An Interim Report on 

The Student Support 

Services Program:

2002–03 and 2003–04, With 

Select Data From 1998–2002

 U . S . D E P A R T M E N T O F E D U C A T I O N

Prepared for:

The U.S. Department of Education

Offi ce of Postsecondary Education

Federal TRIO Programs

By:

Yu Zhang

Tsze Chan

American Institutes for Research

2007

An Interim Report on 

The Student Support 

Services Program:

2002–03 and 2003–04, With 

Select Data From 1998–2002

 U . S . D E P A R T M E N T O F E D U C A T I O N
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. Shirley Johnson served as the contracting offi cer’s representative. The views 

expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the Department of Education. No offi cial 

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

Offi ce of Postsecondary Education

James Manning

Acting Assistant Secretary

Federal TRIO Programs

Larry Oxendine

Director

March 2007

This report is in the public domain, except for the image on the cover. 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, Offi ce of Postsecondary Education, Federal TRIO Programs, An Interim Report on The Student Support 

Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002, Washington, D.C., 2007.

Cover photo © 2007 JupiterImages Corporation.

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-mail 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: www.ed.gov/programs/triostudsupp/index.html.

On request, this publication is available in alternative 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.
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 iii

Contents

Figures .....................................................................................................................................................iv

Tables ........................................................................................................................................................v

Foreword .................................................................................................................................................vii

Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................................ix

Highlights ................................................................................................................................................xi

Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................1

Section I: Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics ...............................................................3

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact ...............................................................................................13

Appendix A: Number of Grantee Institutions and Student Records, Select Years .....................................25

Appendix B: State Tables on Funding and Select Participant Characteristics ..........................................27

Appendix C: Supporting Tables for Figures .............................................................................................31

Glossary ..................................................................................................................................................35

References ..............................................................................................................................................37
iv An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Figures

1. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services grantees and all degree-granting institutions, 

by type of institution: 2003–04 ..................................................................................................................6

2. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services grantees and all degree-granting institutions, 

by minority-serving and nonminority-serving status: 2003–04 ....................................................................6

3. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by participant status and type of 

institution: 2003–04 ...................................................................................................................................8

4. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by eligibility status and type of 

institution: 2003–04 ...................................................................................................................................9

5. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by current year enrollment status 

and type of institution: 2003–04 ..............................................................................................................10

6. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by race/ethnicity and type of 

institution: 2003–04 .................................................................................................................................10

7. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by gender and type of institution: 

2003–04 ...................................................................................................................................................11
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 v

 Tables

1. Student Support Services program total funding, number of grantees, number of participants 

funded to serve, average award, average amount per participant funded to serve, and average 

number of participants funded to serve by reporting years: 2002–03 and 2003–04 ...................................4

2. Number and percentage of Student Support Services grantees, number and percentage of SSS 

grantees submitting annual performance reports, and number, percentage distribution, and average 

number of participants served, by type of institution and reporting years: 2002–03 and 2003–04 ............5

3. Number and percentage of the 1999–2000 through 2002–03 full-time Student Support Services 

freshman participants enrolled one, two, and three years after the freshman year in the original, 

nongrantee, and any institution, by type of institution .............................................................................15

4. Number and percentage of Student Support Services 1999–2003 full-time freshman cohort 

participants at two-year institutions enrolled in any institution one and two years after the 

freshman year, by eligibility status ............................................................................................................16

5. Number and percentage of Student Support Services 1999–2003 full-time freshman cohort 

participants at four-year institutions enrolled in any institution one, two, and three years after 

the freshman year, by eligibility status......................................................................................................17

6. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 2001–02 and 2002–03 full-time 

freshman cohort participants who transferred from two-year to four-year institutions one and two 

years after the freshman year, by degree status ........................................................................................18

7. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 2000–03 full-time freshman cohort 

participants at two-year institutions who completed an associate degree one, two, and three years after 

the freshman year, by eligibility status......................................................................................................20

8. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 1998–2001 full-time freshman cohort 

participants at four-year institutions who completed a bachelor’s degree three, four, and fi ve years after 

the freshman year, by eligibility status......................................................................................................21

9. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 2000–03 full-time freshman cohort 

participants at two-year institutions who were continuously enrolled for at least the fi rst two years and 

completed an associate degree one, two, and three years after the freshman year, by length of program 

services received ......................................................................................................................................23
vi An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Tables

10. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 1998–2001 full-time freshman cohort 

participants at four-year institutions who were continuously enrolled for at least the fi rst four years and 

completed a bachelor’s degree three, four, and fi ve years after the freshman year, by length of program 

services received ......................................................................................................................................24

A–1. Number of Student Support Services grantees and number of student records reported in the 

2002–03 and 2003–04 APRs ...................................................................................................................25

B–1. Number of Student Support Services grantees, funding amount, funding rank, number of 

participants funded to serve, number served, rank of number served, and amount per participant, 

by state: 2003–04 .....................................................................................................................................27

B–2. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, based on race/ethnicity, gender, 

and eligibility status by state: 2003–04 ....................................................................................................29

C–1. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services grantees and all degree-granting 

institutions, by type of institution: 2003–04 ............................................................................................31

C–2. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services grantees and all degree-granting 

institutions, by minority-serving and nonminority-serving status: 2003–04 ..............................................31

C–3. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by participant status 

and type of institution: 2003–04 ..............................................................................................................32

C–4. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by eligibility status 

and type of institution: 2003–04 ..............................................................................................................32

C–5. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by current year 

enrollment status and type of institution: 2003–04 ..................................................................................33

C–6. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by race/ethnicity 

and type of institution: 2003–04 ..............................................................................................................33

C–7. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by gender and type 

of institution: 2003–04 ............................................................................................................................34
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 vii

Foreword

To ensure the success of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, high-quality postsecondary educational 

opportunities must be made available to all students. In keeping with this goal, the Student Support 

Services (SSS) program of the Federal TRIO Programs provides outreach to help students from 

disadvantaged backgrounds who need academic support to complete their education.

On behalf of the Federal TRIO Programs, we are pleased to present this report, An Interim Report 

on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002. 

The SSS program is designed to increase college persistence and graduation rates for eligible students, 

increase the transfer rates of eligible students from two-year to four-year institutions, and foster an 

institutional climate supportive of the success of low-income and fi rst-generation college students and 

individuals with disabilities.

This is the fourth in a series of reports that present a national snapshot of the SSS program, presenting 

grantee data from 2002–03 and 2003–04 with select data for participant cohorts that started in earlier 

years. The annual performance report (APR), submitted annually by SSS grantees, was the primary data 

source for this report.

We are proud to continue our process for sharing national statistical information on the SSS program 

with staff, grantees, members of Congress and the larger education community. It is our hope that the 

collection and dissemination of this information will foster a dialogue among these groups that is aimed 

at assessing 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 students who 

earn college degrees.

Larry Oxendine

Director

Federal TRIO Programs

U.S. Department of Education
viii An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 ix

Acknowledgments

Publishing this report is the end result of a team effort. Special thanks are given to Frances Bergeron, 

Linda Byrd-Johnson, Julie Laurel, and all other team members of the Federal TRIO Programs for 

reviewing the various drafts, ensuring the accuracy of the fi gures reported, and enriching the report 

with the context and history of the program. We would also like to thank the Student Support Services 

grantees for submitting data for the 1998–99 through 2003–04 reporting years.
x An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 xi

Highlights

This report describes essential characteristics and key program outcome measures for the Student 

Support Services (SSS) program grantees and participants in reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04.

Program Grantees and Program Participants

• The SSS program awarded $262.7 million to 937 grantees in the 2002–03 reporting year and $263.7 

million to 936 grantees in the 2003–04 reporting year (table 1). These grantees served a total of 

207,423 and 208,382 participants in reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04, averaging 222 and 

223 students served per grant, respectively (table 2).

• In both the 2002–03 and 2003–04 reporting years, about 48 percent of the grantees were public 

two-year institutions and 36 percent were public four-year institutions (table 2), with the remainder 

served by the private grantee institutions.

• In the 2003–04 reporting year, about 46 percent of the participants were served by public two-year 

institutions, and almost 40 percent were served by public four-year institutions (table 2), with the 

remainder served by private grantee institutions.

• About 11 percent of the grantees were Hispanic-Serving Institutions, 7 percent were Historically 

Black Colleges and Universities, and 3 percent were Tribal Colleges and Universities. Comparable 

percentages among all degree-granting institutions in the nation were 6 percent, 3 percent, and 1 

percent, respectively (fi g. 2).

• In the 2003–04 reporting year, approximately 41 percent of participants served by two-year 

institutions received program services for the fi rst time, and the remaining 59 percent had received 

program services in previous reporting years. Comparable fi gures for participants served by fouryear institutions were 38 percent and 62 percent, respectively (fi g. 3).

• In the 2003–04 reporting year, approximately 77 percent of participants at two-year institutions 

and 74 percent at four-year institutions were in the eligibility categories of low-income and fi rstgeneration, low-income and disabled, or disabled only. These percentages exceeded the statute 

and regulations requirements, which state that at least two-thirds of SSS participants must be 

low-income and fi rst-generation, low-income and disabled, or disabled only (fi g. 4).
xii An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Persistence

• Over two-thirds of the full-time freshmen in two-year institutions were enrolled in a postsecondary 

institution in the next year, and over half of the freshmen were enrolled two years after. Three years 

after the freshman year, about 40 percent were enrolled in a postsecondary institution (table 3).

