A Profile of the

Talent Search

Program: 1999-2000

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Postsecondary Education

Office of Federal TRIO Programs

2002

A Profile of the 

Talent Search 

Program: 1999-2000

Prepared for:

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Postsecondary Education

Office of Federal TRIO Programs

By Mathematica Policy Research Inc.

Justin G. Humphrey

Nancy L. Carey

Wendy Mansfield

2002
This report was prepared for the U.S. Department of Education under Contract 

No. 1-36U-6742 (031). The views expressed herein are those of the contractor. No

official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education is intended or should 

be inferred.

U.S. Department of Education

Rod Paige

Secretary

Office of Postsecondary Education

Sally L. Stroup

Assistant Secretary

Office of Federal TRIO Programs

Larry Oxendine

Acting Director

September 2002

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part

is granted. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation

should be: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, 

A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000, Washington, D.C., 2002.

To obtain additional copies of this report:

write to: Office of Federal TRIO Programs, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K

Street, NW, Suite 7000, Washington, D.C. 20006-8510

or fax your request to: (202) 502-7857

or e-mail your request to: TRIO@ed.gov.

This report is also available on the Department’s Web site at:

http://www.ed.gov/offices/OPE/HEP/trio/talent.html.

On request, this publication is available in alternate formats, such as Braille, large

print, audiotape, or computer diskette. For more information, please contact the

Department’s Alternate Format Center at (202) 260-9895 or (202) 205-8113.
CONTENTS

FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

HIGHLIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

A. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

B. Performance report response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

C. Comparison of response rates: 1998-99 and 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . 3

D. Structure of the report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

II. DEMOGRAPHICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

A. Number of participants assisted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

B. Participant distribution by eligibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

C. Participant distribution by race and ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

D. Participant distribution by gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

E. Participant distribution by age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

F. Participant distribution by grade level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

G. Veterans served. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

H. Participants of limited English proficiency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

I. Target schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

III. PROJECT SERVICES AND ACTIVITIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

A. Academic support services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

1. Middle school participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2. High school participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3. Adult participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

B. Personal and career development services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

1. Middle school participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

2. High school participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3. Adult participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

C. Historical perspective on service provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

IV. PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

A. Secondary school retention, graduation, and reentry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

B. Admissions and financial aid assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

C. Postsecondary admissions and reentry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

D. Postsecondary placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
V. DATA ISSUES AND FUTURE PLANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

APPENDIX A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
TABLES AND FIGURES

TABLES

1. TRIO funding, number of grants, number served, average grant 

award, amount per person served, and average number served: 2000. . . . 2

2. TRIO funding levels in constant 2000 dollars (millions) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3. Number of Talent Search projects and projects reporting performance 

information, by type of host institution: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

4. Number of Talent Search projects and participants and percentage 

reporting performance information, by federal region: 1999-2000 . . . . . 4

5. Participant distribution by eligibility status and type of host institution: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

6. Participant distribution by race and ethnicity and type of host 

institution: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

7. Participant distribution by age and type of host institution: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

8. Participant distribution by grade level and type of host institution: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

9. Estimate of eligible students served by Talent Search, by state: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

10. Percentage of students eligible for the federal free lunch program 

in Talent Search target schools, all other secondary schools, and all 

secondary schools, by state: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

11. Average pupil-teacher ratios for Talent Search target schools, all other

secondary schools, and all secondary schools, by state: 1999-2000. . . . . . 18

12. Percentage of projects offering services to participants, by grade level: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

13. Comparison of percentage of projects offering different types of 

services to participants: 1998-99 and 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

14. Percentage of projects offering multiple services to participants, 

by grade level: 1999-2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

15. Percentage of participants receiving academic support services, 

average number of sessions per project, and average number 

of sessions per participant for participants overall: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . 22

16. Average number of sessions per project and average number 

of sessions per participant for middle school participants: 1999-2000 . . . 23

17. Average number of sessions per project and average number 

of sessions per participant for high school participants: 1999-2000 . . . . . 24

18. Average number of sessions per project and average number 

of sessions per participant for adult participants: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . 25

19. Percentage of participants receiving personal and career development 

services for participants overall: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
20. Percentage of participants receiving each type of service, comparing

performance report data from 1990-91, 1998-99, and 1999-2000 . . . . . . 30

21. Comparison of approved objectives and actual achievements 

for secondary school outcomes: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

22. Comparison of approved objectives and actual achievements 

for assistance in applying for postsecondary admissions and 

financial aid: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

23. Comparison of approved objectives and actual achievements 

for postsecondary outcomes: 1999-2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

24. Postsecondary placement of participants by sector: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . 36

25. Section and item response rates: 1999-2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Appendix Tables

A1. Number of Talent Search projects and participants and percentage 

reporting performance information, by federal region: 1999-2000 . . . . . 39

A2. Participant distribution by eligibility status and federal region: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

A3. Participant distribution by race and ethnicity and federal region: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

A4. Participant distribution by grade level and federal region: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

A5. Percentage of projects providing academic support services, 

by federal region: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

A6. Percentage of projects providing personal and career development

services, by federal region: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Figures

1. Performance report response rates by region: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2. Participant distribution by type of host institution: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . 5

3. Participant distribution by status and type of host institution: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

4. Participant distribution by eligibility status: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

5. Participant distribution by race and ethnicity: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

6. Participant distribution by gender and type of host institution: 

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

7. Participant distribution by age: 1999-2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

8. Participant distribution by grade level: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

9. Average number of target schools per project by type of host institution:

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

10. Percentage of middle school participants receiving academic support 

services: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

11. Percentage of high school participants receiving academic support 

services: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

12. Percentage of adult participants receiving academic support services:

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
13. Percentage of middle school participants receiving personal and career

development services: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

14. Percentage of high school participants receiving personal and career

development services: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

15. Percentage of adult participants receiving personal and career 

development services: 1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

16. Postsecondary placement of Talent Search participants overall:

1999-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
FOREWORD

To help ensure the full success of President Bush’s education initiative, “No Child Left

Behind,” high-quality postsecondary educational opportunities must be available to all

students. In keeping with this goal, the Federal TRIO Programs provide outreach and

support programs to help low-income, first-generation college students progress

through the academic pipeline from middle school to postbaccalaureate programs.

On behalf of the Office of Federal TRIO Programs, I am pleased to present this

report, A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000. The Talent Search Program

identifies and assists youth (between 11 and 27 years of age) from disadvantaged backgrounds who have the potential to succeed in higher education. The program provides academic, career, and financial aid counseling, tutoring, exposure to college

campuses, and assistance in preparing for college entrance examinations and in completing college admission and financial aid applications. The goal of the program is

to increase the number of disadvantaged youth who graduate from high school and

continue on to postsecondary institutions of their choice.

This report is the second in a series of reports that present a national profile of the

Talent Search Program. Individual project reports, under separate cover, summarize

specific information submitted by each Talent Search project and provide aggregate

information on other Talent Search projects in the same federal region, the same

institutional sector, and the nation. The 1999-2000 performance report, submitted by

the Talent Search projects, was the primary data source for both the national profile

and individual project reports.

The Office of Federal TRIO Programs is proud to share with you national information on the Talent Search Program. It is our hope that the collection and dissemination of this information will foster communication aimed at assessing our mission and

implementing measures to see how well we are doing. We look forward to this collaborative relationship as we work together to improve program services and postsecondary enrollment rates for low-income, potential first-generation college students.

Larry Oxendine

Acting Director

Office of Federal TRIO Programs

viii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Publishing this report was a team effort and we appreciate the support of all who contributed. First, we thank the project staff members of the Talent Search projects who

reported the data upon which the report is based. Computer Business Methods Inc.

processed the data files. The Office of Federal TRIO Programs sponsored the report

and Frances Bergeron of the Office of Federal TRIO Programs coordinated the

reporting process. Mary Fran Miklitsch designed this report.

ix

HIGHLIGHTS

This report provides a comprehensive profile of the Talent Search Program using the

1999-2000 performance report data. Complete performance reports were submitted

by 359 of 361 projects (99 percent) serving a total of 328,070 participants. This report

is intended to serve as a resource for the improvement of Talent Search services.

Below are highlights from the following sections: demographics of project participants and target schools, services and activities, and performance outcomes.

Demographics of Project Participants and Target Schools

• Fifty-nine percent of Talent Search participants continued from a previous year

and 41 percent were new to the program.

• Seventy-four percent of participants met both the low-income and first generation college eligibility requirements.

• Thirty-five percent of participants were black or African American, 32 percent

were white, 23 percent were Hispanic or Latino, and 10 percent were of other

racial or ethnic backgrounds.

• Thirty percent of all Talent Search participants were attending middle school,

65 percent were attending high school, and 5 percent had graduated from high

school or dropped out of high school or college.

• Five percent of participants had limited English proficiency.

• A typical project served about 14 target schools, and 40 percent of the students

within Talent Search target schools qualified for the federal free lunch program.

Services and Activities

• College orientation activities, test-taking and study skills development, counseling, and academic advising and course selection were the services most

commonly offered to participants.

• Seventy-seven percent of participants received counseling and 64 percent

received services related to academic advising and course selection.

