U.S. Department of Education

An Interim Report on the Educational Opportunity Centers Program:

2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 2000–02

U.S. Department of Education

An Interim Report on the Educational Opportunity Centers Program:

2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 2000–02

Prepared for:

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Postsecondary Education

Federal TRIO Programs

By:

Margaret Marcus Hale

Tsze Chan

American Institutes for Research

2006

This report was prepared for the U.S. Department of Education under Contract No. ED-01-CO-0026/0010 by the American Institutes for Research. Kathy Fuller provided technical review of the content. Shirley Johnson served as the contracting officer’s representative. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service, or enterprise mentioned in this publication is intended or should be inferred.

**U.S. Department of Education**Margaret Spellings *Secretary*

**Office of Postsecondary Education**James Manning*Acting Assistant Secretary*

**Federal TRIO Programs**Larry Oxendine*Director*

September 2006

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, *An Interim Report on the Educational Opportunity Centers Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 2000–02*, Washington, D.C., 2006.

**To obtain copies of this report:**

**write to:** ED Pubs, Education Publications Center, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398; or

**fax** your request to: 301-470-1244; or

**e-mai**l your request to: edpubs@inet.ed.gov; or

**call in** your request toll free: 1-877-433-7827 (1-877-4-ED-PUBS). If 877 service is not yet available in your area, call 1-800-872-5327 (1-800-USA-LEARN). Those who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a teletypewriter (TTY), should call 1-877-576-7734; or

**order online** at: http://www.edpubs.org.

This report is also available on the Department’s Web site at: http://www.ed.gov/programs/trioeoc/index.html.

On request, this publication is available in alternate formats, such as Braille, large print or computer diskette. For more information, please contact the Department’s Alternate Format Center at 202-260-0852 or 202-260-0818.

**Contents**

ivTables

viFigures

viiForeword

ixAcknowledgments

1Introduction

3Section I: Educational Opportunity Centers Projects and Participants

13Section II: Program Outcomes

19Appendix A: Supporting Tables

27Glossary

**

# Tables

51.Educational Opportunity Centers Program funding characteristics, by reporting year:  2001–02 through 2003–04

62.Number and percentage of Educational Opportunity Centers projects, number and percentage of Annual Performance Reports submitted, and number and percentage distribution of participants reported, by type of host institution and reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04

123.Number and percentage of Educational Opportunity Centers participants with limited English proficiency, by type of host institution: 2003–04

124.Number and percentage of Educational Opportunity Centers participants who were veterans, by type of host institution: 2003–04

19A-1.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by participant status and reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04

19A-2.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by eligibility status: 2003–04

20A-3.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by gender: 2003–04

20A-4.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by race and ethnicity: 2003–04

20A-5.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by academic status or grade level: 2003–04

21A-6.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by age (years): 2003–04

22A-7.Number and percentage of achievement in postsecondary outcomes of Educational Opportunity Centers college-ready participants, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

23A-8.Number and percentage of achievement in postsecondary persistence of Educational Opportunity Centers postsecondary students, by reporting year: 2002–03 and 2003–04

24A-9.Number and percentage distribution of postsecondary placements of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by type of EOC host institution: 2003–04

25A-10.Number of Educational Opportunity Centers projects with reported successes in meeting program outcome measures exceeding numbers of eligible participants, by program outcome measure: 2003–04

# Figures

71.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by participant status and reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04

82.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by eligibility status: 2003–04

93.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by gender: 2003–04

94.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by race and ethnicity: 2003–04

105.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by academic status or grade level: 2003–04

116.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by age (years): 2003–04

157. Percentage of achievement in postsecondary admission of college-ready Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

168. Percentage of achievement in postsecondary reentry of Educational Opportunity Centers postsecondary students, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

179. Percentage of achievement in postsecondary persistence of Educational Opportunity Centers postsecondary students, by reporting year: 2002–03 and 2003–04

1810.Percentage distribution of postsecondary placements of Educational Opportunity Centers Program participants, by type of EOC host institution: 2003–04

# Foreword

To ensure the success of the No Child Left Behind Act, high-quality educational opportunities must be made available to all students. In keeping with this goal, the Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) Program of the Federal TRIO Programs encourages adults from disadvantaged backgrounds to enter or continue a postsecondary education program.

