1

 

U.S. Department of Education

Interim Information Quality Guidelines

Introduction

Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001

(Public Law 106-554) directed the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to issue 

government-wide guidelines that “provide policy and procedural guidance to Federal agencies 

for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information 

(including statistical information) disseminated by Federal agencies.” Information, as defined by 

OMB, includes any communication or representation of knowledge, such as facts or data, in any 

medium or form, including textual, numerical, graphic, cartographic, narrative, or audiovisual 

forms. Dissemination refers to any distribution of information to the public that is initiated or 

sponsored by a federal agency. (OMB, Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, 

Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies, February 22, 

2002, 67 FR 8452-8460).

In summary, OMB’s guidelines, issued on February 22, 2002, direct agencies to:

• Develop and implement their own agency-specific information quality guidelines by 

October 1, 2002;

• Adopt a basic standard of quality (including objectivity, utility, and integrity) as a 

performance goal and incorporate the standard into the agency’s operations;

• Develop a process for reviewing the quality of information to ensure quality before 

information is disseminated; 

• Establish a process for affected persons to request correction of information that may 

not comply with OMB’s or the agency’s guidelines; and

• Report annually to the Director of OMB, beginning January 1, 2004, the number and 

nature of complaints received by the agency regarding the agency’s compliance with 

its guidelines concerning the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information, 

and how such complaints were resolved.

The U.S. Department of Education’s (the Department’s) guidelines were originally developed in 

2002 at the direction of OMB. On April 24, 2019, OMB issued a Memorandum to the Heads of 

Executive Departments and Agencies (M-19-15) to reinforce, clarify, and interpret agency 

responsibilities with regard to responsibilities under the Information Quality Act. We are in the 

process of revising these guidelines in accordance with OMB’s Memorandum M-19-15 and 

commit to complying with each of the implementation updates, which are:

Implementation Update 1.1: Drawing on experience implementing the Guidelines, agencies 

should revisit the parameters for identifying "influential information. "Agencies should provide

specific guidance to program managers for determining the amount and type of predissemination review necessary. Agencies should identify specific types of information the 

agency produces that are "influential" and should provide a rigorous process for determining

whether types of information not specifically listed by the guidelines qualify as "influential."
2

Implementation Update 1.2: When using scientific information, including third-party data or 

models, to support their policies, agencies must ensure compliance with the requirements of

OMB's Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review.

Implementation Update 1.3: When conducting peer review, agencies should ensure reviewers 

are asked to evaluate the objectivity of the underlying 4ata and the sensitivity of the agency's 

conclusions to analytic assumptions. 

Implementation Update 1.4: When influential information that has been peer reviewed changes 

significantly (e.g., as a result of the peer reviewer comments, additional agency analysis, or 

further consideration), the agency should conduct a second peer review.

Implementation Update 2.1: When an agency makes information originally collected or 

developed by other Federal agencies available to the public in a cross-agency dissemination, 

each agency is responsible for the quality of the information they contribute, and that 

responsibility should be clearly communicated to the public. 

Implementation Update 2.2: Agencies should provide the public with sufficient documentation 

about each dataset released to allow data users to determine the fitness of the data for the purpose 

for which third parties may consider using it. Robust practices may include developing a 

standard template or framework that provides data users with the relevant information. 

Safeguarding privacy and confidentiality is vital in the context of open data.

Implementation Update 2.3: Agencies should consider the potential for using existing data 

sources from both inside and outside the agency for statistical and research purposes, while 

protecting privacy and confidentiality. 

Implementation Update 2.4: When designing or improving data collection systems, 

Departments should actively solicit comment from their statistical, research, and evaluation 

agencies about potential downstream uses. Agencies should describe such uses in the 

Information Collection Request submitted to OMB for review under the PRA. 

Implementation Update 2.5: If agencies are considering secondary analysis of data that 

includes personally identifiable information, the agencies should coordinate with their Senior 

Agency Official for Privacy to meet all privacy requirements and manage privacy risks. 