• Fifty-seven percent of participants took part in college orientation activities, 

34 percent participated in cultural activities, and 20 percent received tutoring

services.

xi
Performance Outcomes

• Ninety-seven percent of middle school participants and 95 percent of high

school participants remained in school.

• Ninety-six percent of participants who began the performance period as 

12th graders graduated by the end of the period.

• Seventy-three percent of college-ready participants were admitted to, or

enrolled in, a program of postsecondary education.

• Among those participants who went on to postsecondary education, 42 percent

attended public 4-year schools, 39 percent attended public 2-year schools, 

14 percent attended private 2- and 4-year schools, and 5 percent attended

other types of schools.

xii
I. INTRODUCTION

This report is the second in a series addressing Talent Search projects. The report is

presented in two documents. This first piece, the national report, provides feedback

from Talent Search projects on the status of Talent Search performance reporting and

gives the overall results from all projects reporting. A second, companion document

provides individual reports, which summarize data from each project.

The purpose of the reports is to share feedback and other information from the performance reports that Talent Search projects prepare each year. It is our hope that

Talent Search projects can use this information to plan and improve their own services, which will increase educational opportunities for low-income and potential firstgeneration college students.

In both the national and individual project reports, we look at the data by type of host

institution—public 4-year, private 4-year, and 2-year postsecondary institutions; and

community organizations. In Appendix A, we also present some data by federal region.

Although Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) projects have similar performance report forms, these programs have different missions, participant characteristics, and services. To gather and present performance report information more fully for

each of these programs, we have prepared separate but similar reports for each program.

A. Background

Talent Search projects identify and assist individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds

who have the potential to succeed in higher education. The program provides academic, career, and financial aid counseling to its participants and encourages them to

graduate from high school and continue on to the postsecondary school of their

choice. Talent Search also serves high school dropouts by encouraging them to reenter the educational system and complete their education.

The U.S. Department of Education funded 361 Talent Search projects in the 

1999-2000 program year. Talent Search projects are operated by 2- or 4-year colleges,

public or private nonprofit agencies or organizations, or combinations of these sponsors. In each project, at least two-thirds of the participants must be both low-income

and potential first-generation college students. Talent Search participants must also

be 11 to 27 years of age1 or have completed the fifth grade. Services provided by

Talent Search projects include: academic, financial, career, and personal counseling;

career exploration and aptitude assessment; tutoring; information on postsecondary

education; exposure to college campuses; information on financial aid; assistance in

1

1 Projects may serve clients age 28 or older if no Educational Opportunity

Center is available to serve them and doing so will not dilute the services they provide to the main target group.
completing college admissions and financial aid applications; preparation for college

entrance exams; mentoring; and workshops for participants’ parents.

It is helpful to place Talent Search in the context of the other direct service TRIO

Programs—Upward Bound (UB), Upward Bound Math Science (UBMS),

Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC), Student Support Services (SSS), and

Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program (McNair). Table 1 gives

the funding information and participant numbers for each of the direct service TRIO

Programs in 2000-2001 (FY 2000). As shown, and in contrast to the very intensive

and costly services provided by some of the other TRIO Programs, the Talent Search

Program served the largest number of persons (320,854) of any of the TRIO

Programs at an average cost of $313 per person in 2000-2001.

Table 2 gives TRIO funding levels in constant 2000 dollars. One can see from this

table that Talent Search funding has increased about tenfold in constant dollars since

its inception.

2 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

Table 1. TRIO funding, number of grants, number served, average grant award, amount

per person served, and average number served: 2000

Average Amount Average

Program Number Number grant per person number

TRIO program funding of grants served award served served

Talent Search $100,545,000 360 320,854 $279,292 $313 891

Educational 

Opportunity Centers $30,505,000 82 160,836 $372,012 $190 1,961

McNair $34,859,000 156 3,774 $223,455 $9,237 24

Student Support 

Services $183,300,000 795 176,614 $230,566 $1,038 222

Upward Bound $241,941,000 772 56,564 $313,395 $4,277 73

Upward Bound 

Math Science $30,074,000 123 6,093 $244,504 $4,936 50

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, 2001.

Table 2. TRIO funding levels in constant 2000 dollars (millions)

Upward Student Upward Bound

Talent Search Bound Support Services EOC McNair Math Science 

1967 $9.5 $123.2 — — — —

1970 $16.7 $124.2 $41.7 — — —

1975 $18.4 $117.5 $70.6 $9.2 — —

1980 $32.0 $127.6 $115.1 $13.2 — —

1985 $28.5 $113.4 $107.2 $13.0 — —

1990 $34.5 $121.2 $114.1 $15.4 $2.0 $2.5

1995 $84.1 $204.3 $153.9 $26.4 $20.5 $20.4

2000 $100.5 $241.9 $183.3 $30.5 $34.9 $30.1

SOURCE: Calculated from information provided by U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs

and the Consumer Price Index.
B. Performance report response

This report covers the 1999-2000 reporting period. This was the second year that

Talent Search projects used the new performance report form approved by the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) in 1998. For 1999-2000, aggregate performance

reports covering Sections I-V on the performance report form were submitted by 

99 percent of the projects in operation at the time (Table 3). These records covered

328,070 participants in the reference year.

Figure 1 and Table 4 show the percentage of projects reporting by region. The percentage reporting ranged from 94 percent in Region VIII and 95 percent in Region

VII to 100 percent in all other regions.

I. Introduction 3

Table 3. Number of Talent Search projects and projects reporting performance

information, by type of host institution: 1999-2000

Total Percentage Project Number of

projects of total response participants Percent

Sector in 1999 TS projects rate reported distribution

Public 4-year 121 34% 100% 108,106 33%

Private 4-year 48 13% 100% 39,954 12%

2-year 124 34% 98% 96,516 29%

Community organizations 68 19% 100% 83,494 25%

All projects 361 100% 99% 328,070 100%

Totals do not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.

Figure 1. Performance report response rates by region: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

Region X - 100% Region VIII - 94%

Region VII - 95%

Region V - 100%

Region IX - 100%

Region VI - 100%

Region IV - 100%

Region II - 100%

Region III - 100%

Region I - 100%
C. Comparison of response rates: 1998-99 and 1999-2000

For the 1999-2000 project year, all but two Talent Search projects (99 percent) submitted performance reports using the new OMB approved form. For 1998-99, six

Talent Search projects did not submit a performance report and another six used a

previous version of the report form. Complete demographic data were provided on

307,451 participants in 1998-99 and 328,070 in 1999-2000.

D. Structure of the report

The rest of this report is organized according to the structure of the performance

report. Chapter II presents a demographic profile of Talent Search participants and

target schools. Chapter III discusses the provision of project services. Chapter IV

provides an analysis of performance outcomes, and Chapter V discusses data issues as

well as plans for future years.

4 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

Table 4. Number of Talent Search projects and participants and percentage reporting

performance information, by federal region: 1999-2000

Total Number of

projects Project Number of projects Response

Federal region in 1999 distribution participants reporting rate

Region I (Boston) 14 4% 12,255 14 100%

Region II (New York) 33 9% 32,114 33 100%

Region III (Philadelphia) 35 10% 43,521 35 100%

Region IV (Atlanta) 88 24% 74,486 88 100%

Region V (Chicago) 55 15% 42,556 55 100%

Region VI (Dallas) 48 13% 44,650 48 100%

Region VII (Kansas City) 20 6% 15,940 19 95%

Region VIII (Denver) 18 5% 15,156 17 94%

Region IX (San Francisco) 38 11% 38,956 38 100%

Region X (Seattle) 12 3% 8,436 12 100%

Total for nation 361 100% 328,070 359 99%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
II. DEMOGRAPHICS

This section summarizes the demographic information that was reported on the

1999-2000 Talent Search performance reports. Statistics are given for Talent Search

projects as a whole, as well as projects grouped by type of host institution, defined as

4-year public colleges and universities, 4-year private colleges and universities, 2-year

colleges, and community organizations.

A. Number of participants assisted

A total of 359 Talent Search projects reported serving 328,070 participants overall, or

an average of 914 participants per project. As Figure 2 shows, 33 percent of participants

were served by projects based in public 4-year colleges and universities and 12 percent

in private 4-year colleges and universities. Two-year institutions served 29 percent of

participants and community organizations hosted 25 percent of all participants.

Fifty-nine percent of all participants in 1999-2000 continued from a previous year,

and 41 percent joined Talent Search for the first time (Figure 3). According to the

instructions accompanying the performance report, a new participant is one served by

the project for the first time during the current reporting period. A continuing participant is one who was served by the project for the first time in another reporting

period and who received project services during this reporting period.

Community organizations had a much higher proportion of new participants (58 percent) than did public 4-year institutions (35 percent), private 4-year institutions 

(34 percent), or 2-year institutions (34 percent).

5

Figure 2. Participant distribution by type of host institution: 1999-2000

Totals do not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

Public

4-year

33%

Private 

4-year

12%

2-year 

29%

Community 

organizations 

25%
6 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

Overall, the 1999-2000 program year data present a shift from the 1998-99 program

year, when there was a fairly even split between new and continuing participants 

(52 percent and 48 percent, respectively).