• At four-year institutions, over 82 percent of participants who enrolled full-time in their freshman 

year were enrolled in a postsecondary institution in the following year. Two years after the freshman 

year, over two-thirds of these freshmen were still enrolled in postsecondary institutions. Three 

years after the freshman year, just over 60 percent continued their enrollment in a postsecondary 

institution (table 3).

Transfer from Two-year to Four-year Institutions

• Two years after the freshman year, a total of about 14 percent of full-time freshmen who had 

entered two-year institutions in the 2001–02 reporting year had transferred to four-year institutions 

(table 6).

Degree Completion

• Approximately 9 percent of the 2000–01 full-time freshmen at two-year institutions earned their 

associate degree from the grantee institution by the end of the second year. Two years after the 

freshman year, the cumulative percentage of these freshmen having earned their associate degree 

increased to 18 percent and to 23 percent in three years after the freshman year (table 7).

• About 11 percent of the 1998–99 freshmen at four-year institutions received their bachelor’s degree 

from the grantee institution three years after the freshman year. Four years after the freshman year, 

the percentage of these freshmen who received their bachelor’s degree increased to 22 percent and 

to 28 percent fi ve years after the freshman year (table 8).

• At four-year institutions, the fi rst-generation only participants were more likely than participants 

of other eligibility statuses to earn a bachelor’s degree four or fi ve years after the freshman year 

(table 8).

Length of Services Received and Degree Completion

• In all the freshman cohorts examined, and across both two-year and four-year institutions, 

participants who received more years of services had a higher degree completion rate than 

participants who received services for fewer years (table 9 and table 10). This fi nding should be 

viewed as the fi rst step toward a more thorough understanding of the relationship between length 

of services and degree completion. The impact of institutional and individual characteristics, and 

how they interact with program participation, for example, also must be considered.

Highlights
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 1

Introduction

The Student Support Services (SSS) program is one of the three original TRIO programs authorized 

in 1968 by Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. §1101a), as amended. The goal of SSS is to increase 

the postsecondary persistence and graduation rates of low-income students, fi rst-generation college 

students, or students with disabilities and to facilitate these students’ transition from one level of higher 

education to the next.1

 SSS program services are provided by postsecondary degree-granting institutions 

that receive SSS grants. Activities and services offered by SSS grantees include, but are not limited to, 

instruction in basic skills, tutoring, academic advising, fi nancial aid and career counseling, transfer and 

graduate school counseling, and mentoring. Some SSS grantee institutions also may provide special 

services to eligible students with limited English profi ciency. Beginning in 2001–02, SSS grantees may 

use up to 20 percent of grantee funds for grant aid to participants.

Each grantee is required to provide grantee information to the Federal TRIO Programs through the 

annual performance report (APR), with content stipulated by the program. The current report is based on 

the APRs submitted by the SSS grantees for the 2002–03 and 2003–04 reporting years, with select data 

from the reporting period 1998–99 through 2001–02. Reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04 were the 

second and third years of a four-year funding cycle that started in 2001–02. The select data from previous 

years are used for presenting participant cohorts that started before the 2002–03 reporting year.

This is the latest in a series of four reports describing the SSS program. It differs from the previous 

reports in several ways:

• This report presents for the fi rst time the 2002–03 and 2003–04 APR data.

• The purpose of this report is to update key grantee and participant information.

• Because of their disadvantaged background, SSS participants often need a longer time to complete 

a degree than their counterparts with dissimilar backgrounds. This report displays the completion 

rates for the 1998–99 freshman cohort participants who completed a bachelor’s degree within six 

years of beginning college, that is, within fi ve years after their freshman year.

• This report also presents the degree completion rate by the length of time participants received 

services.

1

 The Federal TRIO Programs have grown from three to eight programs since they were fi rst authorized by the Higher 

Education Act of 1965, as amended, and now include Upward Bound (1964), Talent Search (1965), Student Support Services 

(1968), Educational Opportunity Centers (1972), Training Program for Federal TRIO Programs (1976), Ronald E. McNair 

Postbaccalaureate Achievement (1986), Upward Bound Math-Science (1990), and TRIO Dissemination Partnership (1998).
2 An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Introduction

The rest of this report consists of two sections. Section I describes select grantee and participant 

characteristics for reporting years 2002–03 and 2003–04. Section II presents information on program 

outcomes and impact as measured by persistence and degree completion rates for full-time freshmen and 

type of institution. Section II also presents data on length of services received and degree completion. 

After Section II, three appendices provide some supplemental or supportive information. Appendix A 

presents the number of student records contained in the 2002–03 and 2003–04 APR data. Appendix 

B reports select characteristics of grantees and participants by state. Appendix C provides counts 

corresponding to the percentages displayed in the fi gures.

The APRs provide information on the education progress of participants only for the period the 

students are enrolled at the grantee institution. Academic progress of transferred students is not reported 

in the APR. Thus, using only APR data underreports the achievement of the SSS program. Because the 

majority of SSS participants are from low-income families and, therefore, eligible to apply for fi nancial 

aid, the 1998–2004 federal student fi nancial aid records were used to supplement missing enrollment 

information. This use of fi nancial aid data has facilitated better tracking of participants over time. For 

example, among participants at two-year colleges, the percentage of 2002–03 freshmen enrolled at 

the original institution in 2003–04 was just over 70 percent; using the student fi nancial aid records to 

supplement APR data led to the determination that the percentage of 2002–03 participants enrolled in 

any postsecondary institution in 2003–04 was close to 81 percent (see table 3). However, the student 

fi nancial aid data could not provide reliable information on degree completion. For this reason, the 

bachelor’s degree completion rate of participants who transferred from two-year to four-year institutions 

remains underestimated.

In addition to the supplemental information from student fi nancial aid fi les, beginning in 2001–02, 

SSS grantees were asked to verify or update enrollment and degree completion information on participants 

who, according to their enrollment status at the end of the previous reporting year, should have been 

enrolled in the current reporting year but whose records were missing. The SSS program currently 

is exploring additional options to improve the degree completion rates to more accurately refl ect the 

achievement of the grantees.
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 3

2

 The targeted total of participants refers to the grantee’s planned level of service in terms of numbers of students, as agreed

to by the Federal TRIO offi ce before the beginning of the funding year, corresponding to the number of participants funded to 

serve in table 1.

3 Students served includes new and continuing participants reported by each grantee.

Section I

Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics

This section presents select characteristics of SSS grantees and participants for reporting years 

2002–03 and 2003–04, with some national data provided for comparison.

Characteristics of Grantees for Select Reporting Years

The 2002–03 and 2003–04 reporting years were the second and third years of a four-year funding 

cycle that began in 2001–02.

• In reporting year 2002–03, the SSS program awarded $262.7 million to 937 grantees to serve a 

targeted total of 198,551 participants.2

 In reporting year 2003–04, the SSS program awarded $263.7 

million to 936 grantees to serve a targeted total of 195,288 college students (table 1).

• Compared with reporting year 2002–03, the average grantee award and the average amount per 

participant in reporting year 2003–04 increased slightly from $280,375 to $281,678 and from $1,323 

to $1,350, respectively. The average number of participants funded to serve decreased slightly from 

212 students in reporting year 2002–03 to 209 students in reporting year 2003–04 (table 1).

• Only three grantees in reporting year 2002–03 and only two grantees in reporting year 2003–04 did 

not submit APRs. Therefore, the response rates for these reporting years were nearly 100 percent 

(table 2).

• The average number of students served per grantee was 222 in reporting year 2002–03 and 223 in 

reporting year 2003–04.3

 Public four-year grantee institutions served, on average, more participants 

per grantee than other types of institutions (table 2).

• In the 2003–04 reporting year, public two-year institutions served about 46 percent of the program 

participants, and public four-year institutions served about 40 percent of the participants. Private 

four-year institutions served about 14 percent of program participants, with private two-year 

institutions comprising only 1 percent (table 2).

• In both the 2002–03 and 2003–04 reporting years, 48 percent of the grantees were public two-year 

institutions and 36 percent were public four-year institutions (table 2). In comparison, 26 percent 

of all degree-granting institutions in the nation were public two-year institutions and 15 percent 

were public four-year institutions (fi g. 1).
4

Section I: Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table 1. Student Support Services program total funding, number of grantees, number of participants 

funded to serve, average award, average amount per participant funded to serve, and average 

number of participants funded to serve by reporting years: 2002–03 and 2003–04

 Average amount Average number

 Number of Average per participant of participants

 Total funding Number of participants award funded to serve funded to

Reporting year ($) grantees funded to servea

 ($) ($) serve

2002–03 262,711,302 937 198,551 280,375 1,323 212

2003–04 263,650,147 936 195,288 281,678 1,350 209

SOURCE: Data from program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs.

a

Participants funded to serve refers to the grantee’s planned level of service in terms of numbers of students, as agreed to by 

the Federal TRIO Programs before the beginning of the funding year.