We are pleased to present this document, *An Interim Report on the Educational Opportunity Centers Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 2000–02*, which describes selected aspects of the program primarily for reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04. Two previously published comprehensive profiles of the EOC Program, available from the U.S. Department of Education, present data on reporting years 1998–2000. The next comprehensive EOC report is expected to cover the entire 2002–06 grant cycle.

We are proud to continue our process of sharing national statistical information on the Educational Opportunity Centers Program with staff, grantees, members of Congress and the larger education community. It is our hope that collecting and disseminating this information will foster a dialogue among these groups that is aimed at furthering our mission and implementing measures to see how well we are doing. We look forward to continuing to work together to improve program services and increase the number of disadvantaged adults who pursue postsecondary education.

Larry OxendineDirectorFederal TRIO ProgramsU.S. Department of Education

# Acknowledgments

Publishing this report was a team effort, and we appreciate the support of all who contributed. First, we thank the staff members of the Educational Opportunity Centers projects who reported the data on which this report is based. Frances Bergeron, team leader, Program Management and Development, Federal TRIO Programs, coordinated the data collection and reporting processes. Special thanks also to Kathy Fuller of the Federal TRIO Programs for her valuable comments and edits on the contents and figures presented in this report.

# Introduction

Created in 1972, the Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) Program, one of eight TRIO Programs, funds EOC projects at two- and four-year colleges and universities and public or private agencies or organizations to assist adults from disadvantaged backgrounds to enter or continue a postsecondary education program. Participants in EOC projects generally must be 19 years old or older. In each funded project, at least two-thirds of the participants must be both low-income and potentially first-generation college students. An important objective of the EOC Program is to counsel participants on applying for admission to postsecondary institutions and for financial aid. Examples of other services offered by EOC grantees include academic advising, college orientation activities, tutoring and career workshops.

Each participating grantee is required to provide project information to the EOC Program through its Annual Performance Report (APR), with content stipulated by the program. The current report is based on the APRs submitted by EOC projects for the 2002–03 and 2003–04 reporting years, with select data from 2000–01 and 2001–02.

Fall 2002 (reporting year 2002–03) marked the beginning of a new, four-year funding cycle (2002–06), with a total of 139 projects. All 82 projects funded in the previous funding cycle (1998–2002) continued to receive funding in this new cycle, and 57 projects were funded for the first time. All funded projects submitted their APRs for reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04.

National profile reports published in previous years have offered a comprehensive analysis of EOC Program activities, participant characteristics and program outcomes. This report provides essential data on the first two years (2002–04) of the 2002–06 cycle, compares select data from the preceding and current funding cycles and makes available information on program outcome measures through 2004. The program’s next comprehensive report will cover the period through the end of the 2002–06 funding cycle.

This report has two sections. Section I describes select characteristics of the program’s projects and participants for reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04. Data from earlier years are also presented for characteristics that either are of key interest to the EOC Program or have shown changes over time. Section II presents four years of program outcomes, starting with reporting year 2000–01, to demonstrate program achievement across two funding cycles. In each section, major findings are presented as highlights followed by tables and figures. Appendix A presents the actual numbers from which the percentages were derived. The glossary defines the terms used in this report.

# Section IEducational Opportunity CentersProjects and Participants

This section presents select characteristics of the EOC Program projects and the students served during reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04, with some comparative data from one or two previous years (2000–2002). Where the data did not vary significantly from year to year, the highlights below refer to only the most recent year, 2003–04.

· In 2001–02, the final year of the previous 1998–2002 funding cycle, a total of 82 projects were funded. In the new 2002–2006 funding cycle, the number of projects funded increased to 139. Total annual funding increased from $33,234,295 in 2001–02 to $48,011,331 in 2002–03 and to $48,542,202 in 2003–04 (table 1).