Implementation Update 2. 6: Agencies should develop procedures for clearly documenting and 

communicating the quality of administrative data that have the potential to be used for statistical 

purposes.

Implementation Update 3.1: Consistent with the Office of Science and Technology Policy's 

2010 Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Scientific Integrity,

agencies should ensure that influential information is communicated transparently by including a 

clear explication of underlying assumptions, accurate contextualization of uncertainties, and a 

description of the probabilities associated with both optimistic and pessimistic projections, 

including best-case and worst-case scenarios.
3

Implementation Update 3.2: When an agency has performed analysis using a specialized set of

computer code, the computer code used to process it should be made available to the public for 

further analysis, if consistent with applicable law and policy.

Implementation Update 3.3: Agencies should ensure that when using non-government sources 

to create influential information they communicate to the public sufficient information on the

characteristics of the data and analysis, including its scope (e.g., temporal or demographic), 

generation protocols, and any other information necessary to allow-the public to reproduce the

agencies' conclusions.

Implementation Update 3.4: Agencies should prioritize increased access to the data and 

analytic frameworks (e.g., models) used to generate influential information. All data disclosures 

must be consistent with statutory, regulatory, and policy requirements for protections of privacy 

and confidentiality, proprietary data, and confidential business information.

Implementation Update 3.5: Agencies should explore methods that provide wider access 

to datasets while reducing the risk of disclosure of personally identifiable information. In 

particular, tiered access offers promising ways to make data widely available while protecting 

privacy. Implementation of such approaches must be consistent with principles for ethical 

governance, which include employing sound data security practices, protecting individual 

privacy, maintaining promised confidentiality, and ensuring appropriate access and use.

Implementation Update 4.1: Agencies should revise their procedures to reflect more realistic 

timelines for RFCs. Revised procedures should, at minimum, provide that agencies will not take 

more than 120 days to respond to an RFC without the concurrence of the party that requested the 

request for correction.

Implementation Update 4.2: In its response to an RFC, agencies should not opine on the 

requestor 's or the agency's policy position. 

Implementation Update 4.3: The agency response should contain a point-by-point response to 

any data quality arg11ments contained in the RFC and should refer to a peer review that 

directly considered the issue being raised, if available. 

Implementation Update 4.4: Agencies should share draft responses to RFCs and appeals with 

OMB prior to release to the requestor for assessment of compliance with the above norms.

Implementation Update 4.5: To ensure the integrity of the appeals process, agencies should 

ensure that those individuals reviewing and responding to the appeals request were not involved 

in the review and initial response to the RFC.

Background

Information quality is important to the Department of Education because educators, researchers, 

policymakers, and the public use information that the Department disseminates for a variety of 

purposes. Thus, it is important that the information the Department disseminates be accurate and 

reliable.
4

The Department’s Strategic Plan emphasizes the importance of information quality. For 

example, goal four of the six strategic goals is to “Transform Education into an Evidence-based 

Field.” Under this goal, the Department seeks “to ensure that research funded or published by the 

Department is of the highest quality.” The Department places priority on ensuring “... that highquality research – whether or not it is funded by the Department – is synthesized, publicized, and 

disseminated widely.” 

The Department also relies on high quality information in the administration of its grant 

programs. For example, Objective 1.1 under the Strategic Plan requires the Department to 

“...link federal education funding to accountability for results.” Consequently, programs that 

cannot demonstrate evidence of effectiveness will be candidates for reform or elimination. High 

quality information is required to demonstrate evidence of effective programs. To make sound 

decisions, the Department intends to accept and use only information that is accurate and 

reliable.