• Although only 9 percent of all U.S. degree-granting institutions were minority-serving institutions 

(MSIs),4

 about 21 percent of the SSS grantees were MSIs in the 2003–04 reporting year (fi g. 2):

• Among SSS grantees, 7 percent were Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), 

compared with 3 percent of all degree-granting institutions (fi g. 2);

• Among SSS grantees, 11 percent were Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), compared with 6 

percent of all degree-granting institutions (fi g. 2); and

• Although only about 3 percent of the SSS grantee institutions were Tribal Colleges and Universities 

(TCUs), that number was three times larger than the percentage of TCUs represented in all 

degree-granting institutions (fi g. 2).

4

 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, 

Digest of Education Statistics, Washington, D.C., 2004.
5

Section I: Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table 2. Number and percentage of Student Support Services grantees, number and percentage of SSS 

grantees submitting annual performance reports, and number, percentage distribution, and 

average number of participants served, by type of institution and reporting years: 2002–03 

and 2003–04

 Number of Percent of Average

 grantees that grantees that Number of Percent of number of

 Number Percent submitted submitted participants participants participants

Type of institution of grantees of grantees APRs APRs served served served

2002–03

Public four-year 334 35.7 333 99.7 84,128 40.6 253

Private four-year 141 15.1 140 99.3 27,939 13.5 200

Public two-year 449 47.9 449 100.0 93,105 44.9 207

Private two-year 13 1.4 12 92.3 2,251 1.1 188

 All grantees 937 100.0 934 99.7 207,423 100.0 222

2003–04

Public four-year 334 35.7 333 99.7 83,020 39.8 249

Private four-year 141 15.1 141 100.0 28,454 13.7 202

Public two-year 449 48.0 448 99.8 94,771 45.5 212

Private two-year 12 1.3 12 100.0 2,137 1.0 178

 All grantees 936 100.0 934 99.8 208,382 100.0 223

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports (APRs), 2002–03 and 2003–04.

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.
6

Section I: Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

SSS projects All degree-granting institutions

Historically Black

Colleges and Universities

Hispanic-Serving

Institutions

Tribal Colleges

and Universities

Nonminority-serving

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Institution Status

6.9 2.5

11.0

5.7 2.6 0.8

79.5

91.0

Figure 2. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services grantees and all degree-granting 

institutions, by minority-serving and nonminority-serving status: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 2003–04, and from the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, Digest of Education Statistics, Washington, D.C., 2004. 

Information on Historically Black Colleges and Universities can be found at: http://www.ed.gov/about/inits/list/whhbcu/

edlite-list.html (data retrieved on April 26, 2006); Hispanic-Serving Institutions at: http://www.ed.gov/programs/idueshsi/

defi nition.html (data retrieved on April 26, 2006); and Tribal Colleges and Universities at: http://www.ed.gov/about/inits/list/

whtc/edlite-tclist.html (data retrieved on April 26, 2006).

SSS projects All degree-granting institutions

Public 4-year Private 4-year Public 2-year Private 2-year

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Type of Institution

35.7

15.0 15.1

44.8 48.0

25.6

1.3

14.6

Figure 1. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services grantees and all degree-granting 

institutions, by type of institution: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs and the National Center for 

Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, Washington, D.C., 2004, Table 244—Degree-granting institutions, by 

control and type of institution: 1949–50 to 2003–04. This table can be found at: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d04/

tables/dt04_244.asp.

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.
7

Section I: Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Characteristics of Participants Served in the 2003–04 Reporting Year

Students participating in the SSS grantees were identifi ed in the APRs as “new,” “continuing,” or 

“prior-year.” A new participant is an individual who is participating in the SSS program for the fi rst time 

in the current reporting period. A continuing participant is an individual who participated in the SSS 

program in a previous reporting period and is participating in the current reporting period. A “prior-year” 

participant is an individual who had participated in the SSS program in a previous reporting period but 

is not receiving any program services in the current reporting period. This section presents data on the 

demographic characteristics of the participants who received services in the reporting year—participants 

who were reported either as new or as continuing in the APRs.

Information regarding the participation status, eligibility status, current year enrollment status, 

race/ethnicity and gender of participants served in both the 2002–03 and the 2003–04 reporting years 

were reviewed. Because the data differ only slightly between the two reporting years, only data from the 

2003–04 reporting year are summarized in the following discussion.

• Participant status of new versus continuing—In the 2003–04 reporting year, 41 percent of the 

participants at two-year institutions and 38 percent of the participants at four-year institutions 

were new participants, receiving program services for the fi rst time in 2003–04 (fi g. 3).

• Participant eligibility5

—Approximately 65 percent of the participants served by two-year institutions 

and 62 percent served by four-year institutions were fi rst-generation college students from lowincome families. Overall, approximately 77 percent of participants at two-year institutions and 74 

percent at four-year institutions were low-income and fi rst-generation, low-income and disabled, 

or disabled only (fi g. 4). These percentages exceeded the statutory and regulatory requirements, 

which state that at least two-thirds of SSS participants must be low-income and fi rst-generation, 

low-income and disabled, or disabled only.

• Current year enrollment status—In 2003–04, about 53 percent of the participants served at twoyear institutions were full-time students. By comparison, about 78 percent of the participants at 

four-year institutions were full-time students. About one-quarter of the participants at two-year 

institutions and 13 percent of the participants at four-year institutions had enrollment status that 

varied between semesters or quarters (fi g. 5).6

• Race/ethnicity—In 2003–04, the percentage distribution of participants by race/ethnicity varied 

across type of institution (fi g. 6):

• Forty-seven percent (47 percent) of the participants served at two-year institutions were white 

compared with 37 percent at the four-year institutions.

5

 To receive assistance, students must be enrolled or accepted for enrollment in a program of postsecondary education at a 

grantee institution. Low-income students who are fi rst-generation college students or students with disabilities evidencing 

academic need are eligible to participate in the SSS program. Two-thirds of the participants in any SSS project must be lowincome and fi rst-generation, low-income and disabled, or disabled only. One-third of the disabled participants must be lowincome students.

6

 An example of varied enrollment is a student enrolling half-time in the fall semester and three-quarter time in the spring 

semester.
8

Section I: Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

New Continuing

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Participant Statusa

41.1 37.6

58.9 62.4

Figure 3. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by participant status and 

type of institution: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04.

a

A new participant is an individual who participated in the SSS program for the fi rst time in the reporting period. A 

continuing participant is an individual who received services in both the current reporting period and in a previous reporting 

period.

• Conversely, four-year institutions served more minority students, particularly Hispanic and 

African-American students, than did two-year institutions. About 20 percent of the students 

served at four-year institutions were Hispanic compared with 14 percent served at two-year 

institutions. About 32 percent of the students served at four-year institutions were AfricanAmerican, whereas 29 percent of the students served at two-year institutions were AfricanAmerican.

• Gender—Overall, SSS grantees continue to serve more female than male students. At two-year 

institutions, about 72 percent of the participants were females, about two and a half times the 

percentage of males (28 percent). The male to female percentage difference was less at four-year 

institutions (64 percent vs. 36 percent; fi g. 7).
9

Section I: Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

Low-income and

first-generation

Low-income and

disabled

Disabled only Low-income only First-generation only

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Participant Eligibility Statusa

64.8 62.2

6.7 5.4 5.5 6.8 6.0 8.0

17.0 17.6

Figure 4. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by eligibility status and type 

of institution: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04.

a

To be eligible to participate in the SSS program, a student must be enrolled or accepted for enrollment in a program of 

postsecondary education that receives a SSS program grant and must be qualifi ed in one of the following fi ve eligibility 

categories: low-income and fi rst-generation, low-income and disabled, disabled only, low-income only, or fi rst-generation 

only. These terms are defi ned below:

• Low-income student—a student whose family’s taxable income does not exceed 150 percent of the poverty level in 

the calendar year preceding the year in which the individual initially received services. The poverty level amount is 

determined using criteria established by the Bureau of the Census of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

• First-generation college student—a student from a family in which neither parent (whether natural or adoptive) 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.

• Student with disabilities—a student who has a diagnosed physical or mental impairment that substantially limits his or 

her ability to participate in the educational experiences and opportunities offered by the grantee institution.
10

Section I: Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

Full-time Three-quarter

time

Half-time Less than

half-time

Varied Unknown

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Enrollment Statusa

52.7

77.8

7.4 2.9

8.0 3.2 4.9 1.5

24.8

12.5

2.2 2.0

Figure 5. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by current year enrollment 

status and type of institution: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04. 

a

Varied enrollment status refers to instances in which the enrollment status of a student varies from one semester or quarter 

to another semester or quarter. For example, the enrollment status of a student who enrolls half-time in the fall semester 

and three-quarter time in the spring semester would be classifi ed as varied enrollment. Unknown enrollment status refers to 

a missing or out-of-range response.