· The number of participants that EOC projects were funded to serve also rose from 160,836 in 2001–02 to 217,836 in 2002–03, falling slightly to 217,265 in 2003–04 (table 1). The average amount per participant rose from $207 in 2001–02 to $220 in 2002–03 and to $223 in 2003–04 (table 1).

· The number of participants actually served by EOC projects increased from 165,657 in 2001–02 to 214,684 in 2002–03, a number slightly less than the number of participants the projects were funded to serve in those same reporting years. As the new EOC projects gained experience in providing EOC Program services, the number of participants served increased to 229,596 in 2003–04, or about 12,000 more participants than these projects were funded to serve that reporting year (table 2).

· The average number of participants that EOC projects were funded to serve and actually served decreased between the previous and current cycles (from 1,961 in 2001–02 to 1,567 in 2002–03, and from 2,071 in 2001–02 to 1,544 in 2002–03 [tables 1 and 2]). The reason for the decrease is that, during the 1998–2002 funding cycle, a number of projects were funded to serve far more than 1,000 participants; by contrast, during the new 2002–06 funding cycle, all 57 new projects were funded to serve no more than 1,000 students.

· The gain in the number of participants served between the first two years (2002–03 and 2003–04) of the current funding cycle (2002–06) varied by type of host institution (table 2). Two-year institutions showed the largest gain in the number of participants served between the two reporting years, from 59,133 in 2002–03 and to 69,134 in 2003–04. Community organizations showed a slight decrease in the number of participants served, from 71,260 in 2002–03 to 68,559 in 2003–04. Of all participants served by the EOC Program, the percentage of those served by community organizations dropped from 33 percent in 2002–03 to 30 percent in 2003–04, whereas the percentage of participants served by two-year institutions increased by about the same magnitude over these two years, from 28 percent to 30 percent (table 2).

· The percentage of projects hosted by different types of institutions shifted between the previous (1998–2002) and current (2002–06) funding cycles. The percentage hosted by four‐year institutions dropped slightly, from 49 percent in 2001–02 to 46 percent in 2002–03 and 2003–04, while the percentage hosted by two-year institutions increased significantly, from 28 percent to 36 percent. The percentage of projects hosted by community organizations decreased from 23 percent to 18 percent (table 2).

· New participants represented 83 percent of those served by EOC Program projects in 2002–03 and nearly 77 percent in 2003–04 (fig.1). The proportion of new participants did not vary much between the 2001–02 and 2002–2003 levels (82 and 83 percent, respectively) despite the addition of 57 new projects in 2002–03 because participants typically remained in the program no more than a year, regardless of whether or not the project received funding under an earlier funding cycle.

· In 2003–04, approximately 75 percent of participants were low-income and potentially first‐generation (fig. 2). Almost 12 percent were potentially first-generation only, and just over 9 percent were low-income only (fig. 2).

· In 2003–04, about 36 percent of participants were male and almost 64 percent were female (fig. 3).

· Approximately 60 percent of EOC participants were racial or ethnic minorities. In 2003–04, about 36 percent of participants were African-American and 16 percent were Hispanic or Latino (fig. 4). Participants who were American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, or Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and individuals who categorized themselves as of more than one race, constituted about 4 percent or less each (fig. 4).

· In 2003–04, almost 39 percent of the participants had a high school diploma or alternative certification (fig. 5). Another 18 percent were postsecondary students, 16 percent were adults without high school credentials, and 13 percent were postsecondary dropouts. Twelve percent were high school students or secondary school dropouts (fig. 5).

· In 2003–04, over 44 percent of EOC participants were age 28 and older (fig. 6). Individuals between 19 and 27 years of age made up over 39 percent of the participants, while individuals between 14 and 18 years of age constituted almost 16 percent (fig. 6).

· In 2003–04, between 5 and 6 percent of participants served by all types of EOC host institutions had limited English proficiency (table 3).

· Less than 3 percent of EOC participants were veterans (table 4).