B. Participant distribution by eligibility

Talent Search projects overall exceeded the requirement that two-thirds of their participants be both low-income2 and potential first-generation college students.3

Seventy-four percent of the participants during the 1999-2000 reporting period met

both criteria (Figure 4). Twenty-one percent were either low-income or potential

first-generation students. Five percent had other needs. The distributions of participants by eligibility status were consistent across the four sectors (Table 5).

Figure 3. Participant distribution by status and type of host institution:

1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

Public 

4-year

Private 

4-year

2-year Community 

orgs.

All 

projects

100% 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0

Continuing 

participants

New 

participants

59% 

65% 41%

35%

66% 

34%

66% 

34%

42% 

58%

2 A low-income participant is one whose family’s taxable income was less than 

150 percent of the poverty level amount. The U.S. Department of Commerce,

Bureau of the Census, sets guidelines to determine the definition of poverty level.

3 A potential first-generation college student is one whose parents or guardians

did not receive a baccalaureate degree.
II. Demographics 7

C. Participant distribution by race and ethnicity

Thirty-five percent of all Talent Search participants were black or African American,

32 percent were white, and 23 percent were Hispanic or Latino. Asians and American

Indians/Alaska Natives each made up 4 percent of the Talent Search participant population. One percent of participants were natives of Hawaii or other Pacific islands

and another 1 percent were from a multi-ethnic background (Figure 5). The 1999-

2000 distribution is almost identical to the racial and ethnic composition of participants from the 1998-99 program year.

Figure 4. Participant distribution by eligibility status: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

Low-income and 

first generation

74%

Low-income

only 

7%

First generation 

only 

14%

Other 

5%

Table 5. Participant distribution by eligibility status and type of host institution: 

1999-2000

Low-income Low-income First generation 

Sector and first generation only only Other

Public 4-year 75% 7% 13% 5%

Private 4-year 73% 7% 15% 5%

2-year 73% 5% 16% 5%

Community organizations 73% 8% 13% 6%

All projects 74% 7% 14% 5%

Totals do not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
8 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

The racial and ethnic composition of projects in program year 1999-2000 differed

somewhat among the four sectors. For example, a higher proportion of black or

African American participants (46 percent) were served by projects hosted by private

4-year colleges than by projects overall (35 percent). In contrast, a higher proportion

of Hispanic or Latino participants (38 percent) were served by projects hosted by

community organizations than by projects overall (23 percent). This distribution

among sectors is similar to the 1998-99 distribution. Complete results are provided

in Table 6.

Figure 5. Participant distribution by race and ethnicity: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

American 

Indian or 

Alaska 

Native

4%

Asian

4%

Black or 

African

American

35%

Hispanic 

or Latino

23%

White 

32%

Native 

Hawaiian or

other Pacific

Islander

1%

More than

one race

reported 

1%
II. Demographics 9

D. Participant distribution by gender

Consistent with the pattern for other TRIO Programs, Talent Search served more

women than men. Sixty percent of Talent Search participants in 1999-2000 were

female and 40 percent were male. As Figure 6 shows, the proportions varied little

across the sectors.

Table 6. Participant distribution by race and ethnicity and type of host institution: 

1999-2000

Native

American Hawaiian More

Indian Black or other than one

or Alaska or African Hispanic Pacific race

Sector Native Asian American or Latino White Islander reported

Public 4-year 4% 3% 37% 20% 32% 1% 2%

Private 4-year 1% 2% 46% 20% 29% 0% 1%

2-year 4% 3% 33% 13% 44% 2% 1%

Community organizations 5% 6% 30% 38% 18% 1% 2%

All projects 4% 4% 35% 23% 32% 1% 1%

Totals to do not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.

Figure 6. Participant distribution by gender and type of host institution:

1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

61% 39%

62% 38%

61% 39%

59% 41%

 60% 40% 

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Female Male

Public 4-year

Private 4-year 

2-year 

Community

organizations 

All projects
10 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

E. Participant distribution by age

Sixty-eight percent of Talent Search participants in program year 1999-2000 were 

14-18 years of age (Figure 7). While recent years have seen increased program development for middle school students, almost three-fourths of Talent Search participants remain in the age groups over 14, the same proportion as in 1998-99. The same

trend emerges when percentages are broken down by sector (Table 7).

Figure 7. Participant distribution by age: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

Age 

28 and above 

1%

Age

11-13

25%

Age 

14-18 

68%

Age 

19-27 

5%

Table 7. Participant distribution by age and type of host institution: 1999-2000

Sector 11-13 14-18 19-27 28 and above 

Public 4-year 25% 70% 4% 1%

Private 4-year 33% 65% 2% 0%

2-year 28% 68% 3% 1%

Community organizations 20% 69% 10% 1%

All projects 25% 68% 5% 1%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
II. Demographics 11

F. Participant distribution by grade level

Sixty-five percent of Talent Search participants were in grades 9-12 at the beginning

of the 1999-2000 reporting period and 30 percent of participants were in grades 6-8

(Figure 8). Two percent had dropped out of high school, 2 percent had graduated or

received the GED, and 1 percent had dropped out of postsecondary school.

The distribution across grades was similar for projects hosted by 4-year and 2-year

institutions. However, community organizations less frequently served middle school

participants and more frequently served 12th graders (Table 8).

Figure 8. Participant distribution by grade level: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Postsecondary 

dropout 

High school (or GED) 

graduate 

Secondary school 

dropout 

12th grade only

9th-11th grade

6th-8th grade

1% 

2% 

2%

 22%

 43%

 30%

Table 8. Participant distribution by grade level and type of host institution: 1999-2000

Secondary High school Post6th-8th 9th-11th 12th grade school (GED) secondary

Sector grades grades only dropout graduate dropout 

Public 4-year 30% 46% 20% 2% 2% 1%

Private 4-year 37% 43% 17% 2% 1% 0%

2-year 33% 46% 17% 2% 1% 0%

Community organizations 22% 38% 32% 2% 4% 1%

All projects 30% 43% 22% 2% 2% 1%

Totals to do not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
12 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

G. Veterans served

In 1999-2000, the percentage of Talent Search participants who were veterans was

very small, less than 1 percent (not shown in tables). Slightly more than 100 veterans

participated in Talent Search.

H. Participants of limited English proficiency

Five percent of Talent Search participants had limited English proficiency (not shown

in tables). A person of limited English proficiency is defined as one whose native language is not English and who has sufficient difficulty speaking, reading, writing, or

understanding English to prevent that person from learning successfully in classrooms in which English is the language of instruction. In 1999-2000, 

6 percent of the students served by projects based in 4-year public schools had limited English proficiency. Five percent of students served by 4-year private schools, 

6 percent of students served by 2-year schools, and 4 percent of students served by

community organizations had limited English proficiency.

I. Target schools

Talent Search projects served, on average,4 14 target schools. Target schools, by definition, are secondary schools (middle and high schools) designated by the grantee as

a focus of project services. Projects based in public 4-year institutions generally served

the largest number of target schools, 16 schools per project (Figure 9). Projects based

in 2-year institutions served 13 target schools and those based in private 4-year

institutions and community organizations served 12 target schools.

Of the 361 Talent Search projects funded in 1999-2000, 322 submitted a list of target schools (89 percent) compared to 341 projects (94 percent) submitting a list of target schools for 1998-99 program year. These projects reported serving a total of

5,032 schools in 1999-2000 compared to 5,105 target schools in 1998-99.

The only information obtained from the performance report data about a target

school is its name and location (city, state, and zip code). In an effort to obtain more

in-depth knowledge of the characteristics of Talent Search target schools, we merged

the target school names from the performance reports with school names in the

Common Core of Data (CCD). The CCD is a comprehensive database of elementary and secondary schools across the nation. The data are collected by the U.S.

Department of Education, updated on an annual basis, and provide basic descriptive

information about public schools in the United States. Data are provided at both the

school and district levels.

4 The average refers to the median in this case. The mean number of target

schools served was 16.
II. Demographics 13

Matches to the CCD were found for 95 percent of the 5,032 target schools listed in

the performance report. Errors in the names or locations of schools as provided in the

performance reports may have contributed to the lack of a match for some schools.

One issue that the merge with the CCD allowed us to examine was the extent to

which eligible students in the target schools were served by the Talent Search

Program. A proxy measure of the number eligible for Talent Search is the number eligible for the federal free lunch program. This measure is not the same as the Talent

Search eligibility criterion, but it does give an indication of the proportion of economically disadvantaged students who were served. To be eligible for the free lunch

program, family income must not exceed 130 percent of the poverty level. Overall

estimates show that in 1999-2000 Talent Search served about 24 percent of the estimated number of students eligible for the free lunch program in the target schools.5

State-by-state results, provided in Table 9, also show that this estimate varied a great

Figure 9. Number of target schools per project by type of host institution:

1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

Public 

4-year

Private 

4-year

2-year Community 

orgs.

All

projects

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

16

12

13

12

14

5 The percentages were calculated by dividing the total number of participants

in Talent Search in a given state by the total number of students eligible for the free

lunch program in the target schools in that state. Although all participants in Talent

Search may not be eligible for free lunch, the calculation includes all Talent Search

secondary school participants.
14 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

deal across states. Wisconsin, for example, served 14 percent of the “eligible population” while North Dakota served over 100 percent.6

Table 9 also presents the number of secondary school students7 served by Talent

Search as a percentage of free-lunch-eligible students in all secondary schools, not

just the target schools. Secondary schools were defined as schools serving students in

grade 7 or higher.8 We limited our analysis to secondary schools because the Talent

Search Program regulations require participants to be in grade 6 or higher. Overall,

Talent Search projects served 4.9 percent of the students eligible for the free lunch

program in secondary schools in the U.S. and outlying areas.

