U.S. Department 

of Education

FY 1999 Annual Plan 

Volume 2. 

Program Performance Plans

February 25, 1998

U.S. Department of Education

Program Performance Plans

Programs and FY 1999 budget request Page

Education Reform ........................................................................... 1

Goals 2000 State and Local Education Systemic Improvement — $501,000,000 ................................................. 3

School-to-Work Opportunities — $125,000,000 ......................................................................... 7

Education Technology ...................................................................... 11

Technology Literacy Challenge Fund—State and Local Programs for School Technology Resources and Technology Innovation Challenge Grants

and National Activities — $668,000,000 ........................................................................... 13

Regional Technology in Education Consortia— $10,000,000 ............................................................... 19

Star Schools Program — $34,000,000 ................................................................................ 21

Ready To Learn Television — $7,000,000 ............................................................................. 23

Telecommunications Demonstration Project for Mathematics — $2,000,000 ................................................... 24

Elementary and Secondary Education .......................................................... 25

Education for the Disadvantaged ............................................................. 27

Title I Grants for Schools Serving At-Risk Children — $7,777,000,000 ....................................................... 29

Even Start Family Literacy Program — $114,992,000 .................................................................... 34

Title I Part C: Education of Migratory Children — $354,689,000 ............................................................ 37

Title I, Part D: Programs for Children and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk of Dropping Out of School — $40,311,000 .... 40

Demonstrations of Comprehensive School Reform — $150,000,000 ......................................................... 42

Transition to School Demonstrations — $35,000,000 ..................................................................... 43

High School Equivalency Program and College Assistance Migrant Program — $15,000,000 ...................................... 44

Impact Aid .............................................................................. 47

Impact Aid — $696,000,000 ....................................................................................... 49

Class Size Reduction and Teacher Financing .................................................... 51

Class Size Reduction and Teacher Financing Initiative — $1,100,000,000 ..................................................... 53

School Improvement ....................................................................... 55

Eisenhower Professional Development Program — $335,000,000 ........................................................... 57

Innovative Education Program Strategies (Block Grant) (Title VI, ESEA) — $0 ................................................ 60

Safe and Drug-free Schools Program — $606,000,000 .................................................................... 61

Inexpensive Book Distribution — $13,000,000 .......................................................................... 66

Arts Education — $10,500,000 ...................................................................................... 67

Magnet Schools Assistance Program — $101,000,000 .................................................................... 68

Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Program — $30,000,000 ......................................................... 70

Women’s Educational Equity Act Program (WEEA) — $3,000,000 .......................................................... 71

Title IV of the Civil Rights Act: Equity Assistance Center Program — $8,300,000 ............................................... 72
Allen J. Ellender Fellowship Program — $0 ............................................................................ 73

Native Hawaiian Education Program — $18,000,000 ..................................................................... 74

Alaska Native Education Program — $8,000,000 ........................................................................ 75

Public Charter Schools Program — $100,000,000 ....................................................................... 76

Comprehensive Centers Program — $40,000,000 ........................................................................ 78

Advanced Placement Test Fees — $3,000,000 .......................................................................... 80

Education Opportunity Zones — $200,000,000 ......................................................................... 81

America Reads Challenge ................................................................... 85

America Reads Challenge (prop. leg.) — $210,000,000 ................................................................... 87

Indian Education .......................................................................... 91

Indian Education — $66,000,000 .................................................................................... 93

Bilingual and Immigrant Education ............................................................ 97

Bilingual Education Program — $232,000,000 .......................................................................... 99

Foreign Language Assistance Program — $5,000,000 ................................................................... 104

Emergency Immigrant Education Program — $150,000,000 .............................................................. 106

Special Education ........................................................................ 107

Special Education Grants to States and Preschool Grants— $4,184,685,000 ................................................... 109

Special Education - Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities — $370,000,000 ................................................... 115

Special Education Discretionary Program – $290,961,000 ................................................................ 118

Rehabilitation Services, Disability Research, and Special Institutions ................................ 123

State Vocational Rehabilitation Services — $2,331,224,000 ............................................................... 125

American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS)— $17,238,000 ................................................. 129

Client Assistance Program (CAP) — $10,928,000 ...................................................................... 130

Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) Training Program — $33,685,000 .............................................. 131

Special Projects and Demonstrations — $18,942,000 .................................................................... 132

Vocational Rehabilitation Migrant Program, Section 312 — $2,350,000 ..................................................... 133

Recreation Program Section 316 — $2,596,000 ........................................................................ 134

Protection & Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) — $9,894,000 ......................................................... 135

Projects with Industry (PWI) Section 621 — $22,071,000 ................................................................. 136

Independent Living Programs — $79,574,000 ......................................................................... 137

Helen Keller National Center (HKNC) for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults — $8,176,000 ......................................... 140

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) — $81,000,000 ........................................... 142

Technology Related Assistance to States - P.L. 103-218 — $30,000,000 ...................................................... 144

American Printing House for the Blind — $8,256,000 ................................................................... 145

National Technical Institute for the Deaf — $44,791,000 ................................................................. 147

Gallaudet University — $83,480,000 ................................................................................ 151

Vocational and Adult Education ............................................................. 157

Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act (State Grants and Tech-Prep Indicators) — $1,136,650,000 ......................... 159

National Programs Indicators (Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act)— $13,497,000 ................................... 162

Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Vocational Institutions — $0 ............................................................ 163

Adult Education — $361,000,000 ................................................................................... 164
Adult Education: Evaluation and Technical Assistance — $27,000,000 ...................................................... 167

National Institute for Literacy —$6,000,000 ........................................................................... 168

Literacy Programs for Prisoners and Grants to States for Workplace and Community Transition for Incarcerated Youth Offenders — $0 .... 172

Student Financial Assistance ............................................................... 173

Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE): Office-Wide Performance Indicators ............................................... 175

Pell Grant Performance Measures — $7,594,000,000 .................................................................... 181

Campus-Based Programs — $1,649,000,000 .......................................................................... 183

State Student Incentive Grant (SSIG) Program — $0 .................................................................... 185

Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFEL) — $1,764,317,000 ........................................................ 186

Federal Direct Student Loans Program — $525,484,000 .................................................................. 190

Higher Education ........................................................................ 195

Aid for Institutional Development - Title III (HEA) — $260,000,000 ........................................................ 197

Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education — $22,500,000 ...................................................... 204

International Education Programs — $61,117,000 ...................................................................... 209

Teacher Recruitment and Preparation (HEA, V - prop. leg.) — $67,000,000 .................................................. 211

Annual Interest Subsidy Grants — $13,000,000 ........................................................................ 214

Urban Community Service Program — $0 ............................................................................ 215

Mary McLeod Bethune Memorial Fine Arts Center — $0 ................................................................ 217

TRIO Programs – $583,000,000 .................................................................................... 218

High Hopes for College (College-School Partnerships) (prop. leg.) — $140,000,000 ............................................ 222

National Early Intervention Scholarship and Partnership (NEISP) Program — $0 .............................................. 223

Robert C. Byrd Honors Scholarship Program — $39,288,000 .............................................................. 224

National Need Graduate Fellowship Program (NNGFP) — $37,500,000 ..................................................... 225

College Awareness (Early Awareness Information) — $15,000,000 ......................................................... 228

Learning Anytime Anywhere Partnerships (prop. leg.) — $30,000,000 ...................................................... 229

Access and Retention Innovations (prop. leg.) — $20,000,000 ............................................................. 230

Howard University — $210,000,000 ................................................................................. 231

Educational Research and Improvement ....................................................... 233

National Education Research Institutes — $53,782,000 .................................................................. 235

Interagency Research Initiative — $50,000,000 ........................................................................ 236

Regional Educational Laboratories — $56,000,000 ..................................................................... 237

Dissemination — $18,785,000 ..................................................................................... 240

Statistics and Assessment — $108,000,000 ........................................................................... 241

Eisenhower Federal Activities — $50,000,000 ......................................................................... 243

Fund for the Improvement of Education — $105,000,000 ................................................................. 245

Javits Gifted And Talented Students Education— $ 6,500,000 ............................................................. 246

Eisenhower Regional Mathematics and Science Education Consortia — $25,000,000 ........................................... 247

21st Century Community Learning Centers Program — $200,000,000 ....................................................... 249

National Writing Project — $5,000,000 .............................................................................. 251

Civic Education — $6,300,000 ..................................................................................... 252

International Education Program (Student Achievement Institute) — $5,000,000 ............................................... 253

Civil Rights ............................................................................. 255

Office for Civil Rights (OCR) —$68,000,000 .......................................................................... 257

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 1

Education Reform
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 2
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 3

Goals 2000 State and Local Education Systemic Improvement — $501,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support comprehensive state and local education reform tied to high standards for all students

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Improve student achievement in

core subjects.

1.1 Performance on national assessments.

Between 1990 and 1998, the proportion of

students who meet or exceed basic and

proficient levels in reading and math on such

measures as the National Assessment of

Educational Progress will increase by at least

10 percentage points.

1.2 Meeting/exceeding state standards. The

percentage of students who meet or exceed

state or local performance standards on final

assessments will increase between 1996 and

1998.

1.1 NAEP reading, 1998;

NAEP math, 1998.

1.2 Follow-Up Survey of

Schools, 1998; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1999; analysis of

state and local assessment

results, annually.

! Provide assistance at the state and school

levels for improved school performance

and increased family and community

engagement in learning, by supporting

ED service teams, technical assistance

centers, and state school support teams.

! Support interstate working groups to

discuss how to improve and measure

student achievement and to identify the

types of Goal 2000 activities that support

gains in student achievement.

2. Stimulate and accelerate state

and local reform efforts.

2.1 Participation in reform efforts. By 1999, as

many as 8,000 school districts will actively

participate in standards-based reform stressing

challenging standards for all children.

2.2 Standards for core subjects

– By 1998, all states will have challenging

content and performance standards in place

for reading and math.

– By 1998, increasing percentages of states will

have challenging standards in place for other

core subjects.

2.1 Goals 2000 annual

performance reports, 1997;

District Implementation

Study, 1997; Follow-Up

District Implementation

Study, 1998.

2.2 Review of Goals 2000 state

plans and annual

performance reports, 1997;

Ed Week/Quality Counts II

report, 1998; Council of

Chief State School

Officers, 1997; 1997

American Federation of

Teachers; Council for

Basic Education report,

1998.

! Provide federal financial support

(especially, Goals 2000 grants, Title I,

Eisenhower Professional Development,

Bilingual Education, Special Education,

and Technology grants) and encourage

states to share their model standards.

! Expand public understanding of the need

for challenging academic standards by

disseminating information on standardsbased reform through states, national

associations, and other ED partners.
Goals 2000 State and Local Education Systemic Improvement — $501,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support comprehensive state and local education reform tied to high standards for all students

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 4

2.3 Aligned assessments. By 1999, 20 states will

have assessments aligned to content and

performance standards for two core subjects;

by 2000, all states will.

2.4 Goals 2000 as a catalyst. State and local

school administrators will identify the Goals

2000 initiative as a factor contributing to

effective education reform.

2.3 Council of Chief State

School Officers, 1997;

State Implementation

Study, 1998; Follow-Up

State Implementation

Study, 1999.

2.4 State Implementation

Study, 1998; Follow-Up

State Implementation

Study, 1999; Follow-Up

Local Implementation

Study, 1998.

! Help states and districts develop and

implement aligned assessments designed

to improve student learning by providing

financial support under Goals 2000 and

Title I and by encouraging the sharing of

effective methodologies.

3. Promote parental and

community involvement in

student learning.

3.1 Parental involvement. The percentage of

parents who understand what their children

need to know to achieve to high standards and

know how to help their children succeed in

school will increase. 

3.2 Community involvement and acceptance. 

The percentage of the public that understands

and supports standards-based reform will

increase.

3.3 Parental Assistance Center usefulness. At

least 90% of customers will indicate that the

information or assistance provided through the

Parental Assistance Centers is useful.

3.4 Parental Assistance Center participation.

In the geographic areas in which the Parental

Assistance Centers provide direct services, the

number of children and families who

participate in Parents as Teachers (PAT) or

Home Instruction for Preschool Youngsters

(HIPPY) will substantially increase.

3.1 Barriers to Parent

Involvement Study, 1996;

Council of Chief State

School Officers Report,

1996; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998.

3.2 Phi Delta Kappa/ Gallup

Poll, 1997; other public

opinion polls, 1997.

3.3 Proposed customer survey.

3.4 Annual reports for Parental

Assistance Centers, 1996.

! Increase parents’ knowledge of and

confidence in child rearing activities,

and strengthen partnerships between

parents and professionals through

financial and technical assistance to

Parental Information Resource Centers.

! Disseminate information to the public

regarding parental and community

involvement through ED service teams,

conferences, and publications.

! Develop a common customer survey

instrument that all centers will use to

gather feedback from customers.

! Regularly assess the adequacy and

effectiveness of support that each funded

Parental Assistance Center project

devotes to PAT and HIPPY activities

and ensure that the centers devote a

substantial part of their budget to these

activities.
Goals 2000 State and Local Education Systemic Improvement — $501,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support comprehensive state and local education reform tied to high standards for all students

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 5

4. Promote excellent teaching that

will enable all students to reach

challenging state and/or local

standards.

4.1 Teachers’ knowledge of standards. By

1997-98, surveys will report that teachers in

states with standards or curriculum

frameworks understand state or local content

and performance standards as they apply to

the grades and subjects they teach.

4.2 Schools’ alignment of key processes. By

1997-98, surveys of principals and teachers in

states with standards will indicate that schools

have aligned curriculum, instruction,

professional development and assessment to

meet challenging state or local standards.

4.3 Professional development. The number of

teachers who indicate that they are engaged in

professional development that is enabling

them to teach to challenging standards will

increase annually.

4.1 National Longitudinal

Survey of Schools, 1998.

4.2 Follow-Up Survey of

Schools, 1998; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998.

4.3 Follow-up Survey of

Schools, 1998; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998.

! Provide financial support and

technical assistance to states

administering Goals 2000 subgrants for

teacher preservice and professional

development.

! Support efforts to prepare future teachers

to meet high certification and licensing

standards by promoting partnerships

between school districts and institutions

of higher education to prepare new

teachers.

! Encourage states to align certification

and licensing requirements for teachers

with challenging content standards and

best practice by sharing with the field

the most promising strategies to upgrade

teaching quality through publications,

conferences, and monitoring visits.
Goals 2000 State and Local Education Systemic Improvement — $501,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support comprehensive state and local education reform tied to high standards for all students

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 6

5. Effective federal program

management will support state

and local reform through.

5.1 Satisfaction with Goals 2000

administration. State and local education

agencies participating in Goals 2000 will be

satisfied with its administration on indicators

such as application response time, peer review

and site visits.

5.2 Coordinating across the Department. State

and local education agencies will report that

the services provided by regional service

teams are useful and of high quality.

5.1 ED State Implementation

Survey, 1997; Cross

cutting District Survey,

1998.

5.2 Cross cutting District

Survey, 1998;

Documentation of

Integrated Review Teams;

1998; Follow-Up State

Implementation Study,

1999.

! Continue professional development of

employees to develop expertise in

principles and practices of education

reform.

! Establish OESE-wide standards for

timely completion of site visit reports

and for working with states on satisfying

conditions set for state plan revisions.

! Work closely with the ED integrated

review teams (IRTs) to ensure that

program monitoring reflects reform

goals.

! Develop a monitoring protocol for the

IRTs that provides clear and uniform

guidance on the program areas and

topics to be covered and ways to be

assessed.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 7

School-to-Work Opportunities — $125,000,000 (FY99)

Goal: To build school-to-work systems that result in increased student achievement and career opportunities

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Students

1. Prepare all youth, including

those who are disadvantaged,

have limited English proficiency,

are academically gifted, are out

of school or disabled, to have the

opportunity to engage actively in

School-to-Work (STW) systems

that meet high academic

standards.

Student participation in STW systems:

1.1 All youth. By fall 1997, 750,000 high school

youth will be engaged actively in STW

systems, and by 2000, 2 million youth will be

participating. As of December 1995, 500,000

high school youth participated in STW

systems that offered curriculum that

integrated academic and vocational

education and provided work-based learning

experiences connected to classroom activities.

1.2 Out-of-school youth. By spring 1998,

baseline data will be available on out-ofschool youth participating in STW systems,

and STW systems, and benchmarks will be

established for 1999 and 2000.

1.1 Progress Measures, 1996;

National School-to-Work

Evaluation, 1997; 

National Longitudinal

Survey (NLS) Youth

Module, 1997.

1.2 National STW and MPR 

progress measures, annual, 

1997.

! Conduct targeted outreach to encourage

students to coalesce into an articulate

stakeholder group.

! Sponsor development and identification

of exemplary models for serving out-ofschool youth and other targeted

populations.

! Evaluate states’ progress toward

building comprehensive systems through

site visits, meetings and the continuation

approval process.

2. Prepare all youth to earn a high

school diploma or equivalency

tied to challenging academic

standards, to have the

opportunity to earn a skill

certificate, and to be prepared

for postsecondary education and

careers.

Student achievement in STW systems:

2.1 High school graduation. By fall 2000, high

school graduation rates will increase in local

STW systems.

2.2 Postsecondary enrollment. High school

graduates from the class of 2000 will enroll in

postsecondary education at higher rates than

high school graduates in 1996 and 1998. 

2.3 Skill certificates. By fall 2000, in local STW

systems, 10% of students will earn skill

certificates. About 3% of high school seniors

received skill certificates in 1995-96.

2.1 Progress Measures, 1996; 

NLS Youth Module, 1997.

2.2 National Evaluation, 1997. 

2.3 National Evaluation, 1997.

! Showcase models for whole school

reform

! Sponsor training to develop the capacity

of grantees.

! Facilitate peer-to-peer exchange of

information among States and local

partnerships.

! Sponsor and disseminate research that

identifies models and best practices for

applied learning.

2.4 Out-of-School Youth. By fall 2000, in local

STW systems, the percentage of out-of-school

youth acquiring high school equivalency

diplomas will be higher than the percentage

who achieved diplomas in spring 1997.

2.4 National Evaluation, 1998;

NLS Youth Module, 1997.

! Use available state-level data to track

progress of STW systems.

! Provide technical assistance to states.
School-to-Work Opportunities — $125,000,000 (FY99)

Goal: To build school-to-work systems that result in increased student achievement and career opportunities

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 8

System Building

3. Build comprehensive school-towork systems in every state.3.1 Leveraged State and Local Funds

– States in their first year of implementation

will have a two-to-one ratio of federal dollars

to new state and private dollars.

– States in their second year of implementation

will have a one-to-one ratio of federal dollars

to new state and private dollars.

3.2 Skill standards adoption. By fall 2000, 25%

of STW implementation states will adopt at

least one set of industry-recognized skill

standards.

3.1 Progress Measures, 1997.

3.2 Progress Measures, 2000.

! Develop capacity for states to conduct

in-depth strategic planning to leverage

new resources.

! Identify and disseminate tools and

effective practices of STW grantees.

! Support peer delivery of technical

assistance and training among grantees.

! Provide technical assistance to states in

identifying academic and occupational

standards in broad career majors that

lead to portable skill certificates.

Institutions

4. High schools, postsecondary

institutions and adult high

schools are engaged in building

School-to-Work systems.

Number of institutions involved in STW

activities:

4.1 High schools. By fall 2000, 30% of high

schools will have the key STW components. 

In fall 1996, 13% of STW partnerships

reported high levels of implementation in

their high schools.

4.2 Community and technical colleges. By

2000, 40% will have agreements that grant

academic credit for work-based learning. In

1996, 20% of STW partnerships reported their

postsecondary institutions had such

agreements.

4.1 Progress Measures, 1996;

National Evaluation, 1997;

NLS Youth Module, 1997.

4.2 National Evaluation.

! Sponsor and disseminate policy options

for awarding academic credit for workbased learning.

! Support the development of

postsecondary institution leaders who

can influence changes to existing

admissions policies and articulation

agreements.
School-to-Work Opportunities — $125,000,000 (FY99)

Goal: To build school-to-work systems that result in increased student achievement and career opportunities

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 9

Employers

5. Build strong employer

participation

Participation of employers in STW systems:

5.1 Active engagement. By fall 2000, 600,000

employers will engage in at least one

recognized STW activity. As of December

1995, 150,000 employers nationally engaged

in at least one STW activity. 

5.2 Provide work-based learning opportunities.

 By fall 2000, 40% of all employers

participating in STW systems will offer workbased learning opportunities.

5.1 Progress Measures, 1996;

National Employer Survey

II.

5.2 Progress Measures, 2000.

! Develop and implement a strategic plan

for recruitment of employers.

! Develop prototype products and work

with key organizations to raise a critical

awareness of STW among employers

and organized labor.

! Support the development, testing,

dissemination and implementation of

various approaches to employer

participation.

Integration of STW with other ed reforms and workforce development systems

6. Align School-to-Work

Opportunities with Goals 2000: 

Educate America Act,

Improving Americas Schools Act

(IASA), Perkins, Adult

Education, Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act

(IDEA), Job Training

Partnership Act (JTPA) and

other federal programs.

Number of states participating in the

department’s alignment efforts:

6.1 Alignment. By fall 1997, a baseline will be

established for alignment of STW and Perkins

performance measures and standards in

States.

6.2 Consolidated plans. By fall 1998, Perkins

and STW will be part of consolidated plans in

at least 12 sStates. As of October 1996,

Perkins and STW were part of consolidation

plans in eight States. 

6.1 MPR, 1997.

6.2 Office of Vocational and

Adult Education, 1997.

! STW and the Office of Vocational and

Adult Education (OVAE) work with

MPR to identify barriers to alignment

and build consensus among local school

systems for changes in measurement

systems.

! Align grant procedures of two

departments so they are seamless.

! Identify opportunity for streamlining

grant awards. Align the two

departments’ OIG audit and audit

resolution programs for STW grantees.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 10
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 11

Education Technology
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 12
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 13

Technology Literacy Challenge Fund—State and Local Programs for School Technology Resources and Technology Innovation Challenge

Grants and National Activities — $668,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To use educational technology as part of broader education reform that will provide new learning opportunities and raise educational achievement for all

students.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Help improve student

achievement in core subjects

through federal educational

technology programs operating in

concert with other federal

programs and state and local

reform efforts.

1.1 Student performance on national tests.

Between 1997 and 2001, the percentage of

students who meet or exceed basic and

proficient levels in reading and math on

achievement tests such as NAEP will increase.

1.2 Student performance on state tests. Between

1997 and 2001, in communities where state and

local education agencies have assessment

systems linked to state standards in place, the

percentage of students who meet or exceed

these state and local performance standards will

increase.

1.1 National Assessment of

Educational Progress

(NAEP) and State NAEP

assessments of reading and

math, grades 4, 8, and 12,

1998; Technology

Innovation Challenge

grantee performance

reports, annual, 1998; data

from external program

evaluator, 1998.

1.2 State and local education

assessment data, 1998;

Technology Innovation

Challenge grantee

performance reports,

annual, 1998; data from

external program evaluator,

1998.

! Provide financial and technical assistance. 

Coordinate with related technology

initiatives, including other federal

programs and state and local reform

efforts. 

! Support Technology Innovation

Challenge Grant sites to increase student

performance on state or school tests of

academic achievement and on outcome

measures related to the individual

projects.

2. Help improve student’s

technology literacy through

federal educational technology

programs in concert with other

federal programs and state and

local reform efforts.

2.1 Student proficiency in technology. Between

1997 and 2001, the percentage of students who

demonstrate proficiency in using multimedia

computers and the Information Superhighway

will increase.

2.1 Technology Innovation

Challenge grantee

performance reports,

annual; 1998; data from

external program evaluator ,

1998; Technology Literacy

Challenge Fund, follow-on

evaluation, 1999.

! Same strategies as for Objective 1.

! Support development of assessments that

measure student technology proficiency

through Technology Innovation

Challenge Grants.
Technology Literacy Challenge Fund—State and Local Programs for School Technology Resources and Technology Innovation Challenge

Grants and National Activities — $668,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To use educational technology as part of broader education reform that will provide new learning opportunities and raise educational achievement for all

students.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 14

Teachers, Students, and Classroom

3. Provide practicing and

prospective teachers with the

professional development and

support they need to help students

learn through modern multimedia

computers and the Information

Superhighway.

3.1 Training tied to certification. Training in use

of modern multimedia computers and the

Information Superhighway for effective

instruction will be increasingly required for

certification and accreditation of practicing and

prospective teachers, schools, and districts.

3.2 Staff access. Increasing proportions of 

practicing and prospective teachers, school

administrators and school librarians will have

access to modern multimedia computers and

the Information Superhighway.

3.3 Staff training: Increasing proportions of

practicing and prospective teachers, school

administrators and school librarians will

receive professional development that enables

them to effectively use education technology to

help students learn.

3.4 Support for staff. Teachers will have the

administrative, technical, and local financial

support they need to help students learn

through modern multimedia computers and the

Information Superhighway.

3.1 Advanced

Telecommunications and

U.S. Public Elementary and

Secondary Schools Survey,

1996; Evaluation of

Technology Literacy 

Challenge Fund, 1997;

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998.

3.2 Advanced Telecommunications and U.S. Public

Elementary and Secondary

Schools Survey, 1996;

Evaluation of Technology

Literacy Challenge Fund,

1997; Technology

Innovation Challenge

Grants monitoring and

evaluation reports. 

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998.

3.3 Same as 3.2.

3.4 Same as 3.2.

! Work with professional development

programs to support teacher training for

effective instructional uses of education

technology.

! Connect with institutions for higher

education (including colleges of

education) for high quality preservice and

inservice training.

! Continue to support Local Education

Agencies (LEAs) through Technology

Innovation Challenge Grant program, in

partnership with other programs, to

strengthen and support teacher knowledge

of how to use technology to improve

instruction.

! Develop models through the Technology

Innovation Challenge Grants that provide

teachers with sustained training and

support in the use of technology for

improved instruction.

! Review project reports for evidence of

sustained teacher training and support of

the innovation after the grant period has

ended.
Technology Literacy Challenge Fund—State and Local Programs for School Technology Resources and Technology Innovation Challenge

Grants and National Activities — $668,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To use educational technology as part of broader education reform that will provide new learning opportunities and raise educational achievement for all

students.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 15

4. Encourage expansion of student

access to modern multimedia

computers.

4.1 Student access. The ratio of modern

multimedia computers per student in public

schools will increase to four to five students per

modern multimedia computer by the year 2000.

4.2 Access in high-poverty schools. The access to

education technology in high-poverty schools

will be comparable to that in other schools. 

4.3 Effective technologies. Students with

disabilities will have access to effective

technologies for learning.

4.4 Access outside school. An increasing

percentage of schools will participate in

programs that provide their teachers and

students with access to modern multimedia

computers and the Information Superhighway

outside school.

4.5 Community access. An increasing percentage

of low-income adults and youth will have

access to modern multimedia computers in their

communities to meet their information,

education, and employment needs.

4.1 Advanced Telecommunications and U.S. Public

Elementary and Secondary

Schools Survey, 1997; 

Evaluation of Technology

Literacy Challenge Fund,

1997; follow-on evaluation

, 1999; Technology

Innovation Challenge Grant

monitoring reports from

OERI project officers,

annual, 1998; analyses of

annual evaluation reports

from project evaluators,

annual, 1998; data from

external program evaluator,

1998; Longitudinal Survey

of Schools, 1998.

4.2 Same as 4.1.

4.3 Same as 4.1.

4.4 Same as 4.1.

4.5 Current Population Survey.

! Expand access to educational technology

for high-poverty schools by reviewing

state technology plans and providing

financial and technical assistance.

! Encourage development and

demonstration of effective strategies for

improving the use of educational

technology, particularly in high-poverty

schools, through Technology Innovation

Challenge Grants. 

! Identify gaps in data sources on use and

effectiveness of educational technology,

and work to fill those information gaps.

! Provide information on the E-rate to

schools, particularly schoolwide and high

poverty schools.
Technology Literacy Challenge Fund—State and Local Programs for School Technology Resources and Technology Innovation Challenge

Grants and National Activities — $668,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To use educational technology as part of broader education reform that will provide new learning opportunities and raise educational achievement for all

students.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 16

5. Support linking all schools and

classrooms to the Information

Superhighway.

5.1 School access. The percentage of public

schools with access to the Information

Superhighway will increase to 95% by 2000.

5.2 Classroom access. The percentage of public

school instructional rooms connected to the

Information Superhighway will increase from

3% in 1994 to 14% in 1996, to 25% by 1998,

and to an increasingly larger percentage

thereafter.

5.1 Advanced

Telecommunications and

U.S. Public Elementary and

Secondary Schools survey,

1997; Evaluation of 

Technology Literacy

Challenge Fund, 1997; 

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998.

5.2 Advanced Telecommunications and U.S.

Public Elementary and

Secondary Schools Survey,

1997; Evaluation of

Technology Literacy

Challenge Fund, 1997;

Technology Innovation

Challenge Grants

monitoring reports;

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998.

! Work with the Federal Communications

Commission to expand schools’ access to

advanced telecommunications.

! Expand classroom access to modern

multi-media computers and the

Information Superhighway through

financial and technical assistance,

dissemination of exemplary strategies 

and coordination across programs.

! Encourage development of structures for

facilitating the operation of networked

learning environments that draw on the

resources of the Information

Superhighway to improve student

learning and achievement through

Technology Innovation Challenge Grants.

6. Promote the availability of highquality software and the resources

of the Information Superhighway

part of a challenging and

enriching curriculum in every

school.

6.1 Classroom use. An increasing percentage of

teachers will integrate high-quality educational

technology, high-quality software, and the

Information Superhighway into their school

curriculum for effective support of student

learning.

6.2 Model programs. An increasing number of

federally funded educational technology

projects will be designated as outstanding by

panels of experts.

6.1 Evaluation of Technology

Literacy Challenge Fund,

(1997); Longitudinal Survey

of Schools (1998);

Challenge Fund, follow-on

evaluation (1999). 

6.2 OERI program files,

annual, 1998.

! Expand classroom access to engaging

software and on-line resources of the

Information Superhighway integrated

with school curriculum through financial

and technical assistance and coordination

with related technology initiatives and

activities.
Technology Literacy Challenge Fund—State and Local Programs for School Technology Resources and Technology Innovation Challenge

Grants and National Activities — $668,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To use educational technology as part of broader education reform that will provide new learning opportunities and raise educational achievement for all

students.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 17

! Assist in developing information on

implementation and impact through

monitoring and summarizing grantee

reports, independent evaluations of the

Technology Innovation Challenge Grants

and other educational technology 

programs.

! Encourage Technology Innovation

Challenge Grant sites to submit evidence

of effectiveness in order to be designated

by peers as either “promising” or

“exemplary” by OERI approved

standards.

7. Promote effective federal

program management to support

state and local implementation of

statewide technology plans.

7.1 Technical assistance. Technical assistance

and other support that the U.S. Department of

Education provides, either directly or through

its programs, is of high quality, useful, and

judged by customers as adequate to meet their

needs.

7.2 Private sector collaboration. Private sector

participation in planning, support and

implementation of statewide education

technology plans will increase.

7.1 Customer survey and data

provided by Technology

Innovation Challenge

grantees, annual, 1998; data

from external program

evaluator, 1998.

Data provided by

Technology Literacy

Challenge Grant grantees at

end of five-year award

period, 2000. 