Table 1.Educational Opportunity Centers Program funding characteristics, by reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04

SOURCE: Data for *total funding* and *number of participants projects were funded to serve* are from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs. Other data are based on the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

a The EOC Program began a new, four-year funding cycle in 2002–03.

b *Number**of participants projects were funded to serve* is aggregated from each project’s number of participants funded to serve. 

Table 2.Number and percentage of Educational Opportunity Centers projects, number and percentage of Annual Performance Reports submitted, and number and percentage distribution of participants reported, by type of host institution and reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04  

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

*Note:* Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

a *Four*-*yea*r and *two-year* include public and private institutions. 

b *Community**organizations* include public or private agencies and organizations. 

c The EOC Program began a new, four-year funding cycle in 2002–03.

Figure 1.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by participant status and reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

* The EOC Program began a new, four-year funding cycle in 2002–03.

Figure 2.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by eligibility status: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Figure 3.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by gender: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

**Figure 4.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by race and ethnicity: 2003–04**

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Figure 5.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by academic status or grade level: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:* Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Figure 6.Percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by age (years): 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:* Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Table 3.Number and percentage of Educational Opportunity Centers participantswith limited English proficiency, by type of host institution: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

a *Four-year* and *two-year*include public and private institutions. 

b *Community organizations* include public or private agencies and organizations. 

**Table 4.Number and percentage of Educational Opportunity Centers participants who were veterans, by type of host institution: 2003–04**

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

a *Four-year* and *two-year*include public and private institutions. 

b *Community organizations* include public or private agencies and organizations. 

# Section IIProgram Outcomes

As briefly mentioned in the introduction, the EOC Program funds EOC projects at two- and four‐year colleges and universities and public or private agencies or organizations to assist adults from disadvantaged backgrounds to enter or continue a postsecondary education program. EOC projects may also serve high school students in areas where projects from the Talent Search (TS) Program—another one of the Federal TRIO Programs aimed at providing counseling and services to students to complete secondary education and enter postsecondary education—are not available. Secondary school students are served through target schools designated by either TS or EOC projects to receive program services. Because EOC projects may serve target schools only if the eligible students cannot be appropriately served by a Talent Search project, only a small proportion of the target schools were served by EOC projects. In 2003–04, of the combined total of 510 grantees that reported serving 7,710 target schools, 40 projects were from the EOC Program serving 520 target schools. A more thorough discussion of target schools is presented in a similar report for the TS Program.

For the period 2002–04, the EOC Program identified the following academic milestones as program outcomes for EOC projects:

Postsecondary admission and financial aid assistance;

Postsecondary admission, reentry and persistence; and

Postsecondary placements.

During the EOC grant application process, potential grantees were asked to state in their proposals their target rates of success for each of these identified outcomes. In their APRs, each project reported the number of participants who had attained one or more milestones in the reporting year.

Because data reported vary across projects, program outcomes presented in this section are based on projects that: 1) had identified a target rate to be achieved in a particular objective; 2) had recruited the appropriate participants to receive project services; and 3) had participants attaining the identified objective. It should be noted that many projects reported assisting more students in applying for postsecondary admission and financial aid than the total number of students served. For example, among the 138 grantees who had identified a target rate to be achieved in assisting individuals in applying for postsecondary admission, 32 of them reported serving a total of 29,291 eligible participants but also reported successfully assisting 35,774 individuals. Similarly, 16 grantees reported serving a total of 19,142 eligible participants but also reported successfully assisting 21,971 individuals in applying for financial aid (see table A-10 in Appendix A). Given this problem in the data, the rest of this report focuses on presenting the EOC Program’s more interpretable outcomes of postsecondary admission, reentry, persistence and postsecondary placement.