The second issue we considered was the difference in demographic characteristics

between target schools and all other schools. We selected two variables from the

CCD for this analysis: the percentage of free-lunch-eligible students in a given school

and the ratio of pupils to full-time-equivalent teachers, or the pupil-teacher ratio. In

Table 10, we present the data on free lunch status. The second column indicates the

average percentage of free-lunch-eligible students for the Talent Search target

schools in that state.9 The third column provides the percentage of free-lunch-eligible students for all other secondary schools in that state.10 The fourth column is the

difference between the percentages for Talent Search target schools and for all other

secondary schools.11 The last column provides the percentages for all secondary

6 There are several possible reasons why some states exceeded 100 percent (i.e.

the number of participants served was greater than the number of free-lunch-eligible 

students). First, the income guidelines for participation in Talent Search and participation in the federal free lunch program differ somewhat. For Talent Search, a participant’s household income must not exceed 150 percent of the poverty level. To

qualify for the free lunch program, income must not exceed 130 percent. In addition,

Talent Search requires that only two-thirds of the participants meet both the lowincome and first generation eligibility requirements. The remaining one-third need

not meet either of those criteria.

7 Only secondary school students in states with free lunch data were included.

8 Schools that served grades 5 and 6 only were also included.

9 Percentages were calculated by dividing the total number of students eligible

for free lunch in target schools by the total enrollment in target schools.

10 Percentages were calculated by dividing the number of students eligible for

free lunch in all secondary schools that were not targeted by Talent Search by the total

enrollment in those schools.

11 To calculate the difference, we subtracted the value in column 3 (percentages

of free-lunch-eligible students in all other schools) from the value in column 2 (percentages of free-lunch-eligible students in the target schools).
II. Demographics 15

Table 9. Estimate of eligible students served by Talent Search, by state: 1999-2000

Number served Number served

as percentage as percentage

Number of Number eligible Number eligible of number of number

secondary students for free for free lunch eligible for free eligible for free lunch

served by lunch program program in all lunch program program in all

State Talent Search in target schools secondary schools in target schools secondary schools 

Alabama 19,349 54,599 115,376 35.4% 16.8%

Alaska n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Arizona n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Arkansas 7,433 15,849 67,623 46.9% 11.0%

California 29,039 179,454 933,821 16.2% 3.1%

Colorado 4,907 17,032 63,035 28.8% 7.8%

Connecticut 2,241 12,794 41,551 17.5% 5.4%

Delaware 1,311 5,641 13,688 23.2% 9.6%

District of Columbia n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Florida 5,722 41,963 351,475 13.6% 1.6%

Georgia 9,107 29,324 209,264 31.1% 4.4%

Hawaii 1,939 8,320 24,472 23.3% 7.9%

Idaho 2,616 8,489 24,387 30.8% 10.7%

Illinois n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Indiana 5,266 17,100 84,039 30.8% 6.3%

Iowa 6,873 10,729 41,340 64.1% 16.6%

Kansas 4,679 17,409 47,074 26.9% 9.9%

Kentucky 8,106 41,835 100,596 19.4% 8.1%

Louisiana 10,320 72,458 156,660 14.2% 6.6%

Maine 914 1,808 21,057 50.5% 4.3%

Maryland 3,536 15,754 79,455 22.4% 4.5%

Massachusetts 5,492 19,771 82,549 27.8% 6.7%

Michigan 4,006 23,410 160,400 17.1% 2.5%

Minnesota 5,592 8,573 68,705 65.2% 8.1%

Mississippi 5,137 25,827 123,635 19.9% 4.2%

Missouri 2,143 4,191 101,857 51.1% 2.1%

Montana 563 708 15,999 79.6% 3.5%

Nebraska 1,426 9,161 25,081 15.6% 5.7%

Nevada 1,203 3,819 25,560 31.5% 4.7%

New Hampshire 1,159 3,468 10,623 33.4% 10.9%

New Jersey 5,823 15,459 110,109 37.7% 5.3%

New Mexico n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

New York 14,545 50,634 404,321 28.7% 3.6%

North Carolina 8,502 42,127 161,613 20.2% 5.3%

North Dakota 2,153 1,380 10,797 156.0% 19.9%

Ohio 8,332 36,035 155,071 23.1% 5.4%

Oklahoma n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Oregon 2,510 10,004 61,036 25.1% 4.1%

Pennsylvania 12,110 46,865 175,869 25.8% 6.9%

Rhode Island 851 6,068 18,514 14.0% 4.6%

South Carolina 8,245 28,348 110,594 29.1% 7.5%

South Dakota 849 1,907 11,925 44.5% 7.1%

Tennessee n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Texas 14,341 71,860 603,190 20.0% 2.4%

Utah 4,966 6,355 35,389 78.1% 14.0%

Virginia 1,222 3,339 7,879 36.6% 15.5%

Vermont 6,564 22,708 106,591 28.9% 6.2%

Washington n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Wisconsin 2,231 15,976 50,164 14.0% 4.4%

West Virginia 3,879 16,132 78,902 24.0% 4.9%

Wyoming 675 2,793 7,267 24.2% 9.3%

Outlying areas 10,909 33,306 207,638 32.8% 5.3%

Overall 258,786 1,060,783 5,306,187 24.4% 4.9%

N/a refers to states in which free lunch program data were not available.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports, 1999-2000;

National Center for Education Statistics, Elementary/Secondary and Libraries Studies Division, Common Core of Data, 1999-2000.
16 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

Table 10. Percentage of students eligible for the federal free lunch program in Talent

Search target schools, all other secondary schools, and all secondary schools, 

by state: 1999-2000

Talent Search All other All secondary

State target schools secondary schools Difference schools

Alabama 42.8% 29.0% 13.8% 32.5%

Alaska n/a n/a n/a n/a

Arizona n/a n/a n/a n/a

Arkansas 34.7% 29.5% 5.3% 30.5%

California 46.8% 32.1% 14.6% 33.7%

Colorado 32.9% 16.1% 16.8% 18.3%

Connecticut 68.4% 13.0% 55.4% 15.6%

Delaware 25.2% 24.2% 0.9% 24.6%

District of Columbia n/a n/a n/a n/a

Florida 29.5% 31.1% -1.6% 30.9%

Georgia 46.1% 29.3% 16.9% 30.9%

Hawaii 34.6% 27.5% 7.2% 29.4%

Idaho 18.3% 21.0% -2.7% 19.9%

Illinois n/a n/a n/a n/a

Indiana 29.4% 15.8% 13.5% 17.4%

Iowa 20.7% 15.5% 5.1% 16.5%

Kansas 35.8% 15.9% 19.9% 19.9%

Kentucky 36.9% 29.6% 7.3% 32.2%

Louisiana 55.8% 40.3% 15.4% 44.5%

Maine 27.5% 19.2% 8.3% 19.7%

Maryland 24.9% 18.3% 6.5% 19.3%

Massachusetts 43.7% 15.1% 28.5% 17.7%

Michigan 51.9% 17.7% 34.2% 19.6%

Minnesota 32.4% 14.7% 17.7% 15.8%

Mississippi 67.6% 50.7% 16.8% 53.5%

Missouri 48.6% 22.3% 26.3% 22.8%

Montana 37.9% 19.4% 18.5% 19.8%

Nebraska 32.3% 14.6% 17.7% 18.2%

Nevada 23.4% 15.8% 7.6% 16.6%

New Hampshire 10.5% 9.7% 0.8% 9.9%

New Jersey 55.8% 17.9% 37.9% 19.3%

New Mexico n/a n/a n/a n/a

New York 52.1% 30.0% 22.1% 31.4%

North Carolina 36.1% 24.2% 12.0% 26.2%

North Dakota 26.5% 17.8% 8.7% 18.6%

Ohio 33.9% 14.3% 19.7% 16.4%

Oklahoma n/a n/a n/a n/a

Oregon 34.7% 20.7% 14.0% 22.2%

Pennsylvania 43.1% 16.4% 26.7% 19.3%

Rhode Island 53.2% 19.8% 33.4% 25.0%

South Carolina 32.3% 35.1% -2.8% 34.3%

South Dakota 16.8% 17.6% -0.8% 17.4%

Tennessee n/a n/a n/a n/a

Texas 45.2% 31.0% 14.3% 32.1%

Utah 22.7% 14.8% 7.8% 15.8%

Virginia 13.1% 16.9% -3.8% 15.1%

Vermont 26.4% 18.0% 8.4% 19.3%

Washington n/a n/a n/a n/a

Wisconsin 40.3% 32.2% 8.1% 34.3%

West Virginia 55.2% 14.7% 40.5% 17.3%

Wyoming 17.1% 14.1% 3.0% 15.0%

Outlying areas 56.7% 71.2% -14.5% 68.4%

Overall 39.5% 25.0% 14.5% 26.7%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports, 1999-2000;

National Center for Education Statistics, Elementary/Secondary and Libraries Studies Division, Common Core of Data, 1999-2000.
II. Demographics 17

schools, regardless or whether or not they are Talent Search target schools.12 Table

11 provides information in a similar manner for the pupil-teacher ratio.

