Archived Information

The 21st century is now a service economy dependent on\
technology, innovation, information and technical skills.\
We need what are called \"knowledge workers.\" And\
knowledge workers must be well educated.

---Secretary Rod Paige

As part of the mission to transform education in this nation, the
Department of Education provides over \$20 billion in annual grants for
postsecondary and adult education. Our purpose is to help ensure that
all Americans pursuing baccalaureate or higher degrees, adult literacy,
or advanced vocational programs can readily access high-quality
instruction. The Department also manages a student loan portfolio of
nearly a third of a trillion dollars to provide financial assistance to
millions of students. Our intent is that no individual be denied the
opportunity to reach his or her intellectual potential because of
socioeconomic challenges or physical disabilities. The following
sections describe the Department's efforts toward helping Americans
access quality postsecondary and adult education.

Department Expenditures

A Postsecondary Degree Opens Doors

According to 2003 estimates from the Bureau of the Census, the median
annual income of Americans aged\
25 or older with a bachelor's degree is more than 60 percent higher than
that of their peers who pursued no further education after receiving a
high school diploma. For Americans seeking to provide greater
opportunities for themselves and their families, the message is clear:
successfully completing a postsecondary education program is essential.

During fiscal year (FY) 2004, the Department funded several programs to
prepare students from low-income families for postsecondary education.
The most widespread efforts involve the TRIO grant programs, instituted
nearly 40 years ago. Through various component programs that stress
rigorous academic preparation for college, plus counseling related to
academic and financial assistance options, TRIO primarily targets
secondary school students from low-income families with no history of
attending college (two-thirds of program participants must fulfill both
criteria) and helps them prepare for postsecondary education.

Changes in TRIO's Upward Bound Program have helped 3,500 additional
students to receive services in 2004 without increasing program funding.
A recent study revealed a sizable increase in attendance and course
completion at four-year colleges among the portion of Upward Bound
participants who did not expect to continue education beyond high school
when they entered the program.[^1] However, the same study found no
overall impact on the college-going rate of Upward Bound participants
compared with nonparticipants of similar demographic profiles, which
suggests that many Upward Bound participants were likely to attend
college anyway. In response to this study and a Program Assessment
Rating Tool evaluation, grantees are now targeting more program dollars
to students unlikely to attend college without intervention.

The first government-sponsored national evaluation of the TRIO Talent
Search Program in more than 20 years examined the high school graduation
and college enrollment outcomes reported by Talent Search projects.[^2]
Recently released data from the evaluation indicated that 71 percent of
graduating high school seniors in Talent Search in school year
(SY) 1998--99 reported enrolling in a postsecondary institution.
Individual projects demonstrated varying degrees of success in meeting
their goals. For example, in SY 1998--99, 87 percent of projects met
their goal for secondary school graduation, while 53 percent met their
goal for postsecondary admissions. This evaluation builds upon
previously limited understanding of Talent Search's impact and
effectiveness. Newly created program performance measures will track
college enrollment rates of all program participants.

Partly in response to these findings, TRIO is actively employing the
Educational Credit Management Corporation Foundation's *Realizing the
College Dream* curriculum guide to help increase postsecondary access
and completion among low-income and first-generation college students.
About 800 TRIO grantees are using this curriculum in Upward Bound and
Talent Search programs.

The Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness of Undergraduate Programs
(GEAR UP) initiative targets entire classes of students in schools
serving lower socioeconomic populations. Starting with the seventh
grade, GEAR UP offers hundreds of students at each participating school
a focused six-year approach to postsecondary preparation. GEAR UP
performance indicator data reflect the program's progress in preparing
more low-income students to enter and complete postsecondary education.
During SY 2002--03, the proportion of participating seventh graders who
passed pre-algebra increased from 18 to 22 percent, and 98 percent of
participants were promoted to the eighth grade. Students' and parents'
knowledge of postsecondary education options, preparation, and
financing, key components of GEAR UP, also increased beyond established
targets. GEAR UP is showing promise that the first set of program
graduates in 2005 will study at the postsecondary level in higher
numbers than nonparticipating peers of similar socioeconomic background.

The ability of students with disabilities to access postsecondary
education must also be improved. A study conducted by the Department's
Office of Special Education Programs showed that among a nationally
representative sample of 15- to 17-year-olds receiving special education
services in 2001, approximately one-third of youth with disabilities
have attended postsecondary institutions since high school, a lower rate
than that of their peers. Furthermore, youth with disabilities in
postsecondary settings are more likely to be enrolled in two-year
community colleges than in baccalaureate institutions. We must build on
this research to help facilitate their access into postsecondary
education in greater numbers.

**Performance Goals.** Lack of timely enrollment data makes performance
measurement difficult. The most recent data, which are for 2001, showed
that the gaps between white and African American students and between
white and Hispanic students in immediate enrollment of high school
graduates into postsecondary institutions had declined from that of the
previous year. However, the rate of immediate enrollment had fallen from
the previous year across all subgroups, and the gap between high-income
and low-income students had widened sharply. Current Population Survey
data due in late November are expected to update information for the
2001--02 academic year.

More encouraging are the graduation rates from four-year institutions,
which increased overall and for major race and ethnicity subgroups from
2000 to 2003. Gaps in graduation rates between whites and African
Americans and between whites and Hispanics both decreased.

For two-year degree-granting institutions over the same three-year
period, although graduation rates decreased overall, gaps between whites
and African Americans and between whites and Hispanics both decreased
significantly.

The Department's progress on our performance goals for this objective is
summarized in the table below. See p. 27 for methodology and appendix A,
pp. 204--05, for detailed data.