Data from Technology

Literacy Challenge Fund

application and outreach

work, 1997. 

Technology Literacy

Challenge Fund, follow-on

evaluation, 1999.

! Encourage states to develop and

implement a framework for improvement

and for effective and well-targeted state

support that will enable them to respond

to local feedback in a timely manner.

! Encourage states to use their federal funds

strategically to include leveraging and

coordination with other programs to

support effective use of educational

technology. 

! Develop guides and models for state and

local evaluations.
Technology Literacy Challenge Fund—State and Local Programs for School Technology Resources and Technology Innovation Challenge

Grants and National Activities — $668,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To use educational technology as part of broader education reform that will provide new learning opportunities and raise educational achievement for all

students.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 18

! Encourage private sector participation in

promoting and supporting effective use of

educational technology to increase

educational achievement through

Technology Innovation Challenge Grants

and other programs.

! Use the TLCF performance report to

report on States’ progress relative to their

own goals and to target program

improvement efforts within states.

DEFINITIONS

Advanced telecommunications -- refers to modes of communication used to transmit information from one place to another including broadcast and interactive television,

networked computers, etc.

Modern multimedia computers -- computers with CD-ROM, graphics, and sound capabilities.

Information technology -- technology that allows users to transmit, receive, and manipulate information, e.g., computers, telecommunications, Internet access. 

Information Superhighway -- Internet, a network of networks all running TCP/IP protocols, sharing the same underlying network address space as well as the same domain

name space, and interconnected into a network of information.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 19

Regional Technology in Education Consortia— $10,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve teaching and learning by providing technical assistance and professional development for the effective use of educational technology.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Promote effective use of

technology for teaching and

learning through professional

development and technical

assistance. 

1.1 Regional Technology in Education

Condortia (R*TEC) products, services, and

information: The number of professional

development, training, and technical services

and products for staff, parents, community,

and students -- including those provided

through the Consortium, collaboration with

other R*TECs and strategic alliances -- will

increase annually.

1.2 Recipients of R*TEC products, services and

information. The number of recipients

(individuals or agencies including LEAs and

SEAs) of the R*TEC services and products – 

including those developed and produced

through the Consortium, collaboration with

other R*TECs, and strategic alliances -- will

increase annually.

1.3 Need, quality, and client satisfaction. Of the

recipients of R*TEC products, services, and

information, a growing proportion will

indicate that these products and services are of

high quality and meet unmet needs; have

potential to improve teaching and learning;

help them make better informed decisions

about technology planning, equipment, and

software purchases, and professional

development activities -- and that some of

these services are available only through the

R*TECs.

1.1 ED program midpoint

assessment, 1998; Annual

Consortia project

evaluations, 1998.

1.2 ED program midpoint

assessment, 1998; Annual

Consortia project

evaluations, 1998.

1.3 ED program midpoint

assessment, 1998; Annual

Consortia project

evaluations, 1998.

! Disseminate high-quality information

and resources on the effective planning

and use of technology in education.

! Assess customer satisfaction about major

areas of work (through surveys, focus

groups, or other means of inquiry) and

will document and evaluate findings in

order to improve strategies, products,

and activities over time (e.g., alter

content, level of intensity, format, key

target audience).

! Collaborate with state education

agencies (SEAs), LEAs and other

educational entitites in order to inform

and support better planning, increased

access to technologies, more advanced

uses of technology, and enhanced

instructional practice.

1.4 Recipients representing underserved

schools. In schools and communities of

traditionally underserved populations (low

income, urban, rural, and racial and language

minority populations), there will be an annual

increase in the number of recipients of service,

products, and information; and an increase in

the proportion of recipients indicating that

they found them useful to practice.

1.4 ED program midpoint

assessment, 1998; annual

Consortia project

evaluations, 1998.
Regional Technology in Education Consortia— $10,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve teaching and learning by providing technical assistance and professional development for the effective use of educational technology.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 20

2. Leverage and coordinate

resources for effective use of

educational technology to

improve teaching and learning.

2.1 Building and expanding quality alliances.

The number of alliances and the services of

alliances in which R*TECs are involvedwill

increase each year.

2.2 Leverage. Each year at least 80% of alliance,

consortium members and R*TECs responding

to a survey will report that value was added by

strengthening relationships, increasing service

coordination, increasing their access to

resources, and leveraging resources for greater

impact on their clients.

2.1 ED program midpoint

assessment, 1998; annual

Consortia project

evaluations, 1998.

2.2 ED program midpoint

assessment, 1998; annual

Consortia project

evaluations, 1998.

! Use cooperative agreements as grant

mechanism to facilitate collaboration

among consortia, as well as with other

educational technology initiatives.

! Support increasing communication and

collaboration among consortia and 

coordination with other programs,

particularly those with an educational

technology focus. 

! Assess the value and impact of alliances

(through surveys, focus groups, or other

means of inquiry) and use the findings to

improve alliances over time.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 21

Star Schools Program — $34,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve student learning and teaching through the use of distance learning technologies.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Improve teaching and learning

through increased access to

distance education.

1.1 Underserved schools. The number of K-12

schools and adult basic education programs

serving poor, urban, rural, and disadvantaged

learners participating in distance education

activities will increase annually.

1.2 Non-traditional settings. The number of

learners in non-traditional settings

(community centers, correctional facilities,

etc.) who participate in distance education 

will increase annually.

1.3 Improved student performance. Students

using distance education technologies will

demonstrate increased performance.

1.4 Access to modern technologies. The number

of students who have access to and benefit

from new, advanced distance education

technologies will increase annually. 

1.1 Annual progress reports

and project files, 1998;

national program

evaluation results, 1998.

1.2 Annual performance

reports, 1998; national

program evaluation

results, 1998.

1.3 Same as 1.2.

1.4 Annual review of grant

performance reports, 1998;

project evaluation surveys,

1997; national program

evaluation, 1998.

! Use NCES data to identify communities

representing high populations of

underserved students. Document and

annually report on the number of under

served learners in the program. Develop

and update an on-line map of

communities participating in the

program.

! Encourage the delivery of services to

learners outside classroom settings.

! Work with project and program

evaluators to ensure that evaluation

strategies capture the impact of the

program on student outcomes.

2. Promote the delivery of

challenging and engaging

content in core subjects.

2.1 Alignment with standards. The content of

programming will be aligned with local and

state content standards.

2.2 Increased availability. The number of

schools offering high school credit and

advanced placement courses through distance

education and enrollment will increase

annually.

2.1 Annual review of grant

performance reports, 1998;

project evaluation surveys

to teachers, 1997; national

program evaluation, 1998.

2.2 Annual review of grant

performance reports, 1998;

project evaluation surveys

to schools, 1998; national

program evaluation, 1998.

! Provide access to standards materials online and via print (by subject area). 

Convene workshops and other activities

and provide technical assistance about

aligning standards to programming. 

Make TIMSS materials available to

projects.

! Disseminate information about Star

Schools course offerings through the

Department’s web site, workshops, and

national meetings. 

! Develop priorities for advanced

placement and high school courses.
Star Schools Program — $34,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve student learning and teaching through the use of distance learning technologies.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 22

2.3 Increased elementary enrollment. 

Enrollment in reading, math, science, and

foreign language programs for elementary

students delivered via distance education will

increase annually.

2.3 Annual review of grant

performance reports, 1998;

project evaluation surveys

to schools and teachers,

1997; national program

evaluation, 1998.

! Develop a priority for reading, math,

science and foreign language

programming for elementary students

and their parents.

3. Promote excellence in teaching

through sustained professional

development and integration of

new and multiple technologies

into the curriculum.

3.1 Increased distance learning resources. The

number and type of teacher professional

development activities (courses, workshops,

special broadcasts, etc.) offered via distance

education technologies will increase annually.

3.2 Technological capability. The number of

teachers and school administrators trained to

use distance education technologies to

enhance student learning will increase

annually.

3.3 Instructional integration. The number and

percentage of teachers who integrate distance

education technologies into the curriculum

will increase annually. 

3.4 Improving practice. An increasing

proportion of the teachers participating in the

Star Schools’ professional development or

preservice education activities will report

improvements in their ability to effectively

incorporate technology into instruction.

3.1 Annual review of grant

performance reports, 1998;

project evaluation surveys

to schools, 1997; national

program evaluation, 1998.

3.2 Same as 1.4.

3.3 Same as 2.1.

3.4 Same as 3.3.

! Provide financial and technical

assistance through workshops and

teleconferences in collaboration with

R*TEC and other programs in the

Department to support staff professional

development.

! Report annually on the progress that

students are making as a result of

participation in program activities.

4. Contribute to the available body

of knowledge on use of

technology to enhance learning

to high standards for all

students.

4.1 Increase research-based practice. Research,

evaluation, and dissemination activities about

the use and impact of distance learning will

increase annually.

4.1 NCES distance education

survey; distance learning

resource network; Hezel

reports; TLCF state

reports; national program

evaluation, 1998.

! Develop papers, meetings, and products

for effective use of distance education for

better teaching and learning through

collaboration with OERI’s Institutes,

centers, labs, and other programs, such

as Challenge Grant, Challenge Fund,

Eisenhower, and Title I.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 23

Ready To Learn Television — $7,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To develop, produce, and distribute video programming and educational materials for preschool and elementary school children and their parents, in order

to facilitate the achievement of the National Education Goal for all children in America to start school ready to learn.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Develop, produce, and distribute

high quality televised

educational programming and

written educational materials,

for preschool and elementary

school children and their

caregivers.

1.1 Distribution of educational television

programs. Ready to Learn (RTL) programs

will reach an increasing number of viewers. 

Each RTL educational program will reach

between 4.5 and 6 million adults and young

viewers weekly. The number of RTL

participating stations has grown from 48 in

1995 to 120 in 1997. The current number

represents a potential reach of 90% of the

Nation.

1.2 Distribution of written educational

materials. Increasing numbers of bimonthly

newsletters and free books, through First

Books Program, will be distributed. As of

April 1997 over 650,000 books and 5.4

million newsletters had been distributed;

10% of newsletters were in Spanish. The goal

for 1998 is to distribute 4 million additional

newsletters.

1.3 Evaluation of RTL programing and

outreach activities. Assessments of

programming and materials indicate that

viewers understand and appreciate RTL

programs and reading materials.

1.1 Annual Performance

Reports from the

Corporation for Public

Broadcasting (CPB), 1998;

reports from producers,

WGBH-Boston and The

Children’s Television

Workshop periodic.

1.2 CPB Annual Report, 1998.

1.3 Pre and post-television

production focus groups;

research study measuring

the value and educational

effectiveness of RTL

publications, 1997; CPB

Survey of RTL

Coordinators, 1998.

! Monitor progress of current projects and

monitor program quality. For example,

review performance reports from the

CPB, the Children’s Television 

Workshop, and WGBH - Boston.

! Participate in developing and supporting

collaborations with other federal

agencies, foundations, and related early

childhood groups.

! Support the development and use of

workshops to distribute educational

material and information to caregivers

and children.

! Provide educational materials through

the RTL web site.

! Participate on the RTL Advisory Board.

2. Provide training to education

personnel in the public television

community so that they can train

parents and caregivers to help

children become ready to learn.

2.1 Training for parents and caregivers. The

number of parents and caregivers trained will

increase. To date 44,225 parents and 74,949

caregivers have been trained.

2.2 Evaluation of training quality. Continuous

improvement will be built into training

programs through periodic evaluation.

2.1 CPB Annual Performance

Reports, 1998.

2.2 CPB Survey of RTL

Coordinators, 1998.

! Support and develop workshops for

training of RTL coordinators and

caregivers.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 24

Telecommunications Demonstration Project for Mathematics — $2,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve the learning and teaching of mathematics through the use of technology.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Promote excellent teaching in

mathematics through sustained

professional development and

teacher networks.

1.1 Increasing instructional resources. The

number of high quality videos, curriculum

materials, and on-line services for integrating

of effective practices for mathematics

instruction will increase annually. 

1.2 Improving practice. The proportion of

participating teachers reporting understanding

and use of teaching methods that align with

standards will increase annually.

1.3 Increasing participation in sustained

professional development. The number of

teachers sharing resources through on-line

learning communities will increase annually. 

An increasing proportion of participating

teachers will report improvements in practice

resulting from sharing resources through online learning communities.

1.1 Annual review of grant

performance reports, 1998;

peer review of quality of

materials, 1998; program

evaluation tentatively

planned for FY1998.

1.2 Annual review of grant

performance reports, 1998;

teacher surveys collected

by the project, 1998;

program evaluation

tentatively planned for FY

1998.

1.3 Annual review of grant

performance reports, 1998;

teacher surveys collected

by the project, 1998;

program evaluation

tentatively planned for FY

1998.

! Provide financial assistance to support

development of videos, support

materials, and online services. 

! Based on needs identified by the Third

International Mathematics and Science

Study (TIMSS) data and other national

math assessments, the Office of

Educational Research and Improvement

will work with PBS to develop a specific

focus and content for math

programming.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 25

Elementary and Secondary Education
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 26
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 27

Education for the Disadvantaged
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 28
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 29

Title I Grants for Schools Serving At-Risk Children — $7,777,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: At-risk students improve their achievement to meet challenging standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

At-risk students improve achievement

1. Student achievement in Title I

schools and high-poverty schools

generally will show significant

improvement in core subjects.

1.1 State and local assessments. Increasing

percentages of students in Title I schools will

meet or exceed the basic and proficient levels

in state and local assessments (where in

place). The 1995-96 achievement results for

students attending high- and low-poverty

schools in 13 states provide a baseline for

future comparisons. 

1.2 NAEP reading and math. Increasing

percentages of fourth-graders and eighthgraders in Title I schools will meet or exceed

the basic and proficient levels of the National

Assessment of Educational Progress in reading

and math. Baseline: 1996 NAEP trend data

indicate that fourth-grade reading and math

scores of students attending high-poverty

schools are rising, following a decline in the

early 1990s. 

1.3 Other national tests. Increasing percentages

of students in Title I schools will improve on

national tests.

1.1 Analysis of state and local

assessment results, annual;

National Longitudinal

Survey of Schools, 1999.

1.2 NAEP (National and State) 

Reading and Math, 1997.

1.3 Longitudinal Evaluation of 

School Change and

Performance, 1998 

(Stanford 9).

Schools and classrooms provide high quality education to improve performance

2. Increase the number of Title I

schools actively working to

enable students to reach high

standards each year.

2.1 Recognition for quality. Increasing numbers

of high-poverty schools will be designated as

distinguished schools by their states.

2.1 Title I Performance Report,

1998.

! Work with technical assistance and

professional organizations to promote 

school level improvement by 

— developing an updated schoolwide

idea book and national directory of

schoolwide program schools;
Title I Grants for Schools Serving At-Risk Children — $7,777,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: At-risk students improve their achievement to meet challenging standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 30

2.2 Standards and assessments. Increasing

numbers of Title I schools will implement

standards-based reforms; by 2000 the adoption

of assessments linked to standards will be

universal.

2.3 Research-based curriculum and instruction. 

The number of Title I schools using

comprehensive, research-based approaches to

improve curriculum and instruction will

increase annually (as evidenced by

implementation of Title I targeted assistance,

schoolwide, and Comprehensive School

Reform Program components). 

2.4 Extended learning time. Increasing

percentages of Title I schools will operate

extended-school year, before- and after-school,

and summer programs.

2.5 Services to eligible students attending

private schools. The number of district and

private school officials and teachers reporting

more effective communication, consultation,

and services as a result of Agostini v Felton

will increase annually.

2.2 ED State Implementation

Survey, 1998; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1999; Baseline

and Follow-up Surveys of

Schools, 1998.

2.3 Baseline and Follow-up

Surveys of Schools, 1998; 

Longitudinal Evaluation of

School Change and

Performance, 1998;

National Longitudinal

Survey of Schools, 1999.

2.4 Baseline and Follow-up

Surveys of Schools, 1998;

Title I Performance Report,

1998; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1999. Title I

Performance Report, 1998.

2.5 Evaluation of Title I

Services to Private School

Students, 1999.

— cosponsoring regional conferences

on schoolwide and comprehensive

school reform with the technical

assistance centers and other

partners;

— improving dissemination of

information on effective standardsbased reforms in schoolwide and

targeted assistance programs

— collaborating with Title I state

coordinators to establish summer

programs; and

— identifying and disseminating

descriptions of successful extendedday programs in coordination with

federal programs and agencies 

(including ED’s 21st Century

Schools program and HHS’s Head

Start program)

! Support state and local efforts, in

cooperation with national organizations

of public and private school officials, to

provide services to eligible children

attending private schools under Agostini

v. Felton by

— providing guidance and technical

assistance to states, school districts,

and private school officials to help

them provide services to eligible

students attending private schools.
Title I Grants for Schools Serving At-Risk Children — $7,777,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: At-risk students improve their achievement to meet challenging standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 31

3. The qualifications and training

for teachers and aides will

reflect higher standards.

3.1 Teacher training linked to standards. The

number of teachers and instructional aides in

Title I schools who participate in professional

development stressing standards-based

instruction and teaching will increase

annually. 

3.2 Qualified teacher aides. By 2000, all Title Isupported instructional aides will have earned

high school diplomas or general education

development certificates (GEDs) within 2

years of employment (if they do not already

have them or meet the statutory exemption).

3.1 Baseline Survey of

Teachers, 1998; Title II

Evaluation, 1998; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1999.

3.2 International Reading

Association membership

survey, 1997; Follow-up

Survey of Schools, 1998;

National Longitudinal

Survey of Schools, 1999.

! Support and disseminate best practices

for teacher training.

! Develop and disseminate materials and

models for helping paraprofessionals,

especially in urban areas, advance their

education and become qualified teachers

(e.g., including information on federal

student aid and a paraprofessional idea

book).

4. State and district policy,

monitoring, and assistance will

promote school and classroom

improvements toward

challenging standards.

4.1 Implementing high standards. 

— States will develop measures of adequate

progress linked to state standards that are

substantially more rigorous than those

developed under the antecedent Chapter 1

program.

— Increasing numbers of districts will make

progress in aligning curricula and

instructional materials with standards.

In 1996, 31% of districts in early reform states

reported a great deal of progress in aligning

curricula and instructional, compared with

16% of districts in other states. 

4.2 Linked assessments. By 2001, all states will 

develop or adopt high-quality assessments

linked to high standards in reading and math,

and use those assessments to measure the

performance of students in Title I schools.

4.1 Review of ESEA

Consolidated State Plans,

1998; ED State

Implementation Survey,

1998; Baseline District

Survey (Reports on Reform

from the Field), 1997;

Follow-up District Survey,

1998.

4.2 ED State Implementation

Survey, 1998.

! Help states and school districts develop

and implement challenging academic 

standards by

— encouraging states to share

information on model standards

and effective methodologies for

state assessment;

— working with states through the

consolidated planning process;

— providing states with onsite

technical expertise and support in

standards-based assessment;

— finalizing and disseminating the

standards, assessment, and

accountability guidance; and

— providing support on assessment

issues from the ED service teams

and technical assistance centers.
Title I Grants for Schools Serving At-Risk Children — $7,777,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: At-risk students improve their achievement to meet challenging standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 32

4.3 Accountability: monitoring, intervention,

and assistance. States and districts will

effectively monitor school improvement,

provide technical assistance (through school

support teams and other sources), and take

appropriate action with schools that

consistently fail. In 1996 approximately half

of all districts reported difficulty in providing

effective technical assistance for schools not

making adequate yearly progress. 

4.3 ED State Implementation 

Survey, 1998; Local

District Survey (Living in

Interesting Times) 1997;

Follow-up Local District

Survey, 1998; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998.

! Work with national organizations and

states to assist school support teams and

other assistance providers by developing

or coordinating the development of

materials and training on effective

practices and research-based strategies,

and other innovative strategies for

supporting schools in need of

improvement (e.g., data analysis).

Parents and schools as partners for children’s learning

5. Family involvement in learning

will improve in Title I schools.

5.1 School-parent compacts. Increasing

percentages of school staff and parents will

report that school-parent compacts are a useful

tool for enhancing communication between

parents and schools to improve student

learning.

5.2 Improved attendance and homework

completion. Increasing percentages of schools

will report improved student engagement as a

result of parental involvement.

5.1 Follow-up Survey of

Schools, 1998; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1999.

5.2 Follow-up Survey of

Schools, 1998; National

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1999.

! Support increased parent and family

involvement through

— disseminating a school-parent

compact handbook,

— working with ED partners to

develop strategies for increasing

parent involvement, and

— promoting family literacy options.
Title I Grants for Schools Serving At-Risk Children — $7,777,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: At-risk students improve their achievement to meet challenging standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 33

High-quality and customer-responsive federal administration

6. Federal leadership, assistance,

and guidance in partnership with

states and local districts will

support school improvement.

6.1 Responsive and useful guidance. The

number of state and local program

coordinators who report that guidance

regarding Title I implementation and effective

practices is timely, responsive, and useful will

increase annually. In 1996, over 80% of

districts and 90% of states reported that

written guidance from ED was useful.

6.2 Impact on local understanding. The number

of schools reporting that their staff are

knowledgeable about the provisions of Title I

and how to use Title I to increase student

performance will increase annually.

6.3 Impact on local performance measurement.

Federal technical assistance and other support

to states will result in an increase in the

number of local school districts with the

capacity to disaggregate assessment data.

6.1 Baseline District Survey

(Reports on Reform from

the Field), 1997; ED State

Implementation Study,

1998.

6.2 Baseline and Follow-up

Surveys of Schools, 1998; 

National Longitudinal

Survey of Schools, 1998.

6.3 Follow-up Local District

Survey, 1998; ED State

Implementation Study,

1998.

! Support school improvement in

partnership with the states by providing

clear and timely information to

educators serving at-risk children: 

— establish a Title I home page;

— consult with Title I administrators

in developing guidance materials;

— use electronic mechanisms to

respond to questions; 

— develop a process for sharing

information on effective

disaggregation techniques and

through the technical assistance

centers;

— use the results of district survey to

design additional dissemination

efforts;

— distribute information through

publications widely read by

administrators and teachers for atrisk children.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 34

Even Start Family Literacy Program — $114,992,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help break the cycle of poverty and illiteracy by improving the edcational opportunities of the Nation’s low-income families by integrating early

childhood education, adult literacy or adult basic education, and parenting education into a unified family literacy program.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Participating families improve their literacy level 

1. The literacy of participating

families will improve.

1.1 Adult literacy achievement. Increasing

percentages of adults will achieve significant

learning gains on literacy measures. In 1996,

53 % of adults achieved a moderate- to largesized gain between pretest and posttest on a

test of functional math skills, 19% on a test

of functional reading skills, 17% on a test of

math achievement, and 14% on a test of

reading achievement.

1.2 Adult educational attainment. Increasing

percentages of adults will obtain their high

school diploma or equivalent. In 1996, 10% 

of adults earned a GED since participating in

Even Start. 

1.3 Children’s school readiness and success.

Increasing percentages of children

participating in Even Start will attain

significant gains on measures of school

readiness and achievement. In 1996, 80% of

children made better than expected gains on

a test of school readiness, and 63% achieved

moderate to large gains on a test of language

development.

1.4 Parenting skills. Increasing percentages of

parents will show significant gains on

measures of parenting skills, knowledge, and

expectations for their children. In 1996, 41% 

of parents scored 75% or higher correct on

the posttest measuring the quality of cognitive

stimulation and emotional support provided

to children in the home.

1.1 National Even Start

Evaluation, sample study,

1997.

1.2 National Even Start

Evaluation, 1997.

1.3 National Even Start

Evaluation, sample study,

1997; Synthesis of

Research on

Intergenerational Literacy,

1998.

1.4 National Even Start

Evaluation, sample study,

1997.

! Improve Even Start programs by

— identifying and disseminating

model projects through Staff

Mentoring Sites project; and

— disseminating best practices

through newsletters,

commissioned papers, and

regional meetings.
Even Start Family Literacy Program — $114,992,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help break the cycle of poverty and illiteracy by improving the edcational opportunities of the Nation’s low-income families by integrating early

childhood education, adult literacy or adult basic education, and parenting education into a unified family literacy program.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 35

Participating families improve their self-sufficiency outcomes

2. Self-sufficiency outcomes of

participating families will

improve.

2.1 Adult employment. Increasing percentages of

adults will attain employment during or after

participating in Even Start. In 1996, 13% of

parents unemployed at intake found

employment by the end of the year.

2.2 Continuing adult education. Increasing

percentages of adults will continue in their

education.

2.1 Synthesis of Research on

Intergenerational Literacy,

1998; National Even Start

Evaluation, 1997.

2.2 National Even Start

Evaluation, 1998;

Synthesis of Research on

Intergenerational Literacy,

1998.

! Improve Even Start programs by

— identifying and disseminating

model projects through Staff

Mentoring Sites project and

— disseminating best practices

through newsletters,

commissioned papers, and

regional meetings.

Even Start projects provide high-quality instructional and support services to families most in need

3. Even Start projects will reach

their target population of

families that are most in need of

services.

3.1 Recruitment of most in need. The projects

will recruit low-income, disadvantaged

families with low literacy levels. In 1996,

71% of families had less than $12,000 in

annual income and 47% of parents had less

than a ninth grade education at intake. 

3.1 National Even Start

Evaluation, 1997.

! Work with states to encourage targeting

families most in need of services by

— disseminating models and

discussing targeting issues at state

coordinators meetings and

— reviewing local applications

during integrated reviews for

statements on serving families

most in need.
Even Start Family Literacy Program — $114,992,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help break the cycle of poverty and illiteracy by improving the edcational opportunities of the Nation’s low-income families by integrating early

childhood education, adult literacy or adult basic education, and parenting education into a unified family literacy program.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 36

4. Local Even Start projects will

provide comprehensive

instructional and support

services of high quality to all

families in a cost-effective

manner.

4.1 Service hours. Projects will offer increasingly

higher levels of service hours annually. In

1996, projects averaged 371 hours of adult

education, 201 hours of parenting education,

and 530 hours of early childhood education.

4.2 Participation, retention and continuity.

Projects will increasingly improve retention

and continuity of services. In 1996, 60% of

families were expected to continue. The adult

education participation national average in

1996 was 114 hours, parenting education, 27

hours.

4.3 Local collaborations. Projects will

increasingly promote high-quality, costeffective collaborations. In 1996, on average,

projects had 11 collaborators. 

4.1 National Even Start

Evaluation, 1997.

4.2 National Even Start

Evaluation, 1997.

4.3 National Even Start

Evaluation, 1997;

Building State Alliances

study, 1998.

! Improve Even Start programs by

— identifying and disseminating

model projects through Staff

Mentoring Sites project; and

— disseminating best practices

through newsletters,

commissioned papers, and

regional meetings; and

— conducting an analysis and

evaluation of the quality and costs

associated with Even Start.

High-quality and customer-responsive federal administration

5. The Department of Education

will provide effective guidance

and technical assistance and will

identify and disseminate reliable

information on effective

approaches.

5.1 Federal technical assistance. An increasing

percentage of local project directors will be

satisfied with technical assistance and

guidance.

5.1 National Even Start

Evaluation, 1998.

! Disseminate best practices through

high-quality evaluation studies, an

Internet listserv, newsletters, and

commissioned papers.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 37

Title I Part C: Education of Migratory Children — $354,689,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist migrant children to reach challenging standards

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Addressing the unique educational needs to improve migrant children’s achievement

1. In concert with other federal programs

and state and local reform efforts the

MEP will contribute to improved school

performance of migrant children. 

1.1 State and local assessments.

Increasing percentages of students in

Title I schools, including migrant

students, will meet or exceed the basic

and proficient levels in state and local

assessments (where in place). [NOTE: 

Only to the extent that disaggregated

data on migrant status are reported by

those indicated sources will the Office

of Migrant Education be able to address

indicator 1.1.] 

1.2 Improved attention to assessment of

migrant children. Increasing

percentages of SEAs will include

migrant children in state assessments

that are linked to high standards.

1.1 State and Local

Assessment Results, 1997;

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools (LSS), 1999.

1.2 Council of Chief State

School Officers State

Indicator Survey, 1997;

Crosscutting State

Implementation of Federal

Elementary/Secondary

Programs, 1996 & 1998.

! Encourage states to coordinate their

assessment procedures so that migrant

children are included in state

assessments that are linked to high

standards.

2. SEAs and LEAs will provide education

services outside the regular school term

to help migrant students achieve to high

standards.

2.1 Summer education participation. 

Increasing percentages of migrant

children will be served by summer and

intersession programs.

2.2 Extended learning opportunities. 

Increasing percentages of MEP project

sites will provide services to migrant

out-of-school youth during summer and

intersession programs, extended school

year, and before- and after-school

programs. 

2.1 Migrant Education

Program (MEP) State

Performance Report, 1998;

Fast Response Survey

System (FRSS) of migrant

summer school providers,

1998.

2.2 MEP State Performance

Reports, 1998; LSS, 1999.

! Encourage SEAs and LEAs to establish

summer programs, intersession

programs, and extended day and school

year programs for migrant children.
Title I Part C: Education of Migratory Children — $354,689,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist migrant children to reach challenging standards

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 38

Improving coordination of services to migrant children

3. The MEP wil increase the efficiency

and effectiveness of services to migrant

children through more effective

coordination at the federal, state, and

local levels.

3.1 Inter- and intrastate coordination. 

SEAs and LEAs will demonstrate

increased interstate and intrastate

coordination to improve educational

continuity for migrant students. 

Measures of coordination include joint

products resulting from these formal

agreements, meetings, or conference to

promote coordination; coordinated

guidance to grantees; and joint

planning by local staff from all

available programs.

3.2 Family access to information. The

number of migrant families using the

toll-free number will increase annually.

3.3 Faster processing. States will

increasingly exchange records

electronically within and among states.

3.4 Program coordination. Federal, SEA,

and LEA staff working with Title I,

Part A and Part C, and other federally

funded programs, will demonstrate

increasing levels of substantive

collaboration to meet the unmet needs

of migrant children. 

3.1 Office of Migrant

Education (OME) Survey

of State records transfer

activities, 1998;

information from

Consortium Incentive

Grants, 1995-99.

3.2 Usage reports from the tollfree number coordination

contractor, 1995-99.

3.3 Vendor and state reports on

electronic records transfer,

1999.

3.4 Study of the Participation

of Migrant Children in

Title I Schoolwide

Programs, Planning and

Evaluation Service (PES),

1997; Crosscutting State

Implementation of Federal

Elementary/ Secondary

Programs, 1998; LSS,

1999.

! Encourage SEAs to form multistate

consortia to develop materials and

implement procedures jointly for use

across multiple states.

! Support development and use of 

“locator software” to facilitate searches

of State and regional databases to find

and update records on migrant children.

! Establish and maintain substantive

relationships with other federal

programs, including Migrant Health

(HHS) and Migrant Labor (JTPA).

! Provide technical assistance, through

RST visits, policy letters, meeting

presentations, and other methods of

communication, to promote better

coordination of services to migrant

students across programs.

! Establish schoolwide programs at

schools enrolling migrant children, and

encourage the blending of MEP funds

and services with other program funds

so that migrant children can benefit

more fully.
Title I Part C: Education of Migratory Children — $354,689,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist migrant children to reach challenging standards

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 39

3.5 Schoolwide programs. Increasing

percentages of schools that migrant

children attend will participate in

schoolwide programs to improve the

educational curriculum and instruction

for all children and will help to ensure

that migrant children’s unique needs

are addressed in schoolwide programs.