To serve the public, the Department of Education prepares and disseminates information 

products that describe the condition of American education and the Department’s policies, 

programs, and services. The Department also disseminates profiles of the learner populations 

served by Department programs, evaluations of Department programs, and research products 

describing what works in American education. In addition, the Department reports statistical data 

describing the educational achievement, attainment, and the demographic and socioeconomic 

characteristics of America’s students; the characteristics of the education labor force in the 

United States; the financing of education in the United States; and international comparisons of 

education systems and their students. The Department disseminates most of its information 

products in both printed and electronic formats, as well as in oral presentations. Many 

information products are announced on the Department’s Web site (www.ed.gov), where they 

can be accessed and downloaded.

Purpose and Scope

Consistent with the guidance from OMB, the Department of Education’s Information Quality 

Guidelines (Guidelines) described below reflect the Department’s policy and procedures for 

reviewing and substantiating the quality of information it disseminates, (e.g., reports, studies, and 

summaries), as well as provide an administrative mechanism allowing affected persons to seek 

and obtain, where appropriate, correction of information not complying with the Guidelines. 

These Guidelines, along with those issued by OMB, represent a performance goal for the 

Department and are intended only to improve the internal management of the Department. They 

do not create any private right of action to be used by any party against the government in a court 

of law or in an administrative hearing.

The Guidelines are applicable to information that the Department of Education disseminates on 

or after October 1, 2002, including the review of information to ensure quality before it is 

disseminated to the public. Some previously released information products continue to be used 

for decision-making or are relied upon by the Department and the public as official, 

authoritative, government information; this information is, in effect, constantly being redisseminated and are thus subject to these Guidelines. Previously released information products 
5

that do not meet these criteria are considered archived information and thus are not subject to 

these Guidelines. 

In addition, individual offices within the Department of Education may have more detailed 

guidelines that are tailored to specific information needs. An example of program-specific 

guidelines are the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Statistical Standards, which

may be accessed at the following url: http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/. Other individual offices 

within the Department of Education also may develop guidelines tailored to their specific needs; 

however, individual office guidelines would be consistent with the Department of Education 

Guidelines described below.

Under these Guidelines, information disseminated by the Department of Education is divided 

into four categories: 

• General Information about Education Programs, such as fact sheets, descriptions of 

programs and services and guidance on who is eligible and how and where to apply 

for services or assistance. General information might also include public service 

reports on evaluations of specific programs and services, and descriptions of findings. 

• Research Studies and Program Evaluation Information, such as detailed reports of 

research findings and methodologies and technical reports describing the procedures 

employed and the results of program evaluations.

• Administrative and Program Data, such as aggregates of records from schools, 

school districts, and states. 

• Statistical Data, such as data collections of nonadministrative data and special 

purpose surveys that are designed to fill data gaps or information needs. 

These Guidelines, however, do not govern all information of the Department, nor do they cover 

all information disseminated by the Department. For example, the Guidelines generally do not 

cover:

• Internal information such as employee records;

• Internal procedural, operational, or policy manuals prepared for the management and 

operations of the Department of Education that are not primarily intended for public 

dissemination;

• Information collected or developed by the Department that is not disseminated to the 

public, including documents intended only for inter-agency or intra-agency 

communications;

• Research findings and other information published by grantees, unless the 

Department –

o Represents, uses, or relies upon the information as the official position of the 

Department, or in support of the official position of the Department;

o Has authority to review and approve the information before release; or

o Directs that the information be disseminated;

• Opinions that are clearly identified as such, and that do not represent facts or the 

agency’s views;

• Electronic links to information on other Web sites;

• Correspondence with individuals;
6

• Responses to requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act, the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act, and the Privacy Act;

• Press releases, unless they contain new substantive information that was not 

previously released; 

• Congressional testimony that includes data that has previously been disseminated;

• Comments received from the public in response to Federal Register notices;

• Distributions intended to be limited to subpoenas or adjudicative processes, i.e., the 

findings and determinations made in the course of adjudications; 

• Information collected during the course of a Departmental investigation that is not 

intended to be disseminated to the public, e.g., data collected through resolution of an 

OCR or OIG investigation; and

• Archival records, including previously released information products that are not 

being relied upon, used for decision-making, or held out as authoritative data. 

