U.S. Department of Education

An Interim Report on the Talent Search Program:

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

U.S. Department of Education

An Interim Report on the Talent Search 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:

Yung-chen Hsu

Tsze Chan

Margaret Hale

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 Talent Search 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/triotalent/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: Talent Search Program Projects and Participants

13Section II: Target Schools

21Section III: Program Outcomes

27Appendix A: Supporting Tables

35Glossary

**

# Tables

61.Talent Search Program funding characteristics by reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04

72.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search 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

113.Number and percentage of Talent Search participants with limited English proficiency, by type of host institution: 2003–04

154. Number of projects and number and percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target schools, by type of host institution and reporting year: 2001–02 and 2003–04

165. Percentage of students eligible for federally supported free meals under the National School Lunch Program in Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target secondary schools, nontarget secondary schools and all secondary schools, by federal region: 2003–04

186.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers projects and target schools served, by locale and type of host institution: 2003–04

197.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target secondary schools, by percentage of students eligible for federally supported free meals under the National School Lunch Program and locale: 2003–04

27A‐1.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by participant status and reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04

27A‐2.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by eligibility status: 2003–04

27A‐3.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by gender: 2003–04

28A‐4.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by race and ethnicity: 2003–04

28A‐5.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by academic status or grade level: 2003–04

28A‐6.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by age (years): 2003–04

29A‐7.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target secondary schools and all secondary schools in the United States, by locale: 2003–04

30A‐8.Number and percentage of targeted Talent Search participants who attained secondary school promotion, graduation or reentry, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

31A‐9. Number and percentage of college‐ready Talent Search participants who received assistance in applying for postsecondary admission or financial aid, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

32A‐10. Number and percentage of college‐ready Talent Search participants who gained postsecondary admission or postsecondary reentry, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

33A‐11.Number and percentage distribution of postsecondary placements of Talent Search participants, by type of host institution: 2003–04

34A‐12.Number of Talent Search projects not identifying a program outcome as a project objective, by program outcome measure: 2003–04

34A‐13.Number of Talent Search projects with numbers of reported successes in meeting program outcome measures exceeding numbers of eligible participants, by program outcome measure: 2003–04

# Figures

81.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by participant status and reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04

82.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by eligibility status: 2003–04

93.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by gender: 2003–04

94.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by race and ethnicity: 2003–04

105.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by academic status or grade level: 2003–04

106.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by age (years):2003–04

177.Percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target secondary schools and all secondary schools in the United States, by locale: 2003–04

238. Percentage of secondary school Talent Search participants who attained secondary school promotion, graduation or reentry, by reporting year:2000–01 through 2003–04

249. Percentage of college‐ready Talent Search participants who received assistance in applying for postsecondary admission or financial aid, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

2510. Percentage of college‐ready Talent Search participants who gained postsecondary admission or reentry, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

2611.Percentage distribution of postsecondary placements of Talent Search participants, by type of TS host institution that participants attended: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 Talent Search (TS) Program of the Federal TRIO Programs encourages sixth- to 12th-grade students from disadvantaged backgrounds to complete high school and enroll in postsecondary education. TS projects also reach out to middle school, high school and postsecondary dropouts to encourage them to complete their education.

We are pleased to present this document, *An Interim Report on the Talent Search 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 TS Program, available from the U.S. Department of Education, present data on reporting years 1998–2000. The next comprehensive TS 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 TS 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 students 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 1965, the Talent Search (TS) Program, one of eight Federal TRIO programs, funds TS projects at two- and four-year colleges and universities and public or private agencies or organizations to identify and assist sixth- to 12th-grade students from disadvantaged backgrounds who have the potential to succeed in higher education. Participants are recruited from target schools (i.e., middle and high schools designated by TS projects to receive program services). The TS Program also serves middle school, high school and postsecondary dropouts (generally not more than 27 years of age) by encouraging and assisting them to complete their education. 