+----------------------------------------+--------------+-------------+
| College Access and Completion\         |              |             |
| (Objective 5.1)                        |              |             |
+----------------------------------------+--------------+-------------+
| Performance Goals                      | Status       | Year        |
+----------------------------------------+--------------+-------------+
| High school graduates ages 16 to 24    | Pending      | FY 2002     |
| years enrolled in college the October  |              | through     |
| following graduation                   |              | FY 2004     |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Overall                            |              |             |
+----------------------------------------+--------------+-------------+
| High school graduates ages 16 to 24    | Pending      | FY 2002     |
| years enrolled in college the October  |              | through     |
| following graduation                   |              | FY 2004     |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   White                              |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Black                              |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   White-Black Gap                    |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Hispanic                           |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   White-Hispanic Gap                 |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Low Income                         |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   High Income                        |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Income Gap                         |              |             |
+----------------------------------------+--------------+-------------+
| Graduation from four-year institutions | Exceeded     | FY 2003     |
| within six years                       |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Overall                            |              |             |
+----------------------------------------+--------------+-------------+
| Graduation from four-year institutions | Met          | FY 2003     |
| within six years                       |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   White                              |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Black                              |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   White-Black Gap                    |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Hispanic                           |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   White-Hispanic Gap                 |              |             |
+----------------------------------------+--------------+-------------+
| Program completion from two-year       | Made         | FY 2003     |
| institutions within three years        | progress     |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Overall                            |              |             |
+----------------------------------------+--------------+-------------+
| Program completion from two-year       | Met          | FY 2003     |
| institutions within three years        |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   White                              |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Black                              |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   White-Black Gap                    |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   Hispanic                           |              |             |
|                                        |              |             |
| -   White-Hispanic Gap                 |              |             |
+----------------------------------------+--------------+-------------+

Institutional Accountability Leads to Quality Higher Education

America's institutions of higher education have long been considered to
be among the world's best. The high quality of American postsecondary
education is essential to our nation maintaining a leadership role in
research and development, as well as in economic competitiveness.
Raising the standard of excellence in education requires improving
performance at the postsecondary level in concert with improvement at
the elementary and secondary levels.

One major facet of ensuring institutional quality involves the
activities of "diploma mills" that issue diplomas that are not supported
by appropriate academic rigor to fee-paying customers, as noted by a
recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report.[^3] To ensure that
the public and employers are not misled by credentials that are
purchased rather than earned through rigorous academic activity, the
Department has created a master list of accredited postsecondary
institutions. This list will be made available to assist individuals who
verify credentials as part of the hiring process.

We ensure institutional quality in other matters as well. The
Accreditation and State Liaison staff oversaw the practices of 73
accrediting agencies in all facets of postsecondary education, ensuring
quality of four-year, two-year, and proprietary institutions throughout
the country.

In addition, as mentioned in the Goal 2 discussion on teacher quality,
Department accountability experts oversaw higher education institutions
to maintain rigor in teacher preparation programs.

The Department's Office of Postsecondary Education has developed the
e-Monitoring System to receive timely and accurate information about
grantee performance and the financial status of grant awards. This
system enables efficient tracking of grantee progress and improved
documentation of project monitoring activities, and the system flexibly
accommodates the unique monitoring requirements of any grant program.
See appendix B for more information.

**Performance Goal.** We did not receive satisfactory accountability
reports on the quality of teacher preparation programs from a sufficient
number of states and territories to meet our target for FY 2003. Data
for FY 2004 are pending.

The Department's progress on our performance goals for this objective is
summarized in the table below. See p. 27 for methodology and appendix A,
p. 206, for detailed data.

  -------------------------------------------- -------------- ------------
  Accountability of Postsecondary Institutions                
  (Objective 5.2)                                             

  Performance Goal                             Status         Year

  HEA Title II reports submitted by states and Did not meet   FY 2003
  territories with all data, using required                   
  definitions                                                 
  -------------------------------------------- -------------- ------------

HEA = Higher Education Act; Title II addresses teacher preparation
programs.

Financial Aid Enables College Access and Completion

College attendance and completion depends on rigorous preparation, but
it also requires money. The persistent 30 percent gap between the
proportion of low-income and high-income students matriculating into
postsecondary education reflects this reality.

The Department has taken great strides to reduce the cost barriers to
postsecondary instruction through our Pell Grant Program, Federal Direct
Student Loan Program, and Federal Family Education Loan Program. Cohort
default rates are at a historic low of 5.2 percent, and interest rates
for borrowers dropped to all-time lows in FY 2004.

The effectiveness of these programs in providing aid to economically
needy students is evidenced by recent data showing that the net price of
attending four-year institutions for dependent students in the lowest
quartile of family income, after accounting for both grants and loans
received, fell significantly between 1990 and 2000.[^4] The annual
federal student financial assistance distributed via grants, loans, and
work-study employment has increased from \$47 billion to \$69 billion in
just three years, with the total number of recipients increasing by
nearly 20 percent to 9.6 million in the same time span. One in six
working adults is currently repaying student loans, and 50 million
Americans applied for student financial assistance at least once in the
last eight years. The challenge is to persuade more individuals to grasp
the opportunity provided.

Two major trends are occurring with regard to student financial
assistance. The first is the dramatic increase in the number of
electronic Web submissions of the Free Application for Federal Student
Aid, which increased from 59 percent of total applications for the
2003--04 academic year to 75 percent for the 2004--05 academic year.
Electronic applications are usually processed by the Department in less
than 24 hours, enabling millions of prospective postsecondary students
and the schools and colleges they plan to attend to receive eligibility
information more rapidly and efficiently.

The second major trend is the rush to consolidate existing loans among
borrowers in repayment status. As with the historic lows in home
mortgage rates in FY 2004, similar trends in student loan rates resulted
in a tremendous increase in borrowers' refinancing multiple loans by
consolidating them into a single loan, potentially leading to
significant reductions in student borrowing costs. Concurrent with this
rise in loan consolidations is the growing number of financial entities
specializing in this field.