3.5 Study of the Participation

of Migrant Children in

Title I Schoolwide

Programs (PES), 1997;

LSS, 1999; MEP State

Performance Reports,

1998.

Promoting parental and community involvement in student learning

4. Encourage SEAs to cultivate

relationships among schools, families,

and communities to support and

encourage migrant parents to become

involved with their children’s

education.

4.1 Parental participation. SEAs will

facilitate, encourage, and maintain

participation of migrant parents in their

children’s education.

4.2 Community partnerships. Increasing

percentages of SEAs and LEAs will

form partnerships with appropriate

businesses, local community groups,

and schools to encourage parent

involvement of migrant parents.

4.3 Parent Compacts. Increasing

percentages of schools with migrant

children will promote the involvement

of migrant parents in parent compacts.

4.1 LSS, 1999; Survey of State

Coordinators, 1998.

4.2 Information from

Consortium Incentive

Grants, 1995-99.

4.3 LSS, 1999.

! Encourage SEAs and schools to

encourage full participation and

inclusion of migrant parents in the

education of their children.

! Encourage SEAs and LEAs to work with

agribusinesses and other local

organizations to support education

services and the work of migrant

families and workers.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 40

Title I, Part D: Programs for Children and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk of Dropping Out of School — $40,311,000

(FY 99)

Goal: To ensure that neglected, delinquent, or at-risk children and youth will have the opportunity to meet the challenging State standards needed to further their

education and become productive members of society.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Improved student learning

1. Neglected (N), delinquent (D),

and at-risk students will

improve academic skills that

needed to reach academic and

graduation standards set by the

states.

1.1 Academic achievement. The number of N,

D, and at-risk children and youth who will

progress toward a high school diploma or

GED while institutionalized will increase.

1.1 Analysis of program

evaluations carried out by

state agencies under

Section 1431 of Part D,

Subpart 3 of Title I, Part

D, 1999; ED Feasibility

Study on Improving the

Education Data for

Incarcerated Youth,

January 1998; annual

information from state

performance reports,

1998.

! Disseminate information and guidance

on Part D programs.

! Work with pilot states and the

Department of Justice to enable states

to track and report on academic

progress of N or D students.

! Meet with Title I and juvenile justice

constituencies to encourage adoption of

state standards for neglected or

delinquent students. Include an N or D

strand in Title I conferences and

correction education forums.

2. Institutions and programs will

demonstrate overall educational

reform that better meet the

needs of N, D, and at-risk

children.

2.1 Institution-wide programs. The number of

institutions that will operate institution-wide

programs integrating other federal and state

programs to improve curriculum and

instruction across the institution will increase.

2.2 Innovative Practices. States will use funds

for innovative practices that focus on serving

N or D students.

2.1 Annual information from

State performance

reports, 1998; Census of

juvenile residential

facilities, 1999.

2.2 Analysis of program

evaluations carried out by

State agencies under

Section 1431 of Part D,

Subpart 3 of Title I, 1999.

! Disseminate information on Part D

programs.

! Promote better understanding of

institution-wide objectives and

strategies among federal, state, and

local agencies that provide educational

services to N, D, at-risk children and

youth.

! Provide opportunities for institutional

staff to share and improve strategies

that serve N, D, or at-risk children and

youth.
Title I, Part D: Programs for Children and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk of Dropping Out of School — $40,311,000

(FY 99)

Goal: To ensure that neglected, delinquent, or at-risk children and youth will have the opportunity to meet the challenging State standards needed to further their

education and become productive members of society.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 41

Transition to the community

3. Programs will improve the

ability of N, D, and at-risk

children and youth to further

their education or gain

meaningful employment.

3.1 State support for transition. All state

agencies will have transition programs in

place and have the capacity to track progress

of students after leaving state-operated N or D

programs.

3.2 Innovative transition programs. State and

local programs will develop innovative

strategies that help institutionalized students

make a successful transition from an 

institution back to the community, either to

further their education or to obtain

employment.

3.3 School/employment reenrollment. 

Increasing percentages of participants

will reenroll in school or enter job

training programs following release. 

3.1 Analysis of program

evaluations carried out by

state agencies under

Section 1431 of Part D,

Subpart 3 of Title I, 1999.

3.2 ED survey of local agency

activities under the Title

I, Part D program, August

1998.

3.3 Analysis of program

evaluations carried out by

state agencies under

Section 1431 of Part D,

Subpart 3 of Title I, 1999.

! Identify and disseminate information

on exemplary Part D transition

programs.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 42

Demonstrations of Comprehensive School Reform — $150,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Enable at-risk students to improve their achievement to meet challenging standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

At-risk students improve achievement

1. Student achievement in 

Comprehensive School Reform

(CSR) schools generally will 

show significant improvement in

core subjects.

1.1 State and local assessments. Increasing

percentages of students in CSR schools will

meet or exceed the basic and proficient levels

in state and local assessments (where in

place).

1.1 Analysis of annual state

and local assessment

results in CSR schools,

1999.

! Encourage adoption of effective

comprehensive reform programs by

disseminating program guidance and

information that helps States, districts,

and schools implement, evaluate, and

support reform models and elements.

! Help schools implement successfully

comprehensive reform efforts by

working with labs, states, and other

technical assistance providers to design

and carry out effective technical

assistance strategies.

Schools and classrooms provide high-quality education to improve performance

2. The number of participating

schools providing high quality

curriculum and instruction will

increase each year. 

2.1 Research-based. The number of CSR schools

implementing and sustaining comprehensive,

research-based approaches to improve

curriculum and instruction will increase

annually.

2.2 Recognition for quality. Increasing numbers

of CSR schools will be designated as

distinguished schools by their States.

2.3 Implementation. The number of CSR

schools meeting their objectives for

implementation will increase annually. 

2.1 National evaluation of CSR

schools, 1999.

2.2 National evaluation of CSR

schools, 1999.

! Work with professional organizations

and technical assistance providers to 

promote school level improvement

through adopting CSR approaches. 

! Establish a national directory of CSR

schools.

! Explore multiple means, including

electronic media, for disseminating

information on effective research-based

programs.

High-quality and customer-responsive federal administration

3. Federal leadership, assistance,

and guidance in partnership with

states and local districts will

support school improvement and

improved services to students.

3.1 Useful guidance. The number of state and

local program coordinators who report that

Comprehensive Reform implementation

guidance is timely, understandable, and

informative will increase annually.

3.1 Crosscutting State and

Local Implementation

Surveys, 1999.

! Encourage adoption of effective

comprehensive reform programs by

disseminating program guidance and

information that helps States, districts,

and schools implement, evaluate, and

support reform models and elements.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 43

Transition to School Demonstrations — $35,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve school readiness and learning outcomes for disadvantaged children through effective public school/early care and education partnerships that

help ensure better outcomes for children and families through continuity in program philosophies, pedagogies, and services from pre-school programs to

kindergarten and through the primary grades. 

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Partnerships will result in

improved school readiness and

learning outcomes for

disadvantaged children.

1.1 School readiness. Increasing numbers of

children will perform better on informal

measures of school readiness.

1.2 Retention and special placements. 

Retention in grade and special placements

will decrease in preschool, kindergarten, and

first grade.

1.3 School success. More children are able to

read well and independently by the end of the

third grade.

1.1 National evaluation of the

Transition to School

demonstration grants.

1.2 National evaluation of the

Transition to School

demonstration grants.

1.3 National evaluation of the

Transition to School

demonstration grants.

! Encourage partnerships to use

effective practices to provide

continuity of services in preschool

and school.

2. Partnerships will show improved

alignment of the early care and

education systems to promote

continuity in programs and

services and improve results for

children through grade 3. 

2.1 Staff development. Preschool educators and

other caregivers report that they are better

prepared to meet the developmental and

learning needs of all children. Public school

teachers report that they are more aware of

how to address the comprehensive needs of

students that affect learning.

2.2 Curriculum, standards and accountability. 

Partnerships will increasingly show linkages

between early care and education’s

curriculum, standards, and accountability

systems. 

2.1 National evaluation of the

Transition to School

demonstration grants.

2.2 National evaluation of the

Transition to School

demonstration grants.

! Support and disseminate best

practices for staff development. 

! Encourage partnerships to use

effective practices to provide

continuity of services in preschool

and school.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 44

High School Equivalency Program and College Assistance Migrant Program — $15,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist migrant and seasonal farmworker students obtain the equivalent of a high school diploma and, subsequently, to begin postsecondary education,

enter military service, or get a job. 

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

High School Equivalency Program (HEP)

1. HEP participants complete the

program and receive their GED.

1.1 GED completion. The percentages of HEP

participants who complete the program and

receive the GED will continue to remain high,

if not increase, in comparison with other,

similar populations and programs.

1.1 HEP/CAMP Association

reports (1995, et seq. ); data

from grantee competitive

applications (1993);

Performance Reports

(submitted for noncompeting continuations)

(1994-99); Data from other

programs (e.g., Adult

Education, Student Support

Services).

! OESE will promote greater

coordination of HEP with the MEP

and with other adult education, high

school completion and dropout

prevention programs administered by

OVAE and OPE.

! OESE will work with HEP projects to

collect standardized information on

participant outcomes and activities. 

2. HEP participants enter

postsecondary education,

military service, or other career

positions.

2.1 Postsecondary entrance. Each year an

increasing percentage of those HEP

participants who received a GED will enter

postsecondary education, military service, or

other career positions.

2.1 HEP/CAMP Association

reports (1995, et seq.); data

from grantee competitive

applications (1993);

Performance Reports

(submitted for noncompeting continuations)

(1994-99).

! Propose statutory changes to

strengthen preparation for

postsecondary education and better

target program services on those

persons engaged in seasonal farmwork

or currently eligible for services as

migrant or seasonal farmworkers

under the MEP or JTPA Section 402

program. 
High School Equivalency Program and College Assistance Migrant Program — $15,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist migrant and seasonal farmworker students obtain the equivalent of a high school diploma and, subsequently, to begin postsecondary education,

enter military service, or get a job. 

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 45

College Assistance Migrant Program (CAMP)

3. CAMP students complete their

first academic year at a

postsecondary institution in good

standing.

3.1 Academic achievement. An increasing

percentage of CAMP participants have

satisfactory grade point averages (GPAs)

during the period CAMP services are

provided (i.e., the first academic year at a

postsecondary institution). 

3.1 Data from grantee

competitive applications

(1993); Performance Reports

(submitted for noncompeting continuations)

(1994-99).

! OESE will promote coordination of

CAMP with the MEP and other

relevant OPE programs (e.g., TRIO).

! OESE will work with CAMP projects

to collect standardized information on

participant outcomes and activities. 

4. CAMP students graduate from a

four-year college or university.

4.1 Student graduation. An increasing

percentage of former CAMP participants 

continue to attend postsecondary institutions

and complete degree programs -- in

comparison with other, similar populations

and programs.

4.1 HEP/CAMP Association

reports 1995, et seq).; data

from other programs (e.g.,

Adult Education, Student

Support Services).

! Propose statutory changes to improve

targeting of CAMP services on those

persons currently eligible for services

as migrant or seasonal farmworkers

under the MEP or JTPA Section 402

program.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 46
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 47

Impact Aid
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 48
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 49

Impact Aid — $696,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide appropriate financial assistance for federally connected children who present a genuine burden to their school districts.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Basic payments

1. Provide payments on behalf of

federally connected children

that closely approximate the

actual local cost of educating

children in the district, including

federally connected children.

1.1 Payment amounts. For at least 90% of all

LEAs, actual payments will be within 10% of

the target payment (the payment the LEA

would receive at the level appropriated by

Congress using the formula proposed in the

President's FY 1999 budget). In 1998,

approximately 8% of all payments to LEAs

will be within 10% of the ideal target

payment.

1.2 Per-pupil expenditures. Recipient LEAs’

per-pupil expenditures, after receipt of Basic

Payment, will be within 90% and 110% of the

state average per-pupil expenditures.

1.1 Annual application,

National Center for

Education Statistics

(NCES), and payment

simulations, 1999.

1.2 Annual application,

NCES, and payment data,

1997.

! Propose formula changes through

legislation and appropriations language

to ensure that funds are directed to

districts serving federally connected

children for whom the federal

government has a primary obligation.

2. Make payments in a timely

manner.

2.1 Timeliness of payments. 90% of eligible

applicants will receive an initial payment

within 60 days following the enactment of an

appropriation.

2.1 Annual application and

payment files, 1997. Data

will be provided by

program staff.

! Improve review procedures. 

! Increase use of technology.

3. Make accurate payments. 3.1 Overpayment forgiveness requests. The

number of overpayment forgiveness requests

received will not exceed 10 in a given fiscal

year, beginning with FY 1998.

3.1 Data will be provided by

program staff.

! Continue quality control processes to

minimize payment errors. 

Payments for heavily impacted districts

4. Provide payments that support

adequate current expenditures.

4.1 Per-pupil expenditures. Heavily impacted

payments will provide sufficient funds so that

the per-pupil expenditures of eligible LEAs

shall be between 90% and 110% of the state

average per pupil expenditure. Preliminary

data indiacte that in 1995, 5 LEAs were

within this range, 9 were above it, and 1 was

below it.

4.1 Annual application and

payment data, 1996.

! Propose formula changes through

legislation and appropriations language

to ensure that funds are directed to

districts serving high concentrations of

federally connected children for whom

the federal government has a primary

obligation.
Impact Aid — $696,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide appropriate financial assistance for federally connected children who present a genuine burden to their school districts.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 50

Facilities

5. Continue to maintain, repair,

renovate, and transfer EDowned school facilities.

5.1 Facility transfers. At least 6 school facilities

will be transferred to LEAs or relinquished

annually. All ED-owned facilities will be

transferred or relinquished by 2005. In 1996,

4 facilities were transferred.

5.1 Program files, 1997. ! The Department has requested funding

to maintain ED-owned school buildings

in a safe condition and fund a limited

number of renovation and transfer

projects in the FY 1999 budget.

! Continue negotiations with LEAs to

ensure timely transfer of facilities.

! Continue cooperative efforts with the

Department of Defense to encourage the

transfer of facilities to school districts.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 51

Class Size Reduction and Teacher Financing
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 52
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 53

Class Size Reduction and Teacher Financing Initiative — $1,100,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Reduce average class size nationally in grades 1-3 and provide qualified teachers so that all children may learn to read independently and well by the end of

third grade.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. To reduce average class size

nationally in grades 1-3.

1.1 Smaller classes. States will annually reduce

the average class size in grades 1-3 so that, by

2005, the average class size nationally in the

targeted grades is 18 students per classroom.

1.1 Annual state performance

reports; national

evaluation study, 2006.

! Achieve enactment of the program.

2. To improve student achievement

in reading, in concert with

America Reads Challenge and

other federal programs and

initiatives.

2.1 Student achievement. Increasing

percentages of fourth graders will score at or

above the basic level in reading on the

National Assessment of Educational Progress

(NAEP). In 1994 the baseline was 60

percent.

2.2 State/ local assessments. Increasing

percentages of fourth graders at schools

receiving program funds will score at basic,

proficient, or advanced levels in reading on

State or local assessments.

2.1 National Assessment of

Educational Progress,

2002.

2.2 Title I performance

reports; annual State

performance reports.

! Promote improvement of teacher

preparation in elementary school

reading and link school curriculums to

high standards in reading.

3. To ensure that newly hired and

existing teachers are fully

qualified, and have the

knowledge to teach reading

effectively in small classes.

3.1 Increased professional development in

reading instruction. Increasing percentages

of teachers in grades one through three will

complete intensive professional development

in teaching reading effectively, especially

methods for teaching reading to students who

experience difficulty in learning to read.

3.2 Improved preparation for teaching reading

in small classes. Increasing percentages of

teachers in grades one through three will

receive intensive professional development in

effective teaching methods in small classes.

3.1 Annual state performance

reports; national

evaluation study.

3.2 Annual state performance

reports; national

evaluation study.

! Strengthen the Department’s existing

programs that provide support for

personnel preparation to provide

improved pre-service and inservice

professional development for school

staff.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 54
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 55

School Improvement
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 56
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 57

Eisenhower Professional Development Program — $335,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve the quality of classroom teaching through professional development.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Classroom instruction is

improved through effective

professional development .

1.1 Teachers' skills and classroom instruction. 

By 1998, over 50% of a sample of teachers

will show evidence that participation in

Eisenhower-assisted professional development

has resulted in an improvement in their

knowledge and skills, and by 1999 in an

improvement in classroom instruction. 

1.1 National Eisenhower (Ike)

Evaluation, 1998-2000.

! This program directly supports ED’s

Strategic Objectives 1.4, 2.2, and 2.3 by

providing opportunities for teachers to

improve their knowledge, skills, and

teaching practice in order to help

students achieve high standards of

academic performance.

! Disseminate and discuss ED’s Mission

and Principles of High-Quality

Professional Development.

2. High-quality professional

development and state policy are

aligned with high state content

and student performance

standards.

2.1 District-level professional development. By

1998, over 50% of teachers participating in

district-level or higher education Eisenhowerassisted professional development will

participate in activities that are aligned with

high standards. By 2000, over 75% will.

2.1 National Ike Evaluation,

1998; related information

from periodic state

performance reports, 

2000.

! Work with professional organizations

such as the National Council of

Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) to

develop strategies for encouraging states

to link professional development to high

state standards.

! Disseminate information to Eisenhower

state coordinators on aligning

professional development with high

state content and student performance

standards.

3. Professional development is

sustained, intensive, and highquality and has a lasting impact

on classroom instruction.

3.1 High quality. By 1998, over 50% of teachers

participating in district-level, Eisenhowerassisted professional development activities

will participate in activities reflecting best

practices, including a focus on continuous

improvement. By 2000, over 75 percent will.

3.1 National Ike Evaluation,

1998; related information

from periodic state

performance reports,

2000.

! Produce and disseminate a publication

on exemplary models for professional

development programs that receive

Eisenhower funding.

! Continue to work with the National

Science Foundation (NSF) to share

information on best practices. 
Eisenhower Professional Development Program — $335,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve the quality of classroom teaching through professional development.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 58

3.2 Intensity. By 1998, 35% of teachers

participating in district-level Eisenhowerassisted activities will participate in activities

that are a component of professional

development that extends over the school

year; by 2000, over 50% will. 

3.2 National Ike Evaluation,

1998; related information

from periodic state

performance reports,

2000.

! Through technical assistance

workshops, program guidance, and

ED’s integrated review team (IRT)

visits, the states are encouraged to adopt

and report on strategies that promote

professional development activities that

extend over the school year and assist in

reaching the states’ reform efforts. 

4. High-quality professional

development is provided to

teachers who work with

disadvantaged populations.

4.1 High-poverty schools. The proportion of

teachers participating in Eisenhower-assisted

activities who teach in high-poverty schools

will exceed the proportion of the national

teacher pool who teach in high-poverty

schools.

4.2 Context (not limited to any single

program): Teachers. Teachers in highpoverty schools (with high concentrations of

Title I, Part A sevices) will participate in

intensive, sustained, high quality professional

development at rates comparable to or higher

than the rates for teachers in other schools.

The 1994 SASS shows that 36% of teachers in

high-poverty public schools participated in

professional development programs focusing

on in-depth study in their subject field,

compared with 30% for teachers in lowpoverty schools.

4.1 National Ike Evaluation,

1998; related information

from periodic state

performance reports, 

2000.

4.2 NCES’ Schools & Staffing

Survey (SASS) 1994;

NCES Fast Response

Survey 1996-98.

! Continue to promote the involvement of

teachers from high-poverty schools and

underrepresented populations.

! Review needs assessment plans required

of each LEA to ensure that teachers

from high-poverty schools are included

in long-term, sustained, and intensive

professional development.

5. Effective management of the

Eisenhower Program at the

federal, state, and local levels

supports systemic reform.

5.1 Federal guidance and assistance. The

number of Eisenhower state coordinators who

report that ED guidance and assistance are

timely and helpful will increase. 

5.1 Office of the Under

Secretary’s Planning and

Evaluation Service (PES)

Survey of State Federal

Program Administrators,

1998.

! Through technical assistance

workshops, ensure accurate

interpretation of the program statute,

including new requirements and how

they are to be implemented at the state

and local levels.

! Communicate program expectations

between all entities (Federal, state, and

local).
Eisenhower Professional Development Program — $335,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve the quality of classroom teaching through professional development.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 59

5.2 Integrated state planning and

collaboration. By 1998, 50% of all states

will have developed performance indicators

for integrated professional development

across programs (including Eisenhower) in

order to support systemic reform and will

have data collection systems in place; by

2000, 75% will have. 

5.2 Office of the Under

Secretary’s Planning and

Evaluation Service (PES)

Survey of State Federal

Program Administrators,

1998; related information

from periodic state

performance reports,

1999, 2000.

! Provide technical assistance to states on

performance indicators for state and

local programs.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 60

Innovative Education Program Strategies (Block Grant) (Title VI, ESEA) — $0 (FY 99)

Goal: To support state and local efforts to accomplish promising education reform programs.

Objectives Indicators Data Source Strategies

1. Increase the percentage of Title VI

funded activities that support local

education reform efforts.

1.1 Reform efforts. The use of Title VI

funds will show evidence that the

activities supported are integral to

achieving district reform plans.

1.1 Title VI Annual Reports,

1998; Targeting and

Resource Allocation Study,

1998.

! Make presentations at regional and

national meetings to assist Title VI

coordinators in ensuring that program

funds are used in a manner consistent

with state and local reform plans. 

! Provide coordinators with information

on activities, aligned with the purposes

of the program, that have been proved

effective. 

2. Effective management of the Title VI

program supports systemic reform at

the federal, state and local levels.

2.1 Quality ED service. State and local

educational agencies will report that

technical assistance and other services

provided by ED and federal assistance

providers are useful and of high

quality.

2.2. Quality State implementation. Title

VI state coordination, monitoring, and

assistance will show that the program

is integrated in state activities to

advance state reform agendas. 

2.1 Baseline Crosscutting Survey

of State Implementation of

Federal Programs, 1997 and

Followup Crosscutting State

Survey, 1998.

! Continue professional development of

Office of Elementary and Secondary

employees to develop expertise in

principles and practices of education

reform.

! Ensure that technical assistance and

other services by ED staff are useful

and of high quality through responding

to feedback provided by state and local

program administrators during ED

Integrated Review Team visits will. 
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 61

Safe and Drug-free Schools Program — $606,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help ensure that all schools are safe, disciplined, and drug free by promoting implementation of high-quality drug and violence prevention programs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Outcomes

1. Reduce alcohol and drug use

and availability in schools.

1.1 Drug use in schools. Rates of alcohol and

drug use (alcohol, marijuana, tobacco) in

schools will slow and begin to fall by 2000.

1.2 Drugs offered in schools. The number of

students who are offered illegal drugs at

school will decrease. 1992 levels were 10%,

18% and 23% for grades 8, 10, and 12. 

1.1 Monitoring the Future

(MTF), 1997 (students in

grades 8, 10, and 12 use

of alcohol, marijuana,

tobacco measured.)

1.2 MTF, 1997.

! Identify and publicize promising

prevention programs and strategies.

2. Reduce number of criminal and

violent incidents in schools.

2.1 Violent incidents in schools. The number of

criminal and violent incidents in school (by

students) will show continuous decreases

between now and 2002.

2.2 Weapons in schools. The number of

weapons and firearms carried to school will

decrease. In 1993 12% of high school

students carried weapon on school property.

2.3 Attacks on teachers. The number of

physical attacks, threats on teachers will

decrease. 2% of teachers were physically

attacked ; 8% were threatened.

2.4 School-related homicides. The number of

school-related homicides will decrease. 

CDC/ED study: 85 school-associated

homicides were reported in 1992-1994.

2.1 National Crime Survey,

1997; MTF, 1997

(threatened, injured, and

theft.)

2.2 Center for Disease

Control’s (CDC) biennial

Youth Risk Behavior

Survey (YRBS), 1997.

2.3 MTF, 1997.

2.4 Study needs to be

conducted for 1998/99

and interim, if possible.

! Identify and publicize promising

prevention programs and strategies.

! Host conference for SEAs, governors,

and large SEAs to showcase promising

programs.

! Collaborate with Office of Juvenile

Justice and Delinquency Prevention

(OJJDP) on the truancy and hate crimes

initiatives and on assistance to schools

in violence prevention activities.

! Provide training and technical

assistance, in collaboration with the

Department of Justice and HHS, to

SEAs and LEAs on effective 

prevention strategies.

2.5 Disruptive behavior. The number of

students whose learning is occasionally

interfered with by misbehaving students will

decrease. In 1992, 53% of students in grades

8 and 10 had their learning occasionally

interfered with by other misbehaving

students.

2.5 MTF, 1997. ! Develop, with DOJ, the President’s

Annual Report Card on School

Violence.
Safe and Drug-free Schools Program — $606,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help ensure that all schools are safe, disciplined, and drug free by promoting implementation of high-quality drug and violence prevention programs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 62

3. Reduce alcohol and drug use

among school-age youth.

3.1 Drug use by school-aged children. Rates of

alcohol and drug use among school-aged

children will slow and begin to fall by 2000.

3.2 Tolerance toward drugs. The percentage of

students reporting tolerant attitudes toward

drug and alcohol use will decline

significantly between now and 2002.

3.1 MTF, 1997 (marijuana,

cocaine, LSD, heroin,

meth, tobacco, and

alcohol); National

Household Education

Survey, 1998

3.2 MTF, 1997.

! Identify and publicize promising

prevention programs and strategies.

Quality programs and services

4. Assist Institutions of Higher

Education (IHEs) to implement

effective drug and violence

prevention programs through

National Programs.

4.1 Higher education. By 1999, the National

Programs will provide technical assistance to

all IHEs about models for effective drug and

violence prevention programs.

4.1 Periodic review of ED

files.

! Provide technical assistance on

effective programs.

! Conduct grant competitions to develop,

validate, and disseminate model

programs and strategies.

5. Assist LEAs to align their

programs with ED’s Principles

of Effectiveness for Prevention

Programs through both state

formula grants and National

Programs. Programs must be

tied to a needs assessment, have

goals that are measureable and

tied to outcomes, be research

based, and be evaluated

periodically.

5.1 Principles of effectiveness. By 1999, all

LEAs will use prevention programs that are

based on the Principles of Effectiveness.

5.2 Coordinators. By 2000, all drug and

violence prevention coordinators funded by

the middle school coordinator initiative will 

implement effective, research-based

programs, in accordance with the Principles

of Effectiveness.

5.1 Survey, to be developed,

1999.

5.2 Planned evaluation.

! Develop and promulgate Principles of

Effectiveness for Prevention Programs.

! Develop guidance and provide

technical assistance to states and LEAs

in how to apply the principles.

! Identify and publicize promising

prevention programs and strategies.

! Provide training and technical

assistance to prevention coordinators

for middle schools.

6. Ensure that LEAs enforce the

Gun-Free Schools Act.

6.1 Gun-Free Schools Act notifications and

expulsions. By 1997 all LEAs receiving

ESEA funds will have policies requiring the

expulsion of students who bring firearms to

school and requiring notification of law

enforcement.

6.2 Gun-Free Schools Act

data collection, 1997.

! Use monitoring and technical

assistance to ensure LEA compliance.
Safe and Drug-free Schools Program — $606,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help ensure that all schools are safe, disciplined, and drug free by promoting implementation of high-quality drug and violence prevention programs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 63

7. Assist LEAs to set policies

prohibiting the sale,

distribution, and use of alcohol,

drugs, and tobacco products at

school or at school-sponsored

functions. 

7.1 School policies. By 1997 all LEAs will have

policies prohibiting the sale, distribution, and

use of alcohol and other drugs at school or at

school-sponsored functions and activities. 

7.2 The Pro-Children Act. All LEAs have

policies prohibiting smoking in school.

7.1 ED/LEA survey,

supplemented with data

from SHPPS Survey,

1997.

7.2 HHS/CDC School Health

Policies and Programs

Report, 1997.

! Develop policy for ensuring that 

"medical marijuana" is kept out of all

schools, and disseminate policy to all

SEAs.

! Identify school districts not in

compliance and provide technical

assistance to ensure compliance.

8. Improve the quality and use of

state and local performance

data through both state formula

grant and National Programs.

8.1 State surveys. By 1999 all states will

conduct periodic statewide surveys or collect

statewide data on student alcohol and drug

use and incidents of crime and violence in

schools.

8.2 State performance indicators. By July

1997 all SEA and governors’ programs will

have acceptable performance indicators.

8.3 Approval of LEA applications. All states

will use performance indicators to make

decisions regarding approval of LEA

application for FY 1997 funding. 

8.4 LEA program improvement. LEAs will

routinely use performance indicators to

determine wether activities should be

continued or modified.

8.1 ED/SDFS Survey, 1998.

8.2 Review of ED files, 1997.

8.3 ED/SDFS Survey, 1998.

8.4 ED/LEA Survey, 1998.

! Develop discretionary grant program to

improve SEAs’ capacity to collect and

analyze data.

! Withhold apporval of state plans

without performance indicators. 

Provide technical assistance to SEAs

that are unable to develop appropriate

indicators.

! Identify school districts not in

compliance and provide technical

assistance to ensure compliance.
Safe and Drug-free Schools Program — $606,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help ensure that all schools are safe, disciplined, and drug free by promoting implementation of high-quality drug and violence prevention programs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 64

Federal administration (Safe and Drug Free Schools office)

9. Provide high-quality products

and technical assistance that

helps align local programs with

Principles of Effectiveness

through National Programs.

9.1 Technical assistance. By 1998, the National

Programs will provide technical assistance to

all SEAs and LEAs about models for

effective drug and violence prevention

programs.

9.1 Periodic review of ED

files.

! Hold a conference for SEAs,

governors’ offices, and large LEAs on

what works; publicize proceedings.

! Conduct grant competitions to identify

model programs and support

replication of effective programs.

! Use the Safe and Drug-Free Schools

Program (SDFSP) web page to make

SEAs, LEAs, and schools aware of

promising practices.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 65

Inexpensive Book Distribution — $13,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide programs that promote literacy skills and motivate children to read, including the distribution of inexpensive books to children.

Objective Indicator Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Support the goals of the

America Reads Challenge

and the U.S. Department of

Education’s priority of

having children read

independently and well by

the end of the grade 3 and

the literacy development of

young people through grade

12 by supporting and

promoting the establishment

of reading motivation

programs through Reading Is

Fundamental (RIF) projects.

1.1 Increase in numbers of children served and

books distributed by RIF projects. The number of

children served and books distributed by RIF

projects will increase annually. In FY 1997, RIF

served 1,982,000 children and distributed

6,343,000 books. 

1.2 Financial self-sufficiency. In order to use federal

funds to support the implementation of additional

local RIF projects, the federal share of funds that

support existing RIF projects will decrease over

time. Currently there are 2,000 organizations on a

waiting list to implement local RIF projects.

1.3 Promote community literacy efforts. RIF projects

will increasingly engage in partnership activities

and work to promote broad-based community

support for, and involvement in, literacy projects. 

A 1992 evaluation found that 80% of local RIF

projects were operated by schools, districts, and

PTA organizations. The goal is to involve a 

broader array of community actors, volunteers, and

supporting groups in RIF projects. 