An individual older than 27 years of age may participate in a TS project if he or she cannot be appropriately served by a project of the Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) Program–another of the Federal TRIO Programs—and if the individual’s participation would not dilute the TS project’s services to its primary recipients. In each funded project, at least two-thirds of the participants must be both low‐income and potentially first-generation college students. Program activities offered by TS grantees include: academic, financial and career counseling; tutorial services; mentoring; and assistance with postsecondary applications. 

Each participating grantee is required to provide project information to the TS Program through its Annual Performance Report (APR), with content stipulated by the program. The current report is based on the APRs submitted by TS 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 funding cycle, which funded a total of 474 projects. Among them, 357 were previously funded projects and 117 were projects funded for the first time. Three of the 474 TS projects did not submit their 2002–03 APR. In the following reporting year (2003–04), two of the 474 projects did not receive continued funding. One of the 472 projects did not submit its 2003–04 APR.

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

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

# Section ITalent Search ProgramProjects and Participants

This section presents selected characteristics of the TS Program projects and the students served, with select data on the previous cycle. 

· Reporting year 2002–03 was the first year of a new funding cycle. In the last year of the 1998–2002 funding cycle, a total of 360 projects were funded. In the 2002–06 funding cycle, the number of projects funded increased to more than 470 (table 1). Total annual funding for the TS projects also increased from less than $110 million in the 1998–2002 cycle to over $143 million in the 2002–06 funding cycle (table 1).

· The average number of students that projects were funded to serve decreased from 891 in 2001–02 of the 1998–2002 funding cycle to 820 in 2002–03 and 821 in 2003–04 (table 1). The average amount per participant that projects were funded to serve increased from $343 in 2001–02 to $369 in 2002–03 and $374 in 2003–04 (table 1).

· The average number of students actually served dropped from 923 in the last year of the 1998–2002 cycle to 805 in 2002–03, then increased to 842 in 2003–04 (table 2). The number actually served was larger than the number funded to serve because some projects were able to become more cost efficient and serve more students. Also, a number of projects recruited additional students to take the place of participants who had left the program earlier than anticipated.

· The number of students who received TS Program services increased from 328,538 in 2001–02 to 379,173 in 2002–03 and 396,595 in 2003–04 (table 2). 

· Compared with the last year of the 1998–2002 funding cycle, the percentage of projects hosted by public four-year institutions decreased by nearly 3 percentage points in 2002–03, and the percentage of projects hosted by two-year institutions increased by nearly 4 percentage points in 2002–03 (table 2). 

· The percentage of students served by different types of host institutions remained relatively stable between the 1998–2002 and 2002–06 funding cycles. Two-year and public four-year institutions continued to serve the largest percentage of students in the 2002–04 reporting years (table 2). Relative to 2001–02, the percentage of students served by public four-year institutions dropped slightly in 2002–03 and 2003–04. The percentage of students served by two-year institutions rose from 30 percent to nearly 34 percent (table 2).

· In 2001–02, about 39 percent of the participants were participating in the program for the first time. Because 2002–03 was the beginning of a new cycle with 117 new projects, the percentage of new participants increased to 48 percent. By 2003–04, the share of new participants dropped to almost the 2001–02 level, at about 40 percent (fig. 1).

· In 2003–04, approximately 73 percent of the participants were low-income and potentially first‐generation college students. Another 15 percent were potentially first-generation only, and nearly 7 percent were low-income only (fig. 2).

· About 62 percent of all participants in 2003–04 were female (fig. 3).

· More than two-thirds of the students were racial or ethnic minorities. In 2003–04, about 35 percent of the students served were African-American; another 22 percent of students were Hispanic or Latino (fig. 4). American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander students constituted less than 5 percent each (fig. 4).