Information Quality

These Guidelines assess information quality using three factors: utility, objectivity, and integrity. 

These elements are intended to ensure that information the Department disseminates is useful, 

accurate, reliable, unbiased, and secure. Department staff will treat information quality as 

integral to the creation, collection, maintenance, and dissemination of information, and will 

review products before they are disseminated to ensure that they are consistent with these 

Guidelines. In particular, information products from the Department will follow the Guide to 

Publishing at the U.S. Department of Education, and all clearance submissions under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act will explain how the proposed collection of information will yield 

high quality, objective, and useful data, consistent with OMB’s guidelines. Furthermore, the 

Guidelines provide that the level of quality assurance for information must be tied to its level of 

importance. Influential Information, that is information that will or does have a clear and 

substantial impact on public policies or private sector decisions, must meet a higher level of 

quality as described on page 9 of these Guidelines.

Utility

Utility refers to the usefulness of the information to its intended users. Utility is achieved by 

staying informed of information needs and developing new products and services where 

appropriate. To maximize the utility of influential information, care must be taken in the review 

stage to ensure that the information can be clearly understood and, where appropriate and to the 

extent practical, an external user of the information can reproduce the steps involved in 

producing the information.

Ultimately, the Department intends to ensure that the information it disseminates meets the needs 

of intended users. All information products should be grammatically correct and clearly written 

in plain English. The target audience should be clearly identified, and the product should be 

understandable to that audience. 

To ensure the usefulness of Department products, all information products should provide 

information that will help the Department fulfill its mission “to ensure equal access to education 

and to promote educational excellence throughout the nation.” When appropriate, Department 
7

products should include contact information for users who seek clarification or further 

information, or who want to provide feedback.

In particular—

• General Information should provide clear and readable descriptions of the 

Department’s programs and services and, where applicable, guidance and assistance, 

including who is eligible and how and where to apply for services or assistance. It 

also may include information pertaining to evaluations of specific programs and 

services, and descriptions of findings.

• Research Studies and Program Evaluations should be designed and reviewed to fill 

the information needs that are identified through internal review, legislative 

mandates, or input from data users outside the Department. 

• Administrative and Program Data, e.g., aggregate data (or information) derived from

records at the school, school district, and state levels, should be carefully described 

and documented in all reports and products released by the Department. 

• Statistical Data, e.g., data collections of non-administrative data and special purpose 

surveys should be designed to fill data gaps or information needs that are identified 

through internal review, legislative mandates, or input from data users outside the 

Department, and should be reviewed for how well they fulfill that purpose. 

The usefulness of information the Department disseminates will be evaluated from the 

perspective of the Department, educators, education researchers, policymakers, and the public. 

The Department relies upon internal reviews and analyses, along with feedback from advisory 

committees, educators, education researchers, policymakers, and the public to achieve this. 

Consistent with OMB’s guidance, the Department’s goal is to maximize the usefulness of the

information and minimize the cost to the government and the public. When disseminating its 

information products, the Department will utilize varied dissemination channels so that the 

public, education researchers, and policymakers can locate Department information in an 

equitable and timely fashion. 

Objectivity

Objectivity refers to the accuracy, reliability, and unbiased nature of information. It is achieved 

by using reliable information sources and appropriate techniques to prepare information 

products. Objectivity involves both the content and the presentation of the information. Content 

should be complete, include documentation of the source of any information used, as well as,

when appropriate, a description of the sources of any errors in the data that may affect the 

quality of the information product. The presentation of the information should be clear and in a 

proper context so that users can easily understand its meaning. 

The Department strives to present information to the public in an accurate, clear, complete, and 

unbiased manner. In keeping with the OMB Information Quality Guidelines, all information 

products should undergo editorial and technical peer review to assist the Department in meeting 

this performance goal. 