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

American

Indian or

Alaska

Native

Asian Black or

African

American

Hispanic or

Latino

White Native Hawaiian 

or other

Pacific Islander

More than

one race

reporteda

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Race/Ethnicity

4.5 3.3 3.0 5.8

28.8 31.9

14.2

19.5

46.5

37.3

1.7 0.7 1.3 1.5

Figure 6. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by race/ethnicity and type of 

institution: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04.

a

More than one race reported is a single category listed in the race/ethnicity fi eld of the annual performance report.
11

Section I: Select Grantee and Active Participant Characteristics

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Male Female

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Gender

27.7

72.3

35.7

64.3

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

Figure 7. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by gender and type of 

institution: 2003–04

SOURCE: Data from the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04.
12 An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 13

Section II

Program Outcome and Impact

As mentioned earlier, the goals and objectives of the SSS program are to increase the postsecondary 

persistence and graduation rates of students from disadvantaged backgrounds and to facilitate 

these students’ transition from one level of higher education to the next. The following academic 

accomplishments have been identifi ed as program outcome measures for assessing the performance of 

the SSS grantees:

• Percentage of a full-time freshman participant cohort enrolled one, two, and three years after the 

freshman year;

• Cumulative percentage of a full-time freshman participant cohort at two-year institutions who 

transferred to four-year institutions one and two years after the freshman year;

• Cumulative percentage of a full-time freshman participant cohort at two-year institutions who 

earned an associate degree one, two, and three years after the freshman year;

• Cumulative percentage of a full-time freshman participant cohort at four-year institution who 

earned a bachelor’s degree three, four, and fi ve years after the freshman year.

A full-time freshman participant cohort refers to students who (1) received SSS services for the fi rst 

time in the reporting year (“new” participants), (2) were in their fi rst year of postsecondary education, 

(3) had never attained a bachelor’s degree, and (4) were enrolled full-time in their freshman year. The 

last condition was imposed in order to restrict the data to a reasonable number of years to observe 

degree completion.

Persistence

Table 3 shows the enrollment status one, two, and three years after the freshman year for four fulltime freshman cohorts—1999–2000 through 2002–03—in both two-year and four-year institutions. 

Tables 4 and 5 show the persistence status of these same cohorts by eligibility status. Table 4 focuses 

on full-time freshman participants at two-year institutions, and table 5 focuses on full-time freshman 

participants at four-year institutions.7

7

 Tables 3, 4, and 5 show the percentage of freshmen who reported being enrolled in the reporting year, not the percentage of 

freshmen who continuously enrolled.
14

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

• At two-year institutions, over two-thirds of each of the four full-time freshman cohorts enrolled in 

a postsecondary institution in one year after the freshman year. Two years after the freshman year, 

the enrollment rate of these freshmen was over 50 percent. Three years after freshman year, the 

enrollment rate was about 40 percent (table 3).

• About 11 percent of the 2002–03 full-time freshmen enrolled in institutions in a nongrantee 

institution in the second year. Three years after the freshman year, this number had doubled, with 

slightly over 22 percent enrolled in a nongrantee institution (table 3).8

• At two-year institutions, the enrollment rate for the category “in any institution” one, two, and three 

years after the freshman year increased with each successive cohort (table 3).

• Table 3 indicates that at four-year institutions, for the category “in any institution,” over 82 percent 

of each of the four full-time freshman cohort participants enrolled in the year following their 

freshman year (i.e., second year), and over two-thirds of them enrolled two years after and less than 

two-thirds enrolled three years after the freshman year. Unlike participants at two-year institutions, 

who can complete an associate degree in the second year, participants at four-year institutions do 

not usually attain a bachelor’s degree within two years after the freshman year. Thus, the decrease 

in the enrollment rate two years after the freshman year at four-year institutions can mostly be 

attributed to participants who dropped out or transferred.

• With two exceptions, the enrollment rate at four-year institutions for the category “in any institution” 

improved with each successive cohort (table 3). The fi rst exception is the enrollment rate of the 

2002–03 cohort (86 percent) one year after the freshman year, which was lower than that of the two 

preceding cohorts. The second exception is the enrollment rate of the 2001–02 freshman cohort 

two years after the freshman year, which was slightly lower than that of the 2000–01 freshman 

cohort (73.0 percent and 73.2 percent, respectively).

• Table 4 shows that at two-year institutions, changes in the percentage of full-time freshmen 

enrolled in a postsecondary institution over time as observed in table 3 occurred in all eligibility 

status groups.

• Table 5 shows that changes in the percentage of full-time freshmen enrolled over time as observed 

in table 3 occurred in every eligibility group at four-year institutions.

• Table 5 also shows that at four-year institutions, the enrollment rate of participants whose eligibility 

status was either low-income and fi rst-generation or low-income and disabled was consistently 

higher than that of participants with other eligibility statuses.

8

 A nongrantee institution refers to a postsecondary institution that was not funded by the SSS program in the reporting year
15

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table 3. Number and percentage of the 1999–2000 through 2002–03 full-time Student Support 

Services freshman participants enrolled one, two, and three years after the freshman year in 

the original, nongrantee, and any institution, by type of institution

 Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

Full-time Number of enrolled in enrolled in enrolled in Number of enrolled in enrolled in enrolled in

freshman full-time original nongrantee any full-time original nongrantee any

cohort year freshmen institutiona

 institution institutionb freshmen institution institution institution

One year after the freshman year

1999–2000 14,422 57.6 15.6 73.2 17,301 68.9 14.0 82.9

2000–01 13,521 64.6 13.4 78.0 17,827 74.6 11.4 85.9

2001–02 17,797 67.6 13.2 80.8 18,876 75.1 11.6 86.6

2002–03 14,859 70.2 10.7 80.9 18,552 75.7 10.0 85.7

Two years after the freshman year

1999–2000 14,422 34.2 18.7 52.9 17,301 52.8 16.1 68.9

2000–01 13,521 35.1 21.9 57.0 17,827 57.8 15.4 73.2

2001–02 17,797 41.4 18.5 59.9 18,876 57.6 15.3 73.0

Three years after the freshman year

1999–2000 14,422 17.8 21.0 38.7 17,301 43.8 16.5 60.3

2000–01 13,521 18.2 22.3 40.5 17,827 48.7 15.2 63.9

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 1999–2000, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03, and 2003–04, and from program fi les 

of the U.S. Department of Education, Offi ce of Postsecondary Education, 1999–2004.

Note: This table reports the percentage of freshmen who were enrolled in the reporting year, not the percentage of freshmen 

who were continuously enrolled from year to year.

a

An original institution is a grantee institution.

b

Percent enrolled in any institution is the sum of the percentage enrolled in the original institution and the percentage 

enrolled in a nongrantee institution. 

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions
16

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table 4. Number and percentage of Student Support Services 1999–2003 full-time freshman cohort 

participants at two-year institutions enrolled in any institution one and two years after the 

freshman year, by eligibility status

Eligibility status Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

One year after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 8,983 74.0 8,529 78.2 11,724 81.2 9,705 80.9

Low-income and disabled 998 71.7 854 79.5 1,174 80.5 973 80.9

Disabled only 695 75.7 683 81.4 958 82.4 839 80.5

Low-income only 2,720 70.9 2,612 76.3 2,947 79.5 2,516 81.4

First-generation only 1,014 71.7 827 77.9 963 79.6 810 79.6

 Total 14,410 73.2 13,505 78.0 17,766 80.8 14,843 80.9

Two years after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 8,983 54.1 8,529 57.9 11,724 59.9 —a

 —

Low-income and disabled 998 52.6 854 58.9 1,174 63.9 — —

Disabled only 695 56.1 683 61.1 958 58.2 — —

Low-income only 2,720 48.9 2,612 53.2 2,947 59.2 — —

First-generation only 1,014 51.4 827 54.3 963 60.2 — —

 Total 14,410 52.9 13,505 57.0 17,766 60.0 — —

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 1999–2000, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03, and 2003–04, and from program fi les 

of the U.S. Department of Education, Offi ce of Postsecondary Education, 1999–2004.

Note: This table shows the percentage of freshmen who were enrolled in the reporting year, not the percentage of freshmen 

who were continuously enrolled from year to year. Any institution refers to both grantee and nongrantee institutions.

a

A dash (—) indicates data not available.

Cohort year

1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03
17

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table 5. Number and percentage of Student Support Services 1999–2003 full-time freshman cohort 

participants at four-year institutions enrolled in any institution one, two, and three years after 

the freshman year, by eligibility status

Eligibility status Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

One year after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 10,687 85.0 10,816 87.5 11,665 88.0 11,878 87.2

Low-income and disabled 1,544 84.6 1,662 88.9 1,720 87.6 1,675 85.9

Disabled only 522 81.8 504 84.1 577 84.2 571 82.3

Low-income only 3,478 77.9 3,698 81.4 3,865 83.7 3,438 82.8

First-generation only 1,041 77.1 1,102 82.0 1,004 82.6 945 80.1

 Total 17,272 83.0 17,782 86.0 18,831 86.6 18,507 85.8

Two years after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 10,687 71.2 10,816 75.3 11,665 74.4 —a

 —

Low-income and disabled 1,544 69.8 1,662 77.0 1,720 75.6 — —

Disabled only 522 67.4 504 71.6 577 68.6 — —

Low-income only 3,478 63.5 3,698 68.2 3,865 69.5 — —

First-generation only 1,041 64.1 1,102 66.0 1,004 67.8 — —

 Total 17,272 69.0 17,782 73.3 18,831 73.0 — —

Three years after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 10,687 62.7 10,816 66.1 — — — —

Low-income and disabled 1,544 63.9 1,662 68.3 — — — —

Disabled only 522 53.6 504 59.5 — — — —

Low-income only 3,478 54.0 3,698 58.1 — — — —

First-generation only 1,041 56.1 1,102 57.9 — — — —

 Total 17,272 60.4 17,782 64.0 — — — —

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 1999–2000, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03, and 2003–04, and from program fi les 

of the U.S. Department of Education, Offi ce of Postsecondary Education, 1999–2004.

