Data Trusts and Shared Accountability Agreements

Youth outcomes rarely depend on a single agency. A young person in the juvenile system may also be enrolled in special education, receiving behavioral health treatment, or aging out of foster care. Historically, these agencies worked in isolation—each guarding its data under separate privacy rules. Data trusts are the solution emerging across the Mid-South: formal agreements that let agencies share limited, purpose-driven data under shared governance.

Key Findings

Arkansas and Tennessee lead the region in building data trusts linking justice, education, and child welfare. Arkansas’s pilot, launched in 2024, allows encrypted record exchange between the Administrative Office of the Courts, Department of Human Services, and Department of Education. Each partner contributes specified fields—attendance, case status, and service engagement—into a shared analytical platform overseen by a multi-agency board.

Tennessee’s “Integrated Child Wellbeing Data Trust” goes further. It operates under a legal memorandum approved by the Attorney General, defining each agency’s data rights and duties. The trust produces quarterly cross-system reports tracking how many youth touch multiple systems and what outcomes follow. According to the state’s 2025 evaluation, these data inform targeted prevention strategies and reduce redundant services by 18%.

State Comparisons

Missouri and Oklahoma are developing similar frameworks, supported by the National Governors Association’s State Data Collaborative. Mississippi and Louisiana are still in the exploratory phase, focusing first on standardized definitions for “cross-system youth.” Texas, with its county-based structure, has decentralized data trusts forming at regional levels—most notably in Harris County, where education and juvenile probation now share real time dashboards under court order.

The unifying feature of these trusts is consent. Youth and families are notified whenever their records are shared between systems, and opt-out provisions are clearly documented. This transparency helps turn data sharing from a surveillance concern into a trust-building tool.

What Works

Effective data trusts depend on three foundations: governance, legal clarity, and reciprocity. Arkansas’s model created a “Data Stewardship Board” with equal voting rights across education, justice, and human services. Tennessee uses a shared funding pool to sustain the infrastructure, ensuring no single agency controls access. Missouri has integrated community representatives—including parents of system-involved youth—on its advisory board, providing oversight beyond government walls.

Each of these frameworks includes audit trails for every data query, strict retention limits, and clearly defined outcome metrics. The emphasis has shifted from “who owns the data” to “what outcomes are we jointly responsible for improving?”

Future Outlook

By 2026, data trusts are expected to be the regional standard for child-serving coordination. The federal Office of Juvenile Justice is drafting model agreements to streamline compliance with FERPA, HIPAA, and Title IV-E. Arkansas and Tennessee are helping pilot these templates. Future versions will incorporate AI-driven analytics for early-warning systems—identifying youth at risk of crossover into multiple systems before crises occur.

Shared accountability through data is transforming how agencies define success. When justice, education, and human services share one story, policy becomes coherent—and the lives behind the numbers start to improve.

Sources

Arkansas Administrative Office of the Courts, Data Trust Pilot Charter, 2024.
Tennessee Department of Human Services, Integrated Child Wellbeing Data Trust Evaluation, 2025.
National Governors Association, State Data Collaborative Progress Report, 2025.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Data Governance Guidance, 2024.