During FY 2004, the Government Accountability Office has looked at
various aspects of the Department's management of loan programs. GAO
found that lower interest rates and higher loan volume have increased
federal consolidation loan costs.[^5] GAO determined that consolidation
loans constituted 48 percent of federal student loan dollars originated
in FY 2003, and total consolidation volume rose sevenfold to \$41
billion between 1998 and 2003. The Department is assessing the
comparative advantages of consolidation loans for both borrowers and the
government based on this and other GAO studies.[^6]

In examining the extent to which higher education institutions
participated in the Federal Direct Student Loan Program, GAO found that
the volume of federal student loans provided through the program had
decreased from 34 to 28 percent in the three years leading to 2002.[^7]
More schools were leaving the program than entering it. Schools leaving
the program mentioned difficulties fulfilling program requirements and
higher loan origination fees than those required by Federal Family
Education Loan Program lenders.

In another report, GAO found that the Department substantially addressed
GAO's 2001 recommendations related to cash flow data, loan
consolidations, and interest rate re-estimates.[^8] However, the report
recommended that the Department identify assumptions in the cash flow
model and develop a method to assess loan performance estimates
thoroughly over time. Department officials have begun implementing these
recommendations. As FY 2004 ends, the Department's student financial
assistance programs are instituting an activity-based costing system to
further reduce the costs of program administration.

Not all programs are achieving their full potential in assisting
America's students. A recent analysis determined that the Perkins Loan
Program has proven duplicative of other broader financial aid efforts
and does not target monies effectively to the neediest students. More
optimistically, a similar analysis cited independent corroborating
evidence that the effectiveness of federal support for college
work-study programs is promising, but program measures for the Federal
Work-Study Program needed to be improved to demonstrate results.

However, the overall picture is good. Combined with positive trends in
reducing borrower costs and increasing numbers of graduates across
various racial and ethnic categories, the federal student financial
assistance programs are well poised to deliver increasingly effective
assistance to educational aspirants.

**Performance Goals.** America's postsecondary institutions increased
tuition by an average of nearly seven percent in FY 2003, well above the
existing inflation rate and Department targets. Some of this increase
may be attributed to the recent economic recession that resulted in
reduced support of public postsecondary education institutions in many
states.

The Department plans to discontinue the current measurement of borrower
indebtedness because commercial bankers are using an alternative method
to ascertain acceptable levels of debt.

The Department's progress on our performance goals for this objective is
summarized in the table below. See p. 27 for methodology and appendix A,
pp. 206--07, for detailed data.

  --------------------------------------------- ------------- ------------
  Funding Postsecondary Education\                            
  (Objective 5.3)                                             

  Performance Goals                             Status        Year

  Average national increases in college tuition Did not meet  FY 2003

  Borrower indebtedness for federal student     Not collected FY 2004
  loans                                                       
  --------------------------------------------- ------------- ------------

Minority-Serving Institutions Use Federal Resources to Help Fulfill
Academic Promise

Institutions of higher education that have historically served African
Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans often encounter the
challenges of inadequate infrastructure in providing a quality education
to their students. President Bush has worked with these institutions to
ensure that their needs are addressed by means of three White House
initiatives housed at the Department of Education.

The White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and
Universities has provided leadership on meeting the needs of its member
institutions, and additional financial support is assisting their
efforts. Federal aid to help strengthen the quality of their academic
programs and administration is on pace to meet President Bush's goal of
30 percent additional annual funding for these institutions by 2005.

A recent study of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
indicated that a higher proportion of first-time undergraduates receive
financial aid at HBCUs than at postsecondary institutions taken as a
whole.[^9] These institutions thus demonstrate their commitment to
assisting financially needy students, and therefore the Department's
efforts to strengthen HBCUs help increase access to postsecondary
education.

The White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanic
Americans moved to implement the six recommendations of the 2003
President's Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic
Americans to close the achievement gap between Latino students and their
peers:

-   Setting new and high expectations for Hispanic American children.

-   Supporting No Child Left Behind.

-   Reinforcing and expanding a high-quality teaching profession.

-   Developing a federal research agenda to identify the needs of
    Hispanic American students.

-   Creating pathways to college graduation.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Creating increased federal accountability and coordination.

A partnership of corporations and Hispanic-serving organizations began
establishing strategies for meeting these goals. The partners worked
with six pilot cities to reinforce expectations for educational
excellence, academic attainment, parental involvement and awareness,
academic preparation, mentorship, engagement of the business community,
accountability, and college enrollment. Over the past year, more than
3,500 students, parents, educators, education administrators, and
community and business leaders attended the six pilot-city events,
during which more than 70,000 bilingual publications from the Department
and the White House Initiative were distributed.

The White House Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities and the
Department's Office of Indian Education have channeled federal resources
to provide support for tribal colleges. Approximately \$50.3 million in
federal funds were provided in FY 2003, a six percent increase over the
previous year, mostly to enhance training and technical assistance and
to supplement administrative infrastructure for the improvement of
student services at 34 tribal postsecondary institutions.

In all of these areas, the Department's Institutional Development
Programs (Titles III and V of the Higher Education Act) provided
resources to assist with program improvement efforts. A shining example
is Bronx Community College, a Hispanic-Serving Institution in New York
City. With 53 percent first-generation college students and 46 percent
of student households with incomes below \$15,000, the challenges faced
by a relatively new campus president five years ago were daunting. With
the assistance of Title V grants to redesign curriculum, establish a
center for teaching excellence, and collaborate with the City University
of New York on increasing baccalaureate degree attainment, Bronx
Community College has seen promising results. Four-year graduation rates
have risen by six percentage points in three years, and nearly five in
six students who transfer to the City University remain in baccalaureate
education for more than one year.

However, more can be done to improve the service capacity of
minority-serving institutions. A recent GAO study[^10] found that the
Department has not fully implemented the comprehensive monitoring plan
for Title III and Title V institutions, and the Department's ability to
provide targeted technical assistance was limited. Efforts are being
made to ensure that our monitoring and technical assistance plans are
carried out and targeted to at-risk grantees. The combination of
institutional development funding, consistent White House support, and
the dedication of these institutions provides momentum for ongoing
improvement.

**Performance Goals.** The measures related to positive fiscal balances
and increased technological capacity show mixed results. FY 2003 data on
positive fiscal balances at postsecondary institutions primarily serving
minorities, which became available during FY 2004, demonstrate progress
but remain short of the Department's goal. FY 2003 data on increased
technological capacity at the same institutions became available during
FY 2004 and will be used as a baseline.