Forty percent of students in grades 6 to 12 in the Talent Search target schools were

eligible to receive free lunch. This is about 15 percentage points higher than for all

other secondary schools. Pupil-teacher ratios, however, differed very little between

target schools and all other schools when averaged across the U.S. and outlying areas.

The average class size in a Talent Search target school was about 16 students.

12 Percentages were calculated by dividing the total number of secondary school

students eligible for free lunch in a given state by total enrollment in secondary

schools in that state.
18 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

Table 11. Average pupil-teacher ratios for Talent Search target schools, all other

secondary schools, and all secondary schools, by state: 1999-2000

Talent Search All other All secondary

State target schools secondary schools Difference schools

Alabama 16.2 15.5 0.7 15.7

Alaska 17.5 17.1 0.4 17.1

Arizona 18.0 18.0 0.0 18.0

Arkansas 12.0 13.4 -1.4 13.0

California 22.5 21.3 1.1 21.4

Colorado 15.6 17.3 -1.7 17.0

Connecticut 14.2 13.4 0.8 13.4

Delaware 15.3 14.0 1.3 14.4

District of Columbia 14.0 14.2 -0.2 13.9

Florida 18.3 17.3 1.0 17.4

Georgia 16.2 16.5 -0.3 16.5

Hawaii 16.4 16.6 -0.3 16.5

Idaho 17.0 14.5 2.5 15.1

Illinois 16.2 15.8 0.4 15.8

Indiana 17.2 16.7 0.5 16.8

Iowa 14.1 13.5 0.6 13.6

Kansas 14.1 13.1 1.0 13.2

Kentucky 16.0 17.8 -1.8 17.2

Louisiana 15.6 14.7 0.9 14.8

Maine 14.2 13.4 0.8 13.4

Maryland 17.3 15.8 1.5 16.0

Massachusetts n/a n/a n/a n/a

Michigan 16.2 18.0 -1.7 17.9

Minnesota 14.2 15.4 -1.1 15.3

Mississippi 16.4 16.4 0.0 16.4

Missouri 11.9 13.5 -1.6 13.5

Montana 13.3 12.0 1.4 12.0

Nebraska 14.0 11.6 2.4 11.7

Nevada 21.7 20.0 1.7 20.1

New Hampshire 13.6 13.8 -0.2 13.8

New Mexico 15.1 15.2 -0.1 15.1

New York 16.9 15.2 1.7 15.3

North Carolina 14.4 13.6 0.8 13.7

North Dakota 10.4 12.6 -2.2 12.4

Ohio 16.4 17.3 -0.9 17.2

Oklahoma 13.4 14.4 -1.0 14.2

Oregon 18.7 18.1 0.6 18.1

Pennsylvania 17.0 16.6 0.5 16.6

Rhode Island 13.8 13.3 0.5 13.4

South Carolina 14.8 15.7 -0.9 15.5

South Dakota 16.2 12.1 4.1 12.2

Tennessee n/a n/a n/a n/a

Texas 13.6 13.3 0.3 13.3

Utah 17.8 19.1 -1.3 18.9

Virginia 12.3 12.5 -0.2 12.4

Vermont n/a n/a n/a n/a

Washington 19.6 20.1 -0.6 20.1

Wisconsin 14.2 14.0 0.2 14.0

West Virginia 16.3 15.2 1.1 15.2

Wyoming 13.7 11.4 2.3 11.7

Outlying areas 17.9 19.6 -1.7 19.2

Overall 16.2 15.5 0.7 15.7

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports, 1999-2000;

National Center for Education Statistics, Elementary/Secondary and Libraries Studies Division, Common Core of Data, 1999-2000.
III. PROJECT SERVICES 

AND ACTIVITIES

This section provides an overview of the types of services and activities that Talent

Search projects provide to their participants. The performance reports asked projects

to list the number of activity sessions and the number of participants who attended

each of 10 activities over the 1999-2000 program year. Staff reported participants by

age group—middle school, high school, and adult. Middle school participants were

those in grades 6 to 8 and high school participants were those in grades 9 to 12 or

who had dropped out of high school. Any participant who had completed high school

or earned a GED was considered an adult.

Table 12 presents the percentage of projects that provided each service, broken down

by education level. For example, the first row indicates that 77 percent of Talent

Search projects provided tutoring to middle school students, 73 percent provided

tutoring to high school students, 11 percent provided tutoring to adults, and 83 percent provided tutoring to participants overall. College orientation activities, test-taking and study skills development, counseling, and academic advising/course selection

were the services most commonly offered overall. As expected, the data show that

Talent Search services are geared more toward students in middle and high schools

than toward adults.

The percentage of projects providing each service increased for each of the 10 services between the 1998-99 and 1999-2000 program years (Table 13). The largest

increases were in family activities (8 percentage point increase) and assisted computer labs (7 percentage point increase).

19

Table 12. Percentage of projects offering services to participants, by grade level: 

1999-2000

Service Middle school High school Adult Overall 

Tutoring 77% 73% 11% 83% 

Assisted (computer) labs 55% 62% 16% 70% 

Test-taking & study skills development 91% 95% 23% 97% 

Counseling 91% 95% 45% 96% 

Academic advising/course selection 87% 95% 41% 96% 

Mentoring 54% 56% 12% 64% 

Cultural activities 91% 87% 15% 94% 

College orientation activities 87% 97% 42% 99% 

Family activities 80% 86% 22% 92%

Referrals 40% 62% 31% 70% 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
20 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

For the 1999-2000 program year, projects also varied in the number of types of services they offered to Talent Search participants. Overall, projects were more likely to

offer a wide range of services rather than only one or two. For example, 60 percent

of Talent Search projects offered nine or 10 types of services, while fewer than 2 percent offered four or fewer services (Table 14).

Projects were more likely to provide a range of services to their high school participants than to their adult participants. While 70 percent of projects offered seven or

more types of services to high school students, only 6 percent offered that many services to their adult participants.

Table 13. Comparison of percentage of projects offering different types of services to

participants: 1998-99 and 1999-2000

Service 1998-99 1999-2000 Increase 

Tutoring 80% 83% 3%

Assisted (computer) labs 63% 70% 7%

Test-taking & study skills development 92% 97% 5%

Counseling 92% 96% 4%

Academic advising/course selection 91% 96% 5%

Mentoring 58% 64% 6%

Cultural activities 90% 94% 4%

College orientation activities 95% 99% 4%

Family activities 84% 92% 8%

Referrals 68% 70% 2%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1998-99 and 1999-2000.

Table 14. Percentage of projects offering multiple services to participants, by grade level:

1999-2000

Total services offered Middle School High School Adult Overall 

9 or 10 of above services 15% 23% 2% 61%

7 or 8 of above services 46% 47% 4% 28%

5 or 6 of above services 28% 24% 13% 10%

3 or 4 of above services 8% 4% 21% 1%

1 or 2 of above services 2% 2% 16% <.5%

None of above services 1% 0% 43% 0%

Totals do not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
III. Project Services and Activities 21

A. Academic support services

The following four services, grouped as academic support services, were defined in

the performance report as follows:

• Tutoring—individual or small-group tutoring provided by professional staff or

students who are either part-time paid staff, volunteers, or internship-forcredit students.

• Assisted (computer) labs—academic support or tutoring provided through a

learning or computer center, which may include computer-assisted instruction.

• Test-taking and study skills development—workshops, tutoring, or individual

assistance specifically designed to help students develop the skills necessary to

do any of the following: 1) succeed in academic programs, 2) meet scoring

requirements on national or state standardized tests for admission into a postsecondary educational institution, or 3) pass a high school equivalency exam.

• Academic advising/course selection—assisting students in making education

plans, selecting appropriate courses, meeting academic requirements, planning

for high school graduation, and gaining admission to a postsecondary educational institution.

Three different measures were used to look at the extent to which services were

offered to participants. The first measure indicated the percentage of all Talent

Search participants who received a service. The second measure was the average

number of sessions per project (for only those projects that undertook that service).

The third measure looked at the average number of sessions per participant (for those

participants engaged in that service). Projects differed in the manner in which they

counted sessions, but we included these data here as an indicator of intensity rather

than a measure of the number of participant contacts. This measure underestimates

the actual sessions per participant. When a project provided services to a group of five

people, for example, the project was instructed to count the session as one rather than

five sessions.

Overall, 20 percent of participants received tutoring, 15 percent attended assisted

(computer) labs, 46 percent attended test-taking and study skill development sessions,

and 64 percent were advised on academic matters (Table 15). The average number of

tutoring sessions per participant over this period was about two and the average for

other academic support services was approximately one.