1.1 Annual Performance

Reports, 1997.

1.2 Annual Performance

Reports, 1997.

1.3 Evaluation of the

Inexpensive Book

Distribution Program, 1992;

Annual Performance

Reports, 1997.

! Encourage grantees to broaden and

strengthen community partnerships

to ensure lasting financial

sufficiency. 

! Encourage grantee to coordinate

project efforts with local Title I,

Migrant Education, Even Start, and

America Reads Challenge:

Read*Write*Now programs.

2. Serve children with special

needs* through Reading Is

Fundamental (RIF) projects.

* Children with special needs

are defined as children at risk

of school failure, disabled and

homeless children, children of

migrant families,

institutionalized and

incarcerated children, or

children of institutionalized or

incarcerated parents.

2.1 Children with special needs. An increasing

percentage of children served by RIF will be those

with special needs. Currently, approximately 67%

of children served by RIF projects have special

needs. 

2.1 Annual Performance

Reports, 1997.

! Provide technical assistance and

advice to grantee on effective ways

to reach out to underserved, at-risk,

and special needs children.

! Encourage grantee to coordinate

project efforts with local Title I,

Migrant Education, Even Start, and

America Reads Challenge:

Read*Write*Now programs.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 66

Arts Education — $10,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To promote, improve, and enhance arts education and cultural activities for elementary and secondary students.

Objective Indicator Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Activities supporte with federal

funds will serve an increasing

proportion of students with

disabilities or students who would

not otherwise have access to

cultural activities.

1.1 Outreach. Outreach efforts supported by the

Kennedy Center will reach a greater number

of communities, particularly in urban, rural,

and socioeconomically disadvantaged areas.

1.2 Outreach. Very Special Arts will expand the

number of affiliates and partnerships that it

supports to provide arts education; and its use

of technology will increase access to the arts

for students with disabilities. Planned for FY

1998.

1.1 Annual performance reports,

1998.

1.2 Annual performance reports,

1998.

! Provide technical assistance and

advice to grantees on effective ways

to reach underserved, at-risk, and

special needs students.

2. Grantee activities will emphasize

improvement regarding the

quality of arts education programs

by accentuating professional

development and the development

of curriculum materials. 

2.1 Quality of services. Grantees will create,

revise, and disseminate high-quality

professional development activities and

curriculum materials tied to challenging

standards annually.

2.1 Annual performance reports,

1998.

! Provide information to grantee about

effective teacher training practices.

! Provide arts education resources,

developed by grantees, to schools

through the use of technology.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 67

Magnet Schools Assistance Program — $101,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist in the desegregation of schools served by local educational agencies.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Federally funded magnet

programs eliminate, reduce, or

prevent the incidence and/or the

degree of minority student

isolation in targeted schools.

1.1 Minority group isolation:

— Targeted schools will eliminate, reduce, or

prevent minority group isolation according

to their objective.

— Magnet programs will not have a

significant adverse impact on the racial

composition of feeder schools.

1.2 Minority/nonminority distribution. Magnet

curricular activities generally will reflect the

same minority/nonminority distribution as the

magnet school (or program within school

[PWS]).

1.1 Magnet Schools Assistance

Program (MSAP)

applications, FY 1998;

MSAP annual project

reports, beginning FY

1999; MSAP Evaluation,

2000.

1.2 MSAP applications, FY

1998; MSAP annual

project reports, beginning

FY 1999; MSAP

Evaluation, 2000.

! Provide pre- and postaward technical

assistance to applicants and grantees. 

! Use monitoring and program reports to

identify grantees experiencing difficulty

in meeting their desegregation

objectives, implementing reforms,

carrying out innovative themes, or

strengthening students’ knowledge, and

provide technical assistance to these

grantees.

2. Federally funded magnet

programs or innovative

programs (§5111) promote

national, state, and local

systemic reforms and are aligned

with challenging state content

and student performance

standards.

2.1 National, state, and local reforms. Programs

play an active role in planning and

implementing national, state, and local

reforms.

2.2 State content and performance standards.

Project designs will explicitly provide

evidence of the use of challenging state

content and student performance standards.

These are reflected in the program curriculum

and in planned student assessments aligned to

the curriculum.

2.1 MSAP applications, FY

1998; MSAP annual

project reports, beginning

FY 1999; MSAP

Evaluation, 2000.

2.2 MSAP applications, FY

1998; MSAP annual

project reports, beginning

FY 1999; MSAP

Evaluation, 2000.

! See Objective 1 strategies.

3. Federally funded magnet

programs or innovative

programs (§5111) feature

innovative educational methods

and practices that meet

identified student needs and

interests.

3.1 Innovative themes. Programs will

incorporate innovative themes and elements

that meet identified student needs and

interests.

3.2 Innovative educational methods and

practices. Programs will incorporate

innovative educational methods and practices

that promote student achievement.

3.1 MSAP applications, FY

1998; MSAP annual

project reports, beginning

FY 1999; MSAP

Evaluation, 2000.

3.2 MSAP applications, FY

1998; MSAP annual

project reports, beginning

FY 1999; MSAP

Evaluation, 2000.

! See Objective 1 strategies.
Magnet Schools Assistance Program — $101,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist in the desegregation of schools served by local educational agencies.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 68

4. Federally funded magnet

programs or innovative

programs (§5111) strengthen

students’ knowledge of academic

subjects and skills needed for

successful careers in the future.

4.1 Improved student achievement. Students

will show achievement gains in core subjects,

as well as in applied learning skills, that meet

or exceed the gains for students in the district

as a whole. (Applied learning skills include

higher-order-thinking skills, individual

problem-solving ability, communication skills,

computer skills, and ability to contribute to

group projects.)

4.2 Vocational skills. (Optional for federally

funded magnet schools, PWSs, or innovative

projects that do not feature development of

specialized skills) Students will demonstrate

knowledge and proficiency in vocational skills

related to the magnet theme.

4.1 MSAP applications, FY

1998; MSAP annual

project reports, beginning

FY 1999; MSAP

Evaluation, 2000.

4.2 MSAP applications, FY

1998; MSAP annual

project reports, beginning

FY 1999; MSAP

Evaluation, 2000.

! See Objective 1 strategies.

5. Innovative programs (§5111)

assist in the desegregation of

schools through effective

strategies other than magnet

schools and through parent and

community involvement.

5.1 Assist in desegregation. Innovative programs

involving strategies (other than magnet

schools) such as neighborhood schools, ro

community model schools organized around a

special emphasis, theme, or concept will

measurably assist in the desegregation of

schools.

5.2 Parental and community involvement.

Projects will incorporate practices that support

extensive parental and community

involvement that are related to the program

model (e.g., neighborhood school, community

model school) being implemented.

5.1 Innovative Programs

(§5111) applications, FY

1999; Innovative Programs

annual project reports,

beginning FY 2000.

5.2 Innovative Programs

(§5111) applications, FY

1999; Innovative Programs

annual project reports,

beginning FY 2000.

! See Objective 1 strategies.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 69

Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Program — $30,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To ensure access of homeless children and youth to the same free, appropriate public education, including a public preschool education, as is provided to

other children and youth. 

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Access of homeless children and

youth to equitable public

education will improve.

1.1 Public schools. An increasing percentage of

homeless children and youth will enroll in

public schools.

1.2 All federal and state programs. An

increasing number of homeless children and

youth will have access to all federal

programs and state-sponsored academic

programs.

1.3 Eliminating barriers. Decreasing numbers

of states will report transportation,

immunization, and residency requirements as

barriers to access to education.

1.4 Preschool-age children. Increased

percentage of preschool-age homeless

children will be enrolled in preschool

programs.

1.1 Triennial State Data

Collection Report

[”Triennial Report”], 1998.

1.2 Triennial Report; Followup to the National

Evaluation, 1999.

1.3 Triennial Report, 1998;

Follow-up to the National

Evaluation, 1999.

1.4 Triennial Report, 1998.

! Promote SEA awareness of the need

to improve access to education for

homeless children by encouraging

the Title I and Homeless program 

coordinators to work together to

meet the needs of homeless children

and youth.

! Require state Homeless program

coordinators to ensure that LEAs

have designated local homeless

liaisons.

! Disseminate successful practices

through national conferences,

regional meetings, publications, and

site visits.

! Disseminate information and

guidance on the statutory

requirement for the inclusion of

services to homeless preschool-age

children under the Act.

2. Opportunities of homeless

children and youth to meet the

same challenging state student

performance standards to which

all students are held will inprove.

2.1 Achievement data. Increased number of

LEAs will report that they collect data on the

achievement of homeless children and youth.

2.2 Success. Increased number of LEAs will

report to the state that the educational

performance of homeless children and youth

is improving.

2.1 Triennial Report, 1998;

Follow-up to the National 

Evaluation, 1999.

2.2 Same as 2.1.

! Assist SEAs and LEAs in

developing and implementing plans

to systematically increase

achievement of homeless children

and youth by providing SEAs with

technical assistance from

Comprehensive Regional Assistance

Centers (CACs).

3. States will provide improved

guidance and technical assistance

and identify and will disseminate

reliable information on effective

approaches to serving homeless

children and youth.

3.1 Coordination. An increasing number of

states will report program coordination that

can be used to encourage federal, state, and

local policy makers and administrators to

improve Homeless program services.

3.1 Follow-up to the National

Evaluation, 1998;

Triennial Report, 1999.

! Disseminate successful practices

through national conferences,

regional meetings, publications, and

site visits.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 70

Women’s Educational Equity Act Program (WEEA) — $3,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To promote equity in education for women and girls in the United States.

Objective Indicator Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Promote gender equity in education

to ensure that girls and women

have educational opportunities 

comparable to those available to

boys and men.

1.1 LEA implementation. Increasing

percentages of LEAs will adopt researchbased curriculum, policies, and practices that 

ensure gender equity in education.

1.1 Annual Performance

Reports, 1999.

! SIP staff will coordinate with the

Resource Center to disseminate

current gender equity materials and

resources, and technical assistance on

their use.

2. Increase awareness of gender

equity problems in education. 

2.1 Awareness. Increasing numbers of LEAs

will receive information and technical

assistance on strategies that address gender

equity problems in education.

2.1 WEEA Resource Center

Report, 1999.

! SIP staff will coordinate with the

WEEA Resource Center to

disseminate information and provide

technical information on gender equity

problems in education.

3. Promote training activities that

prepare educators to meet the

needs of women and girls, including

those who suffer from multiple

forms of discrimination (i.e., sex,

race, ethnic origin, limited English

proficiency, disability, or age).

3.1 Training strategies. Increasing numbers of

educators will receive gender equity training,

including training that deals with multiple

forms of discrimination.

3.1 Annual Performance

Reports, 1999; WEEA

Resource Center Report,

1999.

! SIP staff will coordinate with the

WEEA Resource Center to

disseminate information on effective

training techniques and promising

practices for equity in education.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 71

Title IV of the Civil Rights Act: Equity Assistance Center Program — $8,300,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support access and equity in public schools and help school districts to solve equity problems in education related to race, gender, and national origin.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Provide high-quality technical

assistance and training to public

school districts in addressing

equity in education.

1.1 Addressing educational problems. An

increasing percentage of Equity Assistance

Center (EAC) technical assistance services

address problems directly related to

opportunities for special populations affected

by problems in equity related to race, gender,

or national origin, to meet or exceed the same

standards established for all students in a

State or school district.

1.2 Training in capacity building. School

districts will annually expand their own

capacity to cope effectively with special

educational problems occasioned by problems

in equity as a result of training activities

provided by EACs.

1.1 EAC annual performance

reports, 1999.

1.2 EAC annual performance

reports, 1999; project

monitoring records,

annual, 1999; EAC followup surveys on impact of

training, annual, 1999.

! Conduct timely communication of ED

information regarding strategies to

ensure that all students have

opportunities to meet high standards.

! Encourage districts implementing school

choice and other programs to consider

assistance that is available from EACs

in the formulation of their strategies to

improve equality of student access and

involvement in high quality

instructional programs.

! Disseminate information and provide

regular updates from Office for Civil

Rights (OCR), Office of the Genteral

Council (OGC), and other appropriate

sources on issues regarding equity in

education to EACs.

2. Develop an effective

collaborative working

relationship with other technical

assistance providers to ensure

that equity needs are addressed.

2.1 Collaboration with other technical

assistance providers. As a result of

coordination activities, appropriate referrals

and joint technical assistance activities with

research institutions and other technical

assistance providers will increase annually.

2.1 EAC annual performance

reports, 1999.

! Create or expand both regional and

national networks of technical assistance

providers through joint meetings and

other activities.

! Maintain lists of all technical assistance

providers on ED web site.

! Invite other technical assistance

providers to meetings of EAC directors

to expand directors’ knowledge of

resources and mandates of the other TA

providers.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 72

Allen J. Ellender Fellowship Program — $0 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve participants' knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding the three branches of government

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. To implement a program to

increase student’s knowledge and

skills in civic participation , with

emphasis on special needs

students.. 

1.1 Students from targeted groups. Each year,

an increasing percentage of participants will

be special needs students (e.g., those with

disabilities, ethnic minority, and migrant). 

1.2 Outreach to schools. Students from rural

areas, small towns, and urban areas will

participate. Increasing numbers of rural

schools that participate each year.

1.3 Student knowledge. Students will

demonstrate an increased understanding of the

democratic process.

1.1 Grantee’s analysis, 1999.

1.2 Grantee’s annual reports,

1999.

1.3 Grantee analysis of student

and teacher surveys.

(Planned for 1998-99; data

available 1999)

! Disseminate information about the

program to SEAs, LEAs in rural

areas/small towns, and technical

assistance providers.

! Encourage grantee to allocate more

student fellowships to schools with high

proportions of special needs students.

2. Increase the impact of the

Ellender program through

teacher training, educational

materials, and development of

civic education programs.

2.1 Teacher use of materials. More teachers will

use materials prepared by grantee.

2.2 Development of civic education programs.

More teachers will use information and

strategies from grantees professional

development program to organize civic

education programs.

2.1 Grantee site visits, 1999.

2.2 Grantee site visits, 1999.

! Provide information about effective

teacher training and related practices.

3. Make progress toward full

financial independence from

federal funding. 

3.1 Increased private funding. An increasing

percentage of grantees’ funding will come

from nonfederal sources.

3.1 Annual audit and grantee

reports; first available

1998.

! Work with grantee to develop and refine

plans for obtaining funding from

nonfederal sources.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 73

Native Hawaiian Education Program — $18,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist the Native Hawaiian population achieve to challenging standards through supporting supplemental programs that meet their unique needs. 

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Native Hawaiian students served

will enter school ready to learn

and will progress at rates

similar to all students in

achievement.

1.1 Children’s school readiness. Increasing

percentages of Native Hawaiian children

served will improve on measures of school

readiness and literacy relative to the Native

Hawaiian population as a whole.

1.2 Student achievement. Increasing

percentages of students will meet or exceed the

academic goals that are established by the state

or on national assessments.

1.1 Annual performance

reports, 1999.

1.2 Annual performance

reports, 1999.

! OESE staff will share information

obtained from other ED programs with

similar objectives.

2. Parents and teachers will have

access to instructional resources

that meet the unique educational

needs of Native Hawaiian

students.

2.1 Curriculum development. The curriculum

developed by grantees will incorporate the

Native Hawaiian culture and language, and

the contributions of Native Hawaiians.

2.2 Professional Development. The number of

teachers of Native Hawaiian students who will

be prepared to address Native Hawaiians’

unique needs will increase each year.

2.3 Parent involvement. Increasing percentages

of parents and guardians of Native Hawaiian

students will participate in educational

activities at school and at home.

 2.1 Annual performance

reports, 1999.

2.2 Annual performance

reports, 1999.

2.3 Annual performance

reports, 1999.

! OESE staff will share information on

effective parent involvement models and

approaches from Title I and other ED

programs.

! Program staff will provide information

to help facilitate networking among

schools, Native Hawaiian education

organizations, and resource centers to

address the needs of Native students.

3. Native Hawaiian students will

have access to a postsecondary

education.

3.1 Undergraduate enrollment and completion.

Increasing percentages of Native Hawaiian

students attend and complete postsecondary

institutions in comparison to historic trends

for the Native Hawaiian population. 

3.1 Annual performance

reports, 1999.

! OPE will provide information on

counseling, support services, and other

promising activities that meet the needs

of at-risk students and encourage their

inclusion in postsecondary programs. 
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 74

Alaska Native Education Program — $8,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist the Alaska Native population to achieve to challenging standards through supporting supplemental programs that meet their unique educational

needs.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Alaska Native students will have

access to instruction and

curriculum that meets their

unique educational needs.

1.1 Curriculum development. The curriculum

developed by grantees will incorporate Alaska

Native culture and language, and the

contributions of Alaska Natives.

1.2 Student achievement. Increasing

percentages of Alaska Native students will

meet or exceed the performance standards that

are established by the state or district, or on

national assessments.

1.3 Professional development. The number of

teachers of Alaska Native students that will be

prepared to address Alaska Native’s unique

needs will increase each year.

1.1 Annual performance

reports, 1999; final annual

performance reports, 2000.

1.2 Annual performance

reports, 1999; final annual

performance reports, 2000.

1.3 Annual performance

reports, 1999; final annual

performance reports, 2000.

! Program staff will provide

information to help facilitate

networking among schools, Alaska

Native education organizations, and

resource centers to address the needs

of Alaska Native students.

2. Parents of Alaska Native

preschool students will become

more effective educators through

active involvement in their child’s

education.

2.1 Parent involvement. The number of parents

reporting improved ability to teach their

children will increase each year.

2.2 Support services. Increasing percentages of

Alaska Native enrichment programs will

provide support services to families that

enable students to benefit from the program. 

2.1 Annual performance

reports, 1999; final annual

performance reports, 2000.

2.2 Annual performance

reports, 1999; final annual

performance reports, 2000.

! OESE staff will share information

obtained from other ED programs

with similar objectives so that Alaska

Native projects are aware of other

models, approaches, and research.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 75

Public Charter Schools Program — $100,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support the creation of charter schools and evaluate their effects.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Updates Strategies

1. Encourage the development of

charter schools that are free

from state or local rules that

inhibit flexible operation, are

held accountable for enabling

students to reach challenging

state performance standards,

and are open to all students.

1.1 State legislation. By the year 2000, 40 states

will have charter school legislation. As of

August, 1997, 29 states, the District of

Columbia, and Puerto Rico have charter

school legislation.

1.2 Charter operations. By the year 2002, there

will be 3,000 charter schools in operation

around the nation. In January, 1996, 428

charter schools were in operation nationwide.

1.3 Flexibility and accountability. Studies will

show that charter schools operate with greater

flexibility than other public schools and with a

focus on student performance.

1.4 Standards. Studies will show that charter

schools are meeting or exceeding state

performance standards.

1.5 Access. Studies will show that charter schools

are open and accessible to all students. 

During the 1995-96 school year charter

schools had, on average, a racial composition

roughly similar to their state average, but a

slightly lower proportion of students with

limited English proficiency and students with

disabilities.

1.1 RPP study (1998, 1999,

2000), state legislatures,

state educational agencies.

1.2 RPP study (1998, 1999,

2000), state legislatures,

state educational agencies.

1.3 RPP study (1998, 1999,

2000), planned evaluation

of the federal program

(2000, 2001, 2002), UWRand study (1998).

1.4 Planned evaluation of the

federal program (2000,

2001, 2002).

1.5 RPP study (2000), planned

evaluation of the federal

program (2000, 2001,

2002), other research

studies (1998, 1999).

! Provide support and technical assistance

for state and regional

information/outreach meetings

! Develop and disseminate a variety of

publications targeted nationally to

parents, students, potential charter

school developers, chartering agencies,

legislators, policymakers, and others.

! Meet with universities, museums,

organizations focused on educating

disadvantaged children, and others with

the capacity to help charter schools to

encourage their support in sponsoring

and providing technical assistance to

charter schools and potential charter

school developers.

! Support a charter school web site

including a national registry of charter

schools to share information on

curriculum development, policy

development, school finances, and legal

issues. 

! Share information about model charters

and chartering processes for chartering

agencies.

1.6 Educational approaches. Studies will show

that charter schools are implementing a

variety of innovative educational approaches

and documenting their results.

1.6 RPP study (2000), planned

evaluation of the federal

program (2000, 2001,

2002).

! Convene a national conference for

federal charter school grantees, and

others, with a focus on sharing lessons

learned about equity, performance

accountability, effective management,

leadership and partnerships, and crossfertilization to noncharter schools.
Public Charter Schools Program — $100,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support the creation of charter schools and evaluate their effects.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Updates Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 76

2. Evaluate the effects of charter

schools, including identifying the

most effective strategies to

improve quality and innovation

in the public school system.

2.1 Impact evaluation. By the year 2000, a

national study of charter schools will be

completed that examines the impact of charter

schools on student achievement, as well as the

impact on the school systems where the

charter schools are located.

2.2 Program component analysis. By the year

2000, effects of charter schools in areas such

as school governance, school finance, school

and student assessment, standards and

accountability, and educational equity will be

analyzed.

2.3 Impact of federal program. By 1998, an

evaluation of the impact of federal support for

charter schools will be under way.

2.1 RPP study (2000), planned

evaluation of the federal

program (2000, 2001,

2002).

2.2 RPP study (2000), planned

evaluation of the federal

program (2000, 2001,

2002).

2.3 Planned evaluation of the

federal program (2000,

2001, 2002).

! Support research studies to analyze the

effects of charter schools in areas such

as students with disabilities, assessment

and accountability, fairness/equity, and

school finance.

! Collect and disseminate information on

charter school models that promote

student achievement and innovation in

the public school system and support the

development of networks among charter

schools that share this information. 
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 77

Comprehensive Centers Program — $40,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) recipients in improving teaching and learning for all children, particularly children at risk of

educational failure.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Provide with high-quality, costeffective, comprehensive

technical assistance to states,

territories, tribes, school

districts, and schools that helps

students reach high academic

standards.

1.1 Addressing legislative priorities. By 1999,

85% of comprehensive centers’ (CCs) services

will target schoolwide programs, or school

districts and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)

funded schools with the highest percentages

and numbers of children in poverty.

1.2 Integrating technical assistance. The

percentage of CC activities that provide

integrated, noncategorical technical assistance

(such as standards, assessment of special

populations, reading, challenging curriculum,

whole school reform) increases annually.

1.3 Addressing customer needs. The number

and percentage of clients reporting

satisfaction with the quality of technical

assistance provided will increase annually. In

1996, the first year of funding for the

program, when the CCs were not fully

operational, 45% of State Title I Directors

and Goals 2000 Coordinators indicated that

the CCs were helpful or very helpful in

understanding new flexibility and

accountability provisions; 41% indicated that

CCs were helpful or very helpful in

understanding or implementing

comprehensive standards-based reform.

1.4 Building capacity. State education agencies

(SEAs) and local education agencies (LEAs)

will expand their own capacity to provide

high-quality technical assistance in support of

ESEA programs, as a result of professional

development activities provided by CCs.

1.1 Comprehensive center

(CC) performance reports,

quarterly and annual,

1998; report on program

evaluation, 1999.

1.2 CC performance reports,

quarterly and annual,

1998; report on program

evaluation, 1999.

1.3 CC performance reports,

quarterly and annual,

1998; report on program

evaluation, 1999.

1.4 CC performance reports,

quarterly and annual,

1998; report on program

evaluation, 1999.

! Communicate with CCs on statutory and

program priorities and engage CCs in

developing strategies to further

objectives in ED strategic plan.

! Identify and disseminate models of

technical assistance that are

noncategorical and support coordination

of programs.

! Strengthen communication with

customers (SEAs, LEAs, etc) to ensure

that the types of services delivered by

CCs meet customer needs.

! Through Integrated Reviews, meetings

with SEA and LEA officials and other

activities, identify capacity building

needs and interests, and encourage

SEAs and LEAs to use their CC to meet

those needs.

! Encourage CCs to target areas of need

for capacity building and plan training

accordingly.

! Involve CCs in the planning and

implementation of IRTs.
Comprehensive Centers Program — $40,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) recipients in improving teaching and learning for all children, particularly children at risk of

educational failure.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 78

1.5 Participating in ED Integrated Reviews

Teams (IRTs). Technical assistance

provided by CCs in conjunction with ED IRTs

will be consistently perceived by SEAs and

LEAs as highly useful in responding to issues

identified by reviews.

1.5 Report on program

evaluation, 1999; project

monitoring and IRT

reports, periodic, 1998.

2. Develop and expand the capacity

of the Comprehensive Centers to

provide high-quality and costeffective technical assistance

that helps students reach high

academic standards.

2.1 Maintaining staff expertise. Each CC will

maintain appropriate staff with expertise

needed to coordinate ESEA with one another,

as well as with other federal, state and local

programs and reforms.

2.2 Collaborating with other technical

assistance providers. Coordination of

services among the 15 CCs with other

technical assistance providers and research

institutions will leverage resources and result

in increased referrals and joint activities.

2.1 CC performance reports,

quarterly and annual,

1998; report on program

evaluation, 1999.

2.2 CC performance reports,

quarterly and annual,

1998; minutes or other

records of joint meetings

of CC directors and other

TA providers, periodic,

1998; report on program

evaluation, 1999.

! Create or expand regional and national

networks of technical assistance

providers through activities such as joint

meetings of CCs and other service

providers.

! Create opportunities for CCs with

expertise in a particular area to train

other CCs, in order to increase capacity

and knowledge.

! Invite other technical assistance

providers to meet quarterly with CC

directors to expand knowledge of

resources and mandates.

! Share information with ED offices

administering technical assistance

programs regarding services provided

through referrals and joint activities. 
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 79

Advanced Placement Test Fees — $3,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase the numbers of low-income high school students are prepared to pursue higher education.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. A greater number of lowincome students participate in

the Advanced Placement (AP)

program.

1.1 Numbers served. The number of lowincome students taking AP tests will increase

annually.

1.1 Annual Performance

Reports, 1999;

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1999; Schools

and Staffing Surveys,

2001.

! Pursue strategies to encourage more

low-income, minority, and students with

special needs to (1) complete the

challenging academic courses that are

prerequisite to AP courses and (2) take

AP courses. 

! Disseminate information to the public

about the availability of dollars to pay

for or help pay for AP test fees.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 80

Education Opportunity Zones — $200,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist urban and rural local educational agencies with high concentrations of children from low-income families to implement systemic reform strategies to

enable all students in the district to meet challenging academic standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. EOZs will target low-performing

schools (schools identified as

being in need of improvement or

slated for intervention).

1.1 Targeted for services. Schools identified for

school improvement or slated for intervention

will be targeted for services.

1.1 Annual performance

reports; national evaluation

study.

! Promote district efforts to improve

schools by disseminating information

and guidance on best practices and

strategies for turning around low

performing schools, implementing

schoolwide programs, and best practices

for teaching children who are risk of

failure.

! Provide assistance on leveraging all

federal program funds to improve low

performing schools. 

2. EOZs will recruit, retain, and

support qualified teaching staffs. 

2.1 Professional development. The percentage of

EOZ districts with comprehensive professional

development plans for teachers and

instructional leaders will increase.

2.2 Licensure and certification. The percentage

of teachers in EOZ schools who satisfy all state

licensure requirements or have at least a minor

in the subjects they teach and the number who

obtain NBPTS certification will increase.

2.3 Teacher performance. The percentage of

EOZ grantees that have developed systems for

rewarding high-performing teachers or

systems for fairly and quickly removing lowperforming teachers will increase.

2.1 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

2.2 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study; Schools

and Staffing Survey.

2.3 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

! Produce and disseminate a publication on

teacher accountability systems.

3. Student achievement in schools

served by EOZ grants will show

improvements in the core

academic subjects.

3.1 EOZ schools. Increasing percentages of

students in EOZ schools will meet or exceed

basic, proficient and advanced levels in state

and local assessments.

3.1 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

! Develop an application that requires

grantees to demonstrate how they will

use program funds and other resources to

carry out standards-based, districtwide

policies. 
Education Opportunity Zones — $200,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist urban and rural local educational agencies with high concentrations of children from low-income families to implement systemic reform strategies to

enable all students in the district to meet challenging academic standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 81

3.2 Low-performing schools. Low-performing

schools will show progress at least comparable

to districtwide averages in their percent of

students meeting or exceeding basic,

proficient, and advanced levels in state and

local assessments.

3.3 Limited English proficient students.

Disabled and limited English proficient

students will show progress in meeting or

exceeding basic, proficient, and advanced

levels in State and local assessments

comparable to districtwide averages.

3.4 High school graduation. The percentage of

students attending high schools located in

EOZs who graduate will increase.

3.5 Postsecondary education. The percentage of

students from high schools located in EOZs

who pursue postsecondary education will

increase.

3.2 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

3.3 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

3.4 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

3.5 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

! Sponsor activities such as conferences,

workshops, or communications using the

Internet where participating districts can

exchange information and ideas to

enhance the success of program. 

4. District and school

accountability systems will be

focused on student learning

results and will include

incentives and consequences,

and reporting of results to

parents and the community.

4.1 Incentives to schools. The percentage of

districts receiving EOZ grants that provide

incentives to schools for improved student

performance will increase.

4.2 Low-performing school interventions. The

percentage of districts receiving EOZ grants

that have developed systems to identify and

intervene in low-performing schools will

increase.

4.1 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

4.2 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

! Assist districts in developing and

implementing aligned assessments.

! Provide technical assistance on

developing an accountability system that

is comprehensive and fair.
Education Opportunity Zones — $200,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist urban and rural local educational agencies with high concentrations of children from low-income families to implement systemic reform strategies to

enable all students in the district to meet challenging academic standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 82

4.3 Academic standards. The percentage of

EOZs that require students to meet academic

standards at key transition points will increase.

4.4 Measures of school quality. The number of

districts receiving EOZ grants that provide

parents with annual reports on measures of

school quality will increase.

4.3 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.

4.4 Annual performance

reports; grantee

evaluations; national

evaluation study.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 83

America Reads Challenge
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 84
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 85

America Reads Challenge (prop. leg.) — $210,000,000

Goal: All children read well and independently by the end of the third grade.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Improve student achievement

in reading.

1.1 Student achievement. Increasing percentages of

fourth-graders will score at or above the basic

level in reading on the National Assessment of

Educational Progress (NAEP). In 1994 the

baseline was 60 %.

1.2 International assessment. Reading scores of

fourth-graders continue to rank within the top 5

countries in the world.

1.1 National Assessment of

Educational Progress,

1998.

1.2 International Association

for the Evaluation of

Education Achievement

(IEA) Reading Literacy

Study, 1998.

! Strengthen opportunities for children

from birth through age 5 to build

literacy skills by working with families,

caregivers, and communities.

! Promote improvement of teacher

preparation in elementary school

reading and link school curriculua to

high standards in reading.

! Distribute Checkpoints for Progress in

Reading widely to provide a benchmark

for reading skills.

! Promote and support increased family

and community involvement in America

Reads Challenge (ARC):

Read*Write*Now (RWN) and other

community-based reading programs.

! Support the development of a National

Voluntary Test in reading. Encourage

support among urban school districts.

2. Build the capacity of states

and communities to provide

community reading tutoring

programs for children from

birth through elementary

school.