The Department's progress on our performance goals for this objective is
summarized in the table below. See p. 27 for methodology and appendix A,
pp. 207--08, for detailed data.

  ------------------------------------------ ---------------- ------------
  HBCUs, HSIs, and TCUs (Objective 5.4)                       

  Performance Goals                          Status           Year

  HBCUs, HSIs, and TCUs with a positive      Made progress    FY 2003
  fiscal balance                                              

  HBCUs, HSIs, and TCUs with evidence of     Established      FY 2003
  increased technological capacity           baseline         
  ------------------------------------------ ---------------- ------------

HBCUs = Historically Black Colleges and Universities

HSIs = Hispanic-Serving Institutions

TCUs = Tribal Colleges and Universities

Literacy and Employment Skills Help Adults Surmount Barriers

A vast number of Americans delay postsecondary education, including
technical degree programs, until well into adulthood. Still others who
face vocational challenges due to a disability may need specialized
training and vocational rehabilitation services to facilitate economic
sufficiency. Other adults can benefit from improved literacy skills to
see their way to a brighter future. At the Department of Education, we
concentrate our investment in vocational preparation and adult literacy
on helping individuals who are seeking to improve their lives through
further education.

As key developers of employment skills, community colleges serve over 11
million adult learners annually, providing students a bridge to further
education and promising careers, as well as providing a skilled
workforce for business and community leaders. Rapid technological and
economic changes and the growing diversity of student interests present
important challenges to community colleges. The Department's Office of
Vocational and Adult Education produced and disseminated to all
community colleges the research-based handbook, *The Labor
Market-Responsive* *Community College*, which identifies key strategies
and practices for responding more effectively to local economic and
workforce development needs. The handbook is based on extensive field
research at community colleges that demonstrate entrepreneurial
responsiveness. Practical examples in the handbook help college
administrators to forge effective partnerships with employers, community
leaders, and policy-makers. As demonstrated by this publication, our
role is to champion best learning practices that lead to better
employment outcomes.

Vocational rehabilitation programs are a major Department focus in
achieving successful employment outcomes for individuals with
disabilities. In FY 2003, the State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR)
Program assisted about 220,000 individuals with disabilities to obtain
an employment outcome. About 94 percent of the individuals who obtained
an employment outcome obtained competitive employment,[^11] exceeding
the performance target. In addition, the percentage of individuals
obtaining competitive employment who are individuals with "significant
disabilities" (as defined in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973) has
increased annually, growing from about 78 percent in FY 1997 to
90 percent in FY 2003. These results are significant and validate that
individuals with significant disabilities are achieving high-quality,
competitive employment outcomes consistent with their skills and
interests.

Late in FY 2003, the Department's Rehabilitation Services Administration
awarded five model projects to demonstrate the effect of a specific
literacy intervention on improving literacy skills and employment and
earnings of targeted adult participants in the Vocational Rehabilitation
Services Program. These five-year projects, in combination with an
external evaluation, must also demonstrate how VR offices can
effectively integrate literacy services into their service delivery
systems and can best provide literacy services and instruction to a
targeted group of VR consumers. Project participants are being randomly
selected for experimental and control groups.

The Department has placed a special emphasis on improving adult literacy
in the past year. Given the rapid advances in science and technology
evident in nearly every industry, community, neighborhood, and family in
America, national survey data show that many adults do not have the
requisite skills in reading, writing, oral communication, problem
solving, and mathematics that are needed to secure and maintain good
jobs and carry out their responsibilities as parents and citizens. For
many adults, adult education and literacy programs are their best hope
of overcoming these challenges. Several initiatives to improve literacy
skills of specialized populations are ongoing.

Community Partnerships for Adult Learning (C-PAL), a Department
initiative, fosters successful community partnerships in support of
adult education by disseminating the successes of innovative community
solutions. Communities have built successful partnerships and strategies
among local businesses, labor organizations, public school systems,
libraries, faith-based and community-based organizations, literacy
service providers, volunteer organizations, and colleges to respond to
the differing learning requirements of adults. The project's Web
site[^12] includes partnership profiles and resources for adult
education providers interested in creating, sustaining, or improving
partnerships. A toolbox provides how-to information for adult education
instructors and administrators, and the Web site offers links to
research, reports and journals, curriculum materials, and information on
assessment, workforce development, and program evaluation.

To date, the field of adult basic education has not benefited from the
use of evidence-based practice.\
To address this problem, the Department's Office of Vocational and Adult
Education launched a pilot program in FY 2004 in a limited number of
states committed to the improvement of reading instruction for
intermediate-level adults. The **ST**udent **A**chievement in
**R**eading (STAR) pilot is an effort to translate the research-based
principles of the federal Partnership for Reading initiative into usable
classroom practices and to infuse those practices into classrooms and
instructional settings. States work with the Department to assemble a
statewide project team, receive national training, collect important
program performance data, roll out innovative research-based reading
programs, and evaluate the impact on adult readers at the intermediate
level. The STAR pilot also provides funds to local projects within the
states that enable instructors in adult literacy to receive professional
development training. Based on the training and the help provided by an
expert national technical assistance team, the pilot projects will help
states learn from the local application of research-based methods toward
improvement of their adult literacy efforts. Pilot participants will
also benefit from access to research-based training materials and a
reading toolkit with resources for improving intermediate-level adult
reading instruction.

**Performance Goal.** The Department established a new measure for
employment effective FY 2004, and results are not yet available.

The Department's progress on our performance goals for this objective is
summarized in the table below. See p. 27 for methodology and appendix A,
pp. 208--09, for detailed data.

  ---------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
  Literacy and Employment of American Adults                  
  (Objective 5.5)                                             

  Performance Goal                               Status       Year

  Employed persons served by state VR agencies   Pending      FY 2004
  who obtain competitive employment                           
  ---------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------

VR=Vocational rehabilitation

Students Benefit from Institutions' Capacity to Teach World Languages
and Explore International Issues

American postsecondary institutions play a unique role in providing
advanced understanding of the world. These campuses welcome citizens
from nearly every nation on earth to study advanced theory and practice
in numerous academic disciplines. These institutions also provide
American students the opportunity to think strategically about the world
around them.

