Fordham Study reports privacy of nation's children at risk

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Joel Reidenberg <jreidenberg () law fordham edu>
> Date: October 28, 2009 11:39:47 AM EDT
> To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
> Subject: Fordham Study reports privacy of nation's children at risk

> Dave,
>
> The Center on Law and Information Policy has just released a report  
> examining the privacy of state K - 12 educational records databases  
> just as Congress is considering expanding these databases and  
> funding the aggregation of the state databases into multi-state (and  
> likely an eventual national) database of children.   The report can  
> be downloaded at http://law.fordham.edu/childrensprivacy
>
> Regards,
>
> Joel
>
>
>  Fordham University Press Release http://law.fordham.edu/newsroom/14952.htm 
>  :
>
> New York.  October 28, 2009.    Fordham Law’s Center on Law and Info 
> rmation Privacy released a study that found state educational databa 
> ses across the country ignore key privacy protections for the nation 
> ’s K – 12 children. The findings come as Congress is considering  
> legislation that would expand and integrate the 43 existing state da 
> tabases without taking into account the critical privacy failures in 
>  the states’ electronic warehouses of children’s information.
>
>
> CLIP found that sensitive, personalized information related to  
> matters such as teen pregnancies, mental health, and juvenile crime  
> is stored in a manner that violates federal privacy mandates. CLIP  
> reports that at least 32 percent of states warehouse children’s soci 
> al security numbers; at least 22 percent of states record student pr 
> egnancies; and at least 46 percent of the states track mental health 
> , illness, and jail sentences as part of the children’s educational  
> records. Also, almost all states with known programs collect family  
> wealth indicators.
>
> Some states outsource the data processing without any restrictions  
> on use or confidentiality for K- 12 children’s information. Access t 
> o this information and the disclosure of personal data may occur for 
>  decades and follow children well into their adult lives.
>
> “If these issues are not addressed, the results could be catastrophi 
> c from a privacy perspective,” said Professor Joel Reidenberg, found 
> ing director of CLIP. “We don’t question the legitimacy of  
> collecting data for school accountability, but we urge Congress and  
> state officials to take rapid steps to ensure the data is collected  
> and stored properly and used in compliance with established privacy  
> laws and principles.”
>
> CLIP launched the study in 2008 because state departments of  
> education throughout the country had recently established statewide  
> longitudinal databases to track all K-12 students’ progress over tim 
> e. The trend has been accompanied by a movement to create uniform da 
> ta collection systems so that each state’s student data systems can  
> be interoperable.
>
> Often the flow of information from the local educational agency to  
> the state department of education was not in compliance with the  
> privacy requirements of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy  
> Act. One state, New Jersey, diverts special education Medicaid  
> funding to pay for an out-of-state contractor to warehouse data,  
> including medical test results. Many states do not have clear access  
> and use rules regarding their longitudinal databases and over 80  
> percent of states apparently fail to have data-retention policies  
> and, thus, are likely to hold student information indefinitely.  
> Several states, like Montana, outsource the data warehouse without  
> stipulating privacy protections in the vendor contract. Other  
> states, such as Louisiana and Florida, track a long list of  
> disciplinary matters that could remain on students’ records indefini 
> tely.
>
> Even so, House Bill 3221, or the Student Aid and Fiscal  
> Responsibility Act, contains a section that calls for the expansion  
> and further integration of these databases without addressing these  
> privacy concerns. A Senate version of the bill is expected to be  
> released from committee shortly.
>
> “The CLIP study meticulously documents the states’ disregard for  
> safeguarding children’s most personal data,” said Barmak  
> Nassirian, Associate Executive Director, American Association of Col 
> legiate Registrars and Admissions Officers.  “And yet Congress is po 
> ised to fund an ill-thought-through expansion of these systems to in 
> clude data ranging from pre-birth medical information to education,  
> employment, military, and criminal records.”
>
> The study makes several recommendations for increasing the privacy,  
> transparency and accountability of the databases:
>
> Data at the state level should be made anonymous through the use of  
> dual-database architectures.
> Third party processors of educational records should have  
> comprehensive agreements that explicitly address privacy obligations.
> The collection of information by the state should be minimized and  
> specifically tied to an articulated audit or evaluation purpose.
> Clear data-retention policies should be instituted and made mandatory.
> States should have a Chief Privacy Officer in the department of  
> education who assures that privacy protections are implemented for  
> any educational record database and who publicly reports privacy  
> impact assessments for database programs, proposals, and vendor  
> contracts.



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com