, state, and federal policy. Some of the most important issues colleges and universities are navigating such as shifting federal reporting requirements, increasing scrutiny of program value, and improving student outcomes rely on the technical expertise of institutional research and effectiveness professionals who build, maintain, and leverage data systems. To support this vital work, IHEP and the Association for Institutional Research (AIR) launched the Postsecondary Data for Action Network, a community of practice designed to strengthen data teams’ capacity to advance student success and inform policies that increase college completion for all students.  

The network brings together cross-functional teams of research professionals, faculty, administrators, and system and state leaders from community colleges, regional public and private universities, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Minority-Serving Institutions, Tribal Colleges, and state-level education offices. Each team joined the network with a shared goal: to deepen their understanding of student persistence and completion challenges and connect those insights to state and federal policy priorities.  

In fall 2025, we surveyed network participants to identify key challenges and opportunities. A common theme in responses was difficulty accessing and linking data across departments and systems, even among institutions with strong data capacity and infrastructure. Nearly two-thirds of teams said integrating financial aid, academic, student experience, and post-completion data is “not easy” or only “somewhat easy.” Outdated technology, decentralized tools, and unclear data governance often limit their ability to meaningfully support completion initiatives or develop new strategies.  

Despite organizational complexity, technical expertise is strong and well distributed. Nearly three-quarters of teams described regular or deeply embedded data use across departments to guide degree-completion efforts. However, participants noted that data access alone does not guarantee its use in decision-making. 

As Erin O’Brien, PhD, Chief Student Retention Officer, at the University at Buffalo describes, “the data for financial aid, student account balances, well-being, academics, housing, and more reside in disparate systems and are often only connected after the fact. Wouldn’t it be great if we could proactively connect information to identify risks before problems happen?”  

At Oakland University, efforts are underway to use predictive models to identify which students are at risk of stopping out before earning a degree and to develop targeted retention programs based on their experiences. “We compile, analyze, and disseminate information through multiple channels to campus stakeholders, including the provost, deans, and department chairs, to support evidence-based planning and action,” said Song Yan, Associate Vice President for Institutional Research, Assessment, and Data Analytics. 

Similarly, Montclair State University is working to unify its campus data systems and strengthen coordination across departments. “We hope to create a universal ‘data ecosystem’ that supports the success of our students by enabling intentional, collaborative, and measurable interventions,” said Megan Matesic, Lead Institutional Research Analyst. Montclair’s efforts prioritize transfer pathways, program changes, and time-to-degree to ensure students have clear and efficient routes to completion.  

Institutional and system leaders closest to data are a critical bridge between research and decision-making, ensuring policy is grounded in evidence and aligned with students’ lived realities. Their expertise strengthens data coordination across departments and systems, builds shared understanding and trust in information, and translates analysis into practical recommendations that drive policy change. But many teams reported limited confidence engaging in policy dialogue.  

Ten of twelve teams reported they are “slightly” or “somewhat” confident in understanding federal postsecondary policy priorities and their implications for data use. Just one third regularly follow federal policy developments and actively participate in opportunities to provide feedback. Limited access to timely data about workforce and non-credit program outcomes, delayed access to financial aid data, and inconsistent collection of student characteristic data constrain staff capacity to analyze and use data to support federal policy engagement and institutional advocacy.  

At Delaware State University, data leaders are helping to drive collaboration aligned with policy goals to improve student success. “Data inform policy-aligned institutional practices that reduce credit loss, strengthen transfer and academic pathways, and lower barriers to completion,” said Dr. Vanessa Power Anderson, Sallie Mae Research Fellow at Delaware State. “This cross-departmental effort strengthens student support services and demonstrates the institution’s commitment to increasing credential attainment, enhancing workforce readiness, and building stronger communities.” 

As teams continue tackling these challenges together, IHEP and AIR will support their efforts to center data in institutional decision-making. Investing in the people, practices, and relationships that turn data into action can advance completion strategies that help all students succeed. 

For a list of participating teams, view the Postsecondary Data for Action Network initiative page.