· In terms of academic status or grade level, the largest portion of the students, 44 percent, were in ninth to 11th grade; another 33 percent were in sixth to eighth grade; and 19 percent were seniors (fig. 5). Not surprisingly, about 67 percent of the participants were between the ages of 14 and 18; another 28 percent were between the ages of 11 and 13 (fig. 6).

· In 2003–04, about 7 percent of the participants had limited English proficiency (table 3).

**Table 1.Talent Search Program funding characteristics by reporting year: 2001–02 through 2003–04**

SOURCE: Data for total funding and number of participants 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, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

a The TS Program began a new, four‐year funding cycle in 2002–03. Two projects funded in 2002–03 were not funded in 2003–04.

b *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.

Table 2.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search 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, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04. 

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

a *Two‐year* includes public and private two‐year institutions.

b Community organization includes agencies, organizations, secondary schools and state education agencies.

c The TS Program began a new, four‐year funding cycle in 2002–03. Two projects funded in 2002–03 were not funded in 2003–04.

**Figure 1.Percentage distribution of Talent Search 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, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

* The TS Program began a new, four‐year funding cycle in 2002–03. Two projects funded in 2002–03 were not funded in 2003–04.

**Figure 2.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by eligibility status: 2003–04**

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

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

 Figure 3.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by gender: 2003–04

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

**Figure 4.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by race and ethnicity: 2003–04**

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

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

Figure 5.Percentage distribution of Talent Search 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, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. Not shown in the graph are eight postsecondary students or about 0.002 percent of the total number of participants.

**Figure 6.Percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by age (years):2003–04**

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

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

Table 3.Number and percentage of Talent Search participants with 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, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

a *Two‐year* includes public and private two‐year institutions.

b *Community organization* includes agencies, organizations, secondary schools and state education agencies.

# Section IITarget Schools

As briefly mentioned in the introduction, target schools are middle and high schools that receive program services from TS projects hosted by two- and four-year colleges and universities and public or private agencies or organizations. In areas where there are no TS projects available, projects from the Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) Program—one of the Federal TRIO Programs aimed at providing counseling and services to qualified adults who want to continue their education—are authorized to provide to target schools the same services as those of TS projects. Because target schools from these two programs provide similar services to the participants, the analysis in this section combines the target schools from both programs.

In the last year of the 1998–2002 funding cycle, a combined total of 368 grantees from TS and EOC reported serving a total of 5,834 target schools. Among the 368 grantees, 344 were from the TS Program and served 5,533 target schools. The 2002–2006 funding cycle saw an increase in the number of both grantees and target schools. In 2003–04, a combined total of 510 grantees reported serving 7,710 target schools. Among the 510 grantees, 470 were from the TS Program and served 7,190 target schools.

The APRs report only the names and addresses of the target schools. School characteristics needed for the current analysis were captured through merging with the Common Core of Data (CCD). In both the 2002–03 and 2003–04 reporting years, about 92 percent of the data on target schools merged successfully with the CCD. This section presents the various characteristics of these target schools.

· In 2003–04, about 35 and 34 percent of the target schools were served by projects hosted in public four-year educational institutions and in two-year institutions, respectively (table 4). Less than 20 percent of the target schools were served by private four-year institutions or by community organizations (table 4). 

· When compared with the 1998–2002 funding cycle, the percentage of target schools served by public four-year and private four-year institutions dropped slightly in the 2002–06 funding cycle—from 37 percent to 35 percent, and from 14 percent to 12 percent, respectively (table 4). The percentage of target schools served by two-year institutions increased by 4 percentage points, from 30 percent to 34 percent (table 4).

· The representation of economically disadvantaged students is higher among target schools than among nontarget schools. Children from families with incomes at or below 130 percent of the poverty level are eligible for free meals under the National School Lunch Program. On average, about 37 percent of the students attending the middle and high schools targeted by TS projects were eligible for federally supported free meals. In comparison, an average of 21 percent of students attending nontarget schools were eligible for federally supported free meals (table 5). The difference varies by region, ranging from a 7 percentage point difference in Region X to a 22 percentage point difference in Region V (table 5).