General Information

Department of Education information products should be appropriate for the target audience. 

Each product should:
8

1. Clearly state the goals or purpose of the information product;

2. Include an unbiased presentation of the topic in question;

3. If applicable, draw upon peer-reviewed, scientific evidence-based research that is 

appropriately documented; 

4. Clearly identify data sources, if applicable; and

5. Confirm and document the reliability of the data, and acknowledge any shortcomings or 

explicit errors in any data that is included.

Research and Evaluation Information

Department of Education research and evaluation information products should, at a minimum: 

1. Clearly state the goals or purpose of the topic in question;

2. Pose the research or evaluation question in a balanced and unbiased manner;

3. Provide an unbiased test of the question;

4. Have a research study approach or data collection technique that is well thought out, 

designed to use state of the art methodologies in the data collection, and be clearly described

in the study documentation;

5. Present conclusions that are strongly supported by the data;

6. Clearly identify data sources, if applicable;

7. Confirm and document the reliability of the data, and acknowledge any shortcomings or 

explicit errors in any data that is included; and

8. Undergo peer review.

Department of Education research and evaluation information products documenting cause and 

effect relationships or evidence of effectiveness should meet the quality standards that will be 

developed as part of the What Works Clearinghouse. 

Administrative and Program Data

The Department of Education reports data that rely upon information provided by third parties. 

These data draw upon aggregates from student record systems or other administrative data (e.g., 

universe studies, including censuses, and other reports based on aggregate administrative data). 

These data rely upon information provided by third parties. Because of this, the Department does 

not have full control over the quality of the reported data; the Department intends to, however, 

identify the source of the information and any shortcomings or limitations of the data if we rely 

upon it for decision-making purposes. This will facilitate the public’s understanding of the 

strengths and potential weaknesses of these data. Furthermore, as an additional assurance of 

quality, these data should meet the criteria that are being developed as part of an ongoing 

Department-wide data standardization and coordination initiative. At a minimum, these standards 

will require the following:

1. In formulating a data collection plan the goals of the study should be clearly described;
9

2. The subjects to be studied and the data to be collected should be clearly defined, using 

broadly understood concepts and definitions that are consistent with Department data 

definition handbooks;

3. The research study approach or data collection techniques should be well thought out and 

designed to use state-of-the-art methodologies in the data collection, and should be clearly 

described in the study documentation;

4. In designing the work, every effort should be made to minimize the amount of time required 

for responding institutions;

5. The source of research information or data should be reliable. Data should be collected with 

survey instruments that have been properly developed and tested;

6. Response rates should be monitored during data collection. When necessary, appropriate 

steps should be taken to ensure the respondents are representative of the population;

7. When applicable, care should be taken to ensure the confidentiality of personally identifiable 

data, as required by law, during the collection, processing, and analysis of the data; 

8. Upon completion of the work, the findings and data should be processed in a manner 

sufficient to ensure that the data are edited to help ensure that the data are accurate and 

reliable; 

9. The findings and data collection should be properly documented and stored, and the 

documentation should include an evaluation of the quality of the data with a description of 

any limitations of the data. In particular, any known limitations of the information should be 

documented (e.g., missing values, amount of nonresponse);

10. The analysis should be selected and implemented to ensure that the data are correctly 

analyzed using modern statistical techniques suitable for hypothesis testing. Techniques may 

vary from simple tabulations and descriptive analysis to multivariate analysis of complex 

interrelationships. Care should be taken to ensure that the techniques are appropriate for the 

data and the questions under inquiry;

11. All work should be conducted and released in a timely manner;

12. Reports using these data should identify the source(s) of the information, including a citation. 

Reports should also include:

a) The reason the information is provided, its potential uses, and cautions as to 

inappropriate extractions or conclusions.

b) Descriptions of any statistical techniques or mathematical operations applied to the 

data.

c) The identification of other possible sources of potentially corroborating or conflicting 

information; and

13. Prior to dissemination, all reports, data, and documentation should undergo editorial and 

technical review to ensure accuracy and clarity.