The Department's Office of Postsecondary Education supports efforts of
higher education institutions to open the minds of their students to the
changing world. One of the most important initiatives in this regard is
the publication and distribution of instructional materials on less
commonly taught languages directed by the International Education and
Foreign Language Studies Program. These efforts, which predate the
Department by nearly a generation, have funded the development of basic
instructional material for 225 world languages, most of which would not
likely be studied on college campuses without these materials being
available. The language program has anticipated the need for strategic
language study in recent years, developing texts in many important
European and Central Asian tongues.

The Department's Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education
(FIPSE) also directs funds strategically to improve international
understanding and idea exchange in a wide array of academic disciplines
and geographic partnerships. The program is poised to publish the first
edition of a planned annual spotlight catalog of the various
institutions and disciplines benefiting from FIPSE funding. The catalog
will highlight the fund's international programs from 1995 to 2004,
showcasing some 1,400 academic institutions in more than 29 countries at
which thousands of American students studied such subjects as
engineering, biotechnology, veterinary sciences, social sciences, and
arts and humanities.

Through these efforts, American students have access to increased
opportunities to interact intellectually with other nations and cultures
while simultaneously developing their academic talents. Admittedly, the
task of performance measurement is difficult because many of the
programs are engaged in research and development, testing proposed
learning strategies that, if proven effective, might be successfully
replicated by independent means on other campuses.

More work is necessary to convey the effectiveness of these programs to
the general public. However, program performance measures are being
improved to better gauge future effectiveness.

**Performance Goals.** As international programs are a new Department
objective for postsecondary education in FY 2004, we developed new
measures related to foreign language programs and will use FY 2004 data
to establish baselines. We await FY 2004 data on the successful
permanent establishment of international postsecondary consortia
projects.

The Department's progress on our performance goals for this objective is
summarized in the table below. See p. 27 for methodology and appendix A,
pp. 209--10, for detailed data.

+-----------------------------------------+---------------+-----------+
| Capacity of U.S. Postsecondary          |               |           |
| Education Institutions to Teach World   |               |           |
| Languages,\                             |               |           |
| Area Studies, and International         |               |           |
| Studies\                                |               |           |
| (Objective 5.6)                         |               |           |
+-----------------------------------------+---------------+-----------+
| Performance Goals                       | Status        | Year      |
+-----------------------------------------+---------------+-----------+
| International postsecondary consortia   | Pending       | FY 2004   |
| projects institutionalized after the    |               |           |
| grant period                            |               |           |
+-----------------------------------------+---------------+-----------+
| Foreign-language course offerings by    | Established   | FY 2004   |
| Title VI institutions                   | baseline      |           |
+-----------------------------------------+---------------+-----------+
| Outcomes of Title VI funding at         | Pending       | FY 2004   |
| postsecondary institutions              |               |           |
|                                         |               |           |
| -   Graduates employed in higher        |               |           |
|     education, government service, and  |               |           |
|     national security                   |               |           |
|                                         |               |           |
| -   Comprehensive instructional         |               |           |
|     resources produced at IHEs          |               |           |
|                                         |               |           |
| -   K--12 teachers trained through      |               |           |
|     Title VI and Fulbright-Hays         |               |           |
|     programs                            |               |           |
+-----------------------------------------+---------------+-----------+

IHEs = Institutions of higher education

Programs Supporting Goal 5

Sixty-four of our loan and grant programs most directly support Goal 5.
These programs are listed below. In the table we provide both FY 2004
appropriations and FY 2004 expenditures for each of these programs. We
also provide an overview of the results of each program on its program
performance measures. Program performance reports are available on the
Web at <http://www.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/2004report/index.html>.

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 41%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr class="header">
<th>Program Name</th>
<th>Appro-<br />
pria-<br />
tions<sup>†</sup></th>
<th>Expend-itures<sup>‡</sup></th>
<th colspan="9"><p>Program Performance Results</p>
<p>Percent of Targets Met, Not Met, Without Data</p></th>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<th rowspan="2"></th>
<th rowspan="2"><p>FY 2004</p>
<p>$ in millions</p></th>
<th rowspan="2"><p>FY 2004</p>
<p>$ in millions</p></th>
<th colspan="3">FY 2004</th>
<th colspan="3">FY 2003</th>
<th colspan="3">FY 2002</th>
</tr>
<tr class="header">
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Not Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>No Data</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Not Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>No Data</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Not Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>No Data</p></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td>AEFLA: Adult Education National Leadership Activities</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>AEFLA: Adult Education State Grants</td>
<td>582</td>
<td>572</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>60</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>60</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>AEFLA: National Institute for Literacy</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>ATA: Assistive Technology Act</td>
<td>27</td>
<td>51</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>DOEAA: GPRA Data/HEA Program Evaluation</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>EDA: Gallaudet University</td>
<td>101</td>
<td>98</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>21</td>
<td>64</td>
<td>42</td>
<td>58</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>42</td>
<td>58</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>EDA: National Technical Institute for the Deaf</td>
<td>54</td>
<td>53</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>70</td>
<td>60</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>60</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>ESEA: Community Technology Centers</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>29</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: AID Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions</td>
<td>97</td>
<td>87</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
<td rowspan="7">100</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
<td rowspan="7">100</td>
<td rowspan="7">100</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: AID Minority Science and Engineering Improvement</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: AID Strengthening Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving
Institutions</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>9</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: AID Strengthening Historically Black Colleges and
Universities</td>
<td>226</td>
<td>205</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: AID Strengthening Historically Black Graduate Institutions</td>
<td>54</td>
<td>51</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: AID Strengthening Institutions</td>
<td>84</td>
<td>73</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: AID Strengthening Tribally Controlled Colleges and
Universities</td>
<td>24</td>
<td>18</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: B.J. Stupak Olympic Scholarships</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: Byrd Honors Scholarships</td>
<td>42</td>
<td>38</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: Child Care Access Means Parents In School</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: College Assistance Migrant Program</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: Demonstration Projects to Ensure Quality Higher Education for
Students with Disabilities</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>7</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education</td>
<td>164</td>
<td>182</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate
Programs (GEAR UP)</td>
<td>302</td>
<td>287</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>86</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN)</td>
<td>32</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>83</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>67</td>
<td>33</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: Historically Black College and University (HBCU) Capital
Financing–Federal Administration</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: Interest Subsidy Grants</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>2</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: International Education and Foreign Language Studies Domestic
Programs</td>
<td>95</td>
<td>87</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>60</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>60</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: International Education and Foreign Language Studies Institute
for International Public Policy</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: Javits Fellowships</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