· Whereas 54 percent of all secondary schools in the nation were located in urban areas, about 51 percent of secondary schools served by TS projects were located in urban areas (fig. 7). In contrast, proportionally more target schools were located in rural areas outside the Core-Based Statistical Areas (CBSA) than were all secondary schools in the nation—24 percent and 19 percent, respectively (fig. 7). These schools tend to be the most isolated rural schools.

· The distribution of target schools between urban and rural areas varies by type of host institution. In 2003–04, the majority of the target schools served by community organizations were located in urban areas. TS projects hosted by two-year institutions, however, served a higher percentage of target schools that were located in rural areas (45 percent) than were located in urban areas (39 percent) (table 6).

· The geographic distribution of target schools also varies by the mix of economic backgrounds in the student population. Among target schools with 50 percent or more of their students eligible for federally supported free meals, between 53 and 56 percent were located in urban areas. In comparison, among target schools with less than 50 percent of students eligible for federally supported free meals, less than 48 percent were located in urban areas (table 7).

· Overall, at approximately two-thirds of the target schools, less than 50 percent of their students were eligible for federally supported free meals (table 7). This finding should be considered in conjunction with the statistics reported in table 5 that show that when compared with all secondary schools in the nation, target schools had, on average, a higher concentration of students eligible for federally supported free meals.

Table 4. Number of projects and number and percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target schools, by type of host institution and reporting year: 2001–02 and 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program files of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports, 2001–02 and 2003–04.

*Note:*The TS and EOC programs began a new, four‐year funding cycle in 2002–03. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

a In 2001–02, 344 TS projects served a total of 5,533 target schools. The remaining 301 target schools were served by 24 EOC projects.

b In 2003–04, 470 TS projects served a total of 7,190 target schools. The remaining 520 target schools were served by 40 EOC projects.

c *Two‐year* includes public and private two‐year institutions. 

d *Community organization* includes agencies, organizations, secondary schools and state education agencies.

Table 5. Percentage of students eligible for federally supported free meals under the National School Lunch Program in Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target secondary schools, nontarget secondary schools and all secondary schools, by federal region: 2003–04

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

*Note:*Figures are based on secondary schools only. *Secondary schools* are those in which the lowest grade is sixth grade or higher and those that serve only fifth and sixth grades. In 2003–04, 470 TS projects served a total of 7,190 target schools. The remaining 520 target schools were served by 40 EOC projects.

Figure 7.Percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target secondary schools and all secondary schools in the United States, by locale: 2003–04 

SOURCE: Data from the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports and Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04; and the Common Core of Data, 2003–04.

*Note:* Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. In the Common Core of Data, schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia are assigned locale codes reflecting their communities’ proximity to metropolitan areas and their population size and density (see glossary). *Secondary schools* are those in which the lowest grade is sixth grade or higher and those that serve only fifth and sixth grades.

* *Urban* includes schools in large cities, midsize cities, urban fringes of large cities, and urban fringes of midsize cities.

** C*BSA* refers to Core Based Statistical Areas.

*** *Other* includes schools in neither the 50 states nor the District of Columbia, closed schools and schools for which addresses could not be coded.

Table 6.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers projects and target schools served, by locale and type of host institution: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports and Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04; and the Common Core of Data, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. In the Common Core of Data, schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia are assigned locale codes reflecting their communities’ proximity to metropolitan areas and their population size and density (see glossary). In 2003–04, 470 TS projects served a total of 7,190 target schools. The remaining 520 target schools were served by 40 EOC projects.

a *Urban* includes schools in large cities, midsize cities, urban fringes of large cities and urban fringes of midsize cities.

b *CBSA* refers to Core Based Statistical Areas.

c *All rural* combines *Rural outside CBSA* with *Rural inside CBSA*. Both numbers and percentages of *All rural* are excluded from the totals shown here to avoid over counts.

d *Other* includes schools in neither the 50 states nor the District of Columbia, closed schools and schools for which addresses could not be coded.

e *Two‐year* includes public and private two‐year institutions.

f *Community**organization* includes agencies and organizations, secondary schools and state education agencies.

