CATADA:Training and Technical Assistance Materials
  • APR Data Fidelity Review
    • Demonstration
    • Short-term Device Loan
    • Reuse
    • State Financing Activities
    • Training (including ICT Accessibility Training)
    • Technical Assistance
    • Coordination/Collaboration & State Improvement Outcomes
    • Leveraged Funding
    • Performance Measures
    • Data Management System
    • Historical Data Review
  • Short-term versus Open-ended Loans
  • Annual Performance Report Data Structure
  • Assistive Technology “Maker” Activities
  • Assistive Technology Advisory Council
  • Annual AT Data & Fiscal Calendar
  • State Plan Expenditure Tracking & Reporting Reporting
    • AT Act Requirements for Expenditure Tracking
    • Categorizing Expenditures
    • State Plan Expenditure Reporting
    • Budgeting Cycle
  • Flexibility, Comparability & Data Reporting
  • Contract Compensation Options & Data Reporting
    • Period-Based Compensation
    • Unit-Based Compensation
    • Mixed Compensation
  • Managing & Leveraging Resources
    • Managing AT Act Resources
    • Leveraging and Reporting Additional Resources
  • Lead Agency & Implementing Entity
  • Leveraged Funding Understanding Grant Types
  • When is “demonstrating devices” a device demonstration?
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  1. APR Data Fidelity Review

Historical Data Review

PreviousData Management SystemNextShort-term versus Open-ended Loans

Last updated 2 years ago

Before submitting current-year APR data, a comparison should be done with at least the prior year’s data and optimally with multi-year historical data to understand how key elements are increasing, decreasing, or not changing. Each screen of the APR in NATADS provides prior-year total data for that activity to make comparison easy. It is critically important for grantees to be able to explain data volume (output level) trajectory changes. Grantees can use the to create custom tables with historical data to use in this review, and NATADS may be updated to pull a limited number of key data elements from the prior-year APR to provide a benchmark in the current APR to support this kind of fidelity and accuracy review.

Red Flag: No awareness of or ability to explain significant data change.

Grantees should be knowledgeable of their historical data and trajectory patterns over time, especially for key output data elements. Any significant changes should be understood and explained as actual variances due to some known cause (e.g., increases created by new funding and expanded program or decreases caused by program closure) or changes that are artifacts of data system integrity issues or data collection/reporting fidelity issues. If changes are caused by the latter, there should be a clear plan developed to remediate those issues to ensure cleaner and more stable data for the future.

Last updated January 2023

CATADA data portal
catada logo