Projects typically provided 493 tutoring sessions, 169 assisted (computer) labs, 313 testtaking and study development sessions, and 747 sessions related to academic advising/course selection over the 1999-2000 program year. This is an increase from the

1998-99 program year when projects provided an average of 149 assisted (computer) lab

sessions per project, 265 test-taking and study skills development sessions, and 673 academic advising sessions. The average number of tutoring sessions per project, however, dropped from 574 sessions per project in 1998-99.
22 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

1. Middle school participants

As chapter II highlights, about 30 percent of the participants in Talent Search were

in middle school (grades 6-8). Figure 10 shows that more than half of the participants

in this group received academic advising (65 percent) and participated in activities

designed to enhance test-taking and study skills (59 percent). Other forms of 

academic support were less common. Thirty-four percent were tutored and 19 percent were assisted through the use of an assisted (computer) lab.

Table 15. Percentage of participants receiving academic support services, average number

of sessions per project, and average number of sessions per participant 

for participants overall: 1999-2000

Percentage of Average number Average number

participants of sessions of sessions per 

Service receiving service per project participant 

Tutoring 20% 493 2.3

Assisted (computer) labs 15% 169 0.9

Test-taking & study skills development 46% 313 0.7

Academic advising/course selection 64% 747 1.2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.

Figure 10. Percentage of middle school participants receiving academic

support services: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

100%

80

60

40

20

0

Tutoring Assisted 

(computer) labs

Test-taking

and study skills

Academic 

advising

17%

63% 63%

34%

19%

59%

65%
III. Project Services and Activities 23

Each project provided to its middle school participants an average of 344 tutoring sessions, 90 labs, 139 test-taking and study skill development sessions, and 218 academic advising/course selection sessions (Table 16). The average number of tutoring 

sessions per participant was nearly 3, which was 2 sessions more than for assisted

(computer) labs, test-taking and study skills development sessions, and academic

advising/course selection sessions.

2. High school participants

Sixty-four percent of high school participants attended academic advising and course

selection sessions (Figure 11). Forty-one percent were involved in test-taking and

Table 16. Average number of sessions per project and average number of sessions per

participant for middle school participants: 1999-2000

Average number of Average number of 

Service sessions per project sessions per participant

Tutoring 344 2.9

Assisted (computer) labs 90 1.0

Test-taking & study skills development 139 0.8

Academic advising/course selection 218 1.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.

Figure 11. Percentage of high school participants receiving academic support

services: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

100%

80

60

40

20

0

Tutoring Assisted 

(computer) labs

Test-taking

and study skills

Academic 

advising

14% 13%

41%

64%
24 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

study skill development activities, 14 percent received tutoring services through

Talent Search, and another 13 percent attended assisted (computer) labs.

Academic advising and course selection activities were the predominant means by

which high school students received academic support. As shown in Figure 11, the

participation level for this activity was higher than for other academic support services. In addition, the average number of academic advising sessions was 542 (Table

17), higher than for any other academic support service and an increase of 80 sessions

per project over the 1998-99 program year.

3. Adult participants

Sixty-six percent of the adult participants in Talent Search received academic advising/course selection assistance (Figure 12). Fewer participated in tutoring, assisted

(computer) labs, or test-taking and study skills development sessions. Since adult participants are less likely to be enrolled in school upon entering Talent Search, services

such as tutoring or assisted (computer) labs may be less applicable.

Academic support services for adults were less frequent than those provided to middle and high school participants. The average number of sessions per project ranged

from 24 for assisted (computer) labs to 50 for tutoring (Table 18). The average number of sessions per participant ranged from about 1 for most academic support services to over 2 for tutoring.

Table 17. Average number of sessions per project and average number of sessions per

participant for high school participants: 1999-2000

Average number of Average number of 

Service sessions per project sessions per participant 

Tutoring 196 1.6

Assisted (computer) labs 108 0.8

Test-taking & study skills development 181 0.7

Academic advising/course selection 542 1.3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
III. Project Services and Activities 25

Figure 12. Percentage of adult participants receiving academic support

services: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

Tutoring Assisted 

(computer) labs

Test-taking

and study skills

Academic 

advising

100%

80

60

40

20

0

9%

14%

25%

66%

Table 18. Average number of sessions per project and average number of sessions per

participant for adult participants: 1999-2000

Average number of Average number of 

Service sessions per project sessions per participant

Tutoring 50 2.1

Assisted (computer) labs 24 0.9

Test-taking & study skills development 35 1.1

Academic advising/course selection 42 0.9

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
26 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

B. Personal and career development services

Additional services and activities were grouped into a single category, comprising activities designed to enhance the personal and career development of Talent Search participants. These services, such as counseling and mentoring, often had a much broader

function, involving help with academic decisions in addition to personal and careerrelated matters. The six activities were defined in the performance report as follows:

• Counseling—assistance with personal, educational, and career decision-making.

• Mentoring—a variety of personal or academic support activities provided by

other students or professionals and designed to expose project participants to

careers and other educational opportunities available to them.

• Cultural activities—any project-sponsored activities, such as field trips, special

lectures, and symposiums, that are intended to enrich the academic progress

and personal development of project participants.

• College orientation activities—workshops, college fairs, or project-sponsored

trips to other postsecondary institutions to acquaint students with a variety of

postsecondary educational opportunities.

• Family activities—events, workshops, meetings, and counseling designed to

provide families with information on postsecondary educational opportunities

and financial aid available and to involve them in the educational decisions of

their children.

• Referrals to other service providers—the formal and informal network of social

service programs and community organizations, including other TRIO

Programs, available to help project participants.

As in the 1998-99 program year, counseling was the service provided to the largest

number of participants overall in 1999-2000 (77 percent). Fifty-seven percent participated in college orientation, 34 percent in cultural activities, 30 percent in family

activities, and 18 percent in mentoring. Nine percent of participants received referrals to outside service providers (Table 19).

Counseling was also provided more frequently than other personal and career development services, with an average of 1,302 counseling sessions per project during the

1999-2000 program year. Each project also provided an average of 342 college orientation activities, 206 mentoring sessions, 154 family activities, 81 cultural activities,

and 32 referrals to external service providers.
III. Project Services and Activities 27

1. Middle school participants

Counseling is the most common personal and career development service for middle

school students, with 84 percent of participants receiving these services (Figure 13).

More than half of middle school students also participated in college orientation 

(53 percent) and cultural activities (51 percent). Thirty-six percent of these participants engaged in family activities and 25 percent in mentoring activities. These proportions are similar to the percentage of middle school participants engaged in personal and career development services in 1998-99.

Table 19. Percentage of participants receiving personal and career development services

for participants overall: 1999-2000

Percentage of participants Average number of 

Service receiving service sessions per project

Counseling 77% 1,302

Mentoring 18% 206

Cultural activities 34% 81

College orientation activities 57% 342

Family activities 30% 154

Referrals 9% 32

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.

Figure 13. Percentage of middle school participants receiving personal and

career development services: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Referrals

Family activities

College orientation

Cultural activities

Mentoring

Counseling

7% 

 36%

53%

 51%

 25%

 84%
28 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

2. High school participants

As with middle school participants, counseling was the most highly used activity of

high school participants. Nearly three quarters of high school participants (74 percent)

received counseling in 1999-2000 (Figure 14). Fifty-eight percent received college orientation and 27 percent participated in family and cultural activities. Fifteen percent

of students received mentoring, and 10 percent received referrals to service providers

other than Talent Search. These percentages vary little from the proportion of high

school students engaged in personal and career development services in 1998-99.

3. Adult participants

The percentage of adults receiving personal and career services increased in all categories except cultural activities between 1998-99 and 1999-2000. Eighty-two percent

of adult participants received counseling and 65 percent participated in college orientation activities (Figure 15). This represents an increase of 9 and 16 percentage points

from 1998-99, respectively. Forty-four percent participated in family activities and 

24 percent received referrals to other service providers, an increase from the previous

year of 5 percentage points and a decrease of 8 percentage points, respectively.

Figure 14. Percentage of high school participants receiving personal and

career development services: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80%

Referrals

Family activities

College orientation

Cultural activities

Mentoring

Counseling

10% 

27%

58%

 27%

15%

 74%
III. Project Services and Activities 29

C. Historical perspective on service provision

Relatively little information is available on how the Talent Search Program and its

services have evolved since the program first began. A report by Elizabeth Eisner,

however, provides one slice of the program’s lengthy history by analyzing performance report data from the 1990-91 program year (Eisner 1992). Of the 177 projects

in operation in 1990-91, 162 submitted performance reports.

The performance report in 1990-91 differed somewhat from the current version of

the report. Thus, direct comparisons between the 1990-91 data and the 1998-99 and

1999-2000 data are not possible for all of the service dimensions. In addition, definitions were not given for each of the services listed, providing no parameters for categorizing services. There were, however, five general areas of overlap in the performance report items: tutoring, development of study skills, counseling, cultural activities, and college orientation. In counseling, the overall participation rate was one percentage point lower in 1999-2000 than in 1990-91. In tutoring, study skills, cultural

activities, and college orientation, the 1998-99 and 1999-2000 levels exceeded those

reported by Eisner for 1990-91 (Table 20). This information indicates an increased

focus on academic services in Talent Search in the 1990s.