Note: This table shows the percentage of freshmen who were enrolled in the reporting year, not the percentage of freshmen 

who were continuously enrolled from year to year. Any institution refers to both grantee and nongrantee institutions.

a

A dash (—) indicates data not available.

Cohort year

1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03
18

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Transfer From Two-year to Four-year Institutions

The goal of the SSS program is to increase the college persistence and graduation rates of its 

participants and help students make the transition from one level of higher education to the next. 

Beginning in the 2001–02 reporting year, grantees began reporting the type of institutions to which a 

participant transferred.

About 9 percent of the participants who were full-time freshmen in 2001–02 transferred to four-year 

institutions one year after the freshman year. Approximately 5 percent of these freshmen transferred 

before they attained an associate degree, and the remainder had already received an associate degree. 

Two years after the freshman year, over 14 percent of the 2001–02 cohort had transferred to a four-year 

institution, with about half of those who transferred having received an associate degree (table 6).

Table 6. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 2001–02 and 2002–03 

full-time freshman cohort participants who transferred from two-year to four-year institutions 

one and two years after the freshman year, by degree status

 Cumulative percent Cumulative percent Cumulative percent

 transferred without transferred with transferred

Cohort year Number associate degree associate degree (total)

One year after the freshman year

2001–02 17,797 5.4 3.2 8.6

2002–03 14,859 5.2 3.0 8.2

Two years after the freshman year

2001–02 17,797 6.9 7.3 14.2

2002–03 14,859 —a

 — —

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 2001–02, 2002–03, and 2003–04.

Note: Beginning with the 2001–02 reporting year, grantees reported the type of institutions to which participants 

transferred. The percentages are cumulative so that at each year after the freshman year, the percentage represents those 

who transferred in that and the preceding year. For example, two years after the freshman year, a total of 6.9 percent 

of the 2001–02 freshmen had transferred to another institution one year or two years after their freshman year. That is, 

5.4 percent transferred after one year and an additional 1.5 percent transferred after their second year, for a cumulative 

percentage of 6.9 percent.

a

A dash (—) indicates data not available.
19

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Degree Completion

This subsection displays degree completion rates for full-time freshmen who graduated from the same 

institution. As noted earlier, grantees report the academic progress of a program participant only as long 

as the individual remains enrolled in that grantee institution, which means that a degree obtained by the 

same individual in another institution is not reported in the APR. The overall achievement of the SSS 

program in assisting participants to complete their studies is therefore underestimated.9

Associate Degree

Table 7 shows the associate degrees attained by all participants at two-year institutions for three 

full-time freshman cohorts (2000–01, 2001–02, and 2002–03) by eligibility status in one, two, and 

three years after the freshman year. When all participants in the cohort were considered as a group, 

approximately 9 percent of the 2000–01 full-time freshman cohort participants obtained their associate 

degree from the grantee institution one year after the freshman year. The cumulative percentage increased 

to 18 percent two years after the freshman year and to 23 percent three years after the freshman year. 

Two observations are evident when associate degree attainment is analyzed separately by eligibility 

status (table 7):

• Variation in the percentage of associate degree completion rate among the different eligibility 

groups narrows with the number of years allowed for graduation. In the 2000–01 full-time freshman 

cohort, one year after the freshman year, the associate degree completion rate among the different 

eligibility groups ranged from 6 to 11 percent. Three years after the freshman year, the range was 

between 22 and 25 percent.

• Two and three years after the freshman year, 2000–01 full-time freshman who were low-income only 

earned an associate degree at a relatively higher rate than freshmen of other eligibility statuses.

Bachelor’s Degree

Table 8 shows bachelor’s degree attainment for three cohorts of full-time freshman participants 

at four-year institutions by eligibility status three, four, and fi ve years after the freshman year. For the 

1998–99 cohort, approximately 11 percent had obtained a bachelor’s degree from the grantee institution 

three years after the freshman year, 22 percent four years after the freshman year, and 28 percent fi ve 

years after the freshman year. 

The percentage of the 1998–99 full-time freshman cohort participants at four-year institutions earning 

a bachelor’s degree three, four, and fi ve years after the freshman year differed only slightly by eligibility 

status. Three years after the freshman year, the bachelor’s degree completion rate across the eligibility 

groups ranged from 10 to 13 percent. Five years after the freshman year, the range was from 27 to 32 

percent. A relatively larger percentage of the 1998–99 full-time freshmen who were fi rst-generation 

college students earned a bachelor’s degree than freshmen of other eligibility statuses four and fi ve years 

after the freshman year (table 8).

9

 The SSS program is currently exploring alternative data sets to supplement the degree completion rates information.
20

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table 7. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 2000–03 full-time freshman 

cohort participants at two-year institutions who completed an associate degree one, two, and 

three years after the freshman year, by eligibility status

 Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative

Eligibility status Number percenta

 Number percenta Number percenta

One year after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 8,529 8.8 11,724 7.5 9,705 7.3

Low-income and disabled 854 10.9 1,174 8.6 973 9.7

Disabled only 683 6.7 958 6.3 839 4.2

Low-income only 2,612 10.6 2,947 10.7 2,516 9.7

First-generation only 827 6.0 963 5.2 810 6.0

 Total 13,505 9.0 17,766 7.9 14,843 7.6

Two years after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 8,529 17.7 11,724 17.8 —b

 —

Low-income and disabled 854 17.7 1,174 19.5 — —

Disabled only 683 17.3 958 16.7 — —

Low-income only 2,612 20.5 2,947 22.6 — —

First-generation only 827 16.6 963 18.6 — —

 Total 13,505 18.1 17,766 18.7 — —

Three years after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 8,529 22.0 — — — —

Low-income and disabled 854 22.2 — — — —

Disabled only 683 23.4 — — — —

Low-income only 2,612 25.3 — — — —

First-generation only 827 22.7 — — — —

 Total 13,505 22.8 — — — —

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03, and 2003–04.

a

The percentages are based on degree completed at the grantee institution in which participants fi rst enrolled. The 

percentages are cumulative so that at each year after the freshman year, the percentage represents those who completed an 

associate degree in that and all preceding years. For example, three years after the freshman year, a total of 22.7 percent 

of the 2000–01 fi rst-generation only freshmen had received an associate degree one year, two years, or three years after the 

freshman year.

b

A dash (—) indicates data not available.

2000–01

Cohort year

2001–02 2002–03
21

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table 8. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 1998–2001 full-time 

freshman cohort participants at four-year institutions who completed a bachelor’s degree 

three, four, and fi ve years after the freshman year, by eligibility status

 Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative

Eligibility status Number percenta

 Number percenta Number percenta

Three years after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 10,294 10.1 10,687 9.8 10,816 11.6

Low-income and disabled 1,724 13.1 1,544 11.3 1,662 11.4

Disabled only 504 10.7 522 8.6 504 11.7

Low-income only 3,895 11.5 3,478 12.1 3,698 12.6

First-generation only 998 11.3 1,041 11.1 1,102 13.4

 Total 17,415 10.8 17,272 10.5 17,782 11.9

 Four years after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 10,294 21.4 10,687 22.0 —b

 —

Low-income and disabled 1,724 23.1 1,544 23.8 — —

Disabled only 504 21.6 522 19.0 — —

Low-income only 3,895 23.3 3,478 24.6 — —

First-generation only 998 25.4 1,041 29.5 — —

 Total 17,415 22.2 17,272 23.0 — —

Five years after the freshman year

Low-income and fi rst-generation 10,294 27.4 — — — —

Low-income and disabled 1,724 28.7 — — — —

Disabled only 504 27.2 — — — —

Low-income only 3,895 28.4 — — — —

First-generation only 998 32.0 — — — —

 Total 17,415 28.0 — — — —

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 1998–99, 1999–2000, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03, and 2003–04.

a

The percentages are based on degree completed at the grantee institution in which participants fi rst enrolled. The 

percentages are cumulative so that at each year after the freshman year, the percentage represents those who completed a 

bachelor’s degree in that and all preceding years. For example, fi ve years after the freshman year, a total of 32 percent of 

the 1998–99 fi rst-generation only freshmen had received a bachelor’s degree three years, four years, or fi ve years after the 

freshman year.

b

A dash (—) indicates data not available.

1998–99

Cohort year

1999–2000 2000–01
22

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Length of Services Received and Degree Completion

This section provides a fi rst look at degree completion and the lengths of services received. Students in 

each of the three full-time freshman cohorts at two-year institutions (2000–01, 2001–02, and 2002–03) 

who were continuously enrolled for two consecutive years were grouped on the basis of length of program 

services received—cohort members who received program services in their fi rst year only and cohort 

members who received services in both their fi rst and one year after the freshman year.10 Students in 

each of the three full-time freshman cohorts at the four-year institutions (1998–99, 1999–2000, and 

2000–01) who were continuously enrolled for four years were grouped into the following categories 

according to the total number of years they had received services three years after the freshman year: 

(a) received services in their fi rst year (freshman year) only, (b) received services in the fi rst year and one 

additional year through the end of the rest three years, (c) received services in the fi rst year and any two 

of the remaining years, or (d) received services in all four years (freshman through senior).