Statistical Data

Department of Education reports and data collections that draw upon sample survey data should 

be clearly written, and should follow these Guidelines:

1. In formulating a data collection plan, the goals of the study should be clearly described;
10

2. The subjects to be studied and the data to be collected should be clearly defined, using

broadly understood concepts and definitions that are consistent with Department data 

definition handbooks;

3. The research study approach or data collection techniques should be well thought out and 

designed to use state-of-the-art methodologies in the data collection and should also be 

clearly described in the study documentation;

4. In designing the work, every effort should be made to minimize the amount of time required 

for study participants;

5. The source of data should be reliable. The sample should be drawn from a complete list of 

items to be tested or evaluated, and the appropriate respondents should be identified, 

correctly sampled, and queried with survey instruments that have been properly developed 

and tested;

6. Response rates should be monitored during data collection. When necessary, appropriate 

steps should be taken to ensure that the respondents are a representative sample;

7. Care should be taken to ensure the confidentiality of personally identifiable data, as required 

by law, during research/data collection, processing, and analysis of the resulting data;

8. Upon completion of the work, the data should be processed in a manner sufficient to ensure 

that the data are cleaned and edited to help ensure that the data are accurate and reliable;

9. The findings and data collection should be properly documented and stored, and the 

documentation should include an evaluation of the quality of the data with a description of 

any limitations of the data. In particular, any known limitations of the information should be 

documented (e.g., missing values, amount of nonresponse);

10. Data should be capable of being reproduced or replicated based on information included in 

the documentation, such as: 

a) The source(s) of the information;

b) The date the information was current;

c) Any known limitations on the information; 

d) The reason that the information is provided;

e) Descriptions of any statistical techniques or mathematical operations applied to 

source data; and

f) Identification of other sources of potentially corroborating or conflicting information.

11. If secondary analysis of data is employed, the source should be acknowledged, the reliability 

of the data should be confirmed and documented, and any shortcomings or explicit errors 

should be acknowledged (e.g., the representativeness of the data, measurement error, data 

preparation error, processing error, sampling errors, and nonresponse errors); 

12. The analysis should be selected and implemented to ensure that the data are correctly 

analyzed using modern statistical techniques suitable for hypothesis testing. Techniques may 

vary from simple tabulations and descriptive analysis to multivariate analysis of complex 

interrelationships. Care should be taken to ensure that the techniques are appropriate for the 

data and the questions under inquiry; 
11

13. Reports should include the reason the information is provided, its potential uses, and cautions 

as to inappropriate extractions or conclusions, and the identification of other sources of 

potentially corroborating or conflicting information;

14. Descriptions of the data and all analytical work should be reported in sufficient detail to 

ensure that the findings could be reproduced using the same data and methods of analysis; 

this includes the preservation of the data set used to produce the work; 

15. Prior to dissemination all reports, data, and documentation should undergo editorial and 

technical review to ensure accuracy and clarity. Qualified technical staff and peers both 

inside and outside the Department should do the technical review;

16. All work should be conducted and released in a timely manner; and

17. There should be established procedures to correct any identified errors. These procedures 

may include the publication of errata sheets, revised publications, or Web postings. 

Integrity

Integrity refers to the security or protection of information from unauthorized access or revision. 

Integrity ensures that the information is not compromised through corruption or falsification.

The Department strives to protect the information it collects, uses, and disseminates to the public 

from unauthorized disclosure, alteration, loss, or destruction. Statutory and administrative 

guidelines to protect the integrity of Department information include the following:

• Privacy Act;

• Freedom of Information Act;

• OMB Circulars A-123, A-127, and A-130;

• Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects;

• Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act;

• Computer Security Act of 1987;

• Government Information Security Reform Act; and

• National Education Statistics Act, as amended by the USA Patriot Act.