Figure 15. Percentage of adult participants receiving personal and career

development services: 1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Referrals

Family activities

College orientation

Cultural activities

Mentoring

Counseling

24%

44%

65%

 19%

11%

 82%
30 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

Table 20. Percentage of participants receiving each type of service, comparing

performance report data from 1990-91, 1998-99, and 1999-2000

Service 1990-91 1998-99 1999-2000 

Tutoring 8% 21% 20%

Study skills 5% 47% 46%

Counseling 78% 77% 77%

Cultural activities 9% 33% 34%

College orientation 19% 54% 57%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports, 1998-

99 and 1999-2000 and Eisner, “Analysis of Talent Search Performance Reports, 1986-87 and 1990-91.”
IV. PERFORMANCE

OUTCOMES

In the fourth section of the performance report, grantees were asked to report on

their progress in meeting their approved objectives. These objectives were outlined

in a project’s grant proposal and needed to relate to the goals of the Talent Search

Program as well as respond to the prior experience criteria as described in the program regulations. The outcomes addressed secondary school progression, retention,

graduation, and reentry. The outcomes also included admissions and financial aid for

postsecondary education for college-ready participants. College-ready participants

include adults, 12th grade high school students, and high school or high school equivalency graduates.

Only Talent Search projects with the following types of data were included in the

objective and outcome calculations: 1) the applicable population (i.e., high school

participants); 2) objective data; and 3) outcome data. Projects missing any of these

three data types were not included in the calculations. In addition, some projects

reported higher numbers in the outcomes than in the applicable population counts

(i.e, more students graduating high school than 12th grade participants). Thus, we

capped the outcomes at the number reported in the population so no calculation was

over 100 percent.

A. Secondary school retention, graduation, and reentry

Secondary school retention, graduation, and reentry were defined as follows in the

instructions provided to projects with the performance report form:

• Secondary school retention—all middle and high school students who will continue in secondary school for the next academic term.

• Secondary school graduation—all high school seniors (and GED or alternative

education students) who received a high school diploma or completed a high

school equivalency program during the reporting period.

• Secondary school reentry—all secondary school dropouts who reentered 

high school or enrolled in a high school equivalency program during the

reporting period.

As in 1998-99, projects had little difficulty meeting retention and graduation objectives. In 1999-2000 Talent Search projects expected 88 percent of middle school and

high school participants to stay in school. Ninety-seven percent of middle school participants and 95 percent of high school participants did so.

Ninety-six percent of high school participants who were in the 12th grade at the

beginning of the reporting period (September 1, 1999) had graduated by the end of

31
32 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

the reporting period (August 31, 2000)—nine percentage points higher than the

approved objective. In addition, 50 percent of those participants who were reported

as having dropped out of high school at the beginning of the reporting period had

returned to school by the end of the reporting period (Table 21).

For the 1999-2000 program year, graduation rates among 12th graders were almost

equal among the four sectors (not shown in table). Ninety-seven percent of these participants graduated from projects hosted by private 4-year institutions compared with

96 percent at 2-year institutions and 95 percent at both public 4-year institutions and

community organizations.

B. Admissions and financial aid assistance

One of the aims of the Talent Search Program is to assist participants with the process

of applying to college and obtaining financial aid, thus helping to overcome some of

the barriers that economically disadvantaged students often face when pursuing postsecondary education. Program staff can offer assistance at various stages of the college application process—selecting schools to apply to, choosing appropriate courses, completing the application, and finding ways to finance a college education. Talent

Table 21. Comparison of approved objectives and actual achievements for secondary

school outcomes: 1999-2000

Outcome Approved objective Actual 

Retention 

Middle school 88% 97%

High school 88% 95%

Graduation 

Middle school * *

High school 87% 96%

Re-entry 

Middle school 63% **

High school 63% 50% 

*Not applicable for middle school participants. Although promotion from middle to high school was not included among

the approved objectives, projects were asked to provide the number of middle school students who went on to high school.

Projects reported 40,266 participants, or 41 percent of all middle school participants, were promoted from middle to

high school. Performance report data on the number of middle school students eligible to be promoted were not available, so we were not able to determine the percentage of eligible students promoted.

**The performance report did not ask projects to provide the number of participants who were middle school dropouts

at the beginning of the reporting period. As a result, we were not able to determine the percentage of middle school

dropouts that re-entered middle school. Projects reported that 1,210 participants re-entered middle school during the

1999-2000 program year.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
IV. Performance Outcomes 33

Search Program staff were asked to provide the following information to assess the

extent to which participants were receiving these services:

• Applied for postsecondary admission—number of participants who received

help with college entrance applications and the number who applied for postsecondary admission.

• Applied for student financial aid—number of participants who received help

completing financial aid forms, including scholarship applications, U.S.

Department of Education federal student financial aid forms, and state applications for financial aid and the number who applied for financial aid.

Eighty-four percent of high school seniors and graduates applied to a post-secondary

institution and 82 percent applied for financial aid in 1999-2000 (Table 22). Overall,

projects had expected to assist 89 percent of their participants with applications for

postsecondary admissions and for student financial aid. Among the four sectors, community organizations had the highest percentage of students apply for both postsecondary admission (86 percent) and for financial aid (85 percent).

Table 22. Comparison of approved objectives and actual achievements for assistance in

applying for postsecondary admissions and financial aid: 1999-2000

Outcome Approved objective Actual 

Assistance in applying for postsecondary admissions 

Overall 89% 84%

Public 4-year 88% 82%

Private 4-year 91% 85%

2-year 90% 82%

Community organizations 89% 86%

Assistance in applying for student financial aid 

Overall 89% 82%

Public 4-year 88% 80%

Private 4-year 91% 84%

2-year 91% 80%

Community organizations 88% 85%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
34 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

C. Postsecondary admissions and reentry

Postsecondary enrollment numbers were divided into the following two groups:

• Postsecondary admissions—number of high school graduates and participants

who have completed requirements to obtain a high school equivalency degree, as

well as other eligible individuals who have enrolled in programs of postsecondary

education for the first time during this reporting period or for the fall term.

• Postsecondary reentry—number of participants who were previously dismissed

or had halted their educational progress toward a postsecondary degree, but

who reenrolled in a program of postsecondary education during the reporting

period or for the fall term.

Overall, Talent Search projects expected 74 percent of eligible participants to enroll

in college and 64 percent of participants who had previously dropped out of college

to re-enroll. In fact, projects reported that 73 percent of participants enrolled for the

first time and that 76 percent of the participants in the program who had dropped out

re-entered (Table 23).

When examining the data by sector, projects hosted at community organizations had

the highest percentage of their college-ready participants admitted to a postsecondary

institution (76 percent) and projects hosted at 2-year colleges had the highest percentage of their postsecondary dropouts re-enroll (86 percent).

Table 23. Comparison of approved objectives and actual achievements for postsecondary

outcomes: 1999-2000

Outcome Approved objective Actual 

Postsecondary admissions 

Overall 74% 73%

Public 4-year 73% 71%

Private 4-year 76% 72%

2-year 73% 72%

Community organizations 75% 76%

Postsecondary reentry 

Overall 64% 76%

Public 4-year 60% 79%

Private 4-year 60% 60%

2-year 67% 86%

Community organizations 67% 73%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
IV. Performance Outcomes 35

D. Postsecondary placement

In addition to the number of participants who enrolled or re-enrolled in college, projects provided information on the types of colleges those participants chose to attend.

For the Talent Search Program as a whole in 1999-2000, 81 percent of participants

who went on to college attended a 2-year or 4-year public institution (Figure 16).

Forty-two percent attended a public 4-year school and 39 percent attended a public

2-year school. Another 12 percent enrolled in a private 4-year school. The remaining

students chose to attend a vocational or technical school, proprietary school, or a 2-

year non-profit school.

Among Talent Search projects based in postsecondary institutions, it was common for

participants to attend college at an institution of the same type as the program’s host

institution. For example, students from programs based in public 4-year schools

attended a public 4-year college or university at a rate of 49 percent, which is higher

than attendance rates at public 4-year colleges from any other sector (Table 24).

Seventeen percent of students from projects based in private 4-year schools also

attended a private 4-year college or university, and 53 percent of students from projects at 2-year schools attended a 2-year college.

Figure 16. Postsecondary placement of Talent Search participants overall:

1999-2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search

Performance Reports, 1999-2000.

Proprietary 

school 

1%

Public 

2-year 

39%

Nonprofit 

2-year 

2%

Private 

nonprofit 

4-year

12%

Public 

4-year 

42%

Public or

nonprofit 

vocational or

technical 

school 

4%
36 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

Table 24. Postsecondary placement of participants by sector: 1999-2000

Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage

admitted to admitted to admitted to admitted to

public 4-year private 4-year 2-year other types

Sector institutions institutions institutions* of institutions**

Public 4-year 49% 10% 34% 7%

Private 4-year 44% 17% 34% 5%

2-year 33% 8% 53% 5%

Community organizations 41% 14% 41% 5%

All projects 42% 12% 41% 5%

*Includes 2-year public and non-profit schools.

**Includes vocational or technical schools and proprietary schools.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
V. DATA ISSUES AND 

FUTURE PLANS

The following section highlights data issues, response rates, and possible future modifications to the Talent Search performance report. The rates of completion for individual data items and sections on the performance report were uniformly high, ranging from 86 percent to 100 percent (Table 25).