Table 7.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target secondary schools, by percentage of students eligible for federally supported free meals under the National School Lunch Program and locale: 2003–04 

SOURCE: Data from the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports and Educational Opportunity Centers Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04; and the Common Core of Data, 2003–04.

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. *Secondary schools* are those in which the lowest grade is sixth grade or higher and those that serve only fifth and sixth grades. In the Common Core of Data, schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia are assigned locale codes reflecting their communities’ proximity to metropolitan areas and their population size and density (see glossary). In 2003‐04, 470 TS projects served a total of 7,190 target schools. The remaining 520 target schools were served by 40 EOC projects. 

a *Urban* includes schools in large cities, midsize cities, urban fringes of large cities and urban fringes of midsize cities. 

b *CBSA* refers to Core Based Statistical Areas 

c *All rural* combines *rural outside CBSA* with *rural inside CBSA*. Both numbers and percentages are excluded from the totals shown here to avoid over counts.

d *Other* includes schools in neither the 50 states nor the District of Columbia, closed schools and schools for which addresses could not be coded.

e *Missing* refers to the schools that did not report students who are eligible for federally supported free meals under the National School Lunch Program.

# Section IIIProgram Outcomes

TS-funded projects hosted by two- and four-year colleges and universities and public or private agencies or organizations 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. To monitor how well the projects fulfill their mission, the TS Program identified the following academic milestones as program outcomes: 

· Secondary school promotion, reentry and graduation;

· Postsecondary admission and financial aid assistance;

· Postsecondary admission and reentry; and

· Postsecondary placements. 

During the TS grant application process, potential grantees included in their proposals their target rates of success in each of these identified outcomes. In their APRs, projects 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 objectives. Furthermore, a few projects reported more students in the outcome measures than the number of students served. Because the number of projects with this problem was small, their data were included in the analysis without further editing. Tables A–12 and A–13 of Appendix A list the distribution of projects with various reporting problems in 2003–04.

Figures 8–10 present the first three measures for the years 2000–04. Figure 11 presents postsecondary placements for 2003–04.

· The overwhelming majority of nonsenior TS participants continued their academic pursuits. In the four-years examined (2000–04), about 97 percent of participants who were middle or nonsenior high school students were promoted to the next grade (fig. 8, secondary school promotion).

· Over the same period, approximately 91 to 93 percent of participating 12th-grade students and secondary school dropouts received a high school diploma or completed a high school equivalency program (fig. 8, secondary school graduation).

· In three of the four-years observed, about 66 to 72 percent of the participating secondary school dropouts reentered secondary schools (fig. 8, secondary school reentry). The exceptionally low secondary reentry rate for 2001–02 (51.4 percent) is partially explained by the fact that some grantees that year did not report students who entered GED preparation programs in their APR submissions. 

· Over the same four-year period, about 87 to 88 percent of college-ready participants received assistance in applying for postsecondary admission (fig. 9, assistance in applying for postsecondary admission). Another 85 to 86 percent of the college-ready participants also received assistance in applying for financial aid (fig. 9, assistance in applying for postsecondary financial aid). 

· Between 77 and 79 percent of the college-ready participants were actually admitted into a postsecondary institution in the four-years examined (fig. 10, postsecondary admission). Another 69 to 74 percent of the participants who were postsecondary dropouts reenrolled in or were readmitted to a program at a postsecondary institution (fig. 10, postsecondary reentry). 

· In 2003–04, a majority of those who entered a postsecondary institution that year enrolled in two-year (41 percent) or public four-year institutions (40 percent, fig. 11). Students in TS projects hosted by two-year and public four-year institutions tended to enroll in a postsecondary institution of the same type as that of the TS project in which they had participated.