Among all three cohorts enrolled in two-year institutions, even among full-time freshmen who were 

continuously enrolled in their fi rst two years in college, those who received two years of services had 

a higher associate degree completion rate one, two and three years after the freshman year than those 

participants who received services for only one year. Further, the gap increased with the time allowed 

for graduation. For example, for the 2000–01 cohort, 9 percent of those who received services in their 

fi rst year only received an associate degree one year after the freshman year compared with 12 percent of 

those who received services in their fi rst two years. Three years after the freshman year, the comparable 

percentages were 15 percent and 34 percent (table 9). 

The impact of length of services on degree completion was similar for four-year institutions. Three 

years after the freshman year, 23 to 24 percent of the full-time freshmen who had been continuously 

enrolled for four years and received four years of services attained a bachelor’s degree. In comparison, 

11 to 15 percent of similar participants who received only one year of services attained a bachelor’s 

degree. The gap increased with the length of time allowed for graduation—for the 1998–99 cohort, the 

gap increased to a difference of about 20 percentage points four years after the freshman year and 30 

percentage points fi ve years after the freshman year (table 10).

Although participants who receive more services have higher completion rates, other institutional and 

individual characteristics could be infl uencing both the length of services received and the likelihood of 

completing a degree within a certain period of time. A more thorough understanding of the relationship 

between length of services received and degree completion requires controlling the impact of these other 

factors, which is beyond the scope of this report.

10 To be included in the analysis, a participant must be a full-time freshman who graduated from or enrolled in a two-year 

institution one year after the freshman year and enrolled within the next three years after the freshman year in a four-year 

institution. This second restriction was imposed to provide more comparable samples because SSS grantees only serve enrolled 

students. In a two-year institution, for example, participants who received two years of services also must have enrolled for 

at least two years (and, hence, had a better chance of completing college), whereas participants who received one year of 

services include some freshmen who dropped out by the end of the fi rst year, providing a biased picture in favor of participants 

who received a longer period of program services. Limiting the analysis of length of program services to only those freshmen 

who continuously enrolled for two years in two-year institutions and for four years in four-year institutions controls for this

possible bias.
23

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table 9. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 2000–03 full-time freshman 

cohort participants at two-year institutions who were continuously enrolled for at least the fi rst 

two years and completed an associate degree one, two, and three years after the freshman 

year, by length of program services received

 Number of Cumulative Number of Cumulative Number of Cumulative

Years of services received Participants percenta

 Participants percenta Participants percenta

One year after the freshman year

One yearb

 2,944 8.8 4,026 9.1 2,877 6.8

Two years 7,699 12.4 10,448 9.9 9,190 10.2

 Total 10,643 11.4 14,474 9.7 12,067 9.4

Two years after the freshman year

One yearb

 2,944 12.3 4,026 14.3 —c —

Two years 7,699 27.1 10,448 26.2 — —

 Total 10,643 23.0 14,474 28.9 — —

Three years after the freshman year

One yearb

 2,944 14.5 — — — —

Two years 7,699 34.2 — — — —

 Total 10,643 28.7 — — — —

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

a

The percentages are based on degree completed at the grantee institution in which participants fi rst enrolled. The 

percentages are cumulative so that at each year after the freshman year, the percentage represents those who completed an 

associate degree in that and all preceding years. For example, three years after the freshman year, a total of 14.5 percent of 

the 2000–01 freshmen who had received only one year of SSS services in their academic career had completed an associate 

degree one year, two years, or three years after the freshman year.

b

One year refers to participants who received services only in their freshman year. Two years refers to participants who 

received services in the fi rst two consecutive years.

c

A dash (—) indicates data not available.

2000–01

Cohort year

2001–02 2002–03
24

Section II: Program Outcome and Impact

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table 10. Number and cumulative percentage of Student Support Services 1998–2001 full-time 

freshman cohort participants at four-year institutions who were continuously enrolled for at 

least the fi rst four years and completed a bachelor’s degree three, four, and fi ve years after the 

freshman year, by length of program services received

 Number of Cumulative Number of Cumulative Number of Cumulative

Years of services received Participants percenta

 Participants percenta Participants percenta

Three years after the freshman year

One yearb

 2,329 15.1 2,524 11.3 2,779 13.1

Two years 1,539 17.3 1,758 16.6 2,202 21.3

Three years 1,379 18.4 1,566 16.7 1,420 16.8

Four years 4,354 23.1 4,153 23.3 4,408 23.8

 Total 9,601 19.6 10,001 18.1 10,809 19.6

Four years after the freshman year

One yearb

 2,329 28.3 2,524 26.7 —c —

Two years 1,539 34.2 1,758 32.2 — —

Three years 1,379 35.5 1,566 33.8 — —

Four years 4,354 48.6 4,153 52.2 — —

 Total 9,601 39.5 10,001 39.4 — —

 Five years after the freshman year

One yearb

 2,329 33.3 — — — —

Two years 1,539 40.5 — — — —

Three years 1,379 44.3 — — — —

Four years 4,354 62.8 — — — —

 Total 9,601 49.4 — — — —

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 1998–99, 1999–2000, 2000–01, 2001–02, 2002–03, and 2003–04.

a

The percentages are based on degree completed at the grantee institution in which participants fi rst enrolled. The 

percentages are cumulative so that at each year after the freshman year, the percentage represents those who completed a 

bachelor’s degree in that and all preceding years. For example, fi ve years after the freshman year, a total of 33.3 percent of 

the 1998–99 freshmen who had received only one year of SSS services in their academic career had completed a bachelor’s 

degree in three years, four years, or fi ve years after the freshman year.

b

One year refers to participants who received services only in their freshman year. Two years and three years refer to 

participants who received services in their freshman year and one or two additional years of services during the fi rst four 

years. Four years refers to participants who received services in each of the four consecutive years.

c

A dash (—) indicates data not available.

1998–99

Cohort year

1999–2000 2000–01
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 25

Appendix A

Number of Grantee Institutions 

and Student Records, Select Years

Table A–1. Number of Student Support Services grantees and number of student records reported in the 

2002–03 and 2003–04 APRs

 2002–03 2003–04

Number of grantee institutions 937 936

Number of student records reported in the APRs 337,237 345,311

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 2002–03 and 2003–04.

Reporting year
26 An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 27

Table B–1. Number of Student Support Services grantees, funding amount, funding rank, number 

of participants funded to serve, number served, rank of number served, and amount per 

participant, by state: 2003–04

 Number of Amount per

 participants Rank of participant

 Number of Funding Funding funded to Participants number funded to

State grantees amount ($) ranka

 serveb served serveda serve ($)

Alabama 40 11,593,319 4 7,696 8,091 5 1,506

Alaska 1 209,814 57 160 161 55 1,311

American Samoa 1 260,181 53 150 325 52 1,735

Arizona 11 2,665,556 39 2,472 2,641 35 1,078

Arkansas 25 7,012,886 9 5,229 5,664 8 1,341

California 70 19,593,593 1 15,550 16,438 1 1,260

Colorado 15 4,023,624 30 2,891 3,146 29 1,392

Connecticut 4 1,077,487 47 965 1,034 44 1,117

Delaware 3 797,628 50 640 651 48 1,246

District of Columbia 2 834,181 49 625 622 50 1,335

Fed. States of Micronesia 1 228,825 55 160 160 56 1,430

Florida 23 6,010,042 16 4,175 4,530 17 1,440

Georgia 15 3,893,873 32 2,525 2,769 34 1,542

Guam 2 530,371 52 190 224 54 2,791

Hawaii 6 1,801,843 43 1,336 1,415 42 1,349

Idaho 5 1,412,240 44 915 1,023 45 1,543

Illinois 42 11,258,085 5 8,326 8,637 4 1,352

Indiana 13 3,691,635 34 3,425 3,653 25 1,078

Iowa 22 5,844,776 19 4,355 4,480 18 1,342

Kansas 18 4,826,739 23 3,645 3,771 24 1,324

Kentucky 18 4,810,337 24 3,353 3,439 27 1,435

Louisiana 13 4,793,414 25 3,925 4,148 21 1,221

Maine 9 2,755,715 37 1,930 1,962 38 1,428

Maryland 14 4,074,800 29 3,022 3,126 30 1,348

Massachusetts 21 6,324,232 14 4,580 4,935 11 1,381

Michigan 22 6,775,751 11 4,735 4,924 12 1,431

Minnesota 24 7,651,720 7 5,272 5,388 10 1,451

Mississippi 13 3,313,014 35 2,186 2,572 36 1,516

Missouri 20 5,517,273 20 4,165 4,450 20 1,325

 Table continued on next page

Appendix B

State Tables on Funding 

and Select Participant Characteristics
Appendix B: State Tables on Funding and Select Participant Characteristics

28 An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table B–1. Number of Student Support Services grantees, funding amount, funding rank, number 

of participants funded to serve, number served, rank of number served, and amount per 

participant, by state: 2003–04—Continued

 Number of Amount per

 participants Rank of participant

 Number of Funding Funding funded to Participants number funded to

State grantees amount ($) ranka

 serveb served serveda serve ($)