· In the first two years (2002–03 and 2003–04) of the 2002–06 funding cycle, between 56 and 57 percent of participants considered college-ready (see glossary) actually enrolled in a postsecondary institution by the end of each reporting year. By way of comparison, in 2001–02, the final year of the 1998–2002 funding cycle, the figure was 66 percent (fig. 7). The relatively lower achievement in postsecondary admission in 2002–03 and 2003–04 may reflect the start-up time needed by new EOC projects for conducting program activities relating to this objective. Comparable figures for the first two years (1998–99 and 1999–2000) of the 1998–2002 funding cycle were 51 percent and 56 percent, respectively.

· For the objective of postsecondary reentry, the percentage also showed a slight drop, from 60 percent in 2001–02 to 59 percent in 2002–03 to 57 percent in 2003–04 (fig. 8). Part of the decrease may reflect a change in the 2002–06 funding cycle’s APR format, which asks EOC projects to include transfer students in reporting reentry information.

· The 2002–06 funding cycle also adds postsecondary persistence to APRs. As figure 9 shows, between 82 and 88 percent of the postsecondary participants either continued in or completed a program of study in the two reporting years (2002–03 and 2003–04).

· A majority of those who entered a postsecondary institution in 2003–04 enrolled in two-year institutions (62 percent), while another 24 percent entered four-year institutions (fig. 10). The percentages vary by the type of host institution in which the student participated in the EOC Program. Over 82 percent of participants served by EOC projects at two-year institutions entered a program of study in two-year institutions, while about 9 percent entered four-year institutions (fig. 10). By way of comparison, nearly 32 percent of participants served by EOC projects at four-year institutions entered a program of study in four-year institutions. For participants served by EOC projects at community organizations, approximately 58 percent entered two-year institutions, and approximately 31 percent entered four-year institutions (fig. 10).

Figure 7. Percentage of achievement in postsecondary admission of college-ready Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04. 

*Note*: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. The percentages of achievement were calculated on the basis of the projects that had identified a target rate to be achieved, recruited the appropriate participants to serve and reported having participants attaining the identified objective. The percentage of *postsecondary admission* was derived by dividing the number of participants enrolled in or admitted to a program of postsecondary education (first‐time enrollment in postsecondary education) by the number of college-ready participants. *College-ready participants* are defined as 12th-grade high school students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates.

* The EOC Program began a new, four-year funding cycle in 2002–03.

Figure 8. Percentage of achievement in postsecondary reentry of Educational Opportunity Centers postsecondary students, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04. 

*Note:*The percentages of achievement were calculated on the basis of the projects that had identified a target rate to be achieved, recruited the appropriate participants to serve and reported having participants attaining the identified objective.

* For reporting years 2000–01 and 2001–02, the percentage of *postsecondary reentry* was derived by dividing the number of participants reenrolled in or readmitted to a program of postsecondary education (excluding transfer participants) by the number of postsecondary dropouts. 

** For reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04, the percentage of *postsecondary reentry* was derived by dividing the number of participants reenrolled in or readmitted to a program of postsecondary education (including transfer participants) by the number of postsecondary dropouts and postsecondary transfers. 

*** The EOC Program began a new four-year funding cycle in 2002–03.

Figure 9. Percentage of achievement in postsecondary persistence of Educational Opportunity Centers postsecondary students, by reporting year: 2002–03 and 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2002–03 and 2003–04. 

*Note: Postsecondary persistence* refers to participants who were in programs of postsecondary education at the beginning of the reporting period and who continued in or completed a program of postsecondary education during the same period. The percentages of achievement were calculated on the basis of the projects that had identified a target rate to be achieved, recruited the appropriate participants to serve and reported having participants attaining the identified objective. The percentage of *postsecondary persistence*  was derived by dividing the number of participants who completed or continued in a program of postsecondary education by the number of postsecondary students served. The decline in persistence between 2002–03 and 2003–04 should be interpreted with caution, as the percentage was based on only 52 projects for 2002–03 and 68 projects for 2003–04. Data on *postsecondary persistence* were not required in the Annual Performance Reports prior to 2002–03.

* The EOC Program began a new, four-year funding cycle in 2002–03. 