2.1 America Reads Challenge (ARC) legislation.

Proposed legislation will be passed and funded.

2.2 Community coalitions. By the summer of 1998,

all 50 states will have ARC:RWN pilot sites (at

least one per state) that are linked to

empowerment zones and enterprise communities

and supported by a coalition of community

sponsors. In FY 1997 the baseline was 14 sites.

2.1 Department information,

1997-98.

2.2 Department information,

1998.

! Work with Congress to obtain

authorizing language for ARC by FY

1998.

! Strengthen the Department’s programs

to provide in-class reading instruction

with upgraded standards and curriculum

through elementary school.

! Encourage development of at least one

ARC:RWN site per state for FY 1998.
America Reads Challenge (prop. leg.) — $210,000,000

Goal: All children read well and independently by the end of the third grade.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 86

2.3 Volunteer tutors. One million volunteer tutors

are trained and mobilized to work in community

reading programs by 2002, through ARC:RWN

programs, College Work Study, and Corporation

for National Service programs.

2.4 Reading children. By 2002, 3 million children

will participate in ARC:RWN.

2.5 Early Childhood. ARC-proposed legislation that

includes a focus on early childhood and family

literacy will be passed. Community early

childhood programs such as Even Start and Head

Start will be linked to community-based reading

programs.

2.3 Department and

Corporation for National

Service records, 2002;

America Reads Challenge:

RWN Evaluation, 1998-

2002.

2.4 Department records, 2002;

America Reads Challenge:

RWN Evaluation, 1998-

2002.

2.5 Department information,

1998; Head Start and Even

Start Evaluations, 1998-

2002.

! Distribute through the World Wide Web

(WWW) and other means Simple Things

You Can Do and other community

guides.

! Work with the Corporation for National

Service and CollegeWork-Study

Program to coordinate tutoring

programs with ARC:RWN community

efforts.

! Enlist more colleges and universities

into the ARC College Work-Study

initiative.

! Encourage the ARC:RWN Sponsors

Group to expand their involvement in

the ARC:RWN community efforts.

! Encourage federal early childhood

programs to link with community

coalitions.

3. Promote excellence in the

teaching of reading in

schools, and links between

reading teachers and

community reading efforts.

3.1 Improved teacher preparation. Increasing

percentages of teachers of kindergarten through

third grade will complete high-quality, intensive

professional development in reading.

3.2 Teachers’ knowledge of children’s reading

skills needed. Publications such as the

ARC:RWN publication, Checkpoints for

Progress for Teachers will be disseminated to

encourage higher standards in the teaching of

reading.

3.3 ARC legislation. The ARC legislation passed by

Congress will include funding to support reading

specialists.

3.1 Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998; Schools

and Staffing Surveys, 1999

(Need to add new data

element; none currently

exists for reading.)

3.2 Department information,

1998

3.3 Department information,

1998

! Strengthen the Department’s existing

programs that provide support for

personnel preparation to provide

improved preservice and inservice

professional development for preschool

and school staff.

! Disseminate through the WWW highquality materials for teachers, such as

Checkpoints for Progress for Teachers,

to improve the teaching and learning of

reading.
America Reads Challenge (prop. leg.) — $210,000,000

Goal: All children read well and independently by the end of the third grade.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 87

4. Help ensure highperformance school and

community reading/ tutoring

programs by conducting

reading and tutoring research

and evaluations,

disseminating best practices,

and providing technical

assistance.

4.1 ARC legislation. The ARC legislation passed by

Congress will include funding to support

dissemination of best practices, technical

assistance, and evaluations.

4.2 School curricula aligned with standards.

Increasing numbers of teachers will report using

curricula aligned with high standards in English.

4.3 Read*Write*Now! and other materials. Highquality Read*Write*Now!and other materials

will be disseminated through the WWW.

4.4 Information on best practices. Information on

best practices in reading, tutor training, and

tutoring will be provided to improve practice.

4.5 Research and evaluation. Research and

evaluations on reading will be conducted to fill

the gaps and provide state-of-the-art information.

4.1 Department information,

1998.

4.2 Baseline Survey of

Schools, 1996.

4.3 Follow-up Survey of

Schools, 1997.

4.4 Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1998.

4.5 America Reads Challenge:

RWN Evaluation, 1998-

2002.

! Encourage alignment of school

curriculums in reading with high state

and local standards.

! Disseminate through the WWW high

quality research-based materials for

children, tutors, and caregivers.

! Support state-of-the-art research through

the new reading center, grant

competitions, and other programs

throughout the Department to develop,

disseminate, and encourage the use of

the most promising approaches to

reading instruction and tutoring.

! Through evaluation studies and support

to improve state and local performance

data systems, provide useful information

on how states and communities are

doing in improving children’s reading.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 88
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 89

Indian Education
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 90
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 91

Indian Education — $66,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist American Indian and Alaska Native children achieve to the same challenging standards expected of all students by supporting access to programs

that meet their special educational and culturally related academic needs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. American Indian and Alaska Native

(Indian) students served by LEAs

receiving Indian Education grants will

progress at rates similar to those for all

students in attendance, achievement to

standards, promotion, and graduation.

1.1 Student attendance. Increasing

percentages of LEAs receiving Indian

Education grants will demonstrate

improved attendance rates among

Indian students and rates comparable

to those for all students.

1.2 Student achievement. Increasing

percentages of Indian students will

meet or exceed the performance

standards that are established by the

state, district, or tribe (as appropriate),

or on national assessments. In 1994,

48% of American Indian students in

grade 4 and over 60% in grade 8 were

at or above the basic level in reading

proficiency; in 1996 over 50% of

American Indian students in grades 4

and 8 scored at or above the basic

level in mathematics.

1.3 Student promotion and graduation. 

Increasing percentages of Indian

students will progress from one grade

level to the next and graduate at rates

comparable to all students.

1.4 Student academic course completion.

Increasing percentages of Indian

students will complete college

preparatory courses at rates similar to

all students.

1.1 Sample of school/district

data (attendance records);

Indian Education Annual

Performance Reports,

1999.

1.2 Indian Education Annual

Performance Reports,

1999; NAEP, 1996;

Longitudinal Survey of

Schools, 1999.

1.3 Indian Education Annual

Performance Reports,

1999.

1.4 NCES transcript data,

1999.

! Coordinate with other ESEA programs

(e.g., Title I) to help Indian children

progress at rates similar to those for all

students in attendance, achievement to

standards, promotion, and graduation

(e.g., provide coordinated guidance to

grantees and encourage joint planning

by local staff from both the Indian

Education and Title I programs on how

to identify and address the needs of

Indian children).

! Work with LEAs to ensure that Indian

Education applications reflect the

accomplishment of local and state

standards by Indian children.
Indian Education — $66,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist American Indian and Alaska Native children achieve to the same challenging standards expected of all students by supporting access to programs

that meet their special educational and culturally related academic needs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 92

2. Parents or guardians, school systems,

tribes, and local communities will

become active partners in children’s

learning in school, home, and the

community, to help children meet the

standards for academic excellence that

are held for all students.

2.1 Partnerships. Increasing percentages

of LEAs receiving Indian Education

grants will form partnerships with

appropriate local organizations and

community groups to improve school

readiness among Indian children.

2.2 Parental involvement. Increasing

percentages of parents and guardians

of Indian students will participate in

educational activities at school (e.g.,

parent committees and volunteering)

and at home.

2.1 Indian Education Annual

Performance Reports,

1999; Indian Education

program applications,

1999; Longitudinal Survey

of Schools, 1999.

2.2 Indian Education Annual

Performance Reports,

1999; Indian Education

program applications,

1999; Longitudinal Survey

of Schools, 1999.

! Promote unique collaborative

community and LEA partnerships that

combine federal programs and resources

at the local level (including tribal

organizations) to meet the needs of

Indian children.

! Encourage SEAs and LEAs to be

sensitive to the unique needs of the

parents of Indian children and will

encourage parents’ full participation and

inclusion in the education of their

children.

3. LEAs receiveing Indian Education

grants will build the capacity of school

systems and native communities to

implement teaching and learning

strategies that are aligned with

challenging standards in core academic

areas, and that incorporate the special

educational and culturally related

academic needs of Indian students.

3.1 Responsive schools. Increasing

percentages of LEAs that serve Indian

students will use instructional

strategies in core academic areas (e.g.,

mathematics, reading, science, and

social studies) that are aligned with

challenging standards and that

incorporate needs of Indian students.

3.2 Local programs’ professional

development. Increasing percentages

of LEAs will offer professional

development opportunities that address

strategies for incorporating Indian

culture and language in curriculum

and address the needs of Indian

students.

3.1 Indian Education Annual

Performance Reports,

1999; Indian Education

program applications,

1999.

3.2 Same as 3.1.

! Hold workshops and institutes, and

provide onsite technical assistance and

reviews on how to meet the special

educational and culturally related

academic needs of Indian children. 
Indian Education — $66,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist American Indian and Alaska Native children achieve to the same challenging standards expected of all students by supporting access to programs

that meet their special educational and culturally related academic needs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 93

4. Assist LEAs to align their Indian

Education programs with local reform

efforts, including: 

– Comprehensive plans

– Needs assessment

– Measurable objectives

– Outcome-based goals

– Annual evaluation

4.1 Program alignment. Increasing

percentages of LEAs will report

alignment between Indian Education

programs and local reform efforts by

FY 1999.

4.2 Comprehensive Plans. Increasing

percentages of Indian Education

comprehensive plans will reflect the

standards set by the ESEA. 

4.1 Indian Education Annual

Performance Reports,

1999; Indian Education

program applications,

1999.

4.2 Same as 4.1.

! Hold workshops, and institutes, and

provide onsite technical assistance in

reviews.

5. Research, evaluation, and data

collection will provide information on

the educational status of Indian

children to improve education

programs and to provide information

for policy decisions.

5.1 Program development. Increasing

percentages of Indian Education

programs will utilize information from

research, evaluation, and data

collection on the educational status of

Indian children to revise and improve

their programs and services to Indian

children.

5.2 Policy information. Research and

evaluation on Indian Education will

inform the national Indian education

community and provide direction to

policymakers at the national or state

level, tribes, and the general public,

about the condition of education for

Indian children.

5.1 Schools and Staffing

Survey, 1999-2000.

5.2 Schools and Staffing

Survey, 1999-2000.

! Disseminate Indian Education research,

evaluation, and data collection products

to the Indian Education community,

policymakers at the national or state

level, tribes, and the general public.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 94
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 95

Bilingual and Immigrant Education
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 96
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 97

Bilingual Education Program — $232,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help limited-English proficient (LEP) students reach high academic standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Student outcomes — participants in Title VII programs

1. Improve English proficiency and

academic achievement of

students served by Title VII of

the Bilingual Education Act.

1.1 English proficiency. Students in the

program will annually demonstrate

continuous and educationally significant

progress on oral or written English

proficiency measures.

1.2 Other academic achievement. Students in

the program will annually demonstrate

continuous and educationally significant

progress on appropriate academic

achievement measures of language arts,

reading, and math.

1.3 Success in regular classrooms. Sixth-graders 

who were identified as LEP in first grade and

who have been in the program for five years

or who have successfully exited from the

program will perform at levels comparable to

those similar non-LEP students on English

language academic achievement measures by

FY 2000.

1.4 Low retention. LEP students in programs

will be retained in grade at rates comparable

to those for similar non-LEP students by FY

1998.

1.1 Contracted evaluation

based on local project data,

1997 biennial.

1.2 Contracted evaluation

based on local project data,

1997 biennial.

1.3 Title VII subsample of

contracted evaluation on

LEP achievement, 2000.

1.4 Contracted evaluation

based on local project data,

1997 biennial.

! Implement the federal Bilingual

Education Instructional Services

program to support linguistic and

academic development of LEP students.

! Increase onsite monitoring to ensure

high-quality grant implementation.

! Focus program administration on

outcomes and accountability instead of

process compliance.

! Use Bilingual Education Support

Services funds to aggregate and analyze

performance measure data.

! Disseminate successful models through

the National Clearinghouse on

Bilingual Education and other

Departmental technical assistance

providers.
Bilingual Education Program — $232,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help limited-English proficient (LEP) students reach high academic standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 98

Student outcomes — all limited English proficient children

2. Ensure that LEP students

nationwide achieve to high

standards (part of Departmentwide effort).

2.1 Student achievement. The proportion of LEP

and former LEP students nationwide who

meet or exceed basic and proficient levels on

NAEP reading and math will increase

between FY 1997 and FY 1998.

2.2 Student achievement. The annual status

dropout rate of Hispanic students will decline

by 10% of the FY 1996 rate by FY 1999.

2.1 National Assessment of

Educational Progress

(NAEP), supplemented by

annual LEP inclusion

studies, 1999.

2.2 National Center for

Education Statistics

(NCES) survey “Dropout

Rates in the U.S," FY

1999.

! Encourage coordination of Title VII

services with other federal programs to

serve the maximum number of students

with highest-quality instruction.

2.3 Inclusion in state and local plans. 100% of

new state and local consolidated plans for

federal programs will include LEP students in

framework of standards, assessment, and

accountability by FY 1998. 

2.4 Participation in other programs. LEP

students will be appropriately served by all

education federal programs by FY 1998. 

2.3 Annual joint OESE/

OBEMLA review, 1997. 

2.4 Review conducted by each

ED principal office with

information from

enhanced data collection

instruments, 1998.

! Explore partnerships with non-profit

organizations to leverage federal funds.
Bilingual Education Program — $232,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help limited-English proficient (LEP) students reach high academic standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 99

Program improvement

3. Build capacity of schools and

school districts in program to

serve LEP students.

3.1 Comprehensive programs. 75% of programs

will be comprehensive and integrated with the

mainstream of school and district by FY 1998.

3.2 Effect of federal support. 80% of grantees

will maintain program activities after

expiration of federal funding by FY 1998. 

3.1 Onsite monitoring survey;

Annual benchmark

research study, 1997.

3.2 Contracted evaluation,

1998 for some grants,

annual.

! Emphasize program features that will

allow grantees to carry on activities

after grant expires.

! Provide intensive technical assistance

on school reform issues.

! Disseminate information through the

Comprehensive Technical Assistance

Centers and the National Clearinghouse

for Bilingual Education.

! Provide high-quality data needed for

accountability and improvement:

— publish guidance on program

evaluation for grantees.

— strengthen grantee performance

reports.

— implement research and

evaluation agenda.
Bilingual Education Program — $232,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help limited-English proficient (LEP) students reach high academic standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 100

Research, information dissemination, and technical assistance

4. Ensure that schools serving LEP

students have access to highquality information and

guidance. 

4.1 State data collection. 100% of state

education agencies will collect data on the

education of LEP students by FY1998.

4.2 Inquiries to NCBE. The number of inquiries

to the National Clearinghouse on Bilingual

Education will increase by 15% per year.

4.1 OBEMLA review of SEA

data collection surveys,

1997, annually.

4.2 NCBE performance report,

1997, annually.

! Encourage state education agencies to

apply for federal bilingual education

program funding and to collect data on

LEP students.

! Pursue research agenda on topical

issues important to LEP students,

including assessment, evaluation, and

the voluntary national assessment.

! Commission a study on expected gains

of LEP students.

! Commission a study on aggregation of

project evaluation data.

Professional development

5. Improve quality and quantity of

educational personnel serving

LEP students. 

5.1 New teachers. At least 2,000 teachers per

year will complete high quality bilingual

education/English as a second language

certification or degree programs through the

Bilingual Education Professional

Development program.

5.2 Total bilingual/ESL teachers. Number of

teachers with state recognized credentials in

bilingual education/ESL will increase by 5%

by FY 1999.

5.3 Teacher placement. 90% of educational

personnel trained through Title VII will be

placed in instructional settings with LEP

students.

5.1 OBEMLA review of

project evaluations, 1998,

annually.

5.2 Schools and Staffing

Survey, 1999.

5.3 OBEMLA review of

project evaluations, 1997,

annually.

! Expand technical assistance to grantees

to promote

— incorporation of LEP educational

issues into the general teacher

training curriculum and

— partnerships between teacher

training institutions and school

districts.

! Work with Department's professional

development team to ensure that LEP

educational issues are addressed in all

relevant teacher training programs.
Bilingual Education Program — $232,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help limited-English proficient (LEP) students reach high academic standards.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 101

Federal program administration

6. Ensure that the Office of

Bilingual Education and

Minority Languages Affairs

(OBEMLA) administers its

programs in an efficient and

customer service-oriented

fashion.

6.1 Customer satisfaction. A majority of

OBEMLA customers will express satisfaction

with administration of ED programs by FY

1998.

6.2 Streamlining. Number of steps necessary to

award discretionary grants will diminish by

30% between FY 1996 and FY 1997.

6.1 Annual OBEMLA

customer surveys, 1998.

6.2 Analysis of funding

process by OBEMLA,

1997.

! Streamline the funding process for

grants. 

! Place the full application package for

bilingual education grants on the

Internet.

! Establish an OBEMLA web page to

provide information on ED programs

and provide an easy way for customers

to reach ED.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 102

Foreign Language Assistance Program — $5,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help students reach national education objective of mastering one or more foreign languages.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Updates Strategies

1. Improve foreign language

proficiency of students served by

the Foreign Language Assistance

Program (FLAP).

1.1 Increasing student achievement. The

percentage of students participating in

Foreign Language Assistance Program

supported instruction who meet or exceed

national standards for foreign language

education will increase annually.

1.1 Review of grantee annual

reports, 1997; program

evaluation under

consideration, FY 1998.

! Coordinate with federal, state, and local

programs, professional associations, and

other entities to improve foreign

language education through support of

effective foreign language instruction to

high standards.

2. Build capacity of schools in

FLAP to teach foreign

languages.

2.1 Increased professional development. At

least 80% of educational personnel involved

in funded projects will report receiving highquality preservice or inservice training related

to foreign language instruction by FY 1998.

2.2 Increased school capacity for effective

instruction At least 80% of grantees will

maintain program activities [for at least three

school years] after expiration of FLAP

funding for the program.

2.1 Review of grantee annual

reports, 1997; program

evaluation under

consideration, FY 1998.

2.2 Review of grantee annual

reports, 1997; program

evaluation under

consideration, FY 1998.

! Support dissemination of information

on effective foreign language education

and related career opportunities.

! Encourage development of effective

preservice and inservice professional

development for teachers of foreign

languages. 

! Emphasize program features that will

allow grantees to carry on activities after

grant expires.

3. Cooperate with federal

programs and state and local

reform efforts to increase the

proportion of U.S. students

proficient in foreign languages.

3.1 Increased student proficiency. The number

of students who demonstrate that they meet

the national standards for foreign language

education will increase by 10% annually.

3.2 Increased capacity. The number of

elementary school programs [in less

commonly taught languages] will increase by

5% annually.

3.1 Data from Joint National

Committee for Languages

and Center for Applied

Linguistics, annual, 1997.

3.2 Data from Joint National

Committee for Languages

and Center for Applied

Linguistics, annual, 1997.

! Coordinate Foreign Language

Assistance Program services with other

federal programs to serve the largest

number of students with highest-quality

instruction.

! Serve as national "lighthouse" program

for instruction of foreign languages,

with professional associations and others

in identifying and disseminating

information on effective models and best

practice in foreign language learning.
Foreign Language Assistance Program — $5,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help students reach national education objective of mastering one or more foreign languages.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Updates Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 103

3.3 Increased professional development. The

percentage of foreign language teachers who

report participating in professional

development activities that led to

improvements in foreign language instruction

will increase annually.

3.4 Ready for advanced study. The number of

students [scoring at proficient levels] on the

AP test and SAT II foreign language

achievement test (widely used for 4 year

college or university admission and

placement) will increase 5% annually.

3.3 Data from Joint National

Committee for Languages

and Center for Applied

Linguistics, annual, FY

1997; Schools and Staffing

Survey, 2001.

3.4 Educational Testing

Service data, annual.

! Support dissemination and utilization of

the national standards for foreign

language education.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 104

Emergency Immigrant Education Program — $150,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help offset the cost of supplementary services to recent immigrant students.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Provide financial assistance to

schools that serve large numbers

of recently arrived immigrant

students. 

1.1 Use of funds. 90% of program funds will be

used for direct services to students by FY

1997.

1.2 Distribution of funds. 90% of eligible

applicants will receive payment by May 15 by

FY 1998.

1.1 SEA Biennial Report,

1998.

1.2 Annual grant notification

documents and payment 

files, 1998.

! Provide technical assistance to

encourage grantees to 

— use more funds for direct services

to students, and

— focus on helping eligible students

reach high academic standards.

! Streamline and expedite award

distribution.

! Collect eligible student counts earlier in

the year to shorten award process.

2. Help participating students to

reach high standards.

2.1 Student achievement. The number of

participating students meeting challenging

state performance standards will increase.

2.1 SEA Biennial Report,

1998.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 105

Special Education
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 106
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 107

Special Education Grants to States and Preschool Grants— $4,184,685,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve results for children with disabilities by assisting state and local education agencies provide children with disabilities access to high-quality

education that will help them meet challenging standards and prepare them for employment and independent living.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Program improvement

1. States ensure children with

disabilities are a part of all

accountability systems and

actively work to monitor and

improve their performance.

1.1 Performance goals and strategies. By 1998

all states will have established performance

goals and strategies for children with

disabilities aged 3-21, and will report progress

in meeting those goals.

1.2 Participation in assessments. Children with

disabilities, as appropriate, will be included in

regular state assessment and results reported

starting July 1998.

1.3 Participation in alternate assessments. 

Children with disabilities in regular

assessments will participate in alternate

assessments and results reported starting 

July 2000.

1.1 State reported data, 1998 

and 1999.

1.2 Data from the Outcomes

Center, 1998.

1.3 Data from the Outcomes

Center, 1998; NCES Fast

Response Survey, 1996-

1998.

! Monitor to ensure that states develop 

goals and strategies and include children

with disabilities in assessments.

! Support state reform efforts through

State Improvement Grants.

! Conduct research, provide technical

assistance, and disseminate information

on appropriate accommodations for

assessments, alternative assessments,

performance goals, and interpreting

assessment results.

! Inform parents of assessment

requirements through parent training

and information dissemination.

2. States are assessing their needs

for professional development

and taking appropriate action.

2.1 Emergency/temporary certifications. The

percentage of teachers who have emergency or

temporary certification will be reduced.

2.2 Appropriately trained teachers. The

percentage of regular and special education

teachers with the skills and knowledge to

appropriately serve children with disabilities

will increase.

2.3 Reciprocity. The number of states with

reciprocity agreements regarding certification

will increase.

2.1 Schools and Staffing

survey, 1999.

2.2 Schools and Staffing

Survey, 1999.

2.3 Professional

Clearinghouse and

Grantee reports, annual.

! Monitor State Improvement Grants and

State Comprehensive Systems of

Personnel Development (CSPDs) to

ensure that states are addressing

personnel needs.

! Provide technical assistance to states to

assist them in addressing their personnel

needs.

! Support personnel development

activities, including preparing personnel

and developing model teacher

preparation programs.
Special Education Grants to States and Preschool Grants— $4,184,685,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve results for children with disabilities by assisting state and local education agencies provide children with disabilities access to high-quality

education that will help them meet challenging standards and prepare them for employment and independent living.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 108

3. States effectively monitor local

school districts and provide

technical assistance and take

other actions as appropriate to

ensure compliance with the Act.

3.1 State monitoring. The percentage of states

deemed to effectively monitor local

educational agencies on implementing the

requirements of IDEA will increase.

3.2 State technical assistance. The percentage

of States deemed to provide effective technical

assistance to poorly performing local

educational agencies on implementing the

requirements of IDEA will increase.

3.1 Monitoring one-quarter of

states, annual.

3.2 Monitoring one quarter of

states, annual.

! Monitor states and take appropriate

corrective action to ensure that States

carry out their monitoring

responsibilities.

! Monitor to ensure that states address

technical assistance needs of local

educational agencies in their State

Improvement Grants plans.

Access to high quality education

4. All children with disabilities will

participate in the general

curriculum to the maximum

extent appropriate.

4.1 Participation in the regular classroom. The

percentage of children with disabilities who

participate in the general curriculum most of

their day in the regular classroom, with

appropriate supports and accommodations

such as behavioral interventions and adaptive

instructional materials will increae. Preschool

children with disabilities will receive services

in settings with typically developing peers.

45% of children with disabilities ages 3

through 21 and 51% of children aged 3

through 5 were reported by states as being

served in regular education classrooms for

the 1994-95 school year.

4.1 State reported data, 1998;

Schools and Staffing

Survey, 1999;

Longitudinal study of

children with disabilities

starting in the fourth

grade, 2000.

! Monitor states to ensure access to the

regular education curriculum and

compliance with the least restrictive

environment provisions.

! Conduct research, provide technical

assistance and disseminate information

on including children with disabilities in

the general curriculum and in the least

restrictive environment.

! Support professional development that

provides personnel with the skills and

knowledge they needed to serve children

with disabilities in the least restrictive

environment.

! Facilitate the participation of children

with disabilities in charter schools.
Special Education Grants to States and Preschool Grants— $4,184,685,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve results for children with disabilities by assisting state and local education agencies provide children with disabilities access to high-quality

education that will help them meet challenging standards and prepare them for employment and independent living.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 109

5. Students 14 and older will take

courses and receive services that

will facilitate the transition from

school to work or postsecondary

education.

5.1 Participation in appropriate secondary

education. The access of children with

disabilities to appropriate quality academic,

vocational education, or other programs that

address their needs will increase. The

National Longitudinal Transition Study

(NLTS) reported that 65% of students with

disabilities took one or more vocational

education courses during their most recent

year in secondary school.

5.2 Transition services. All children with

disabilities ages 14 and older will have IEPs

that include a statement of transition service

needs that will help focus on the child’s

courses of study in advanced-placement

courses or a vocational education program. 

The High School Transcript Study found that

students with disabilities earned more credits

in vocational courses in high school than

other students did (5 credits vs. 4 credits).

5.1 Bureau of Labor StatisticsNational Longitudinal

Survey Youth, 1996.

Transcript study conducted

in 1990, and in 1994

Transcript study that was

conducted in conjunction

with the National

Assessment of Educational

Progress (NAEP).

5.2 Monitoring reports, one

quarter of states, annual 

Evaluation of Transition

Requirements, 1999.

! Ensure that states monitor local school

districts for the development and

implementation of appropriate

Individualized Educational Programs

(IEPs) and access to vocational

education.

! Conduct research, provide technical

assistance, and disseminate information

on providing access to academic

programs and vocational education

programs that meet high standards.

! Support professional development that

provides personnel with the skills and

knowledge needed to provide academic

programs and vocational education that

meet high standards.

6. All children with disabilities will

receive appropriate services that

address their individual needs,

including related services such

as assistive technology.

6.1 Parent satisfaction. The percentage of

parents who are satisfied with their child’s

education will increase over time.

6.2 Teachers’ view. The percentage of teachers

reporting that children receive the services

they need will increase over time.

6.1 National Household

Survey, 1999;

Longitudinal Elementary

School Study, 2000;

Kindergarten Survey,

2000.

6.2 Schools and Staffing

Survey, 1999.

! Ensure that states monitor for parent

and regular education teachers’

participation in IEP development and

placement decisions.

! Conduct research on home school

collaboration.

! Provide technical assistance,

disseminate information, and train

personnel on practices to improve

educational results particularly in the

area of home-school collaboration.
Special Education Grants to States and Preschool Grants— $4,184,685,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve results for children with disabilities by assisting state and local education agencies provide children with disabilities access to high-quality

education that will help them meet challenging standards and prepare them for employment and independent living.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 110

7. Schools will provide appropriate

behavioral interventions for

children with disabilities whose

behavior impedes the learning of

themselves or others.

7.1 Disciplinary actions. The percentage of

children with disabilities who have been

suspended or expelled will decrease.

7.2 Identification of children with emotional

disturbance. Children with emotional

disturbance will be identified earlier. 

7.1 Project FORUM, 1999.

7.2 Special studies of children

with disabilities served,

2000.

! Monitor states to ensure that children

with disabilities are not being

inappropriately suspended or expelled.

! Conduct research, provide technical

assistance, and disseminate information

on addressing behavior in children with

disabilities, including children with

emotional disturbance and behavior

problems.

! Support professional development on

addressing behavior for children with

disabilities.
Special Education Grants to States and Preschool Grants— $4,184,685,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve results for children with disabilities by assisting state and local education agencies provide children with disabilities access to high-quality

education that will help them meet challenging standards and prepare them for employment and independent living.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 111

Challenging standards and preparation for employment and independent living

8. Improve the educational results

of children with disabilities.

8.1 Performance on assessments. The

percentage of children with disabilities who

are proficient in reading, math, and other

academic areas, based on NAEP and State

assessments will increase.

8.2 School completion. The percentage of

children with disabilities exiting school who

graduate with a diploma or a certificates will

increase; and the percentage of children with

disabilities leaving school who drop out will

decrease. Of students with disabilities ages 14

through 21 who are known to have left school

52% graduated with a regular diploma in the

1994-95 school year, 63% graduated with a

regular diploma or certificate of completion

and, 34% dropped out.

8.1 NAEP state data reported

to public, 1999.

8.2 State-reported data on

diplomas, certifications,

and drop-outs, 1996;

Bureau of Labor Statistics,

National Longitudinal

Survey Youth, 1996.

! Ensure that States include strategies in

their State Improvement Grant plans to

improve performance on assessments.

! Ensure that students with disabilities are

appropriately included in NAEP.

! Conduct research, provide technical

assistance, and disseminate information

on instructing children with disabilities,

including practices in the areas of

reading and math.

! Support professional development to

provide teachers with the skills and

knowledge they needed to instruct

children with disabilities, including

instruction in reading and math.

! Ensure that children with disabilities 

benefit from the America Reads

initiative.
Special Education Grants to States and Preschool Grants— $4,184,685,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve results for children with disabilities by assisting state and local education agencies provide children with disabilities access to high-quality

education that will help them meet challenging standards and prepare them for employment and independent living.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 112

9. Improve participation in

postsecondary education and

employment.

9.1 Postsecondary education. The percentage of

students with disabilities going on to four-year

colleges and two-year community colleges and

technical schools will increase. The National

Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS)

reported that 13.9% of youth with disabilities

who left high school in the 1985-86 or 1986-

87 school years had enrolled in some type of

postsecondary school in the year before they

were interviewed for the study (summer and

fall of 1987), and that 27.7% of youth with

disabilities who had been out of school for

three to five years had ever attended

postsecondary school.

9.2 Employment. The percentage of students

with disabilities who are employed within 2

years of leaving school will increase. The

NLTS reported that 45.9% of youth with

disabilities who left high school in the 1985-

86 or 1986-87 school year were employed at

the time of the follow-up survey in the summer

and fall of 1987.

9.1 Bureau of Labor Statistics,

National Longitudinal

Survey Youth, 1996.

9.2 Bureau of Labor Statistics,

National Longitudinal

Survey Youth, 1996.

! Monitor states on transition

requirements focusing on facilitating

movement to postsecondary education.

! Build School-to-Work systems that

result in increased student achievement

and opportunities.

! Conduct demonstrations, provide

technical assistance, and disseminate

information on how to enhance

participation in postsecondary education

and employment .