All items related to demographics, with the exception of target schools (90 percent),

had response rates of 100 percent. All items in the performance outcomes section, with

the exception of the percentage of participants reentering middle school, had response

rates of 90 percent or higher. The response rates for items in the services section could

not be determined from the given data. In this particular section, projects were given

a list of 10 services to report on. They were asked to list the number of sessions they

provided during the performance period and the number of participants served

through each activity. Because not all projects provided all 10 services, it was not possible to determine whether a field was left blank because that particular service was

never provided or because the project did not have the information on hand.

An additional difficulty in interpreting the services data was the lack of clarity about

how the numbers of sessions and participants for a given service were calculated. The

instructions on the performance report stated that “the number of sessions, activities,

events, and organizations categories should reflect the total number of these provided. For example, the project may have conducted 50 tutoring sessions for 15 adults.

Thus, under the ‘Tutoring’ column, the project should indicate No. of Sessions—50,

No. of Participants—15.” In the given example, it is not clear whether each of the 

15 participants attended 50 group sessions, or whether 50 individual sessions were

held and split among 15 students.

There were also some data inconsistencies in Sections III and IV of the performance

report. In Section III, some projects claimed to provide services to more participants

than were included in Section II. For example, 22 projects (6 percent) reported that

they provided tutoring activities to more middle school students than were listed as

participants in the demographics section. In addition, some of the outcome data provided in Section IV were inconsistent with demographic data in Section II. In some

cases, projects stated that they had more participants in an outcome than was feasible.

For example, 59 Talent Search projects (16 percent) claimed to have more high school

students re-enroll in high school than they had secondary school drop-outs.

The U.S. Department of Education has added edit checks to the Web-based application that will correct both of these issues. It will require that the totals in each part of

Section III and Section IV cannot be larger than the totals in Section II. In addition,

the Department has added edits to Section III that require a numeric value for each

service or activity field to ensure complete reporting. Those projects not providing the

37
38 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

service or activity must enter a zero in the field. The results of this change should be

immediately apparent in the 2000-01 performance data. The Department will continue to clarify the directions for completing the reports and to make revisions based on

feedback from the project staff concerning the report form and instructions.

Table 25. Section and item response rates: 1999-2000

Section and item Response rate 

Number of participants assisted 100%

Participant distribution by eligibility 100%

Participant distribution by ethnic background 100%

Participant distribution by gender 100%

Participant distribution by age 100%

Veterans served 100%

Participants of limited English proficiency 100%

Target schools 90%

Approved objectives:

Secondary school retention 100%

Secondary school graduation 100%

Secondary school reentry 94%

Assistance in applying for postsecondary admissions 98%

Assistance in applying for student financial aid 99%

Postsecondary admissions 99%

Postsecondary reentry 91%

Participant status at the end of the reporting period:

Continued in middle school 99%

Promoted from middle school to high school 99%

Continued in high school 99%

Re-entered middle school 86%

Re-entered high school 90%

Received high school diploma 99%

Obtained a GED/high school equivalency degree 90%

Applied for admission to programs of postsecondary education 99%

Applied for student financial aid for postsecondary education 99%

Admitted to (or enrolled in) a program of postsecondary education 99%

Re-enrolled in a program of postsecondary education 91%

Dropped out of middle school 94%

Dropped out of high school 97%

Other 96%

Unknown 100%

Postsecondary placements (types of institutions) 91%-100%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
39

APPENDIX A: TABLES

Table A1. Number of Talent Search projects and participants and percentage reporting

performance information, by federal region: 1999-2000

Total Number Number

projects Project of of projects Response

Federal region in 1999 distribution participants reporting rate 

Region I (Boston) 14 4% 12,255 14 100%

Region II (New York) 33 9% 32,114 33 100%

Region III (Philadelphia) 35 10% 43,521 35 100%

Region IV (Atlanta) 88 24% 74,486 88 100%

Region V (Chicago) 55 15% 42,556 55 100%

Region VI (Dallas) 48 13% 44,650 48 100%

Region VII (Kansas City) 20 6% 15,940 19 95%

Region VIII (Denver) 18 5% 15,156 17 94%

Region IX (San Francisco) 38 11% 38,956 38 100%

Region X (Seattle) 12 3% 8,436 12 100%

Total for nation 361 100% 328,070 359 99%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.

Table A2. Participant distribution by eligibility status and federal region: 1999-2000

Low-income and Low-income First generation

Federal Region first generation only only Other needs 

Region I (Boston) 72% 9% 15% 4%

Region II (New York) 78% 9% 8% 6%

Region III (Philadelphia) 74% 6% 16% 5%

Region IV (Atlanta) 72% 5% 16% 7%

Region V (Chicago) 71% 8% 16% 5%

Region VI (Dallas) 75% 6% 13% 5%

Region VII (Kansas City) 73% 7% 17% 3%

Region VIII (Denver) 73% 9% 12% 6%

Region IX (San Francisco) 76% 5% 14% 5%

Region X (Seattle) 72% 6% 18% 4%

Percent for nation 74% 7% 14% 5%

Totals do not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
40 A Profile of the Talent Search Program: 1999-2000

Table A3. Participant distribution by race and ethnicity and federal region: 1999-2000

Am. Black or Hisp. Haw. or 

Indian/ African or other MultiFederal Region Al. Nat. Asian Am. Latino White Pac Is. racial Unk. 

Region I (Boston) 1% 6% 20% 30% 38% 0% 3% 2% 

Region II (New York) 1% 3% 34% 53% 8% 0% 2% 0% 

Region III (Philadelphia) 0% 2% 31% 34% 32% 0% 1% 0% 

Region IV (Atlanta) 2% 1% 57% 2% 37% 0% 0% 1% 

Region V (Chicago) 4% 4% 48% 9% 33% 0% 2% 0% 

Region VI (Dallas) 6% 2% 34% 24% 32% 0% 1% 0% 

Region VII (Kansas City) 2% 3% 26% 7% 60% 0% 2% 0% 

Region VIII (Denver) 28% 1% 1% 22% 48% 0% 0% 0% 

Region IX (San Francisco) 3% 15% 15% 44% 11% 9% 3% 0% 

Region X (Seattle) 12% 6% 6% 16% 56% 1% 3% 0% 

Percent for nation 4% 4% 35% 23% 31% 1% 1% < .5%

Table A3 includes “Unknown” response option so data do not not match totals in Figure 5.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.

Table A4. Participant distribution by grade level and federal region: 1999-2000

Secondary High school Post Post

Middle High school (GED) secondary secondary

Federal Region school school dropout graduate dropout student 

Region I (Boston) 34% 63% 1% 1% 0% 0%

Region II (New York) 25% 67% 3% 4% 1% 0%

Region III (Philadelphia) 27% 67% 2% 2% 2% 0%

Region IV (Atlanta) 34% 62% 2% 1% 0% 0%

Region V (Chicago) 31% 60% 2% 6% 1% 0%

Region VI (Dallas) 29% 69% 1% 1% 0% 0%

Region VII (Kansas City) 32% 63% 3% 2% 1% 0%

Region VIII (Denver) 32% 61% 3% 2% 2% 0%

Region IX (San Francisco) 24% 72% 1% 1% 0% 1%

Region X (Seattle) 35% 62% 1% 2% 0% 0%

Percent for nation 30% 65% 2% 2% 1% <0.5%

Totals do not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.
Appendix A 41

Table A5. Percentage of projects providing academic support services, by federal region:

1999-2000

Assisted Test-taking Academic

Federal Region Tutoring (computer) labs and study skills advising

Region I (Boston) 100% 79% 100% 100%

Region II (New York) 91% 76% 94% 94%

Region III (Philadelphia) 71% 77% 97% 97%

Region IV (Atlanta) 84% 69% 99% 98%

Region V (Chicago) 80% 71% 98% 98%

Region VI (Dallas) 81% 69% 98% 98%

Region VII (Kansas City) 89% 79% 95% 95%

Region VIII (Denver) 76% 65% 100% 82%

Region IX (San Francisco) 87% 58% 95% 95%

Region X (Seattle) 83% 75% 92% 100%

Percent for nation 83% 70% 97% 96%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.

Table A6. Percentage of projects providing personal and career development services, by

federal region: 1999-2000

Cultural College Family

Federal Region Counseling Mentoring activities orientation activities Referrals 

Region I (Boston) 100% 79% 93% 100% 93% 93%

Region II (New York) 97% 58% 94% 97% 88% 55%

Region III (Philadelphia) 100% 69% 97% 97% 94% 60%

Region IV (Atlanta) 98% 59% 94% 100% 91% 68%

Region V (Chicago) 91% 60% 93% 100% 91% 71%

Region VI (Dallas) 98% 75% 96% 98% 98% 77%

Region VII (Kansas City) 100% 68% 100% 100% 89% 63%

Region VIII (Denver) 100% 59% 100% 100% 82% 65%

Region IX (San Francisco) 92% 58% 84% 95% 92% 79%

Region X (Seattle) 92% 92% 100% 100% 100% 75%

Percent for nation 96% 64% 94% 99% 92% 70%

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Federal TRIO Programs, Talent Search Performance Reports,

1999-2000.

43

REFERENCES

Eisner, Elizabeth. “Analysis of Talent Search Performance Reports, 1986-87 and

1990-91.” Paper included in the report from the Design Conference for the

Evaluation of the Talent Search Program, hosted by the U.S. Department of

Education, Office of Policy and Planning, September 30, 1992.