Montana 15 4,350,523 26 3,078 3,421 28 1,413

Nebraska 13 3,715,559 33 2,875 3,454 26 1,292

Nevada 3 853,743 48 600 624 49 1,423

New Hampshire 4 1,084,836 46 715 715 47 1,517

New Jersey 17 4,827,593 22 3,594 4,027 22 1,343

New Mexico 14 3,897,904 31 2,715 2,853 33 1,436

New York 46 13,184,418 3 10,995 11,783 3 1,199

North Carolina 34 8,772,806 6 5,882 6,748 7 1,491

North Dakota 9 2,702,888 38 1,645 1,697 40 1,643

Northern Mariana Islands 1 228,825 55 160 91 57 1,430

Ohio 21 6,104,251 15 4,522 4,638 14 1,350

Oklahoma 20 5,874,452 18 4,063 4,453 19 1,446

Oregon 16 4,220,326 27 2,805 2,999 32 1,505

Palau 1 237,607 54 175 242 53 1,358

Pennsylvania 25 6,516,522 13 4,575 4,764 13 1,424

Puerto Rico 22 7,325,283 8 6,709 7,124 6 1,092

Rhode Island 2 648,789 51 600 571 51 1,081

South Carolina 25 6,517,594 12 4,225 4,580 16 1,543

South Dakota 9 2,456,110 40 1,510 1,576 41 1,627

Tennessee 16 4,150,805 28 2,835 3,090 31 1,464

Texas 59 16,035,459 2 13,110 14,012 2 1,223

Utah 10 2,913,738 36 1,926 2,256 37 1,513

Vermont 7 2,017,195 42 1,474 1,277 43 1,369

Virginia 18 4,903,895 21 3,800 3,916 23 1,291

Washington 20 6,007,932 17 4,145 4,590 15 1,449

West Virginia 9 2,430,251 41 1,836 1,947 39 1,324

Wisconsin 23 6,901,993 10 5,161 5,602 9 1,337

Wyoming 4 1,185,896 45 960 968 46 1,235

 Total 936 263,650,147 —c

 195,288 208,397 — —

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 2003–04.

a

Rank is in descending order.

b

Participants funded to serve refers to the grantee’s planned level of service in terms of number of students, as agreed to by 

the Federal TRIO offi ce before the beginning of the funding year.

c

A dash (—) indicates data not applicable.
29

Appendix B: State Tables on Funding and Select Participant Characteristics

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table B–2. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, based on race/ethnicity, 

gender, and eligibility status by state: 2003–04

 Native 

 American Hawaiian More Low- 

 Indian or Black/ or other than income/ All

 Alaska African- Hispanic Pacifi c one fi rst- other

State native Asian American or Latino White Islander race Male Female generation groups

Percent

Alabama 0.6 0.4 63.7 1.2 33.8 0.1 0.3 27.8 72.2 69.5 30.5

Alaska 19.5 2.7 6.0 8.1 57.0 0.0 6.7 29.2 70.8 51.6 48.4

American 

 Samoa 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 98.5 0.0 48.0 52.0 60.0 40.0

Arizona 16.2 2.8 9.1 34.3 35.7 0.6 1.3 32.1 67.9 55.1 44.9

Arkansas 1.2 0.8 43.6 1.7 51.9 0.1 0.6 27.1 72.9 64.1 35.9

California 1.6 15.6 15.5 42.0 21.5 1.5 2.3 31.9 68.1 67.1 32.9

Colorado 5.4 4.5 11.4 33.1 41.8 0.1 3.7 34.8 65.2 63.0 37.0

Connecticut 0.6 7.5 41.4 29.8 18.1 1.1 1.6 34.3 65.7 74.7 25.3

Delaware 0.5 4.0 39.5 6.0 48.7 0.3 1.1 24.6 75.4 58.0 42.0

District of 

 Columbia 1.3 1.9 93.0 2.4 1.3 0.0 0.0 29.0 71.0 70.2 29.8

Fed. States of 

 Micronesia 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 81.9 18.1

Florida 0.6 2.2 57.4 10.6 27.6 0.4 1.2 26.1 73.9 69.3 30.7

Georgia 0.5 1.5 78.8 1.4 17.0 0.1 0.7 29.4 70.6 67.6 32.4

Guam 0.0 13.1 1.4 1.8 1.4 82.4 0.0 28.4 71.6 72.3 27.7

Hawaii 1.1 27.3 2.8 4.9 18.4 33.9 11.7 29.1 70.9 60.3 39.7

Idaho 5.2 1.7 0.9 18.0 73.2 0.3 0.8 36.9 63.1 63.9 36.1

Illinois 0.5 2.0 40.9 13.4 41.9 0.1 1.1 25.5 74.5 65.9 34.1

Indiana 0.5 1.2 32.4 6.5 57.9 0.1 1.4 36.6 63.4 55.2 44.8

Iowa 1.2 4.3 14.0 6.3 72.9 0.2 1.1 32.6 67.4 61.3 38.7

Kansas 5.6 2.9 23.1 8.6 57.3 0.4 2.1 37.4 62.6 62.9 37.1

Kentucky 0.7 0.6 20.4 1.3 76.1 0.2 0.6 27.2 72.8 65.4 34.6

Louisiana 0.7 1.2 69.3 1.5 27.0 0.0 0.3 27.5 72.5 68.5 31.5

Maine 3.3 0.8 2.7 0.7 91.6 0.2 0.7 34.2 65.8 49.5 50.5

Maryland 0.5 3.9 63.6 4.5 25.2 1.1 1.3 31.6 68.4 59.4 40.6

Massachusetts 0.8 9.8 21.8 18.5 45.9 1.4 1.7 36.8 63.2 59.6 40.4

Michigan 3.1 1.8 37.4 6.4 49.8 0.2 1.2 31.2 68.8 65.1 34.9

Minnesota 5.2 7.2 21.2 3.3 60.5 0.3 2.2 37.3 62.7 56.8 43.2

Mississippi 0.1 0.4 78.2 0.4 20.5 0.1 0.3 34.0 66.0 64.6 35.4

Missouri 1.0 2.2 33.9 3.2 57.4 0.5 1.8 31.4 68.6 58.4 41.6

Montana 39.1 0.8 1.7 2.2 54.6 0.7 1.0 37.5 62.5 58.2 41.8

Nebraska 7.3 4.1 23.1 5.8 58.0 0.3 1.3 32.2 67.8 71.6 28.4

Nevada 2.9 8.3 25.0 28.7 28.7 3.1 3.2 31.1 68.9 72.8 27.2

New Hampshire 1.0 2.8 4.4 2.9 88.3 0.0 0.6 30.4 69.6 44.2 55.8

New Jersey 1.7 7.6 37.7 24.5 25.3 0.7 2.4 32.2 67.8 65.7 34.3

New Mexico 16.0 1.0 4.8 48.8 27.5 0.1 1.8 34.9 65.1 64.4 35.6

Table continued on next page

Race/ethnicity Gender Eligibility status
Appendix B: State Tables on Funding and Select Participant Characteristics

30 An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table B–2. Percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, based on race/ethnicity, 

gender, and eligibility status by state: 2003–04—Continued

 Native 

 American Hawaiian More Low- 

 Indian or Black/ or other than income/ All

 Alaska African- Hispanic Pacifi c one fi rst- other

State native Asian American or Latino White Islander race Male Female generation groups

Percent

New York 1.8 7.9 27.9 20.7 39.9 0.3 1.5 37.4 62.6 51.4 48.6

North Carolina 2.0 0.9 58.8 1.8 35.7 0.2 0.6 25.9 74.1 66.7 33.3

North Dakota 37.0 1.2 3.7 1.8 55.6 0.2 0.5 38.3 61.7 65.0 35.0

Northern Mariana 

 Islands 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.8 0.0 29.7 70.3 78.2 21.8

Ohio 0.6 1.6 42.2 3.5 49.9 0.1 2.2 32.9 67.1 54.5 45.5

Oklahoma 17.6 0.8 22.1 4.3 53.4 0.2 1.7 32.3 67.7 63.9 36.1

Oregon 4.0 5.2 6.2 10.9 68.4 1.0 4.2 31.0 69.0 63.0 37.0

Palau 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 50.8 49.2 76.4 23.6

Pennsylvania 0.6 5.0 29.2 6.8 57.1 0.4 0.9 37.1 62.9 55.2 44.8

Puerto Rico 0.0 0.0 0.4 99.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 32.1 67.9 71.5 28.5

Rhode Island 1.3 4.5 24.8 25.2 39.6 0.0 4.6 29.6 70.4 47.0 53.0

South Carolina 0.5 0.9 70.9 1.3 25.8 0.2 0.5 23.1 76.9 67.7 32.3

South Dakota 44.7 0.6 3.8 1.2 48.9 0.6 0.2 34.8 65.2 65.9 34.1

Tennessee 0.9 0.8 50.7 1.4 45.0 0.4 0.8 29.3 70.7 67.8 32.2

Texas 0.8 2.4 27.4 43.9 24.0 0.6 0.8 30.1 69.9 68.4 31.6

Utah 12.7 2.7 3.0 10.6 67.2 2.6 1.0 38.5 61.5 60.4 39.6

Vermont 1.0 1.2 2.5 1.8 92.7 0.2 0.6 41.8 58.2 52.3 47.7

Virginia 0.5 0.8 45.8 1.0 50.8 0.2 0.9 28.1 71.9 62.5 37.5

Washington 6.1 11.1 11.7 16.5 49.9 1.2 3.4 30.5 69.5 67.1 32.9

West Virginia 0.6 0.6 21.5 1.4 74.8 0.1 1.0 36.9 63.1 66.1 33.9

Wisconsin 6.4 14.7 12.7 7.3 58.1 0.3 0.5 40.0 60.0 59.9 40.1

Wyoming 11.5 0.7 2.0 8.1 74.4 0.1 3.2 31.2 68.8 60.5 39.5

 Total 3.9 4.5 30.5 17.0 41.6 1.2 1.4 32.0 68.0 63.4 36.6

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 2003–04.