Figure 8. Percentage of secondary school Talent Search participants who attained secondary school promotion, graduation or reentry, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

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

*Note:*The 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.

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

** The percentage of participants who attained secondary school *promotion*was derived by dividing the number of secondary school participants who were promoted to the next grade in middle school or high school (except those who graduated) by the number of secondary school participants (except 12th-grade students).

*** The percentage of participants who attained secondary school *graduation* was derived by dividing the sum of the number of 12th-grade students who received high school diplomas or others who completed a high school equivalency program by the sum of 12th-grade students and secondary school dropouts.

**** The percentage of participants who gained secondary school *reentry* was derived by dividing the number of those dropouts who reentered secondary schools by the number of secondary school dropouts. 

Figure 9. Percentage of college‐ready Talent Search participants who received assistance in applying for postsecondary admission or financial aid, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

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

*Note: College‐ready* participants are defined as 12th‐grade high school students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates. The 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. 

* The TS Program began a new, four-year funding cycle in 2002–2003. 

** The percentage of participants receiving *assistance in applying for postsecondary admission* was derived by dividing the number of participants who applied for admission to postsecondary education programs by the number of college‐ready participants.

*** The percentage of participants receiving assistance in *applying for postsecondary financial aid* was derived by dividing the number of participants who applied for student financial aid for postsecondary education by the number of college‐ready participants.

Figure 10. Percentage of college‐ready Talent Search participants who gained postsecondary admission or reentry, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

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

*Note: College‐ready* participants are defined as 12th‐grade high school students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates. The 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.

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

** The percentage of participants who gained *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. 

*** The percentage of participants who gained *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.

Figure 11.Percentage distribution of postsecondary placements of Talent Search participants, by type of TS host institution that participants attended: 2003–04 

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

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

* *Community organization* includes agencies and organizations, secondary schools and state education agencies.

** *Two‐year* includes public and private two‐year institutions.

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

# Appendix ASupporting Tables

**Table A‐1.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search 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, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

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

a The TS Program began a new, four‐year funding cycle in 2002–03. 

**Table A‐2.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by eligibility status: 2003–04**

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

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

**Table A‐3.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by gender: 2003–04**

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

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

Table A‐4.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by race and ethnicity: 2003–04

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

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

**Table A‐5.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search 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, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

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

**Table A‐6.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search participants, by age (years): 2003–04**

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

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

Table A‐7.Number and percentage distribution of Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers target secondary schools and all secondary schools in the United States, by locale: 2003–04

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

*Note:*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. In the Common Core of Data, schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia are assigned locale codes reflecting their communities’ proximity to metropolitan areas and their population size and density (see glossary). In 2003–04, 470 TS projects served a total of 7,190 target schools. The remaining 520 target schools were served by 40 EOC projects.

a *Urban* includes schools in large cities, midsize cities, urban fringes of large cities and urban fringes of midsize cities.

b *CBSA* refers to Core Based Statistical Areas.

c All rural combines Rural outside CBSA with Rural inside CBSA. Both numbers and percentages of All rural are excluded from the totals shown here to avoid over counts.

d *Other*includes schools in neither the 50 states nor the District of Columbia, closed schools and schools for which addresses could not be coded.

Table A‐8.Number and percentage of targeted Talent Search participants who attained secondary school promotion, graduation or reentry, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

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

*Note:*The percentages for each outcome measure were calculated on the basis of the projects that had identified a target rate to be achieved, recruited and served participants appropriate to the outcome measure, and reported having participants attaining the identified objectives.

a The percentage of participants who attained *secondary school promotion* was derived by dividing the number of secondary school participants who were promoted to the next grade in middle school or high school (except those who graduated) by the number of secondary school participants (except 12th‐grade students). 

b The percentage of participants who attained *secondary school graduation* was derived by dividing the sum of 12th‐grade students who received high school diplomas plus those who completed high school equivalency programs by the sum of 12th‐grade students and secondary school dropouts. 

c The percentage of participants who gained *secondary school reentry* was derived by dividing the number of those dropouts who reentered secondary schools by the number of secondary school dropouts.

d The TS Program began a new, four‐year funding cycle in 2002–03. Two projects funded in 2002–03 were not funded in 2003–04. 

