 without understanding context – what are normal seasonal variations, what local context has impacted changes etc. This lessens the value of shared data. A collaborative approach to developing data seems to work best • Local authorities, and other stakeholders, need to be engaged when new data requests are being developed. • The RIIA was mentioned as a model for this – DfE, ADCS, Regional groups and supporting agencies like D2I all working together to find a solution. • Gap for more D2I-like work. • All data asked for needs to have a purpose – LAs mention providing data but not receiving worthwhile information back. • Question: What data products are useful for LAs etc? Reliance on informal networks to make things work • Multiple organisations requesting data (DfE, Ofsted, Children’s Commissioner, regional groups etc.) • Multiple channels that changes could be communicated through. • Challenging for LA analysts to monitor all changes. • Informal networks are filling this gap (Google groups forum, D2I newsletter) as well as formal networks (respondents mentioned that regional groups were a good source of information). • At local level some things work because of informal relationships – an example might be data team and IT working together to implement new software (Python IDEs etc.), or partnership working relying on having the correct contact to ask for data. Local authorities are variable • Significant differences in resourcing of data teams. • Some LAs have large well-resourced teams, others have 1 or 2 people covering everything. • Some sit corporately, some within Children’s Services. • Where data teams are already very stretched, there is apprehension about providing new measures. • LAs want requests for new data items to be sufficiently supported with appropriate