Under the Privacy Act, the Department safeguards personally identifiable information that it 

gathers and maintains about individuals in a system of records. The Department is also highly 

protective of administrative records and sample survey data that include personally identifiable 

information, especially survey data that are collected under pledges of confidentiality.

Under the Computer Security Act of 1987, the Department of Education has identified all federal 

computer systems that contain sensitive information and has implemented security plans to 

protect these systems, so as to protect sensitive information against loss, misuse, disclosure or 

modification. In this context, sensitive information includes data covered under the Privacy Act 

and information that could affect the conduct of federal programs.

Influential Information

Government information that is particularly influential needs to meet higher quality standards, 

and in particular must be reproducible. Per the OMB guidelines, information is designated as 

influential if the Department determines that the information is reasonably likely to have a clear 
12

and substantial impact on public policies or private sector decisions if disseminated. Scientific, 

financial, and statistical information all may be considered influential. Individual programs 

within the Department of Education may designate certain classes of scientific, financial, and 

statistical information as influential. 

For example, institutional data on the total number of student borrowers who enter repayment on 

Stafford loans during a specific fiscal year, and related data on the subset of students who default 

before the end of the next fiscal year are used in the calculation of cohort loan default rates of 

Stafford loan borrowers at each postsecondary institution. These default rates are compared to 

established thresholds for high and low default rates, resulting in sanctions for institutions with 

high default rates and reduced administrative burden for institutions with low default rates. 

Given this use, these data and the calculations used in computing the rates and in setting the 

thresholds are influential. Similarly, the data and formulas used in determining program 

allocation of funds in areas such as special education, adult education, and Title I are influential.

As specified in the OMB guidelines, influential information must be accompanied by supporting 

documentation that allows an external user to understand clearly the information and be able to 

reproduce it, or understand the steps involved in producing it. With respect to original and 

supporting data related thereto, the Department will assure reproducibility for such data 

according to commonly accepted scientific, financial, or statistical standards for that type of data, 

taking into account any ethical and confidentiality constraints. In the case of influential analytic 

results, the mathematical and statistical processes used to produce the report must be described in 

sufficient detail to allow an independent analyst to substantially reproduce the findings using the 

original data and identical methods. In situations where the public cannot access the data and 

methods due to other compelling interests such as privacy, intellectual property or other 

confidentiality protections, the Department will apply especially rigorous robustness checks to 

analytic results and document what checks were undertaken. 

Information Correction Requests and Appeals 

Effective October 1, 2002, the Department of Education will allow any affected person to request 

the correction of information the Department disseminates that does not comply with applicable 

OMB and Department of Education information quality guidelines. An affected person is an 

individual or an entity that may use, benefit or be harmed by the disseminated information at 

issue.

Most Department information products include the names of knowledgeable staff that can assist 

users in understanding the information presented, and in determining whether there is an error 

that warrants action using the correction process described in this section. Users of the 

Department’s information should consult with the contact person listed in the product before 

filing a formal request for correction.

Information Correction Requests

In the Department of Education’s correction request process, the burden of proof rests with the 

requester. An affected person who believes that information the Department disseminates does 

not adhere to the information quality guidelines of OMB or the Department, or an office of the 

Department that has issued program-specific guidelines, and who would like to request 

correction of specific information, needs to provide the following information:
13

• Identification of the requester (i.e., name, mailing address, telephone number, and 

organizational affiliation, if any); 

• A detailed description of the information that the requester believes does not comply 

with the Department’s or OMB’s guidelines, including the exact name of the data 

collection or report, the disseminating office and author, if known, and a description 

of the specific item in question;

• Potential impacts on the requester from the information identified for correction (i.e., 

describe the requestor’s interest in the information and how the requestor is affected 

by the information in question); and

• An explanation of the reason(s) that the information should be corrected (i.e., 

describe clearly and specifically the elements of the information quality guidelines 

that were not followed).

