Discussion:

Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.04, when a data subject requests access to government data about him/herself, the entity must respond within ten working days. Pursuant to section 13.02, subdivision 8, a parent is entitled, with limited exceptions which apparently do not apply here, to gain access to data about his/her minor child.

In her comments to the Commissioner, Ms. Kepple wrote:

...Mr. Mackin responded to [X's] March 7, 2003 data request within three days after he received the request. Between the time the request was actually first received by Superintendent Mark Wolak and the time Mr. Mackin was able to respond to the request, there was a 9-day period from March 15-23, 2003 while the school district's spring break occurred. If you exclude the period of time during which spring break occurred, when employees were not reporting to work, 10-11 days elapsed from the date of the request to the date of Mr. Mackin's response. This is certainly a reasonable and timely response under the circumstances.

...As is clear from Mr. Mackin's March 27, 2003 letter, there are no ...copies of all documentation that the district has complied with its own policies and procedures in this situation. The only data requested which actually exists is the documentation relating to [Y's] recorder of history profile, and that data has already been provided to the parent....As the Commissioner is aware, the school district is not obligated to create data to satisfy a data request....

In summary, ISD #832 responded to the parent's data request in a timely manner, given the circumstances of spring break occurring shortly after the data request was received by the school district, and all data requested, which actually exists, was provided to the parent with the district's March 27, 2003 response.

As stated above, section 13.04 requires that government entities respond to requests from data subjects within ten days of the date of the request, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. Here, Ms. Kepple argues that because the District's spring break occurred shortly after X made his/her request, the District had extra time within which to respond. The Commissioner respectfully disagrees with Ms. Kepple. Section 13.04 is clear in its statement of the ten day response time and no exceptions are noted. Thus, the District did not respond in a timely manner to X's data request. The Commissioner notes that if government entities shut down at times other than Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays, they need to have a process in place such that data requests can be received and processed as required by statute.

Regarding the completeness of the District's response, Ms. Kepple stated that the District provided all data responsive to X's request and informed X that no other data exist. X asked for all documentation related to [Y's] recorder of history profile and copies of all documentation that the district has complied with its own policies and procedures in this situation. In reviewing Mr. Mackin's March 27, 2003, response, it appears he provided to X a copy of Y's submission of work to fulfill the Recorders of History Graduation Standard and the general assignment. Mr. Mackin also stated:

We do not have anything in our district policies or building procedures that would specifically address the communication responsibilities of the teacher regarding an incomplete graduation standard. Our report card includes any graduation standards earned that term and we annually give our [students] a mid-year update of their graduation standards transcript. That would be what you received in February....

I have included a copy of the expectations we give to teachers regarding the communication of incomplete grades or failure grades. While it does not explicitly state graduation standards, I would expect teachers to communicate those in similar fashion.

When a government entity responds to a data request, it should make every effort to address the specifics of the request as clearly as possible. In other words, if an individual has requested two different types of data, the entity should list each item and discuss (1) that it is providing the data, (2) the statutory basis on which it is denying access to the data, or (3) that the data do not exist. Obviously, if an entity does not understand an individual's request, the entity needs to seek clarification prior to expiration of the statutory response time.

Here, it is the Commissioner's opinion that in his March 27, 2003, letter to X, Mr. Mackin could have been more clear in discussing the District's response to X's data request. On March 7, 2003, X requested access to data. Regarding X's request for all documentation related to [Y's] recorder of history profile, Mr. Mackin provided some related data but did not inform X that no other data exist. Regarding X's request for copies of all documentation that the district has complied with its own policies and procedures in this situation, Mr. Mackin responded, We do not have anything in our district policies or building procedures that would specifically address the communication responsibilities of the teacher regarding an incomplete graduation standard. He also provided to X a copy of the expectations we give to teachers regarding the communication of incomplete grades or failure grades. It does not appear to the Commissioner that Mr. Mackin specifically addressed whether the District does or does not have the data X requested.

Opinion:

Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue that X raised is as follows:

Signed:

Brian J. Lamb
Commissioner

Dated: August 1, 2003