Table A‐9. Number and percentage of college‐ready Talent Search participants who received assistance in applying for postsecondary admission or financial aid, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

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

*Note: College‐ready participants* are defined as 12th‐grade high school students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates. The percentages for each outcome measure were calculated on the basis of the projects that had identified a target rate to be achieved, recruited and served participants appropriate to the outcome measure and reported having participants attaining the identified objectives.

a The percentage of college‐ready participants receiving assistance in*applying for postsecondary admission* was derived by dividing the number of participants who applied for admission to programs of postsecondary education by the number of college‐ready participants.

b The percentage of college‐ready participants in receiving assistance in *applying for postsecondary financial aid* was derived by dividing the number of participants who applied for student financial aid for postsecondary education by the number of college‐ready participants.

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

Table A‐10. Number and percentage of college‐ready Talent Search participants who gained postsecondary admission or postsecondary reentry, by reporting year: 2000–01 through 2003–04

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

*Note: College‐ready participants* are defined as 12th‐grade high school students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates. The percentages for each outcome measure were calculated on the basis of the projects that had identified a target rate to be achieved, recruited and served participants appropriate to the outcome measure and reported having participants attaining the identified objectives. 

a The percentage of participants who gained *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 The percentage of participants who gained *postsecondary reentry* was derived by dividing the number of participants re‐enrolled in or re‐admitted to a program of postsecondary education (including transfer participants) by the number of postsecondary dropouts.

c The TS Program began a new, four‐year funding cycle in 2002–03. Two projects funded in 2002–03 were not funded in 2003–04. Seven projects in 2002–03 and five projects in 2003–04 were excluded from the *postsecondary reentry* measure because they reported successes in excess of the number of eligible participants.

Table A‐11.Number and percentage distribution of postsecondary placements of Talent Search participants, by type of host institution: 2003–04

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

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

a *Two‐year* includes public and private two‐year institutions. 

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

c *Community organization* includes agencies and organizations, secondary schools and state education agencies.

Table A‐12.Number of Talent Search projects not identifying a program outcome as a project objective, by program outcome measure: 2003–04

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

*Note:*The number of Talent Search projects is based on the total number of projects that submitted Annual Performance Reports.

**Table A‐13.Number of Talent Search projects with numbers of 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, Talent Search Annual Performance Reports, 2003–04.

*Note:*The number of Talent Search projects includes the projects that had identified a target rate for the measure to be achieved, recruited and served participants appropriate to the outcome measure but reported more participants attaining the identified objectives than had been recruited. 

# Glossary

This glossary lists the 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 Talent Search APRs provide data on the participants, activities and outcomes for the funded projects.

**College-ready participants** are defined in the instructions for the Talent Search APRs as 12th-grade high school students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates.

**Common Core of Data (CCD)** is the U.S. Department of Education’s primary database on public elementary and secondary education in the United States. The CCD is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are designed to be comparable across all states. The objectives of the CCD are twofold: 1) to provide an official listing of public elementary and secondary schools and school districts in the nation, which can be used to select samples for other NCES surveys; and 2) to provide basic information and descriptive statistics on public elementary and secondary schools and schooling in general. 

**Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA)** are used by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the U.S. Census Bureau to refer collectively to metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. The general concept of a metropolitan or micropolitan area is that of a core area containing a substantial population nucleus, together with adjacent communities having a high degree of economic and social integration with that core. Each CBSA must contain at least one urban area of 10,000 or more inhabitants; each metropolitan statistical area, at least one urbanized area of 50,000 or more inhabitants; and each micropolitan statistical area, at least one urban cluster of at least 10,000 but less than 50,000 inhabitants. For more information, see http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/aboutmetro.html.

**Federal regions** are as follows:

Region I:Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont 

Region II:New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands 

Region III:Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia

Region IV:Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee

Region V:Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin

Region VI:Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas

Region VII:Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska

Region VIII:Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming

Region IX:Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, the Federated States of Micronesia, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands

Region X:Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington

**First-generation college student** is 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.

**Locale codes,** one of three major systems used by federal agencies to classify the urbanicity of particular geographical or governmental units, were developed by the National Center for Education Statistics in the 1990s and revised in 2002. The codes signify the urbanicity or rurality of individual schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia and are used in the CCD and for other purposes at the U.S. Department of Education. Locale codes are based on the addresses of the individual schools and reflect three aspects of the schools’ communities: proximity to metropolitan areas, population size and density.

· Large city is a principal city of a metropolitan Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) with a population greater than or equal to 250,000.

· Midsize city is a principal city of a metropolitan CBSA with a population less than 250,000.

· Urban fringe of a large city is any incorporated place, census-designated place, or non-place territory within a metropolitan CBSA of a large city and defined as urban by the U.S. Census Bureau.

· Urban fringe of a midsize city is any incorporated place, census-designated place, or non-place territory within a CBSA of a midsize city and defined as urban by the U.S. Census Bureau.

· Large town is an incorporated place or census-designated place with a population greater than or equal to 25,000 and located outside a metropolitan CBSA or inside a micropolitan CBSA.

· Small town is an incorporated place or census-designated place with a population less than 25,000 and greater than or equal to 2,500 located outside a metropolitan CBSA or inside a micropolitan CBSA.

· Rural, outside CBSA is any incorporated place, census-designated place, or non-place territory not within a metropolitan CBSA or within a micropolitan CBSA and defined as rural by the U.S. Census Bureau. The population for any place or non-place territory in this code is less than 2,500.

· Rural, inside CBSA is any incorporated place, census-designated place, or non-place territory within a metropolitan CBSA and defined as rural by the U.S. Census Bureau. The population for any place or non-place territory in this code is less than 2,500.

**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 by using criteria established by the U.S. Census Bureau.

**Participant status** indicates involvement in the Talent Search Program for each student in the reporting year.

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

· *A continuing participant* is an individual who participated in the Talent Search 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 reentry** refers to participants who were previously dismissed or who halted their educational progress toward a postsecondary degree, but who reenrolled in a program of postsecondary education during the reporting period or have been readmitted for the next academic term.

**Secondary school graduation** refers to all high school seniors (and GED or alternative education students) who receive a high school diploma or complete a high school equivalency program during the reporting period. 

**Secondary school promotion** refers to all middle and high school students (not including 12th-grade high school students) who will continue in secondary school for the next academic term.

**Secondary school reentry** refers to secondary school dropouts who reenter a program of secondary education during the reporting period.

**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 middle or high school designated by a Talent Search 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

�EMBED Word.Picture.8���

�EMBED Word.Picture.8���

�

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

� For the grant cycle beginning in 2006, the TS Program established five mandatory objectives for all projects: secondary school promotion; secondary school graduation; application for student financial aid; application for postsecondary admissions; and enrollment in postsecondary education.

� College-ready participants are defined as 12th-grade high school students and high school (and high school equivalency) graduates.

# _1224502567.xls

# _1224502701.xls

# _1224502730.xls

# _1224503367.xls

# _1224502716.xls

# _1224502634.xls

# _1224502523.xls

# _1224502557.xls

# _1224485393.xls

# _1224502504.xls

# _1096442925.doc

# _1224419070.xls

# _1096442423.doc