^†^ Budget for each program includes program budget authority and the
program's proportional share of salaries and expenses budget authority.

‡ Expenditures occur when recipients *draw down* funds to cover actual
outlays. FY 2004 expenditures may include funds from prior years'
appropriations. Expenditures for each program include the program's
proportional share of administrative expenditures.

A shaded cell denotes that the program did not have targets for the
specified year.

AEFLA = Adult Education and Family Literacy Act ATA = Assistive
Technology Act

DOEAA = Department of Education Appropriations Act HEA = Higher
Education Act

EDA = Education of the Deaf Act GPRA = Government Performance and
Results Act

ESEA = Elementary and Secondary Education Act

AID = Aid for Institutional Development

Programs Supporting Goal 5 (Cont'd)

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 43%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr class="header">
<th>Program Name</th>
<th>Appro-<br />
pria-<br />
tions<sup>†</sup></th>
<th>Expend-itures<sup>‡</sup></th>
<th colspan="11"><p>Program Performance Results</p>
<p>Percent of Targets Met, Not Met, Without Data</p></th>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<th rowspan="2"></th>
<th rowspan="2"><p>FY 2004</p>
<p>$ in millions</p></th>
<th rowspan="2"><p>FY 2004</p>
<p>$ in millions</p></th>
<th colspan="3">FY 2004</th>
<th colspan="3">FY 2003</th>
<th colspan="5">FY 2002</th>
</tr>
<tr class="header">
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Not Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>No Data</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>Not Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>No Data</p></th>
<th colspan="2"><p>%</p>
<p>Met</p></th>
<th colspan="2"><p>%</p>
<p>Not Met</p></th>
<th><p>%</p>
<p>No Data</p></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: Postsecondary Education Facilities Loans programs</td>
<td>-27</td>
<td>-6</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: SFA Federal Direct Student Loans</td>
<td>2,827</td>
<td>-105</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
<td rowspan="7">100</td>
<td rowspan="7">20</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
<td rowspan="7">80</td>
<td rowspan="7">100</td>
<td colspan="3" rowspan="7">0</td>
<td rowspan="7">0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: SFA Federal Family Education Loan Program &amp;
Liquidating</td>
<td>5,993</td>
<td>8,732</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: SFA Federal Pell Grants</td>
<td>12,088</td>
<td>12,716</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: SFA Federal Perkins Loans</td>
<td>181</td>
<td>162</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: SFA Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants</td>
<td>779</td>
<td>738</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: SFA Federal Work-Study</td>
<td>1,014</td>
<td>978</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: SFA Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnerships</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>64</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA/DOEA: Student Aid Administration</td>
<td>717</td>
<td>785</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: TRIO Educational Opportunity Centers</td>
<td>50</td>
<td rowspan="6">867</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: TRIO McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement</td>
<td>43</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="2">100</td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: TRIO Student Support Services</td>
<td>269</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="2">50</td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td>50</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: TRIO Talent Search</td>
<td>148</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: TRIO Upward Bound</td>
<td>320</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td>100</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HEA: TRIO Other</td>
<td>21</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>HEA: Underground Railroad Program</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>HKNCA: Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and
Adults</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="2">71</td>
<td colspan="2">29</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>MECEA: International Education and Foreign Language Studies Overseas
Programs</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>13</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>NLA: Literacy Programs for Prisoners</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>5</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>RA: Client Assistance State Grants</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="3">100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>RA: Independent Living Centers</td>
<td rowspan="2">101</td>
<td>67</td>
<td rowspan="2">0</td>
<td rowspan="2">0</td>
<td rowspan="2">100</td>
<td rowspan="2">33</td>
<td rowspan="2">67</td>
<td rowspan="2">0</td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="2">80</td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="2">20</td>
<td rowspan="2">0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>RA: Independent Living State Grants</td>
<td>21</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>RA: Independent Living Services for Older Blind Individuals</td>
<td>33</td>
<td>28</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="2">100</td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>RA: Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>RA: Projects with Industry</td>
<td>23</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>33</td>
<td>67</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="2">100</td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>RA: Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>RA: Supported Employment State Grants</td>
<td>38</td>
<td>34</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="2">100</td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>RA: Vocational Rehabilitation Demonstration and Training
Programs</td>
<td>27</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>60</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="2">40</td>
<td colspan="2">60</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>RA: Vocational Rehabilitation Evaluation</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>RA: Vocational Rehabilitation Grants for Indians</td>
<td>32</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="2">100</td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>RA: Vocational Rehabilitation Program Improvement</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>RA: Vocational Rehabilitation Recreational Programs</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="5"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>RA: Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants</td>
<td>2,584</td>
<td>2,287</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="2">67</td>
<td colspan="2">33</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>RA: Vocational Rehabilitation Training</td>
<td>44</td>
<td>37</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>86</td>
<td colspan="2">71</td>
<td colspan="2">29</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>USC: Howard University</td>
<td>239</td>
<td>238</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="2">58</td>
<td colspan="2">42</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>VTEA: Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Vocational and Technical
Institutions</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td colspan="2">100</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Total</strong></td>
<td><strong>29,687</strong></td>
<td>* <strong>29,724</strong></td>
<td colspan="11"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

^†^ Budget for each program includes program budget authority and the
program's proportional share of salaries and expenses budget authority.