Figure 10.Percentage distribution of postsecondary placements of Educational Opportunity Centers Program participants, by type of EOC host institution: 2003–04 

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

**Four-year* and *two-year* include public and private institutions. 

** *Community organizations* include public or private agencies and organizations. 

*** *Other* includes public or nonprofit vocational or technical schools, proprietary schools and unknown schools.

# Appendix ASupporting Tables

This appendix shows the data from which the tables and figures in the sections I and II are derived, and enables readers to better understand the metrics used in this report.

**Table A-1.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by participant status and reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04**

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

a The EOC Program began a new, four-year funding cycle in 2002–03.

**Table A-2.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by eligibility status: 2003–04**

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Table A-3.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by gender: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

**Table A-4.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by race and ethnicity: 2003–04**

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

**Table A-5.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by academic status or grade level: 2003–04**

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Table A-6.Number and percentage distribution of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by age (years): 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Table A-7.Number and percentage of achievement in postsecondary outcomes of Educational Opportunity Centers college-ready participants, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. *College-ready participants* are defined as 12th-grade high school students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates. Percentages for each outcome measure were calculated on the basis of the projects that had identified a target rate to be achieved, recruited the appropriate participants to serve and reported having participants attaining the identified objectives.

a The percentage of *postsecondary**admission*was derived by dividing the number of participants enrolled in or admitted to a program of postsecondary education (first-time enrollment in postsecondary education) by the number of college-ready participants.

b For reporting years 2000–01 and 2001–02, the percentage of *postsecondary reentry* was derived by dividing the number of participants reenrolled in or readmitted to a program of postsecondary education (excluding transfer participants) by the number of postsecondary dropouts.

c For reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04, the percentage of *postsecondary**reentry*was derived by dividing the number of participants reenrolled in or readmitted to a program of postsecondary education (including transfer participants) by the number of postsecondary dropouts and postsecondary transfers.

Table A-8.Number and percentage of achievement in postsecondary persistence of Educational Opportunity Centers postsecondary students, by reporting year: 2002–03 and 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

a *Postsecondary persistence* refers to participants who were in programs of postsecondary education at the beginning of the reporting period and who continued in or completed a program of postsecondary education during the same period. Data on *postsecondary persistence* were not required in the Annual Performance Reports prior to 2002–03. The percentages for this outcome measure were calculated on the basis of the projects that had identified a target rate to be achieved, recruited the appropriate participants to serve, and reported having participants attaining the identified objective. The percentage of *postsecondary persistence* was derived by dividing the number of participants who have completed or continued in a program of postsecondary education by the number of postsecondary students served. 

b The EOC Program began a new four-year funding cycle in 2002–03.

c The decline in persistence between 2002–03 and 2003–04 should be interpreted with caution, as the percentage was only based on 52 projects for 2002–03 and 68 projects for 2003–04.

**Table A-9.Number and percentage distribution of postsecondary placements of Educational Opportunity Centers participants, by type of EOC host institution: 2003–04**

SOURCE: Data are from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

a *F*our-*year* and *two-year* include public and private institutions. 

b *Other* includes public or nonprofit vocational or technical schools, proprietary schools and unknown schools.

c *Community organizations* include public or private agencies and organizations.

Table A-10.Number of Educational Opportunity Centers projects with reported successes in meeting program outcome measures exceeding numbers of eligible participants, by program outcome measure: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data are from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

a The number of EOC projects includes those that had identified a target rate to be achieved, recruited the appropriate participants to serve and reported having participants attaining the identified objectives.

b Eligible participants for *postsecondary admission assistance* were 12th-grade students, high school (and high school equivalency) graduates and  postsecondary dropouts.  

c For *postsecondary financial aid assistance*, eligible participants were 12th-grade students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates and postsecondary students.  

d For *postsecondary admission*, eligible participants were 12th-grade students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates.

e For *postsecondary reentry*, eligible participants were postsecondary dropouts and transfers.

f For *postsecondary persistence*, eligible participants were postsecondary students.

# Glossary

This glossary lists terms used in the report. Some of them are specific to the TRIO Program and do not necessarily apply to other U.S. Department of Education programs or grants.