This information should be provided to the Branch Chief for the Information Management 

Branch, Office of the Chief Information Officer at the following address:

Branch Chief, Information Management Branch

Office of the Chief Information Officer

U.S. Department of Education

550 12th Street, SW

PCP Room 9175

Washington, DC 20202

ATTN: Information Quality Request

Alternatively, requesters may submit e-mail requests to the following address: 

“ofoinformationquality@ed.gov.” Requesters should indicate that they are submitting an 

Information Quality Request in the subject line of the e-mail.

Review

The Branch Chief for the Information Management Branch will review the request and 

determine whether it contains all the information required for a complaint. If the request is 

unclear or incomplete, the Department will seek clarification from the requester. 

If the request is clear and complete, the Branch Chief will forward it to the appropriate program 

office(s) for a response to the requester. The responsible office(s) will determine whether a 

correction is warranted, and if so, what corrective action it will take. Any corrective action will 

be determined based on the nature and timeliness of the information involved, as well as the 

significance of the error on the use of the information, the magnitude of the error, and the cost of 

undertaking a correction. 

Comments about information on which the Department has sought public comment, such as 

rulemaking or studies cited in a rulemaking, will be responded to through the public comment 

process, or through an individual response if there was no published process for responding to all 

comments. The Department may choose to provide an earlier response, if doing so is 

appropriate, and will not delay issuance of the final action in the matter.
14

The Department is not required to change the content or status of information simply based on 

the receipt of a request for correction. The Department may reject a request that appears to be 

made in bad faith or without justification, and is only required to undertake the degree of 

correction that is appropriate for the nature and timeliness of the information involved. In 

addition, the Department need not respond substantively to requests that concern information not 

covered by the information quality guidelines. 

Response

The Department will respond to all requests for correction within 120 calendar days of the

Branch Chief’s receipt of the request, including requests that the Department elects not to 

process further. For requests that merit review –

• If the request is clear and complete, the Department’s response will explain the 

findings of the review, or will inform the requester if more time is needed to complete 

the review, the reason(s) for the additional time, and an estimate of the time it will 

take to respond. The appropriate program office will be responsible for determining 

what action is necessary and, if an error was made, it will determine the appropriate 

level of correction.

• If the request is incomplete or unclear, the Branch Chief will seek clarification from 

the requester. In the case of an unclear or incomplete request, the requester may 

submit additional clarifying information if he or she so chooses. However, the

deadline for the Department’s review and response will be based upon the date the 

clarifying information is received.

Once a decision is made, the response will explain to the requester that he or she has a right to 

appeal the decision. Copies of all Department correspondence related to Information Quality 

Requests will be maintained by the Branch Chief.

Appeals

If a requester is not satisfied with the Department’s decision on the request (including the 

corrective action, if any), he or she may appeal to the Department’s Chief Information Officer

within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of the Department’s decision. This administrative 

appeal must include a copy of the initial request, a copy of the Department’s decision, and a 

letter explaining why he or she believes the Department’s decision was inadequate, incomplete, 

or in error.

This appeal information should be provided to the Department’s Chief Information Officer at the 

following address:

Chief Information Officer

U.S. Department of Education

550 12th Street, SW
15

PCP, Room 9112

Washington, DC 20202

ATTN: Information Quality Appeal

Alternatively, requesters may submit an appeal by e-mail to the following address: 

“OFOInformationQualityAppeal@ed.gov.” 

Requesters should indicate that they are submitting an Information Quality Appeal in the subject 

line of the e-mail. Such e-mail requests must include all of the information specified for an 

appeal submitted by regular mail.

The Department will ensure that all appeals are subjected to an impartial review that is 

conducted by parties other than those who prepared the Department’s decision. The Department 

will respond to all appeals within 120 calendar days of the Chief Information Officer’s receipt of 

the appeal, or will inform the requester if more time is needed to complete the review of the 

appeal, and the reason(s) for the additional time.