^‡^ Expenditures occur when recipients *draw down* funds to cover actual
outlays. FY 2004 expenditures may include funds from prior years'
appropriation. Expenditures for each program include the program's
proportional share of administrative expenditures.

\* Additionally, expenditures of \$16 million met prior years'
obligations for Goal 5 programs that were not funded for FY 2004.

> A shaded cell denotes that the program did not have targets for the
> specified year.

HEA = Higher Education Act DEOA = Department of Education Organization
Act

SFA = Student Financial Assistance programs HKNCA = Helen Keller
National Center Act

MECEA = Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 NLA =
National Literacy Act

RA = Rehabilitation Act USC = United States Code

VTEA = Vocational and Technical Education Act

PART Analysis for\
Goal 5 Programs

The Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) was developed and implemented
by the Office of Management and Budget as a standardized process for
determining program effectiveness in a consistent way across agencies.
Over a five-year period, most government programs will be evaluated
under this process. Results of PART reviews are used by agencies as one
component of justifying their budget requests. Following are summaries
of PART reviews that were conducted in conjunction with preparing the
Department's FY 2004 budget request and subsequent updated reviews of
those programs.[^13]

Program: Adult Education State Grants

Year of rating: *For FY 2004 Budget*

Rating: *Results Not Demonstrated*

Program Type: *Block/Formula Grants*

![](media/image4.wmf)

Recommendations:

1\. Implement reforms to the program, including increased grantee
accountability, improved performance reporting, and a clear focus on
improving participants' reading, math, literacy, and numeracy skills.

2\. Adopt common performance measures with similar federal programs,
including a new measure to gauge cost-effectiveness. Set short- and
long-term targets based on the common measures. Develop strategy for
collecting necessary data to institute common measures.

Response:

1.  The administration's blueprint for reauthorization of adult
    education programs proposed reforms in the recommended areas.
    Reauthorization legislation passed by the House and Senate includes
    elements of the blueprint that will increase the accountability of
    states and local programs for results and focus the program more
    directly on participant outcomes.

2.  The Department adopted the common performance measures created
    through the administration's common measures initiative and set
    annual targets based on final definitions for common measures
    established by the Departments of Education and Labor. Under current
    law, the Department does not have the authority to require states to
    report data for the common measure related to increase in earnings.
    Long-term targets are yet to be set.

![](media/image5.wmf){width="0.21653543307086615in"
height="0.2200787401574803in"}

Program: Federal Pell Grants

Year of Rating: *For FY 2004 Budget (Initial)*

*For FY 2005 Budget (Revised)*

Rating: *Adequate*

Program Type: *Block/Formula Grants*

![](media/image6.wmf)

Recommendations:

1\. Reduce overawards in the Pell Grant Program.

2\. Improve targeting in the eligibility formula toward the neediest
students.

Response:

1.  This legislation was proposed in 2002, and the Department, Treasury,
    and OMB continue working with congressional authorizing committees
    to develop a final bill.

2.  The Department has met extensively with congressional staff to build
    support for improved targeting as part of the Higher Education Act
    reauthorization.

![](media/image5.wmf){width="0.21653543307086615in"
height="0.2200787401574803in"}

Program: Student Aid Administration

Year of Rating: *For FY 2004 Budget (Initial)*

*For FY 2005 Budget (Revised)*

Rating: *Adequate*

Program Type: *Capital Assets*

![](media/image7.wmf)

Recommendations:

1\. Develop a unit-cost framework and meaningful efficiency targets.

2\. Implement a new data strategy that yields more timely and accurate
financial and program data.

3\. Better integrate data into decision-making, including the
development of a more comprehensive approach to eliminating program
fraud and error.

4\. Improve contract oversight and performance management.

5\. Maintain progress on system integration efforts.

Response:

1\. The Department's student aid unit cost methodology has been
redesigned to address GAO concerns and Department needs. A final review
of methodology and calculations is ongoing by Department offices and
program staff; baseline unit costs for FY 2002 and FY 2003 should be
available in late 2004.

2\. The Department is in the process of implementing an extensive new
data strategy with a focus on streamlined system structure and common
data definitions.

3\. Department senior and program management use various reports to make
better-informed decisions. The effectiveness of these reports was a
major factor in moving the Department from red to green on the Financial
Performance initiative on the *President's Management Agenda*.

4\. The Department has reorganized the student aid acquisition
operation, hiring staff with expertise in acquisition planning and
contract performance monitoring; qualitative and quantitative contract
support has also been obtained as needed.

5\. Implementation of the Common Servicing for Borrowers system, which
integrates services previously provided under three separate contracts,
is well under way. Efforts to integrate systems for aid application,
origination, and disbursement are actively under development.

![](media/image5.wmf){width="0.21653543307086615in"
height="0.2200787401574803in"}

Program: Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Vocational and Technical
Institutions

Year of Rating: *For FY 2004 Budget*

Rating: *Results Not Demonstrated*

Program Type: *Competitive Grants*

![](media/image8.wmf)

Recommendations:

1\. Seek legislative program reforms that include increased grantee
accountability, improved performance reporting, and a clear focus on
strengthening the academic and technical skills of postsecondary Indian
students.

2\. Explore whether efficiencies can be gained by combining this program
with other programs serving similar objectives.

3\. Adopt common performance measures with similar programs, including a
new measure to gauge cost-effectiveness. Set short- and long-term
targets based on the common measures and develop strategy for collecting
necessary data to institute these common measures.

Response:

1\. This reauthorization strategy was proposed in the President's 2004
and 2005 budgets.

2\. The administration's strategy includes a proposal that this program
be reauthorized as part of the Higher Education Act. By administering
similar programs together the Department can pursue management and
programmatic efficiencies.

3\. The Department will adopt appropriate common performance measures
with similar programs and develop short- and long-term performance
targets when the program is reauthorized.