! Support professional development

activities (including the development of

model teacher preparation programs and

materials) that provide teachers and

others with the skills and knowledge

they need to deliver effective school to

work transitions or postsecondary

education.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 113

Special Education - Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities — $370,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Family and child outcomes are enhanced by early intervention services, and states provide a comprehensive system of early intervention services for infants

and toddlers with disabilities and their families.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. All eligible children are

identified.

1.1 Total number of children served. The

number of eligible infants and toddlers with

disabilities being served will increase.

Baseline in 1995 was 174,288.

1.2 Birth to one-year olds served. The

percentage of infants served under 1 years ols

will increase as a proportion of infants and

toddlers served. Baseline in 1994 was 0.8% .

1.3 States serving at-risk children. The number

of States serving infants and toddlers at risk of

developing disabilities will increase. Baseline

was 9 states and 1 territory in FY 1996.

1.1 Annual state data reports -

Child count data taken as

of 12/1 submitted by the

States.

1.2 Annual state data reports -

child count data taken as of

12/1 submitted by the

states and Census Bureau

data on the general

population 0-3.

1.3 State application review, 

periodic.

! Conduct demonstration and outreach

projects on effective practices for

identifying children and families who

qualify for services.

! Provide targeted technical assistance

and disseminate information on effective

“child find” practices, focusing on states

that identify and serve low percentages

of children and families.

! Convene a panel of experts for purposes

of evaluating and recommending ways

to bring greater uniformity to the

definition of developmental delay.

2. Needs of the child and family are

addressed in a timely,

comprehensive manner.

2.1 Receipt of all services indicated. The

percentage of families receiving all the

services identified on the individualized

family service plan and the percent of families

reporting that their services were coordinated

will increase. Baseline to be determined

through new research

2.2 Natural settings. The percentage of children

primarily receiving services in natural settings

appropriate for the age of the child will

increase. Baseline was 53% in 1994.

2.1 Office of Special Education

Program’s (OSEP) Early

Intervention Longitudinal

Study, 1999.

2.2 State reported data,

annual.

! Monitor state practices and state

applications to ensure that the child and

family receive timely and appropriate,

individualized services based on the

needs identified in a comprehensive,

multidisciplinary assessment.

! Conduct research to identify effective

practices for providing and coordinating

services in ways that are cost effective,

comprehensive and support the family’s

needs.

! Conduct research, provide technical

assistance, and disseminate information

on effective home visiting and other

practices that increase the family’s

capacity to care for their children.
Special Education - Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities — $370,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Family and child outcomes are enhanced by early intervention services, and states provide a comprehensive system of early intervention services for infants

and toddlers with disabilities and their families.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 114

2.3 Family capacity. The percentage of families

reporting that early intervention has increased

the family’s capacity to enhance their child’s

development will increase. Baseline to be

determined through new research.

2.4 Transition experiences. The percentage of

families reporting a successful transition (e.g.,

a transition meeting was held in a timely

manner and a plan developed and followed)

will increase. Baseline data to be determined

through new research.

2.5 Setting of subsequent services. The number

of children transitioning to inclusive settings

will increase. Timing of new data collection

to be determined.

2.3 OSEP’s Early Intervention

Longitudinal Study, 2001.

2.4 OSEP’s Early Intervention

Longitudinal Study, 2003.

2.5 State reported data

(proposed new data

element to be collected

annually, first data

expected in 2002).

! Support and encourage Parent Training

and Information Centers (PTIs) and

Community Resource Centers in serving

families of eligible children from birth

to age 3.

! Encourage an emphasis on transition in

the state self-assessment process as part

of monitoring activities.

! Provide technical assistance and

disseminate information on effective

transition practices, with particular

focus on transitioning children to

natural community-based settings.

! Work with the Federal Interagency

Coordinating Council to improve

transitions into and out of programs that

serve children with disabilities and their

families.

! Ensure that all OSEP Clearinghouses,

where appropriate, provide timely,

understandable and useful information

to families of eligible children from

birth to age 3.

3. Child’s functional development

is enhanced by early intervention

services.

3.1 Functional abilities. Child’s functional

abilities are increased and sustained. Baseline

to be determined through new research.

3.1 OSEP’s Early Intervention

Longitudinal Study, 2001.

! Conduct research to determine shortand long-range child outcomes and to

determine how developmentally

appropriate practices can be conducted

within family friendly models (e.g.,

Institute on Early Childhood Program

Performance Measures).
Special Education - Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities — $370,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Family and child outcomes are enhanced by early intervention services, and states provide a comprehensive system of early intervention services for infants

and toddlers with disabilities and their families.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 115

4. State policy, monitoring and

technical assistance promote

comprehensive, effective family

focused early intervention

services.

4.1 Funding sources. The number of States

accessing all appropriate sources of funding

(Medicaid, Maternal and Child Health Block

Grant, state general revenues) will increase

(from the number reported in FY 1997).

4.2 State monitoring activities. The number of

states that rigorously monitor local

implementation of Early Intervention and

provide effective technical assistance to

service providers on implementation of the

requirements of Part C of IDEA will increase. 

Baseline data available in FY 1998.

4.1 State performance reports,

annual.

4.2 Program monitoring,

ongoing.

! Conduct research to determine the best

models for coordinating funding from

multiple sources for comprehensive

early intervention/early childhood

services.

! Encourage states to share information

on effective ways to fund Early

Intervention using multiple funding

sources.

! Monitor state practices and state

applications and take appropriate

corrective action to ensure that states

carry out their monitoring

responsibilities and address technical

assistance needs of their service

providers.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 116

Special Education Discretionary Program – $290,961,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To link best practices to states, school systems, and families to improve results for infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Ensure an adequate supply of

highly qualified personnel.

1.1 Supply of qualified personnel. An

increasing number of states will meet their

identified needs for qualified personnel.

1.2 Research-validated effective practices. An

increasing percentage of training

programswill incorporate research-validated

practices into program curricula.

1.3 Personnel employed with certification. An

increasing percentage of special education

teachers and related services personnel will be

certified appropriately.

1.4 Special education training for regular

education teachers. An increasing

percentage of regular education teachers and

community service providers will receive

preservice and inservice training in special

education and developmentally appropriate

practices.

1.5 Effective personnel. An increasing

percentage of special and regular education

teachers and early intervention personnel will

have the knowledge and skills to improve

educational results for children with

disabilities.

1.1 CSPD / State Improvement

reports; State

Improvement grant

applications, beginning in

FY 1998

1.2 Review of funded awards

and institutional practices,

beginning in FY 1999.

1.3 NCES Schools and

Staffing Survey, FY 2000.

1.4 NCES Schools and

Staffing Survey, FY 2000.

1.5 Surveys of personnel’s

sense of self-efficacy,

surveys of teachers,

parents, and students

regarding personnel’s

knowledge and skills.

! Develop a model computer program for

tracking personnel system/demand and

make it available to all states.

! Identify research-validated effective

practices.

! Add grant selection criteria that promote

the use of research-validated effective

program content and pedagogy.

! Establish a cooperative agreement to

link research-validated practices to

personnel preparation and training

programs.

! Require State Improvement Grant

applications to include current data on

regular and special education personnel

employed, certification status, and

training received.

! Support preparation programs for

personnel to work with both children

with low-incidence and high-incidence

disabilities, to ensure an adequate supply

of highly qualified personnel.

! Promote innovative solutions to address

the needs for an adequate supply of

highly-qualified personnel.
Special Education Discretionary Program – $290,961,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To link best practices to states, school systems, and families to improve results for infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 117

2. Rigorous research, development,

demonstration, and innovation

responds to critical needs and

advances knowledge to improve

results for children with

disabilities.

2.1 Respond to knowledge gaps. An increasing

percentage of IDEA-supported research and

demonstration products, including technology

products, will respond directly to identified

needs of SEAs, LEAs, and direct service

providers.

2.2 Ensure quality. An increasing percentage of

projects, including technology projects, use

rigorous research and evaluation methods.

2.3 Advance knowledge use. An increasing

percentage of final research reports

documenting activities to advance the use of

the knowledge produced are reported.

(OSERS)

2.4 Research impact; to be developed.

2.1 Survey of SEAs, LEAs,

and others as part of the

comprehensive planning

process.

2.2 Standing panel’s review of

grant applications and

recommendations for

increasing rigor of

applications.

2.3 Review and summary of

final reports.

! Determine the knowledge and

information needs of SEAs, LEAs, and

other service providers, and incorporate

these needs into Department priorities.

! Fund demonstration projects to apply

and validate research findings.

! Incorporate selection criteria into grant

applications that emphasize the

useability of research knowledge. 

! Provide technical assistance (TA),

information, and support to grantees and

potential consumers of research

information on strategies (e.g., improved

credibility, visibility, and

communicability of research products) to

enhance the use of research.

! Use the annual meeting of Office fo

Special Education Programs (OSEP)-

supported researchers to analyze recent

advances and continuing gaps in

knowledge to respond to stakeholder

needs.

! Fund research syntheses as a means to

identify best practices.

! Encourage IDEA-supported researchers

to submit findings and products to OERI

expert panels.

! Increase awareness of researchers

supported by IDEA research.
Special Education Discretionary Program – $290,961,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To link best practices to states, school systems, and families to improve results for infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 118

3. Technical Assistance (TA)

and information will be

coordinated and accessible to

parents, teachers,

administrators, early

intervention personnel,

related personnel, and

transition personnel and will

result in improved practices.

3.1 Customer satisfaction. An increasing

percentage of customers will receive TA and

information and will report satisfaction with

the services received.

3.2 Improving practices. An increasing

percentage of customers will use TA and

information to improve practices.

3.3 Respond to information needs. An

increasing number of TA and information

materials will respond to critical needs.

3.4 Use effective practices. An increasing

number of TA and information products and

events will promote effective practices in

curricula, policies, and services and are based

on validated research.

3.1 Surveys of recipients and

potential recipients of TA

and information.

3.2 Surveys of TA and

information recipients,

including SEAs, LEAs,

and other service

providers.

3.3 Surveys to document

content of TA activities.

3.4 Surveys to document

content of TA activities.

! Determine the TA and information

needs of SEAs, LEAs, and other

customers and incorporate these needs

into Department priorities.

! Incorporate conditions into grant

announcements that ensure TA and

knowledge competencies and promote

emphasis on effective practices in

curriculum policies and services.

! Assess alternative TA and dissemination

approaches and identify effective

strategies that respond to customer

needs.

! Provide training to TA providers and

disseminators to improve their practices.

! Assess existing models of TA and

information to identify effective

strategies for increasing research use.

! Provide TA and training to OSEP

network of TA providers on effective

strategies for increasing the use of

research.

! Develop coordinated, collaborative

strategies with other ED-funded

providers of TA and information.

4. Local education agencies and

early intervention programs

implement program 

innovations and improvements. 

4.1 LEAs and community-based programs

implement innovation and improvement

efforts. An increasing percentage of LEAs

and community-based programs will indicate

that they have implemented innovations,

validated practices, and improved their

programsin order to improve the results of

children with disabilities.

4.1 Surveys of LEAs and

community-based

programs on the type of

innovations, including

supporting evidence.

! Assess alternative TA approaches and

identify effective strategies that respond

tothe needs of LEAs and communitybased providers. 

! Provide TA and training on models and

strategies for effective practices to OSEP

network of TA providers.
Special Education Discretionary Program – $290,961,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To link best practices to states, school systems, and families to improve results for infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 119

5. State systems of education and

early intervention for infants,

toddlers, and children with

disabilities are reformed and

improved.

5.1 Development of accountability systems. The

number of states with accountability systems

in place to track the progress of infants,

toddlers, and children with disabilities will

increase.

5.2 Inclusion in statewide assessments. All 

students with disabilities will be included in

statewide assessment systems.

5.3 State Improvement Grants. By 1999, all

states will have submitted a competitive

application for the State Improvement Grant

program.

5.1 Review of State

Improvement Plans,

beginning FY 1998

5.2 Review of State

Improvement Plans.

5.3 Review of State

Improvement Plans.

! Provide TA and information to states to

use in developing and implementing

their State Improvement Plans.

! Promote partnerships among state and

local agencies and organizations to

ensure that the needs of children with

disabilities and their families are met.

! Conduct research on accommodations

that allow children with disabilities to

participate in assessments and on

developing alternative assessments.

! Provide TA and information on

accommodations and alternative

assessments.

6. Families receive the information

and training that they need to

increase their participation in

their child’s education.

6.1 Families receiving information and

training. An increasing number of families

will report satisfaction with the information

and training they receive about rights,

protections, effective practices, and related

issues. 

6.1 Surveys of families’

satisfaction with

information services.

! Promote coordination among providers

of TA and information, both OSEPsupported and other Department

providers.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 120
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 121

Rehabilitation Services, Disability

Research, and Special Institutions
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 122
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 123

State Vocational Rehabilitation Services — $2,331,224,000 (FY 99)

Goal : Individuals with disabilities served by the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grant program will achieve high quality employment.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Consumer outcomes

1. Ensure that individuals with

disabilities who are served by

the Vocational Rehabilitation

State Grant program achieve

employment consistent with

their unique strengths,

resources, abilities, capabilities,

and interests.

1.1 Number achieving employment. The overall

number of individuals with disabilities who

achieve employment will increase. The

number employed in 1996 was 213,334. 

1.2 Percentage of individuals obtaining

employment. The percentage of all persons

served who obtain employment will increase.

The percentage obtaining employment in

1996 was 61%.

1.3 Percentage of individuals obtaining

competitive employment.

— Of individuals obtaining employment, the

percentage who obtain competitive

employment will meet or exceed 85%. The

percentage obtaining competitive

employment in 1995 was 85%.

— Of individuals with severe disabilities

obtaining employment, the percentage

obtaining competitive employment will

increase over 5 years. The percent of

individuals with severe disabilities

obtaining competitive employment in 1996

was 72%.

1.4 Improved earnings.Of individuals exiting the

program in competitive employment, the ratio

of their average hourly wage to the U.S.

average hourly wage will equal or exceed .68. 

In 1995, the ratio was .66.

1.1 Annual Rehabilitation

Services Administration

(RSA) State data, 1997.

1.2 Same as 1.1.

1.3 Same as 1.1.

1.4 Same as 1.1.

! Develop a state improvement plan 

jointly with state agencies that are

performing below standards to be

included in regulations currently under

development. RSA would also provide

technical assistance (see 3.1).

! Develop coordinated approaches among

federal agencies that affect employment

of individuals with disabilities.

! Identify and disseminate information

regarding best practices for assisting

individuals with disabilities to achieve

appropriate employment outcomes.

! Develop a monitoring and technical

assistance plan for states, taking into

consideration performance on the

indicators to be developed regarding

employment outcomes. 

! Award grants for system change to

encourage coordination between state

VR agencies and state-level job training

programs.

! Encourage state agencies to seek more

employer involvement in the program.
State Vocational Rehabilitation Services — $2,331,224,000 (FY 99)

Goal : Individuals with disabilities served by the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grant program will achieve high quality employment.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 124

1.5 Own income as primary support. The

percentage of individuals who report upon

obtaining employment that their own income

is their primary source of support will be 80%. 

In 1995, the percentage was 80%.

1.6 Transitioning students. The percentage of

VR consumers who enter at age 16-25 who

obtain employment will improve over time. 

In 1995, this percentage was 59%.

1.7 Employment retention. The percentage of

individuals obtaining competitive employment

who maintain employment and earnings 24

months after closure will improve over time. 

Baseline to be determined based on data from

the VR longitudinal study.

1.8 Satisfaction with employment. The

percentage of individuals who are satisfied

with their employment outcome will continue

to increase until an 80% level is achieved. 

Data from the VR longitudinal study indicate

that about 64% of consumers are satisfied.

1.5 Same as 1.1.

1.6 Same as 1.1.

1.7 VR longitudinal study,

ongoing; RSA is

developing standards and

indicators that will

measure employment

retention.

1.8 Same as 1.7

! Work jointly with the Social Security

Administration (SSA) to address the

work disincentives that affect SSA

beneficiaries who want to work.

! Work jointly with the Department of

Labor, the School-to-Work office, SEAs,

and other ED programs to ensure that

students with disabilities receive

appropriate school-to-work transition

services.

! Explore legislative and other options to

provide more follow-up and followalong services to consumers to assist in

job retention.

State VR agency Management

2. State VR agencies will operate a

comprehensive, effective,

efficient, and accountable

program of vocational

rehabilitation.

2.1 Satisfaction with services. A consistently

high proportion of consumers will report

satisfaction with VR services. Preliminary

data from the VR Longitudinal Study indicate

that 76% of consumers are very or mostly

satisfied with services.

2.1 VR longitudinal study, 

ongoing; RSA is

developing standards and

indicators that will

measure consumer

satisfaction with services.

! Identify low-performing agencies, and

assist States to identify problems and 

develop plans to improve services. 

! Strategies will address how funding for

direct services to consumers

significantly affects outcomes.
State Vocational Rehabilitation Services — $2,331,224,000 (FY 99)

Goal : Individuals with disabilities served by the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grant program will achieve high quality employment.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 125

2.2 Program efficiency. RSA will create an

indicator to measure VR agencies’ efficiency

and effectiveness based on data to be analyzed

in May 1997 including cost/placement,

spending on direct services to consumers, etc.

2.3 Program accountability. The number of

States that meet minimum performance

standards will increase over time. Baseline is

being developed.

2.4 Corrective action.States will implement

corrective action plans in response to findings

from RSA monitoring reports. Establish

baseline based on 1996 monitoring reports.

 2.2 RSA data reports, 1998.

2.3 RSA data reports, FY

1998.

2.4 State corrective action

plans. System to follow up

must be developed.

! Encourage all state agencies to

implement streamlining plans through

training. Support efforts through

regional continuing education programs

and in-service training, and the

provision of technical assistance. 

! Help states improve performance

through monitoring and technical

assistance.

! Follow up with state agencies during

annual monitoring to ensure that

corrective action plans have been

implemented. 

! Explore options to collect information

regarding state agency progress on

corrective action plans. 

Federal administration

3. RSA will help States improve

services and outcomes for

consumers. 

3.1 Monitoring and technical assistance.

— RSA will complete its annual monitoring of

all state agencies and provide technical

assistance as needed. In 1995, RSA

reviewed 72 of the 82 state agencies. 

— RSA will conduct 10 comprehensive,

onsite, monitoring reviews each year and

provide technical assistance as needed. In

1995, RSA conducted 6 such reviews.

3.1 RSA Central Office

records, 1997.

! Ensure that staff are trained and able to

effectively use RSA’s monitoring and

technical assistance guide. 

! Ensure that staff are trained and able to

use available data and information

effectively in the annual review.

! Award a technical assistance contract to

procure expertise in identified problem

areas.

! Sponsor national conferences, training,

and implementation activities in

response to program needs.

! Provide targeted training to state VR

agencies through regional continuing

education programs.
State Vocational Rehabilitation Services — $2,331,224,000 (FY 99)

Goal : Individuals with disabilities served by the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grant program will achieve high quality employment.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 126

3.2 Availability and use of data.

— The time between the agencies’ reporting

due date and the availability of the

complete and accessible national database

will continually decrease. FY 1995

database was not available for 13 months

after agencies’ reporting due date.

— All appropriate ED personnel will be

trained and able to use the database. The

database is accessible to two individuals.

3.3 Evaluation and dissemination. VR agencies

and interested consumers will have access to

high-quality, convenient information on

effective practices and Federal requirements.

3.2 RSA database report, FY

1998; contract updates,

after award of contract;

and RSA training records,

after system is created.

3.3 RSA web page, under

development through

1998.

! RSA will award a contract in FY 1997

to develop and implement an improved

data management, analysis, and

reporting system to improve the use of

the database.

! Train ED employees in methods to

access and use the database.

! Distribute evaluation results on

promising practices through

publications targeted to the VR

community.

! Put program requirements and

evaluation results on the WWW.

! Review, revise, and improve the

issuance of RSA’s policy and guidance

directives to state VR agencies.

Consumer supported employment outcomes

4. Increase the number of

individuals with the most severe

disabilities receiving supported

employment services who

achieve high quality supported

employment outcomes.

4.1 Percentage achieving supported 

employment. The percentage of individuals

with a supported employment goal who

achieve a supported employment outcome will

increase to 65% in FY 1998. In FY 1996,

64% achieved supported employment

outcomes.

4.2 Percentage earning at least minimum wage. 

The percentage of individuals who achieve a

supported employment outcome who earn at

least the minimum wage will increase to 50%

by 2002. In FY 1996, 45% earned at least the

minimum wage.

4.1 Annual Supported

Employment Caseload

Report, 1998.

4.2 Annual RSA data, 1998.

! Identify poor performance and provide

targeted technical assistance.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 127

American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS)— $17,238,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve employment outcomes of American Indians with disabilities who live on reservations by providing effective tribal vocational rehabilitation (VR)

services.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Ensure that eligible American

Indians with disabilities receive

vocational rehabilitation services

and achieve employment

outcomes consistent with their

unique strengths, resources,

abilities, capabilities, and

interests. 

1.1 Number of eligible individuals who receive

services under the program. The overall

number of American Indians with disabilities

who receive services each year will increase.

Benchmark to be determined during FY 1998

based on analysis of annual performance

reports.

1.2 Number of eligible individuals who achieve

employment outcomes. The overall number

of American Indians with disabilities who

achieve employment outcomes each year will

increase. Benchmark to be determined during

FY 1998.

1.3 Percentage of individuals who leave the

program with employment outcomes. The

percentage of all persons served who obtain

employment will increase annually.

Benchmark to be determined during FY 1998.

1.1 Annual performance

reports, onsite reviews,

and project follow-up.

1.2 Annual performance

reports, onsite reviews,

and project follow-up.

1.3 Annual performance

reports, onsite reviews,

and project follow-up.

! Linkage with National Institute on

Disability and Rehabilitation Research

(NIDRR) capacity-building project to

improve the number and quality of

applications.

! Through monitoring and technical

assistance, provide guidance to projects

in order to (1) increase the scope of their

outreach activities; (2) improve their

networking with other Tribal and nonTribal agencies that are major referral

sources; and (3) provide interagency

training to improve appropriateness of

referrals.

! Provide monitoring and technical

assistance to individual projects,

including a national conference that will

focus on methods for improving

employment outcomes.

! Conduct an evaluation study that

examines the consumer characteristics,

services provided, outcomes, and

management of the program.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 128

Client Assistance Program (CAP) — $10,928,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide assistance and information to help individuals with disabilities secure the benefits available under the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants

program and other programs funded under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Provide appropriate information

and adequate services to resolve

the concerns of individuals.

1.1 Multiple cases. The number of reported

individuals who had multiple CAP case files

in a given year will decrease. New data

collection instrument is currently in

Departmental review.

1.1 CAP grantee performance

reports, annual, 1999.

! Provide technical assistance on new data

collection reporting elements. 

! Provide technical assistance on how

CAPs should approach each case in a

comprehensive manner.

! Keep National Association of Protection

and Advocacy Systems (NAPAS)

informed of ED activities in this area.

2. Resolve cases at lowest possible

level.

2.1 Alternative Dispute Resolution. The use of

alternative dispute resolution (ADR) will

increase. 

2.2 Formal appeals or legal remedies. Reliance

on formal appeals or legal remedies to resolve

disputes will decrease. 

2.1 CAP grantee performance

reports, annual, 1999.

2.2 CAP grantee performance

reports, annual, 1999.

! Develop a model "alternative dispute

resolution" policy for the CAPs.

! Provide technical assistance on how

CAPs can use alternative dispute

resolution effectively.

3. Meet expectations of individuals

served regarding their

satisfaction with CAP services.

3.1 Response rates. Response rate to CAP

satisfaction surveys will increase.

3.2 Satisfaction. Satisfaction with CAP services

among individuals served will increase.

3.1 CAP grantee performance

reports, annual, 1999.

3.2 CAP grantee performance

reports, annual, 1999.

! Develop a model client satisfaction

survey for CAPs to use.

! Provide technical assistance to

encourage CAPs to follow up with

individuals served.

4. Accurately identify problem

areas requiring systemic change

and engage in systemic activity to

improve services under the

Rehabilitation Act.

4.1 Systemic advocacy. The percentage of CAPs

conducting and reporting on their systemic

advocacy activities will increase.

4.2 Effects of systematic change. CAPs will

report changes in policies and practices as a

result of their efforts.

4.1 CAP grantee performance

reports’ narrative section,

annual, 1999.

4.2 CAP grantee performance

reports’ narrative section,

annual, 1999.

! Compile and assess CAP narrative

reporting regarding systemic activities.

! Provide technical assistance and follow

up for those CAPs not reporting systemic

activities.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 129

Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) Training Program — $33,685,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide the public vocational rehabilitation (VR) sector with well-trained staff and to maintain and upgrade the skills of current staff.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Produce graduates to work

within the VR system to help

individuals with disabilities

achieve their goals.

1.1 Increase numbers trained. The number of

students trained and the number of “pay back”

years generated will increase. Baseline data

will be collected in FY 1998.

1.2 Percentage working. The percentage of

graduates fulfilling their pay back

requirements will be established. Baseline

data will be collected in FY 1998.

1.1 Annual grantee reporting

form.

1.2 Annual grantee reporting

form and results of

monitoring reviews.

! Develop revised reporting form to

capture more accurate information.

! Provided grantees with clearer guidance

on the purpose of ED program and ways

to respond better to program goals.

2. Maintain and upgrade the

knowledge and skills of

personnel currently employed in

the public vocational

rehabilitation system.

2.1 Increase skills. Supervisors will report an

increase in the skills of rehabilitation

professionals after training. Baseline to be

collected during special study.

2.2 Cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness of

continuing education, in-service training, and

short-term training programs will be assessed. 

Baseline to be collected during special study.

2.1 Results of special study

planned for FY 1998.

2.2 Results of special study

planned for FY 1998.

! Special study of Regional Continuing

Education Programs and In-Service

Training programs to be scheduled for

FY 1998.

3. Increase and enhance the skills

and knowledge of manual,

tactile, oral, and cued speech

interpreters so as to be better

able to provide communication

access for individuals who are

deaf or individuals who are deafblind in a greater variety of

situations.

3.1 Increase number of interpreters. The 

number of certified and non-certified working

interpreters nationwide will be increased. 

Baseline to be collected during special study.

3.1 Special study, if funds

permit, beginning in FY

1999.

! Improve guidance on performance report

to collect baseline and change data.

! Build a special evaluation component for

this program into the next grant

competition for the national projects to

assess the quality of the training

provided by the regional training

programs, the quality of the curricula

developed by the national programs, 

and the capability of interpreters in the

field to meet the demand for various

communication modalities.

! Increase the number of workshops or

training sessions which offer continuing

education unit credits.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 130

Special Projects and Demonstrations — $18,942,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To expand and improve the provision of rehabilitation services to individuals with disabilities.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Demonstrate innovative and

experimental approaches to the

provision of vocational

rehabilitation (VR) services.

1.1 Incorporation by VR agencies. The number

of projects reporting that the State Vocational

Rehabilitation agencies incorporated their

approach to serving individuals with

disabilities will increase.

1.1 Grantee final reports at

completion of project

period, monitoring

reviews.

! The Rehabilitation Services

Administration (RSA) will implement

an annual plan to reflect need for

baseline data, specify outcomes for next

performance period, and disseminate

clearer guidance to grantees for

reporting data.

! RSA will provide technical assistance to

grantees in order to promote successful

outcomes. 

2. Disseminate information about

successful new types or patterns

of services or devices for

individuals with disabilities.

2.1 Dissemination to State VR agencies. The

number of funded projects that disseminate

information to State Vocational Rehabilitation

agencies will increase.

2.1 Grantee annual reports. ! RSA will identify and disseminate

information to other grantees and state

VR agencies regarding best practices.

! RSA will convene a project directors’

meeting. 

3. Improve the provision of

supported employment services.

3.2 Increased knowledge. Recipients of

information on replicable models and

practices, and technical assistance will report

an increase in the knowledge of effective

policies, methods, and models of supported

employment.

3.1 Monthly teleconference

status reports; annual

performance reports, 1998;

evaluation studies to be

completed 1998-2000;

summaries of provider

evaluation of technical

assistance activities,

scheduled to begin after

April 1998.

! RSA will monitor project performance

via monthly teleconference and review

annual performance reports to

determine progress in meeting project

goals and objectives.

! RSA will review evaluation in relation

to level of reported satisfaction of

providers receiving technical assistance.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 131

Vocational Rehabilitation Migrant Program, Section 312 — $2,350,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase employment opportunities for migratory agricultural workers or seasonal farm-workers who have disabilities.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Project services

1. Ensure that eligible migratory

agricultural workers or seasonal

farm-workers with disabilities

receive vocational rehabilitation

services and achieve employment

outcomes.

1.1 Numbers served. The overall number of

migratory agricultural workers or seasonal

farm-workers with disabilities who receive

services each year will increase.

1.2 Individuals who achieve employment

outcomes. The overall number of migratory

agricultural workers or seasonal farm-workers

with disabilities achieve employment

outcomes each year will increase.

1.1 Annual performance

reports, biannual telephone

monitoring reports, annual

Rehabilitation Services

Administration (RSA) 911

data.

1.2 Annual Rehabilitation

Services Administration

911 data and annual

project performance

reports.

! Grantees provided with clearer guidance

on the purpose of ED program and ways

to respond better to program goals.

! RSA works to coordinate grantee

activities with the State Vocational

Rehabilitation agency. 

! RSA will conduct telephone monitoring

twice a year to all continuing project to

assess program activities and provide

technical assistance.

! RSA is conducting an internal review of

performance reports to determine

effectiveness of the program in terms of

meeting its stated objectives.

2. Improve the accuracy and

consistency of data reported on 

the number of migratory

agricultural workers or seasonal

farm-workers with disabilities

served by the State Vocational

Rehabilitation (VR) agencies

and these projects.

2.1 Accurate data. State VR agency 911 data

and project data will reflect the accurate count

of individuals served by these programs.

2.1 Annual performance

reports, biannual telephone

monitoring reports, annual

Rehabilitation Services

Administration 911 data.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 132

Recreation Program Section 316 — $2,596,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To initiate recreation programs providing individuals with disabilities recreation activities and related experiences that can be expected to aid in their

employment, mobility, socialization, independence, and community integration.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Project services

1. Recreation programs are

sustained after federal funding

ceases.

1.1 Project continuation. A minimum of 85% of

grantee’s programs will continue after federal

funds end.

1.1 Biannual telephone

monitoring reports.

! Provide grantees with clearer guidance

on the purpose of the program and better

ways to respond to program goals.

! The Rehabilitation Services

Administration (RSA) is conducting an

internal review of performance reports

to determine effectiveness of the

program in terms of meeting its stated

objectives. 

! Grantees will have an opportunity to

present their programs and receive

technical assistance from RSA.

! RSA will conduct telephone monitoring

twice a year of all continuing projects to

provide guidance and to determine if

project will continue after federal

funding ceases.

! RSA will contact annually all projects

whose federal funds just ended to

determine if the project is being

sustained without federal support.

2. Recreation programs will

maintain the same level of

services over the three-year

grant period as federal funding

decreases.

2.1 Individuals served. The number of

individuals served will not decline.