Race/ethnicity Gender Eligibility status
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 31

Appendix C

Supporting Tables for Figures

Table C–1. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services grantees and all 

degree-granting institutions, by type of institution: 2003–04

Type of institution Number Percent Number Percent

Public four-year institution 334 35.7 634 15.0

Private four-year institution 141 15.1 1,896 44.8

Public two-year institution 449 48.0 1,086 25.6

Private two-year institution 12 1.3 620 14.6

 Total 936 100.0 4,236 100.0

SOURCE: Data from program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, and from the National 

Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, Washington, D.C., 2004, Table 244—Degree-granting 

institutions, by control and type of institution: 1949–50 through 2003–04. This table can be found at: http://nces.ed.gov/

programs/digest/d04/tables/dt04_244.asp.

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

Grantees

All degree-granting 

institutions

Table C–2. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services grantees and all degreegranting institutions, by minority-serving and nonminority-serving status: 2003–04

Institutional status Number Percent Number Percent

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) 65 6.9 104 2.5

Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) 103 11.0 242 5.7

Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) 24 2.6 35 0.8

Nonminority serving institutions 744 79.5 3,855 91.0

 Total 936 100.0 4,236 100.0

SOURCE: Data from the program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support 

Services annual performance reports, 2003–04, and from the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, Digest of Education Statistics, Washington, D.C., 2004.

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

Grantees

All degree-granting 

institutions
Appendix C: Supporting Tables for Figures

32 An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table C–4. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by eligibility 

status and type of institution: 2003–04

Eligibility status Number Percent Number Percent

Low-income and fi rst-generation 61,271 64.8 68,346 62.2

Low-income and disabled 6,354 6.7 5,943 5.4

Low-income only 5,711 6.0 8,804 8.0

First-generation only 16,087 17.0 19,341 17.6

Disabled 5,199 5.5 7,428 6.8

 Total 94,622 100.0 109,862 100.0

SOURCE: Program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04.

Note: Number of participants is based on valid responses in the fi eld of eligibility status only; number of participants may 

differ from other tables in this report due to invalid responses. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

Type of institution

Table C–3. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by participant 

status and type of institution: 2003–04

Participant status Number Percent Number Percent

Newa

 39,839 41.1 41,918 37.6

Continuingb

 57,069 58.9 69,556 62.4

 Total 96,908 100.0 111,474 100.0

SOURCE: Program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04.

Note: Number of participants is based on valid responses in the fi eld of participant status only; number of participants may 

differ from other tables in this report due to invalid responses. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

a

A new participant is an individual who participated in the SSS program for the fi rst time in the reporting period.

b

A continuing participant is an individual who received services in both the current reporting period and in a previous 

reporting period.

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

Type of institution
33

Appendix C: Supporting Tables for Figures

An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table C–5. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by current 

year enrollment status and type of institution: 2003–04

Enrollment status Number Percent Number Percent

Full-time 50,847 52.7 86,172 77.8

Three-quarter time 7,150 7.4 3,251 2.9

Half time 7,746 8.0 3,579 3.2

Less than half time 4,724 4.9 1,691 1.5

Varieda

 23,932 24.8 13,891 12.5

Unknown 2,119 2.2 2,208 2.0

 Total 96,518 100.0 110,792 100.0

SOURCE: Program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04.

Note: Number of participants is based on valid responses in the fi eld of enrollment status only; number of participants may 

differ from other tables in this report due to invalid responses. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

a

Varied enrollment refers to instances in which the enrollment status of a student varies from one semester or quarter to 

another semester or quarter. For example, the enrollment status of a student who enrolls half-time in the fall semester and 

three-quarter time in the spring semester would be classifi ed as varied enrollment.

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

Type of institution

Table C–6. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by race/

ethnicity and type of institution: 2003–04

Race/ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent

American Indian or Alaska Native 4,364 4.5 3,653 3.3

Asian 2,862 3.0 6,341 5.8

Black or African-American 27,719 28.8 35,126 31.9

Hispanic or Latino 13,662 14.2 21,473 19.5

White 44,701 46.5 41,114 37.3

Native Hawaiian or other Pacifi c Islander 1,661 1.7 781 0.7

More than one race reporteda

 1,219 1.3 1,632 1.5

 Total 96,188 100.0 110,120 100.0

SOURCE: Program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04.

Note: Number of participants is based on valid responses in the fi eld of race/ethnicity only; number of participants may 

differ from other tables in this report due to invalid responses. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

a

More than one race reported is a check box in the race/ethnicity fi eld of the annual performance report.

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

Type of institution
Appendix C: Supporting Tables for Figures

34 An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

Table C–7. Number and percentage distribution of Student Support Services participants, by gender and 

type of institution: 2003–04

Gender Number Percent Number Percent

Male 26,792 27.7 39,800 35.7

Female 70,009 72.3 71,552 64.3

 Total 96,801 100.0 111,352 100.0

SOURCE: Program fi les of the U.S. Department of Education, Federal TRIO Programs, Student Support Services annual 

performance reports, 2003–04.

Note: Number of participants is based on valid responses in the fi eld of gender only; number of participants may differ from 

other tables in this report due to invalid responses. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

Two-year institutions Four-year institutions

Type of institution
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 35

Glossary

This glossary defi nes the terms used in the report. Some of them are specifi c to the TRIO program 

and do not necessarily apply to other U.S. Department of Education programs.

Annual performance report (APR) is the program report submitted to TRIO by each grantee annually. 

The SSS APRs include information describing the participants, activities, and outcome measures for 

the funded programs.

First-generation college student means a student from a family in which neither parent (whether 

natural or adoptive) 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.

Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) are institutions of higher education that have a full-time 

equivalent (FTE) undergraduate enrollment that is at least 25 percent Hispanic and where not less 

than 50 percent of the institution’s Hispanic students are low-income individuals as defi ned in the 

Higher Education Act of 1965, 20 U.S.C. §1101a (see low-income individuals below).

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) are defi ned by the Higher Education Act of 

1965, as amended, as “any historically black college or university that was established prior to 1964, 

whose principal mission was, and is, the education of black Americans, and that is accredited by a 

nationally recognized accrediting agency or association determined by the Secretary [of Education] 

to be a reliable authority as to the quality of training offered or is, according to such an agency or 

association, making reasonable progress toward accreditation.”

Individual with disabilities means a student who has a diagnosed physical or mental impairment that 

substantially limits his or her ability to participate in the educational experiences and opportunities 

offered by the grantee institution.

Low-income individual means a student whose family’s taxable income does not exceed 150 percent 

of the poverty level in the calendar year preceding the year in which the individual initially received 

services. The poverty level amount is determined by using criteria established by the Bureau of the 

Census of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) are postsecondary institutions that reported an enrollment 

of a single minority group, as the term “minority” is defi ned under §365(2) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 

1067k(2)), or a combination of those minority groups, that exceeded 50 percent of its total enrollment. 

For the purpose of this report, “minority” is defi ned as American Indian, Alaska Native, Black (not 

of Hispanic origin) and Hispanic. Pacifi c Islanders also are considered to be minorities for purposes 
Glossary

36 An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002

of the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP). The list of minority 

institutions was complied based on the defi nition of “minority institution” found in §365(3) of the 

Higher Education Act (HEA) (20 U.S.C. 1067k(3)), and on enrollment data from the Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) collected by the National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES).

Participant status indicates involvement in the SSS program for each student in the reporting year.

• A new participant is an individual who participated in the Student Support Services program for 

the fi rst time in the current reporting period.

• A continuing participant is an individual who participated in the Student Support Services program 

in both the current reporting period and in a previous reporting period.

Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) are postsecondary institutions created to meet the higher 

education needs of American Indians, who often reside in geographically isolated rural areas with little 

access to postsecondary education. These tribally controlled postsecondary institutions are funded in 

part by the Tribally Controlled Community College Assistance Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-471).
An Interim Report on The Student Support Services Program: 2002–03 and 2003–04, With Select Data From 1998–2002 37

References

U.S. Department of Education, Offi ce of Postsecondary Education, A Profi le of the Student Support 

Services Program: 1996–97, Washington, D.C., 2001.

U.S. Department of Education, Offi ce of Postsecondary Education, A Profi le of the Student Support 

Services Program: 1997–98 and 1998–99, With Select Data From 1999–2000, Washington, D.C., 

2004.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, A Profile of the Student 

Support Services Program: 1997–1999 Through 2001–02, With Select Data From 

1999–2000, Washington, D.C., 2005.




Our mission is to ensure equal access to education 

and to promote educational excellence throughout the nation.

www.ed.gov