**Annual Performance Reports (APRs)** are submitted annually to TRIO by each project. The Educational Opportunity Centers’ APRs provide data on the participants, activities and outcomes for the funded projects.

**College-ready participants** were defined in the 2002–03 and 2003–04 instructions for the Educational Opportunity Centers’ APRs as high school (and high school equivalency) graduates whom the grantee had determined had the skills necessary to succeed in postsecondary education. Because EOC projects may, under certain circumstances, provide services to secondary students, in fig. 7 and table A-7, 12th-grade students were also considered college-ready.

**Educational Opportunity Centers projects,** housed at two- or four-year colleges and universities and public or private agencies or organizations, receive funds from the Educational Opportunity Centers Program to assist adults from disadvantaged backgrounds to enter or continue a postsecondary education program.

**Low-income individual** is an individual whose family’s taxable income did not exceed 150 percent of the poverty level amount in the calendar year preceding the year in which the individual initially participates in the project. The poverty level amount is determined using criteria established by the U.S. Census Bureau.

**Participant status** indicates involvement in the Educational Opportunity Centers Program for each student in the reporting year.

· A *new participant* is an individual who participated in the Educational Opportunity Centers Program for the first time in the current reporting period.

· A *continuing participant* is an individual who participated in the Educational Opportunity Centers Program in both the current reporting period and in a previous reporting period.

· *All participants* include new and continuing participants reported by each project.

**Participants funded to serve** refers to the project’s planned level of service, in terms of numbers of students, as agreed to by the TRIO national office before the beginning of the funding year.

**Postsecondary admission** refers to participants who are high school graduates or who have completed the requirements to obtain a high school equivalency degree, and other eligible individuals who have enrolled in programs of postsecondary education for the first time during this reporting period or have been admitted for the next academic term.

**Postsecondary persistence or completion** refers to participants who were in programs of postsecondary education at the beginning of the reporting period and have continued in or completed a program of postsecondary education during the same period.

**Postsecondary reentry or transfer** refers to participants who were previously dismissed or who halted their educational progress toward a postsecondary degree and those participants wishing to transfer to another institution or postsecondary program who reenrolled in a program of postsecondary education during the reporting period or have been readmitted for the next academic term.

**Potentially first-generation college status** refers to an individual neither of whose natural or adoptive parents received a baccalaureate degree, or a student who, prior to the age of 18, regularly resided with and received support from only one natural or adoptive parent and whose supporting parent did not receive a baccalaureate degree.

**Talent Search projects,** housed at two- or four-year colleges and universities and public or private agencies or organizations, receive funds from the Talent Search Program to identify and assist sixth- to 12th-grade students from disadvantaged backgrounds in completing high school and enrolling in higher education, and encourage middle school, high school and postsecondary dropouts to complete their education.

**Target school** refers to a secondary school designated by a Talent Search or EOC project as a focus of project services.

Our mission is to ensure equal access to education

and to promote educational excellence throughout the nation.

www.ed.gov

�

�

� EOC projects may serve individuals younger than 19 years old if such students cannot be appropriately served by a project of the Talent Search Program (another member program of the Federal TRIO Programs), and if the individual’s participation will not dilute an EOC project’s services to its primary audience.

� U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, A Profile of the Educational Opportunity Centers Program: 1999–2000, Washington, D.C., 2002; U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, A Profile of the Educational Opportunity Centers Program: 1998–99, Washington, D.C., 2002.

� For the new grant cycle beginning in 2006, the EOC Program established four mandatory objectives for all EOC projects: 1) enrollment in a continuing education program; 2) application for student financial aid; 3) application for postsecondary admissions; and 4) enrollment in postsecondary education.

# _1224310904.xls

# _1224680070.xls

# _1230970306.xls

# _1224311027.xls

# _1224322934.xls

# _1224310820.xls

# _1224310848.xls

# _1224309331.xls

# _1224310776.xls

# _1224308867.xls

# _1096442925.doc