California collects expansive sets of data about students in its public K-12 and higher education systems--data that, collectively, have great potential to meet the information needs of state policymakers, local educators, and other stakeholders. But the data are collected and maintained in systems that are not connected, were designed for different purposes, are subject to different regulations, and often use different data definitions. As a result of these disconnects, important information about student progress is often impossible to access, share, and use--whether at the state, regional, or local level. While there may be a few benefits to the current structure, they are outweighed by major disadvantages, including inefficient use of taxpayer dollars. A significant weakness is that California's current approach leaves the state and its institutions unable to answer important questions about student progress and outcomes, such as: (1) With California's public universities straining to meet student demand for enrollment, how many students meet current eligibility requirements, but do not apply? What are their educational outcomes?; (2) How many students attend multiple colleges or universities in various regions of the state during their college careers? How does this affect their educational trajectories and chances of college completion?; and (3) California is investing millions of dollars in strengthening educational pathways from high school into college. Which programs are most effective, and for which students? [For Part I of this series, see ED574475; for Part III, see ED584699; and for Part IV, see ED584698.]