![](media/image5.wmf){width="0.21653543307086615in"
height="0.2200787401574803in"}

Program: TRIO Student Support Services

Year of Rating: *For FY 2004 Budget*

Rating: *Results Not Demonstrated*

Program Type: *Competitive Grants*

![](media/image9.wmf)

Recommendations:

1\. Closely monitor new SSS annual program goals and make better use of
project performance report data to improve the program.

2\. Explore policies that would reduce statutory and regulatory barriers
faced by qualified first-time grantees in order to encourage their
participation in the program.

3\. Collect and establish second-year data for performance measures.

Response:

1\. Projects are now required to measure performance goals by cohort and
are not able to renegotiate the goals stated in applications.

2\. The Department increased the number of reviews and audits of prior
experience data and stopped awarding points for partial performance.
Additionally, the Department is exploring regulatory options to follow
reauthorization.

3\. Recent student persistence rates exceeded both the short- and
long-term performance targets. Data on college completion will be
included in the FY 2006 budget request.

![](media/image5.wmf){width="0.21653543307086615in"
height="0.2200787401574803in"}

Program: TRIO Upward Bound

Year of Rating: *For FY 2004 Budget*

Rating: *Ineffective*

Program Type: *Competitive Grants*

![](media/image10.wmf)

Recommendations:

1\. Complete an anticipated rulemaking process in the upcoming year to
increase the proportion of high-risk students served by Upward Bound
grantees.

2\. Provide technical assistance to new applicants and current grantees
on high-risk participants.

3\. Explore policies that would encourage more qualified first-time
grantees to participate in the program.

4\. Closely monitor new Upward Bound annual program goals and make
better use of project performance report data to improve the program.

Response:

1.  The Department expanded and strengthened its Expansion Initiative to
    serve a greater proportion of high-risk students and plans to
    conduct a rigorous evaluation beginning in 2006. Additionally, the
    Department continues to assess appropriate regulatory actions
    following reauthorization.

2\. The Department provides guidance on serving high-risk participants
in all technical assistance workshops.

3\. The Department increased the number of reviews and audits of prior
experience data and stopped awarding points for partial performance.
Additionally, the Department is exploring regulatory options to follow
reauthorization.

4\. Projects are now required to provide services at an average cost of
no more than \$5,000 per student, and the new Expansion Initiative
requires participating students to have high-risk factors.

![](media/image5.wmf){width="0.21653543307086615in"
height="0.2200787401574803in"}

Program: Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants

Year of Rating: *For FY 2004 Budget*

Rating: *Adequate*

Program Type: *Block/Formula Grants*

![](media/image11.wmf)

Recommendations:

1\. In the upcoming reauthorization, work with the Congress to align
federal funding with performance, and hold all states accountable for
their performance. The administration will revisit whether funding for
this program should be reclassified as discretionary.

2\. Establish specific performance targets in the out years and collect
the necessary data to support new measures. Also, consider whether any
additional measures are appropriate for this program.

3\. Take significant steps to improve program management using existing
outcome data and make these data available to the public in a more
timely manner.

Response:

1\. The reauthorization of Title IV of the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 passed the House on May 8, 2003; the revisions made no significant
changes to the program. The Senate version of the bill passed on
November 14, 2003; it made no changes that would affect the mandatory
classification of the program. However, it did include the
administration's proposal to authorize incentive grants to state VR
agencies based on performance.

2\. Annual measures were revised to address wide variation across
states. The Department also conducted a study to examine the variables
related to state VR agency performance. The Department is also working
to assist states to collect the necessary data to implement the Job
Training Common Measures.

3\. By automating data submission and improving the data editing
process, the Department has achieved a six-month improvement over
previous years in making our data available. The Department is also
posting previous year state performance on the program's standards and
indicators on our Web site. Detailed data tables and outcome reports
have been developed for use by both program staff and state VR agencies
to manage the program.

[^1]: Policy and Program Studies Service/Mathematica Policy Research,
    *The Impacts of Regular Upward Bound: Results from the Third
    Follow-Up Data Collection* (Washington, DC, 2004). Available at
    <http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/highered/upward/upward-3rd-report.pdf>.

[^2]: Policy and Program Studies Service/Mathematica Policy Research,
    *Implementation of the Talent Search Program, Past and Present:
    Final Report from Phase I of the National Evaluation* (Washington,
    DC, 2004). Available at
    <http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/highered/talentsearch/toc.pdf.>

[^3]: GAO--04--1096T, available at
    <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d041096t.pdf.>

[^4]: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
    Statistics, *Paying for College: Changes Between 1990 and 2000 for
    Full-Time Dependent Undergraduates* (NCES 2004--075), table 7,\
    p. 28. Available at
    [http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004075.pdf](http://www.nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004075.pdf).

[^5]: GAO-04-568T, available at
    <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04568t.pdf>.

[^6]: GAO--04--101 and GAO--04--843, available at
    <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04101.pdf> and
    <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04843.pdf>.

[^7]: GAO-04-107, available at
    <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04107.pdf.>

[^8]: GAO--04--567R, available at
    <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04567r.pdf>.

[^9]: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
    Statistics, *Historically Black Colleges and Universities, 1976 to
    2001* (NCES 2004--062), p. 6. Available at
    [http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004062.pdf](http://www.nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004062.pdf).

[^10]: GAO--04--961, available at [http://www.gao.gov/new.items\
    /d04961.pdf.](http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04961.pdf.)

[^11]: Competitive employment is defined under the State VR program as
    work in the competitive labor market that is performed on a
    full-time or part-time basis in an integrated setting, and for which
    an individual is compensated at or above the minimum wage, but not
    less than the customary wage and level of benefits paid by the
    employer for the same or similar work performed by individuals who
    are not disabled.

[^12]: The site can be accessed at
    [http://]{.underline}[www.c-pal.net](http://www.c-pal.net/).

[^13]: Information about the PART process is available at
    <http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part/>. Information on Department
    PARTs is available at [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb\
    /budget/fy2005/pdf/ap_cd_rom/part.pdf](http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb%0B/budget/fy2005/pdf/ap_cd_rom/part.pdf)
    and <http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2005/pma/education.pdf>.