2.1 Projects Director’s

meeting, FY 1998; annual

report on grantees

activities and outcomes;

biannual telephone

monitoring reports; annual

assessment of continuation

project.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 133

Protection & Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) — $9,894,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide assistance and information to individuals with disabilities eligible for the PAIR program and conduct advocacy to ensure the protection of their

rights under Federal law.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Develop an instrument to collect

data from grantees that will be

used to measure the following

objectives. 

1.1 Data collection. In FY 1999, data collection

will begin.

1.1 Grantee performance

reports, annual, 2000;

PAIR program evaluation

planned in FY 1998.

! Consult with PAIR grantees, the

National Association of Protection and

Advocacy Systems (NAPAS), and others

to obtain input in the development of key

data collection elements. 

! Assess findings from the PAIR program

evaluation to identify additional

measures for this program.

2. PAIR programs adequately

identify priorities and objectives

to meet the needs of individuals

with disabilities.

2.1 Percentage outside PAIR priorities. The

percentage of individuals seeking services

whose concerns are not within the PAIR's

stated priorities will decrease.

2.2 Assess priorities and objectives. PAIRs

annually assess the appropriateness of their

priorities and objectives, and make changes as

necessary to meet the needs of individuals with

disabilities. 

2.1 Grantee performance

reports, annual, 2000.

2.2 Grantee performance

reports, annual, 2000.

! Provide technical assistance to help

PAIRs identify appropriate priorities and

objectives.

3. PAIR programs meet

expectations of individuals served

in terms of their satisfaction with

the PAIR services received.

3.1 Survey response rate. Tthe response rate of

satisfaction surveys by individuals served will

increase.

3.2 Satisfaction. Satisfaction of PAIR services by

individuals served will increase.

3.1 Grantee performance

reports, annual, 2000.

3.2 Grantee performance

reports, annual, 2000.

! Develop a model client satisfaction

survey for PAIRs to use.

! Provide technical assistance to

encourage PAIRs to follow up with

individuals served.

4. Identify problem areas requiring

systemic change and engage in

systemic activities to address

those problems.

4.1 Systemic advocacy. The percentage of PAIRs

conducting and reporting on their systemic

advocacy activities will increase.

4.2 Effects of systematic change. PAIRs will

report changes in policies and practices as a

result of their efforts.

4.1 Grantee performance

reports, annual, 2000.

4.2 Grantee performance

reports, annual, 2000.

! Compile and assess PAIR narrative

reporting in this area.

! Provide technical assistance and follow

up for those PAIRs not reporting

systemic advocacy activities.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 134

Projects with Industry (PWI) Section 621 — $22,071,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To facilitate the establishment of partnerships between rehabilitation service providers and business and industry in order to create and expand employment

and career advancement opportunities for individuals with disabilities.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Ensure that PWI services

(through partnerships with

business and industry) result in

competitive employment,

increased wages, and job

retention for individuals with

disabilities.

1.1 Placement rate of individuals with

disabilities into competitive employment.

The percentage of individuals served who are

placed in competitive employment will

increase from the FY 1995 placement rate of

68%.

1.2 Change in earnings of individuals who are

placed in competitive employment. PWI

projects will report that participants placed in

competitive employment increase earnings by

an average of at least $195 per week. The

average change in earnings in 1994 was

$195.

1.3 Job retention. An indicator will be developed

to assess the percentage of individuals who

maintain employment nine months after

placement.

1.1 Revised performance

indicator data, first issue

1999, annually thereafter.

1.2 Revised performance

indicator data, first issue

1999, annually thereafter.

1.3 Survey and assessment

tool, first pilot 1998.

! Monitor placement rates by conducting

off-site monitoring with grantees.

! Provide technical assistance on building

strong partnerships with industry. 

Disseminate information on models of

effective Business Advisory Councils. 

! Provide technical assistance to grantees

that demonstrate difficulty or noncompliance with the wage standard

defined in PWI regulations and monitor

progress through off-site monitoring and

progress reports.

! Design and pilot a data collection

instrument to measure job retention

rates.

2. Ensure that PWI services are

available for individuals with the

most need.

2.1 Percentage of individuals served who were

unemployed for six months or more prior to

program entry who are placed in

competitive employment. The percentage of

previously unemployed individuals served

who are placed into competitive employment

will increase from the FY 1995 level of 69%.

2.1 Revised performance

indicator data, first issue

1999, annually thereafter.

! Provide technical assistance to grantees

that demonstrate poor performance.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 135

Independent Living Programs — $79,574,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Individuals with significant disabilities served by the Title VII, Chapter 1 programs will achieve consumer-determined independent living goals; and 

Independent Living Services will be provided and activities will be conducted to improve or expand services to older individuals who are blind.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Title VII, Chapter 1 programs: Part B, State Independent Living Services and Part C, Centers for Independent Living

1. Increase the number of

individuals with significant

disabilities who are served by

and benefitting from the Title

VII, Chapter 1 programs.

1.1 Number of individuals with significant

disabilities served as grouped by age. The

number of individuals receiving individual

independent living services will increase in all

age categories. The number of individuals

receiving individual IL services in FY 1995 is:

under 6--1,570; 6 to 17--5,487; 18 to 22--

10,901; 23 to 54--65,700; and 55 and older--

38,079.

1.2 Number of goals set and achieved by

consumers. The number of consumer goals

set and achieved will increase in all service

areas measured (e.g., self-care,

communication, mobility, etc.). The number

of goals set in all areas in FY 1995 was

approximately 150,000. Of these, roughly

95,000 were met.

1.1 Annual Rehabilitation

Services Administration

(RSA) 704 Reports (704

Report), 1997.

1.2 Annual RSA 704 Report,

1997.

! Develop technical assistance action

plans that will assist grantees that are

performing below standards and

indicators of compliance.

! Identify and disseminate information

regarding best practices for assisting

individuals with disabilities to achieve

appropriate independent living

outcomes.

! Develop a monitoring and technical

assistance plans for States and CILs,

taking into consideration performance

on the indicators, requests for

assistance, recency of last onsite review,

and annual financial audit.

2. Increase the satisfaction of

consumers who receive 

Chapter 1 Independent Living

(IL) services.

2.1 Consumer satisfaction with IL services. A

consistently high proportion of consumers will

report satisfaction with IL services. 

Preliminary data indicate 90% of consumers

are very or mostly satisfied with services.

2.1 Annual 704 Report, State

Plan for Independent

Living (SPIL) Attachment

16. Beginning in 1998.

! Identify and assist low-performing

service providers.

! Revise the reporting requirements for

the SPIL and 704, Part I to include

reporting of Attachment 16 consumer

satisfaction data.

3. Improve access to personal

assistance services (PAS),

housing, transportation, and

community-based living through

increased advocacy efforts.

3.1 Number of Centers for Independent Living

(CILs) using effective advocacy techniques.

All CILs will have an advocacy program to

address at least two of the following areas:

community-based PAS accessible/ affordable

housing and transportation options moving

people from nursing homes and other

institutions to the community.

3.1 Annual RSA 704 Report,

1998.

! With training and technical assistance

providers, provide coordinated

assistance to CILs on advocacy

techniques and strategies.
Independent Living Programs — $79,574,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Individuals with significant disabilities served by the Title VII, Chapter 1 programs will achieve consumer-determined independent living goals; and 

Independent Living Services will be provided and activities will be conducted to improve or expand services to older individuals who are blind.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 136

3.2 Increase in community-based living. The 

number of individuals who leave nursing

homes for community-based housing and the

number of individuals at risk of entering

nursing homes who are receiving IL services

and can remain at home will increase.

3.2 Annual RSA 704 Report,

1998.

! Present information at national

meetings of CIL directors on the

importance of facilitating community

change.

! Provide leadership to establish focused

national/state/local advocacy efforts on

affordable/accessible housing and

transportation, PAS, and communitybased living arrangements.

4. Increase the amount of funds in

addition to Title VII that

support Chapter 1 grantees .

4.1 Increase in funding from alternative

sources. 75% of CILs will have greater than

25% of their budget from sources other than

Title VII, Chapter 1 and 80% of states will

contribute more than the required minimum

match for Title VII, Chapter 1, Part B.

4.1 Annual RSA 704 Report,

1998.

! Identify and publish potential funds

availability, increase grantees’ capacity

to obtain grants, and identify and share

replicable model local and state resource

development techniques and strategies.

! Identify significant outcomes of the

Chapter 1 programs and disseminate

results to grantees and other potential

funding sources.

5. Increase the coordination,

cooperation, and communication

between the Chapter 1 programs

and other entities serving

individuals with significant

disabilities in states.

5.1 Improve coordination. The quality and

quantity of entities coordinating, cooperating,

and communicating with CILs, SILCs, and

DSUs regarding IL issues will increase.

5.1 Annual RSA 704 Report

subparts IDI, IEI, and IIB.

! Develop coordinated approaches among

federal agencies that affect independent

living goals of individuals with

disabilities.

! Work jointly with other agencies and

other ED programs to ensure that

students with disabilities receive

appropriate transition services.

! Encourage increased collaborative

efforts with non-Rehabilitation Act

providers assisting individuals with

significant disabilities.
Independent Living Programs — $79,574,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Individuals with significant disabilities served by the Title VII, Chapter 1 programs will achieve consumer-determined independent living goals; and 

Independent Living Services will be provided and activities will be conducted to improve or expand services to older individuals who are blind.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 137

Title VII, Chapter 2: Independent Living Services for Older Individuals Who Are Blind

6. Provide Chapter 2 services to

increasing numbers of

individuals who are older and

severely visually impaired, and

increase consumer satisfaction.

6.1 Increase the number of individuals served.

The number of older and severely visually

impaired individuals served in each state will

increase. In FY 1995, there were 22,103.

6.2 Increase consumer satisfaction. The

percentage of individuals receiving services

who are evaluated will indicate growing

satisfaction with services received until there

is a 90% satisfaction rate.

6.1 Annual Report --

Independent Living

Services for Older

Individuals Who Are

Blind (7OB Annual

Report), 1997.

6.2 7OB Annual Report and

new consumer satisfaction

addendum in the revised

7OB Report .

! Provide technical assistance at national

project directors meeting as to the most

successful strategies and techniques for

increasing and improving service.

! Conduct an independent consumer

satisfaction review of all grantees.

! Identify and assist state agencies with

low consumer satisfaction rates.

7. Increase funding for Chapter 2

programs from sources other

than Title VII, Chapter 2.

7.1 Increase funding from alternative sources.

The number of states that are contributing

more than the required minimum match will

increase until it is at least 80% exceed the

minimum match.

7.1 7OB Annual Report. ! RSA will aggregate and share with

grantees innovative methods of

supporting Chapter 2 activities from

sources other than Chapter 2.

! RSA will aggregate examples of

outcomes of the Chapter 2 program and

share them with grantees and other

potential funding sources.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 138

Helen Keller National Center (HKNC) for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults — $8,176,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Individuals who are deaf-blind become independent and function as full and productive members of their local community.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Individuals who are deaf-blind

receive the services and training

they need to become as

independent and self-sufficient

as possible.

1.1 Numbers served. The number of consumers

served by the HKNC training program will be

maintained or increased. 85 were served in

1996.

1.2 Clients improve functionally. Participants in

the training program will increase their skills

and abilities in areas such as Communication, 

Orientation & Mobility, and Independent

Living (IL). Baseline data to be determined

through a new data collection system

developed in 1997 to be implemented in 1998.

1.3 Satisfaction ratings. Satisfaction levels of

consumers, family members, as appropriate,

and state sponsors will increase. Baseline

data to be determined through a new data

collection system to be developed in 1998 and

implemented in 1999.

1.4 Employment outcomes. The number of

consumers placed in employment settings will

increase. 22 consumers (47%) terminating

training in 1996 were placed in employment

settings.

1.5 Independent Living. IL situations of HKNC

consumers improve. 49 clients received

training in IL skills in 1996 and 7 of the 35

clients terminated (20%) returned to less

restrictive living situations.

1.6 Regional services. HKNC maintains or 

increases the number of consumers served

through its regional offices. 1,626 individuals 

with deaf-blindness and 355 families were

served in regional offices in 1996.

1.1 Internal client caseload

reports summarized in the

HKNC Annual Report,

1998. 

1.2 Annual Report, 1999.

1.3 Annual Report, 2000.

1.4 Annual Report, 1998.

1.5 Annual Report, 1998.

1.6 Annual Report, 1998.

! Develop an internal document, the

Individualized Training Plan (ITP), to

document short-term goals and their

completion.

! Make new efforts to increase the number

of students participating in community

work experience programs throughout

their training.

! Initiate a program to compare baseline

(entry skills) with skill level at

termination using Helen Keller

Functional Profile (HKFP) — a

functional criterion-based assessment

tool.

! Provide training to staff to increase and

improve their qualifications, expertise,

and job performance.

! Develop a consumer satisfaction

questionnaire indicating level of

satisfaction for use at the end of each

training period and at the time of

program completion.

! Develop a State sponsor survey to obtain

feedback about the services delivered to

consumers after program completion. 

! Conduct a follow-up survey to obtain

data on employment status and

satisfaction with community living

(housing, community participation and

supports) and to gain information on

goals completed one year after students

leave the HKNC training program.

! Conduct periodic consumer surveys to

determine satisfaction with field

services.
Helen Keller National Center (HKNC) for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults — $8,176,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Individuals who are deaf-blind become independent and function as full and productive members of their local community.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 139

2. Family members are able to

provide and obtain services that

meet the needs of the individual

who is deaf-blind.

2.1 Family assistance. An increasing percentage

of families will report that HKNC training has

increased their ability to enhance the life of a

family member who is deaf-blind to function

as a fully productive member of the

community. A family survey developed in

1997 will be conducted annually, beginning in

1998.

2.1 Annual Report, 1999. ! Develop a family satisfaction survey and

gather data from family members of

consumers attending program, including

individuals who cannot give direct

feedback due to linguistic limitations.

! As appropriate, include input from

family members into the process for

identifying goals for the ITP. Conduct

regular review (every 13 weeks) with the

family to assess progress.

! Conduct national parent meetings with

agendas developed through a needs

assessment completed by parents.

3. Increase the capacity of the

adult service system to meet the

training and support needs of

deaf-blind persons in their local

community.

3.1 Numbers trained. The number of

professionals, service providers, and parents

receiving training from HKNC will be

maintained or increased. 1,517 individuals

participated in training activities in 1996.

3.2 Satisfaction with training. The satisfaction

of professionals receiving training through

professional seminars at HKNC and National

Training Team workshops will increase. 

Forms are under development for use in 1998.

3.3 Affiliate training. The number of affiliate

agencies and other organizations receiving

training from HKNC will be maintained or

increased. 1,197 agencies received services

in 1996.

3.4 Increase affiliates. Increase the number of

HKNC affiliate programs. 40 programs

participated in 1996.

3.1 Annual Report, 1998.

3.2 Annual Report, 1999.

3.3 Annual Report, 1998.

3.4 Annual Report, 1998.

! Increase the number of university

affiliations and student internships

offered.

! Develop a brochure to market the

availability of community-based

consultations and disseminate it through

the regional offices.

! Conduct participant assessment of

training activities using competencybased evaluations.

! Develop a national database of federal,

state, and regional offices and staff and

other service providers in order to

improve HKNC’s networking,

coordinating, collaborating, and training

activities.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 140

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) — $81,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support the conduct and dissemination of high-quality research that contributes to improvement in the quality of life of persons with disabilities.. 

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. NIDRR grantees will conduct

high-quality research that leads

to high-quality research

products.

1.1 Scientific excellence. Peer evaluation will

document research quality, as reflected in

research design, sample sizes, and analytical

methods, in at least 80% of projects. 

1.2 Research usefulness. The percentage of

customers who agree that grantee research is

useful will increase.

1.3 Increased publication and citation. 

Publication of research findings, with the

appropriate citation, will increase in refereed

journals and other recognized forums.

1.4 Impact of findings. The measurable effects

of research findings will increase. Baseline to

be established by 9/30/99.

 1.1 Prospective and in-process

peer evaluation, initiated

in 1996.

1.2 Biennial customer inquiry

, annual consensus

conferences on various

topics, 1999.

1.3 Analysis of grantee records

and reports; literature

search, annual, 1999.

1.4 Retrospective evaluation

contract at five-year

intervals, 2000.

! Provide training for prospective peer

review panels.

! Use various systems of review and

evaluation to assess the quality,

productivity, and relevance of NIDRR

research.

! Contract an impact study to assess

productivity, relevance, and quality of

research.

! Involve broad constituency in planning,

priority setting, and program reviews.

2. Disseminate and promote use of

information on research

findings, in accessible formats,

to improve rehabilitation

services and outcomes.

2.1 Dissemination plan. 80% of grantees will

include a dissemination plan that identifies

target audiences.

2.2 Product availability. 75% of grantee

products and 90% of NIDRR products will

be available in alternative formats: cognitive

accessibility, sensory accessibility. 

2.3 Information and TA usefulness. At least

90% of recipients find the information and

technical assistance that they receive useful..

2.1 Analysis of grantee

dissemination plans,

annual, 1999

2.2 Analysis of a sample of

grantee products, 1999.

Administrative review,

1999.

2.3 Customer survey, biennial,

1999.

! Survey consumer and provider needs.

! Develop targeted Dissemination and

Utilization (D&U) projects. 

! Publish and distribute accessibility

guidelines for publications, meetings,

and web sites. and provide a model of

accessibility in NIDRR’s own products,

communications, and meetings.
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) — $81,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support the conduct and dissemination of high-quality research that contributes to improvement in the quality of life of persons with disabilities.. 

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 141

3. Expand system capacity for

conduct of high-quality

rehabilitation research and

services by ensuring availability

of qualified researchers and

practitioners, including persons

with disabilities and other

underserved groups.

3.1 Contribution of trainees and fellows. The

contributions by NIDRR trainees and fellows’

to the field of rehabilitation research will

increase by 25%.

3.2 Researchers with disabilities and from

underserved groups. The number

researchers working in the field who have

disabilities or are from underserved groups

will increase by 25%.

3.3 Impact on field. Over a five-year period, the

number of practitioners who report that

NIDRR-funded research and training

activities make a significant contribution to

professional development in the field will

increase by 25%.

3.1 Analysis of trainee/fellow

documentation of

employment, 2000.

3.2 NIDRR-sponsored survey,

2002.

3.3 Analysis of grantee

reports, annual, 1999.

! Develop precollege awareness programs

that targets disabled persons and

individuals from underserved groups.

! Expand “new scholars” undergraduate

program.

! Develop cooperative training activities

with RSA/state VR.

! Emphasize the training of graduate

researchers in all centers, and encourage

grantees to target persons with

disabilities and individuals from

underserved groups.

! Improve the clarity of goals of Research

Training Grant (RTG) program.

4. Ensure productivity and

management effectiveness.

4.1 Relevant priorities. Priority setting will

respond to needs articulated by researchers,

consumers, practitioners, and policymakers

and reflect advances in the state of knowledge

and progress toward agency goals.

4.2 Usefulness of NIDRR products. The

percentage of customers reporting that

NIDRR products and information are useful

will increase.

4.1 Public hearings; analysis

of public comments on

priorities, annual, expert

panel review, 1999.

4.2 Customer survey, biennial,

1999.

! Convene conferences of consumers and

researchers to identify emerging issues

in disability research and service

delivery.

! Contract a comprehensive study of

NIDRR’s historical accomplishments as

basis for setting future directions.

! Implement customer evaluation on a

program-by-program basis.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 142

Technology Related Assistance to States - P.L. 103-218 — $30,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase availability of, funding for, access to, and provision of assistive technology devices and assistive technology services.

 Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Through systemic activity,

improve access to and

availability of assistive

technology (AT) for individuals

with disabilities who require

assistive technology.

1.1 Information. The number of individuals

with disabilities and service providers who

receive information about AT will increase.

1.2 Trained professionals. The number of

professionals who are trained to provide AT

services will increase.

1.3 Timeliness. The timeliness of the provision

of AT will increase.

1.4 Barrier reduction. The number of barriers to

AT will decrease. 

1.5 VR consumers. The number of vocational

rehabilitation (VR) consumers that receive

assistive technology will increase. 

1.1 - 1.4:

Responses to National

Institute on Disability and

Rehabilitation Research

(NIDRR) Performance

Guidelines, annual, 1998. 

1.5 Rehabilitation Services

Administration Annual Reports,

1998.

! Provide technical assistance to states on

accessibility issues.

! Attend meetings of professional

organizations for special education and

vocational rehabilitation, and provide

technical assistance; disseminate

information about successful activities

developed between education programs

for children with disabilities and Tech

Act projects.

! Increase collaboration with state VR

agencies.

! Monitor Tech Act reports for indications

of reduction in number of barriers to

accessing assistive technology by

underrepresented populations and rural

populations; disseminate information

about successful activities in eliminating

barriers.

2. Through systemic activity,

increase funding for assistive

technology devices and services.

2.1 Available funds. The amount of funding for

AT from programs authorized to provide them

will increase.

2.2 Funding sources. The number of funding

sources for AT will increase.

2.3 Information. The number of individuals

with disabilities and service providers who

receive information about the funding of AT

will increase.

2.1 - 2.3

Responses to NIDRR Annual

Performance Guidelines,

1998.

! Provide technical assistance and

disseminate information to AT grantees

regarding funding of AT services and

devices.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 143

American Printing House for the Blind — $8,256,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Precollege level blind students receive appropriate educational materials which result in improved educational outcomes

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Appropriate, timely, quality

educational materials are

provided to pre-college level

blind students to allow them to

more fully benefit from their

educational programs.

1.1 Customer satisfaction. A targeted percentage

of customers/consumers will agree that the

educational materials provided through the

Act are appropriate, timely, and of high

quality, and that they allow blind students to

more fully benefit from their educational

programs. The targeted percentage will be set

by an advisory committee of Ex Officio

Trustees representing a broad range of service

delivery systems. Baseline data to be

determined during FY 1998.

1.2 Student performance and participation. 

Performance of students and their

participation in their educational programs

will improve due to availability of educational

materials provided through the Act. Baseline

data to be determined during FY 1998.

1.1 Surveys of Ex Officio

Trustees, annual, 1998;

Input from Research and

Publications Advisory

Committees, annual, 1998;

Consumer surveys,

ongoing, 1998.

1.2 Survey of Ex Officio

Trustees, 1998; Annual

survey of Ex Officio

Trustees, 1998; Annual

survey of teachers, 1998.

! American Printing House f or the Blinds

(APH's) existing survey of Ex Officio

Trustees will be conducted on a triennial

basis beginning in 1998. Surveys

targeting select issues will be conducted

in each of the interim years. 

! The Educational and Technical

Research and the Publications Advisory

Committees, will annually review

APH’s progress in improving the

appropriateness, timeliness of delivery,

and quality of products produced

through the Act.

! Ongoing surveys of consumers will be

conducted by an outside vendor to

provide data regarding the

appropriateness, timeliness of delivery,

and quality of products produced

through the Act.

! Ex Officio Trustees will be surveyed to

better understand how materials

provided thought the Act impact on

student performance and how to

measure the impact.

! Surveys of ex-officio trustees and

teachers will be conducted on an annual

basis to collect data regarding student

performance and participation in their

educational programs in relation to

materials provided through the Act.
American Printing House for the Blind — $8,256,000 (FY 99)

Goal: Precollege level blind students receive appropriate educational materials which result in improved educational outcomes

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 144

2. Research will result in

identification and development

of educational materials

responsive to consumer needs.

2.1 Responsiveness to needs. A targeted number

of Ex Officio Trustees will express satisfaction

with the prioritization of APH's research

projects. The targeted number will be set by

an advisory committee of Ex Officio Trustees

representing a broad range of service delivery

systems. Baseline data to be determined

during FY 1998.

2.1 Survey of Ex Officio

Trustees, annual, 1998; 

Input from the Educational

and Technical Research

Advisory Committee,

annual, 1998.

! An area of the annual survey of Ex

Officio Trustees will be dedicated to

collecting data regarding the match

between APH's research priorities and

product needs in the field.

! Beginning with 1998 meetings of the

Educational and Technical Research

Advisory Committee, research project

prioritization, progress reports, and

timelines will be reviewed for committee

input.

3. Advisory services assist service

providers to be knowledgeable

about how to most effectively use

products provided through the

Act.

3.1 Effectiveness of assistance. A targeted

percentage of service providers will agree that

APH's advisory services will help them to

become knowledgeable about how to most

effectively use products provided through the

Act. The targeted percentage will be set by an

advisory committee of Ex Officio Trustees

representing a broad range of service delivery

systems. Baseline data to be determined

during FY 1998.

3.1 Survey of Ex Officio

Trustees, annual, 1998;

Evaluations of technical

assistance to direct service

providers, periodic, 1998

! Design a section of the annual survey of

Ex Officio Trustees to collect data

regarding the satisfaction of service

providers with advisory services

provided through the Act.

! When technical assistance is provided

during FY 1998, participants will be

requested to complete evaluations to

indicate their satisfaction regarding the

assistance.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 145

National Technical Institute for the Deaf — $44,791,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide deaf students with state-of-the-art technical and professional education programs, undertake a program of applied research; share NTID

expertise and expand outside sources of revenue.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Provide deaf students with

outstanding state-of-the-art

technical and professional

education programs,

complemented by a strong arts

and sciences curriculum and

supplemented with appropriate

student support services.

1.1 Enrollment. Enroll 1,100 deaf students and

maintain or increase that level. The 1996-97

total enrollment was 1,085.

1.2 Support services. An appropriate continuum

of student support services geared to assist

students in achieving academic success will be

maintained. Student support services

primarily consist of sign language

interpreting [80,000 hours], note taking

[42,000], tutoring/advising [15,000 hours] in

1996.

1.3 Program satisfaction. Demonstrate student

satisfaction regarding educational experiences

at NTID. Approach to be determined in

1998; data will be summarized and

interpreted in 2000.

1.4 Interpreter training. Enrollment in the

Educational Interpreter program will increase.

The 1996 enrollment was 72.

1.1 NTID Registrar Office 

records, annual, 1998.

1.2 Department records

summarized in National

Technical Institute for the

Deaf (NTID) Annual

Report, 1998.

1.3 Customer survey, annual,

2000.

1.4 NTID Registrar Office

records, annual, 1998.

! Continually evaluate the need to revise

existing curriculum and develop new

majors to reflect the changing needs of

students and industry.

! Provide a barrier-free communication

environment within NTID and improve

informational access on the Rochester

Institute of Technology (RIT) campus

for deaf and hard-of-hearing students.

! Enhance the use of technology in the

delivery of support services and use

computers in the curriculum.

! Identify an approach to be used to

acquire student satisfaction information

by December 1998. 

! Register 350-370 new students annually

through a comprehensive marketing

plan which targets minority students,

women students, transfer students,

international students, and crossregistered students.

! Expand and enhance career

opportunities for students by responding

to changes in the field.

! Enhance the curriculum to ensure that

graduates meet the requirements of

National and State Certifying Boards.

2. Maximize the number of

students successfully completing

a program of study.

2.1 Student retention rate. Increase the firstyear student retention rate to 75%. The 1996

first-year student retention rate was 72%,.

2.2 Graduation rate. The overall graduation 

rate will increase. The most recent

graduation rates for students in Technical

Programs is 48% and for Professional

Programs is 62% .

2.1 NTID Registrar Office 

records, annual, 1998.

2.2 NTID Registrar Office

records, annual, 1998.

! Expand articulation agreements with

other colleges and universities and

review NTID’s process for accepting

appropriate credits.

! Launch First-Year Experiences for all

first-year students to better prepare them

for making appropriate career choices.
National Technical Institute for the Deaf — $44,791,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide deaf students with state-of-the-art technical and professional education programs, undertake a program of applied research; share NTID

expertise and expand outside sources of revenue.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 146

! Develop and refine retention initiatives

(e.g., early warning system, career

restoration program, peer support

system, mentoring).

! Develop and implement instructional

practices to enable underprepared

students to acquire the skills necessary

to complete a postsecondary program of

study including sign language and

English.

3. Prepare graduates to find

satisfying jobs in fields

commensurate with their

education.

3.1 Placement rate. Increase placement rate of

graduates in the workforce to 95%. The 1995

placement rate was 94%.

3.2 Earnings parity with hearing peers. 

Increase NTID/RIT graduates’ earnings to a

level commensurate with their hearing peers. 

A 1990 Internal Revenue Service (IRS) study

indicated that NTID graduates with

bachelor’s degrees were earning 93% of the

pay of their hearing peers.

3.3 Federal subsidies. Reduce dependence

on Federal subsidies to deaf individuals.

Baseline to be determined.

3.4 Earnings growth rate. NTID/RIT graduate

earnings growth rates will remain competitive

with the market. 1996 information revealed

initial average salary rate of $20,500,

increased to $26,700 after five years,

3.1 NTID Placement Office

records, annual, 1998.

3.2 IRS Studies, periodic,

2000.

3.3 Social Security

Administration Study

on Transfer

Payments, 1998. 

3.4 Alumni Feedback

Questionnaire (AFQ),

annual, 2000.

! Provide an array of academic support

counseling (e.g., career and personal

counseling, academic and employment

advisement, placement assistance).

! Explore new technical career areas

which will ensure that students have

access to emerging careers which

enhance their earning potential.

! Conduct periodic cooperative research

studies with Internal Revenue Service

(IRS), Social Security Administration

(SSA), and other agencies.

! Support alumni through outreach

training programs designed to enhance

their earnings potential.

! Modify AFQ to allow us to measure

more effectively job satisfaction and

upward mobility by December 1998.
National Technical Institute for the Deaf — $44,791,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide deaf students with state-of-the-art technical and professional education programs, undertake a program of applied research; share NTID

expertise and expand outside sources of revenue.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 147

Undertake a program of applied research to enhance the social, economic, and educational well-being of deaf people

4. Conduct a program of applied

research to provide innovative

support for the teaching and

learning process for deaf and

hard-of-hearing individuals. 

4.1 Respond to student needs. Increase the

percentage of NTID supported research

projects that focus on the needs of deaf and

hard-of-hearing students. In 1996, 55% of

research projects were focused on students.

4.1 Research Report, annual,

1998.

! Conduct research that advances our

knowledge of educational challenges

(e.g., reading college-level materials,

transfer of skills across domains,

matching educational interpreting to

student needs) and understanding of the

academic potential of deaf and hard-ofhearing students, including students

with special needs, in order to optimize

their academic success.

4.2 Respond to identified institutional needs. 

Increase the percentage of research that

responds to institutional issues (e.g., access,

retention, instructional technology and its

applications.) In 1996, 15% of research

projects were focused on institutional needs.

4.2 Research Report, annual,

1998.

! Conduct research that expands 

knowledge of the distant learner and

identifies their learning characteristics

and the pedagogical skills and methods

necessary for a successful distance

learning program.

! Conduct research that analyzes the

contribution of social/family

circumstances, diverse learning styles,

personalities, and motivational factors to

goal setting and goal attainment by deaf

and hard-of-hearing students.

5. Conduct outreach programs for

external audiences to increase

the knowledge base and improve

practice in the field. 

5.1 Consumer satisfaction. Trained

participants indicate that the training

they have received assists them to serve

or work with individuals who are deaf

and hard-of-hearing. Baseline to be

determined. 

5.1 Summary of

participant

evaluations, annually,

1998.

! Conduct two kinds of English Language

Teacher Outreach Project (ELTOP)

workshops. One will focus on serving

educators from postsecondary settings. 

The other will focus on serving

educators from secondary and

elementary programs.
National Technical Institute for the Deaf — $44,791,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide deaf students with state-of-the-art technical and professional education programs, undertake a program of applied research; share NTID

expertise and expand outside sources of revenue.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 148

5.2 Training. Provide quality inservice training

at the same or greater participation level for

school personnel, employers, and coworkers

working with deaf and hard of hearing people;

alumni; and parents. In 1996-1997, 258

professionals, 118 employer representatives

and school personnel, 431 alumni, and 75

parents participated.

5.3 Secondary students. Expand career

awareness and college orientation programs

for secondary school students. In 1997

— Explore Your Future Program (EYF)—166

High School juniors

— Career Awareness Program (CAP)—50

High School freshmen & sophomores.

5.4 Effect positive change. Facilitate a wider

distribution of NTID knowledge and

expertise. In 1997, 15 workshops were

conducted, 44 publications produced, 33

professional presentations were made.

5.2 Center for Outreach

Records (summarized in

the NTID Annual Report),

annual, 1998.

5.3 Center for Outreach

Records (summarized in

the NTID Annual Report),

annual, 1998.

5.4 Research Report, annual,

1998.

! Conduct workshops for secondary

teachers to Access English skills

through the Science Outreach Project , 

C-Print Project workshops, Sign

Communication Proficiency Interview

(SCPI) workshops, and workshops for

employers and co-workers.

! Host visits by state VR counselors to our

campus during FY 1998 for the purpose

of informing them about our programs

and services.

! Make presentations to state/regional

meetings of State Coordinators and/or

RCDs to provide information on the

latest developments on our campus.

! Conduct workshops; publish research

results and provide electronic access to

summaries of research findings; present

research findings; and maintain active

and visible roles with key educational

and advocacy organizations. 

6. Outside sources of revenue will

result in NTID’s ability to

expand its resource base while

simultaneously performing

additional activities that support

its mission .

6.1 Fund raising. Increase annual fund raising

efforts for the Federal Endowment Grant

program, other private funds raised,

equipment donations, and grants and

contracts. (In 1996, NTID raised $226,438 in

matching fund for the Endowment Grant

program, an additional $729,208 from private

sources, $683,098 in equipment donations,

and had 10 grants and/or contracts totaling

$733,587.)

6.1 Development Office

Report summarized in the

NTID Annual Report,

1998.

! Complete a $10 million fundraising

campaign by 1999. To date, $7.5

million has been raised.

! Encourage researchers and others to

seek grant/contract monies to the

maximum extent feasible. 
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 149

Gallaudet University — $83,480,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To challenge students who are deaf to achieve their academic goals and attain productive employment; provide leadership in setting the national standard for

best practices in education of the deaf and hard of hearing; and establish a sustainable resource base.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Gallaudet challenges students who are deaf to achieve their academic goals and attain productive employment.

1. University Programs and

PCNMP will maintain a diverse

and quality student body.

1.1 Enrollment at Gallaudet University.

Maintain or increase the number of students

enrolled in the undergraduate program and

the graduate program. The 1996

Undergraduate enrollment was 1,302;

graduate enrollment was 398; MSSD was

268; and, KDES was 170.

1.2 Enrollment at KDES/MSSD. Maintain an

appropriate student enrollment serving

students with a broad spectrum of needs. In

1997, KDES enrolled 163 students and

MSSD, 241 students.

1.3 Student retention rate. Increase the student

retention rate. The 1997 Undergraduate

retention rate was 63%. The 1996 retention

rates for KDES and MSSD respectively were

89% and 90%.

1.4 Student graduate gate Increase overall

graduation rate. The 1996 graduation rate

was 38.8% at the University. At MSSD, 58

students out of total 64 graduated.

1.1 Office of Enrollment

Services records,

summarized in the annual

report, 1998.

1.2 PCNMP Enrollment Office

records, summarized in the

annual report, 1998.

1.3 Office of the Registrar

records, summarized in the

annual report, 1998.

1.4 Office of the Registrar

records, summarized in the

annual report, 1998.

! PCNMP will establish annual

enrollment goals intended to achieve the

requirements of the Education of the

Deaf Act (EDA) related to composition

of the student body.

! KDES/MSSD will seek information

from its National Mission Advisory

Panel about student enrollment issues.

! Incorporate strategies from studies

conducted by Gallaudet into the

University’s Retention Improvement

Plan and determine factors related to

graduation completion rates. 
Gallaudet University — $83,480,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To challenge students who are deaf to achieve their academic goals and attain productive employment; provide leadership in setting the national standard for

best practices in education of the deaf and hard of hearing; and establish a sustainable resource base.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 150

2. Gallaudet University offers

students at every level effective

educational programs,

supplemented by appropriate

student support services,

administrative services, and

extra-curricular activities that

contribute directly to academic

achievement and quality of

student life.

2.1 Literacy skills. Annual English test results

will indicate marked improvement in English

competency levels for all students. Baseline

data on college level and Model Secondary

School for the Deaf (MSSD) will be available

in 1999. In 1996, Kendall Demonstration

Elementary School (KDES) students in grades

3, 4, and 5 tested at an average grade

equivalent of 1.82 and grades 6, 7,and 8 at

2.8. (The range was 1.9 to 9.0)

2.2. Student support services. Maintain an

appropriate continuum of student support

services geared to assist students in achieving

academic success. University student support

services primarily consist of tutoring,

counseling, academic advising. Student 

support services contact hours totalled

130,600 in FY 1996. PCNMP’s provide

quality support services required by students’

Individualized Education Programs (IEP).

2.1 English Department

Records, KDES and

MSSD records, 

summarized in the annual

report, 1999.

2.2 Department Records,

PCNMP’s student IEP’s,

summarize in the annual

report, 1999.

! The English Department will continue

to modify curriculum offerings and

instructional methods to foster literacy.

! KDES/MSSD will design an integrated

curriculum and implement best practices

that foster literacy across content areas.

! KDES/MSSD will establish

developmentally appropriate assessment

instruments and procedures for tracking

student achievement of literacy skills.

! KDES/MSSD will establish

instructional teams to design and

implement an integrated curriculum

from Preschool through grade 12.

! KDES/MSSD will obtain and use public

input from the National Advisory Panel

as well as constituents in the field on

effective educational programs.

! KDES/MSSD will use the

Individualized Education Program (IEP)

process to identify and provide needed

student support services that will help

students best benefit from their

education.

! University Programs & PCNMP will use

students’ feedback to improve

instructional programs.
Gallaudet University — $83,480,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To challenge students who are deaf to achieve their academic goals and attain productive employment; provide leadership in setting the national standard for

best practices in education of the deaf and hard of hearing; and establish a sustainable resource base.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 151

3. Curriculum and ExtraCurricular activities prepare

students to meet the skill

requirements of the workplace

and/or continue their studies. 

3.1 Employment opportunities. An increased

number of Gallaudet and the Model

Secondary School (MSSD) students will find

jobs in fields commensurate with their

training and education. Baseline to be

determined

3.2 Advanced studies - University. An

increased number of Gallaudet students apply

to and are accepted into programs of advanced

studies beyond the baccalaureate degree. In

1995, 37% of 85 respondents reported that

they were continuing their education. 

3.3 Advanced Studies for MSSD Students. An

increased number of MSSD students apply to

and are accepted into College level programs. 

In 1996, 73% of 68 MSSD students attended

postsecondary education programs.

3.1 University and

KDES/MSSD studies on

the status of graduates’

employment, and results of

employer surveys,

summarized in the annual

report, 1999.

3.2 Graduate follow-up

studies, summarized in the

annual report, 1999.

3.3 Graduate follow-up

studies, summarized in the

annual report, 1999.

! Information on employment status and

additional education obtained by

graduates will be distributed to all

academic and support departments to

enhance their internal program reviews.

! KDES/MSSD will develop a

comprehensive plan to provide students

with transition skills, instruction and

exposure to workplace environments.

Gallaudet provides leadership in setting the national standard for best practices in education of the deaf and hard of hearing

4. Research conducted contributes

to quality state-of-the-art

educational services for deaf and

hard of hearing individuals.

4.1 Respond to student needs. Increase the

percentage of research projects that focus on

the needs of deaf and hard-of hearing

students. In 1996, 69 research projects were

either completed or ongoing that focussed on

the needs of students who are deaf or hard-ofhearing.

4.1 Department records,

summarized in Gallaudet’s

annual research report,

1998.

! The University will increase its support

related to implementation of research

results on campus and at other

universities.

! PCNMP will develop a strategy for

determining field satisfaction related to

its mechanisms for obtaining public

input on research, development and

demonstration activities.
Gallaudet University — $83,480,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To challenge students who are deaf to achieve their academic goals and attain productive employment; provide leadership in setting the national standard for

best practices in education of the deaf and hard of hearing; and establish a sustainable resource base.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 152

4.2. Public input satisfaction survey. Conduct a

national survey to determine if KDES/MSSD

are obtaining satisfactory public input on 

infant through 12 grade research,

development, and demonstration activities. 

Baseline to be determined in 2000.

4.2 Report on National

Survey, summarized 

PCNMP Annual Report,

2000.

! KDES/MSSD will obtain public input

on research related to best practices in

the priority areas of family involvement,

transition, and literacy.

! KDES/MSSD will support research on

PCNMP priorities by University faculty,

PCNMP teachers, and staff through

Gallaudet’s internal RFP process.

5. Gallaudet works in partnership

with others to develop and

disseminate educational

programs and materials for deaf

and hard-of- hearing students.

5.1 KDES/MSSD projects and programs. The

number and type of PCNMP projects and

programs developed and evaluated annually

will be maintained or increased. In FY 1997,

6 projects were funded to develop model

programs in family education and literacy. 

5.2 Use of KDES/MSSD expertise. Increase in

the number of programs and institutions that

adopt innovative curricula and other

products, or modify their strategies as a result

of KDES/MSSD’s leadership. Baseline to be

determined.

5.3 Programs delivered to the field. The

University will increase the numbers and

kinds of programs delivered to the field. In

1996, 39,108 persons were served through

University Programs, 21,686 persons were

served through PCNMP, and 105,071

PCNMP Outreach Products were distributed.

5.1 PCNMP Annual Report,

1998.

5.2 PCNMP Annual Report,

1998.

5.3 Outreach program(s)

records, summarized in

Gallaudet’s annual report,

1999.

! PCNMP will develop partnerships and

collaborations with a wide variety of

other school programs serving deaf and

hard-of-hearing children to identify,

develop, test, and disseminate

information about best practices and

effective educational innovations.

! PCNMP will develop and implement a

national communications network in

collaboration with the Gallaudet

University Regional Centers.

! Gallaudet will expand programs that

best meet the needs of deaf and hard-ofhearing persons, their families and

professionals who serve them.

! Gallaudet will investigate alternative

approaches to meet the needs of nontraditional students.
Gallaudet University — $83,480,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To challenge students who are deaf to achieve their academic goals and attain productive employment; provide leadership in setting the national standard for

best practices in education of the deaf and hard of hearing; and establish a sustainable resource base.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 153

Gallaudet University establishes sustainable resource base

6. Outside sources of support are a

growing segment of Gallaudet’s

resources and result in the

University becoming more

independent of the Federal

Government. 

6.1 Fundraising. Increase annual fund raising

efforts related to the Federal Endowment

Grant program and other private funds and

increase the number of grants and contracts

received. In 1997, Gallaudet raised $2

million in funds toward the Endowment Grant

program, raised $6.7 million in gifts and

pledges, and received 28 grants worth over

$3.5 million.

6.1 Administration and

Business Financial

Records and Institutional

Advancement Records,

summarized in the annual

report, 1998.

! Aggressively pursue all forms of private

support for the University.

! Encourage researchers and other

faculty/staff to seek grant/contract

monies to the maximum extent feasible.

! The University will continue to study the

market and will adjust fee levels

accordingly
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 154
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 155

Vocational and Adult Education
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 156
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 157

Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act (State Grants and Tech-Prep Indicators) — $1,136,650,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase access to and improve educational programs that strengthen education achievement, workforce preparation, and lifelong learning.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Student achievement

1. Vocational students achieve high

level of proficiency in math,

science and communication

skills.

1.1 Academic proficiency of vocational

students. By fall 2000, vocational students

will show increasing proficiency on

standardized assessment instruments.

1.2 Academic proficiency of targeted

populations. By fall 2000, targeted

populations will show increasing proficiency

on standardized assessment instruments.

1.1-1.2 National Education

Longitudinal Study 

(NELS) Base Year

“Second Follow-up and

High School Transcript

Files,” 1992 for Math

and Science. Followup: 2000.

! Work with states to establish 

challenging goals, benchmarks, and

uniform accountability measures for use

by all states.

! Improve the connection between

academic and industry-based skills by

working with School-to-Work (STW),

the National Skills Board, and VocEd

State Offices.

2. Vocational students achieve a

high level of proficiency in

industry-recognized skill

certificate programs in

secondary and postsecondary 

institutions.

2.1 Earning industry-recognized skill

certificates. By fall 2000, there will be an

increasing proportion of vocational students

successfully completing programs with

industry approved/recognized skill standards

and certificates in major career/occupational

areas in secondary and postsecondary

institutions.

2.1 Study to be conducted

using 1998 National

Programs funding.

! Work with the National Skill Standards

Board to support three consortia of states

to implement challenging industryrecognized skills in health, business,

and manufacturing.

! Through Tech-Prep, STW, and State

Offices, continue work to encourage and

support the interconnection between

challenging academic and industrybased skills.

3. Vocational students make

successful transitions to

continuing education, work, or

other career options.

3.1 Secondary education attainment. The

proportion of vocational students attaining a

degree or GED diploma, entering

postsecondary programs, and attaining

employment in their area of concentration will

increase.

3.2 Postsecondary education attainment. The

proportion of vocational students attaining an

associate or bachelor degree or certificate, and

attaining employment in their area of

concentration will increase.

3.1-3.2 School-to-Work (STW)

National Evaluation

Surveys & follow-ups,

1996, 1998, & 2000 for

secondary. Beginning

Postsecondary Students,

1996 for postsecondary.

! Encourage Congress to incorporate this

objective into the performance

measurement systems of the states

through new legislation.
Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act (State Grants and Tech-Prep Indicators) — $1,136,650,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase access to and improve educational programs that strengthen education achievement, workforce preparation, and lifelong learning.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 158

4. Employers are satisfied with the

competencies of vocational

concentrators they hire.

4.1 Employer satisfaction. By fall 1999, at least

50% (currently 41%) of the employers will

indicate the highest satisfaction categories for

students in and graduates of secondary

Vocational Education programs; this will be

at least 60% (currently 54%) for

postsecondary students & graduates.

4.1 National Assessment of

Vocational Education

(NAVE), Vol. II; NAVE

follow-up; National

Employer Surveys, 1994,

1996, 1999.

! Promote employer involvement in

secondary and postsecondary vocational

education reforms.

! Increase business-community college

partnerships. 

! Create faculty internships with business.

Student participation

5. All students, including targeted

populations, have access to highquality vocational-technical

education programs.

5.1 Access of special populations. By fall 2000,

targeted populations will increasingly

participate in secondary and postsecondary

programs that implement industry

skill/recognized skill standards and award

certificates.

5.2 Outcomes of special populations. By fall

2000, the rate will increase among targeted

populations of successful transition from

secondary to postsecondary education

programs or work, and from postsecondary

programs to work.

5.1-5.2 Study to be conducted

using 1998 National

Programs funding.

! Identify and disseminate models that

effectively serve targeted populations in

Vocational Education programs.

! Collaborate with the National Center for

Education Statistics ( NCES) and the

Planning and Evaluation Service (PES)

to improve and expand data collections

on targeted student populations.

Performance standards and measures

6. Improve the quality and use of

State accountability systems.

Performance measurement. An increasing

number of states will:

6.1 Use Standards and Measures for local

program improvement.

6.2 Use common School-to-Work and Vocational

Education Standards and Measures.

6.1-6.3 MPR Associates’,

Common Core

Measures Contract,

1998.

! Work with states and other stakeholders

to create accountability systems as

required by new legislation.

! Provide states technical assistance to (1) 

develop and use performance standards

to improve program quality, (2) identify

and share models o performance and
Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act (State Grants and Tech-Prep Indicators) — $1,136,650,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase access to and improve educational programs that strengthen education achievement, workforce preparation, and lifelong learning.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 159

6.3 Adopt core Standards and Measures with

common definitions.

6.3 Same as 6.1. accountability, and (3) create outcome

measures common to STW and

vocational education. Collaborate with

ED offices and other Federal agencies

engaged in providing technical

assistance on accountability initiatives.

School reform

7. Coordinate Vocational

Education with Goals 2000,

ESEA, Adult Education, IDEA,

STW and state school reform

strategies.

7.1 Consolidated state plans. By fall 1998,

Perkins will be part of ESEA consolidated

plans in at least 12 states. 

7.2 State and local reforms. By fall 1999, the

New American High School and Urban High

School initiatives, increasingly will be a core

reform element in many state reform

initiatives.

7.1-7.3 OVAE Fall 1997, STW

Progress Measures,

1996; National

Evaluation, 1997; 

National Employer

Survey II, 1998. NCES

Fast Response Survey of

State reform initiatives,

1998.

! Disseminate successful reform strategies

to secondary and postsecondary urban

institutions.

! Expand the New American High School

initiative.

! Implement a system to work with State

directors of community colleges to

encourage colleges to become active

partners in secondary school reform. 

8. States align vocational teacher

certification and assessment with

National Board for Professional

Teacher Standards and provide

leadership for professional

development. 

8.1 National standards. An increasing number

of States utilize the National Board for

Professional Teacher Standards for vocational

teacher certification and assessment.

8.2 Increased access to professional

development. An increasing percentage of 

vocational teachers will receive high-quality

professional development.

8.1 National Board for

Professional Teacher

Standards Annual Report.

8.2 Schools and Staffing

Survey (SASS), 1987-88,

1993-94, 1999. Additional

analysis needed.

! OVAE is addressing professional

development through a $4 million grant

competition supporting projects that

develop, implement, and operate

programs using different curricula

models that integrate vocational and

academic learning.

! Identify model teacher preparation

programs that include integrated

curriculum strategies, contextualized

instructional approaches, skill and

academic standards. and disseminate

information to colleges of education.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 160

National Programs Indicators (Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act)— $13,497,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase access and improve vocational education that will strengthen work force preparation, employment opportunities, and lifelong learning.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Performance standards and measures

1. Improve and expand national

knowledge base of strategies that

support state and local reform in

vocational education.

1.1 Improve knowledge base. Products and

services of the National Center for Research

in Vocational Education (NCRVE) will focus

on the identification, development, and

assessment of integrated instruction strategies,

secondary and postsecondary linkages,

professional development, and state

performance goals and indicators.

1.1 Short-term studies, annual

reports and on-going

research from the National

Center for Research in

Vocational Education

(NCRVE), and other

research contracts.

! Coordinate vocational education

research agendas with PES, OERI, and

DOL.

! Identify promising practices to train and

retrain teachers in integrated and

contextualized instructional approaches.

! Identify integrated curricula that

strengthen student competency in math,

science, technology, and

communication.

2. Increase the use of research and

development findings to improve

state and local practice.

2.1 Customer satisfaction. External peer

reviews/customer satisfaction surveys of

NCRVE research and technical assistance

activities, to be conducted by ED, will show

increasing satisfaction with the quality of

research and program improvement

activities.

2.1 Annual independent 

stakeholder surveys, 1998,

1999, 2000.

! Develop and implement a Customer

Peer Review process for NCRVE

research and technical assistance

activities.

3. Support state efforts to refine

and expand performance

measurement and accountability

practices in vocational 

education for program

improvement.

3.1 Core standards and measures. The number

of States adopting core Standards and

Outcome Measures with common definitions

will increase.

3.1 Progress and Performance 

Measures Contract

outcomes.

! Assist States in designing strategies to

develop a unified system of core

measurement indicators, including

outcome measures; designing a

reporting format for collecting outcome

data; and field testing the reporting

process and use of data for program

improvement.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 161

Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Vocational Institutions — $0 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase access to and improve vocational education that will strengthen workforce preparation, employment opportunities, and lifelong learning in the

Indian Community.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Student achievement and participation

1. Vocational students served in

Tribally Controlled

Postsecondary Vocational

Institutions make successful

transitions to work or continuing

education.

1.1 Improved employment of graduates. By the

year 2000 the number of vocational students

attaining employment in the field in which

they were trained or pursuing higher level

training at the certificate or BA level will

increase.

1.1 Tribally Controlled

Postsecondary Vocational

Institutions Annual

Performance Report, 1999.

! Work with the Office of the White

House Initiative for Tribal Colleges and

Universities to develop additional

strategies.

! Work with grantees to improve the

collection of placement data.

! Encourage grantees to include

apprenticeship and work-based learning

opportunities in their institutions.

! Work with grantees to encourage

coordination of associate degree

programs with four-year institutions

through articulation agreements.

2. Vocational students served in

Tribally Controlled

Postsecondary Vocational 

Institutions have access to high

quality vocational-technical

education programs.

2.1 Increased student participation. By the year

2000 the number of vocational students

seeking certificates or AA degrees in

vocational training areas will increase.

2.2 Improved participation in apprenticeships.

By the year 2000 the number of vocational

students participating in apprenticeship and

work-based learning programs will increase.

2.3 Increased participation in articulated

programs. By the year 2000 the number of

vocational students participating in associate

degree training programs that are articulated

with an advanced degree option will increase.

2.1 Tribally Controlled

Postsecondary Vocational

Institutions Annual

Performance Report, 1999.

2.2 Tribally Controlled

Postsecondary Vocational

Institutions Annual

Performance Report, 1999.

2.3 Tribally Controlled

Postsecondary Vocational

Institutions Annual

Performance Report, 1999.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 162

Adult Education — $361,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support adult education systems that result in increased adult learner achievement in order to prepare adults for family, work, citizenship, and future

learning.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

Adult learners

1. Improve literacy in the United

States.

1.1 Improve literacy. By fall 2002 the number of

adults performing in the lowest proficiency

level in the National Adult Literacy Survey

(NALS) will decrease. Between 40 and 44

million adults performed in the lowest of five

proficiency levels in the 1992 NALS.

1.1 NALS I and NALS II,

2002.

! In partnership with the National Center

for Education Statistics (NCES),

National Programs funds will help

support the development and execution

of a second National Adult Literacy

Survey.

2. Provide adult learners with

opportunities to acquire basic

foundation skills (including

English language acquisition)

and complete secondary

education.

2.1 Basic skill acquisition. By fall 2000, 40% of

adults in beginning-level Adult Basic

Education (ABE) programs will complete that

level and achieve basic skill proficiency. 

Current baseline: 630,000 beginning level

students 28% completion rate.

2.2 Basic English language acquisition. By fall

2000, 40% of adults in beginning English for

Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL)

programs will complete and achieve basic

English literacy. Current baseline: 435,000

beginning ESOL students 27% completion

rate.

2.3 Secondary completion. By fall 2000, 40% of

adults enrolled in secondary level programs

will earn a diploma or GED. Current

baseline: 925,000 secondary level students

38% completion rate.

2.4 Transition to work. By fall 2000, 300,000

adults participating in adult education will get

a job or retain or advance in their current job. 

Current baseline: 268,000.

2.1 Adult Education

Management Information

System/ annual, 1997.

2.2 Adult Education

Management Information

System/annual, 1997.

2.3 Adult Education

Management Information

System/annual, 1997.

2.4 Adult Education

Management Information

System/annual, 1997.

! Leverage National Programs funds with

State “353" funds to develop a model

basic skills certification program and

disseminate results nationally.

! Working with OSERS, the National

Adult Literacy and Learning Disabilities

Center, and the National Institutes of

Health, DAEL will develop information

concerning learning accommodation

strategies to facilitate the assessment,

placement, participation, retention, and

completion of adults with disabilities in

literacy programs.

! Based on the evaluation of the National

Workplace Literacy Program, technical

assistance will be provided to help states

and local programs integrate work

readiness activities within the basic

skills delivery system.
Adult Education — $361,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support adult education systems that result in increased adult learner achievement in order to prepare adults for family, work, citizenship, and future

learning.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 163

3. Provide adult learners at the

lowest levels of literacy access to

educational opportunities to

improve their basic foundation

skills.

3.1 Educationally disadvantaged. By fall 1999,

adults at the lowest levels of literacy (those in

Beginning ABE and Beginning ESOL) will

comprise 45-50% of the total national

enrollment. Current baseline: 42%.

3.2 Distance learning. By fall 2000, 15 states

will offer ESOL instruction through the

Crossroads Café distance learning program. 

Current baseline: 5 states.

3.3 Welfare-to-Work clients. By fall 2000,

150,000 welfare to work clients will be

enrolled in work-related basic skills training.

3.1 Adult Education

Management Information

System/ annual, 1997. 

3.2 Adult Education

Management Information

System/annual, 1999. New 

data elements required.

3.3 Adult Education

Management Information

System/annual, 1999. New 

data elements required.

! To broaden access to literacy services, 

National Programs funds will leverage

investment from at least 10 states (with

high percentages of low level adult

learners) to develop a second phase of 

Crossroads Cafe in a family literacy

context.

! DAEL will develop a “Tool Box” of

technical assistance services, including

evaluation results of Crossroads Café

programs and three implementation

models, to promote the use of Crossroads

Cafe.

State and local programs

4. Implement state and local

performance management

systems for accountability and

program improvement.

4.1 Building performance management

capacity. By fall 2000, all states will

implement a national results-based

performance management system to report on

program effectiveness and learner

achievement.

4.1 Adult Education

Management Information

System, annual, 2001. Will

require modification and

expansion to accommodate

new result measures and

benchmarks.

! Create a national performance-based

management system for the adult

education delivery system. Phase I, 

outcome measures and methodology;

Phase II, pilot test; and Phase III, 

implementation and training at the state

and local level.

Professional development and teacher training

5. States will implement statewide

professional development

systems and professional

standards for instructors.

5.1 High teaching standards. By fall 2000, at

least 25% of states will adopt professional

standards for adult education teachers.

Current baseline: 10 states.

5.1 Adult Education

Management Information

System, 1998. Minor

revisions to system needed.

! National Programs funds will support

collaborative projects with states to

develop model professional teaching

standards.
Adult Education — $361,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support adult education systems that result in increased adult learner achievement in order to prepare adults for family, work, citizenship, and future

learning.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 164

Systems building

6. Improve access to quality

programs for adult learners by

integrating services and

leveraging resources.

6.1 Family literacy. By fall 2000, adult

education programs in 20 states will be formal

partners with Even Start and Head Start

agencies in the delivery of family literacy

programs.

6.2 Employment and training. By fall 2000, 

adult education programs in at least 10 states

will be formal partners with one-stop career

systems.

6.1 Adult Education

Management Information

System, 1998. Requires

system revision.

6.2 Adult Education

Management Information

System, 1998.

! Continue collaborative partnership with

the National Center for Family Literacy

and Even Start to develop state-level

alliances that further coordinated family

literacy services.

! With input from field experts, design

and provide technical assistance in the

creation and use of contextualized

learning practices in workplace learning,

family literacy and services for

out-of-school youth.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 165

Adult Education: Evaluation and Technical Assistance — $27,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve practice in adult education.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

Model English as a Second Language (ESL) programs

1. Improve the effectiveness of 

ESL programs by carefully

testing promising instructional,

curriculum, staff and

development approaches.

1.1 Replication of promising models. Models

will be effectively implemented at

demonstrations sites and, ultimately,

successfully adopted by ESL programs, in

general.

1.2 Student achievement. Students in

demonstration projects will show improved

achievement in reading, writing, and

speaking English.

1.1 Interim report of

independent evaluation of

model ESL programs,

2002; final report, 2005.

1.2 Interim report of

independent evaluation of

model ESL programs,

2002; final report, 2005.

! Coordinate with President’s Hispanic

Initiative to support $20 million

demonstration for model ESL programs.

! Provide technical assistance to help ESL

programs implement reform models.

! Initiate independent evaluation to track

implementation of models and student

impacts.

Improved practice

3. Improve and expand knowledge

base of strategies that support

reform in adult education.

3.1 Customer satisfaction. External peer

reviews/customer satisfaction surveys show

increasing satisfaction with the quality of

research, development, and program

improvement activities.

3.1 Stakeholder surveys,

1999.

! Disseminate findings from national

studies in a timely fashion and in

formats that are useful to the field.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 166

National Institute for Literacy —$6,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To lead the national effort to assure opportunities for all adults with literacy needs to receive effective and responsive services resulting in success in the

family, at work, and in the community.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

Increasing national awareness and understanding that improving the literacy skills of America’s adults and families will strengthen families, communities, and the

economy

1. Public Awareness Campaign. 

Raise the awareness level of the

general public, policymakers,

and the private sector as to the

nature and extent of literacy

problems in the United States

and their impact on our

economy, families, and

communities.

1.1 Airing of public service messages. Future

public service messages will air in media

markets nationwide. Baseline is under

development.

1.2 Referrals to literacy programs. During

campaign months, there will be a 30%

increase in the number of potential students,

tutors, and contributors referred to local

literacy programs. The Literacy Hotline made

over 1,000 referrals a month.

1.1 Contractor’s monitoring of

TV and radio placements,

ongoing, 1998.

1.2 Reports from hotline/

clearinghouse, quarterly,

1998.

! The contractor and other campaign

partners will work to leverage large

amounts of free air time on TV and

radio to reach a large national audience.

! Create an on-line listserv for

communication with states about

campaign success and strategies.

2. Literacy Leader Fellowships. 

Provide a unique opportunity for

individuals in the field to 

conduct year-long projects to

benefit the literacy field. 

Fellowships offer a way for

timely, innovative ideas to have

an immediate impact on the

literacy community.

2.1 Dissemination of fellows’ reports. Increasing

numbers of requests will be received for the

fellows’ project reports. In a typical month,

the hotline receives 110 requests for fellows’

reports.

2.1 National Institute for

Literacy (NIFL) internal

mailing records, reports of 

distribution from hotline/

clearinghouse, Internet,

ongoing, 1998.

! NIFL staff and current and former

fellows will actively disseminate

information about fellowships by

making presentations at meetings and

conferences nationwide.

! Publish fellows’ reports and publicize

the fellowship program and reports on

Literacy Information and

Communication System (LINCS).
National Institute for Literacy —$6,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To lead the national effort to assure opportunities for all adults with literacy needs to receive effective and responsive services resulting in success in the

family, at work, and in the community.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 167

Increasing national awareness and understanding that improving the literacy skills of America’s adults and families will strengthen families, communities, and the

economy

3. Promote the development of

sound public policy that expands

access to high-quality literacy

services to all who need it, by 

serving as a resource for

policymakers, and assisting the

literacy field in staying informed

about, developing consensus

around, and speaking with one

voice on literacy-related policy

issues.

3.1 Congressional staff attendance at Policy

Forums. NIFL will host at least three

bipartisan briefings on the Hill.

3.2 Public reception of Policy Updates. NIFL

will produce 12 or more Policy Updates

annually that reach the target audience while

the issue discussed is still timely. In 1997, 13

Policy Updates were produced.

3.1 NIFL’s project

management system,

ongoing, 1998.

3.2 NIFL’s project

management system,

ongoing; customer

satisfaction contract, 1999.

! NIFL director, deputy director, and

project officer will maintain close

contact with Congressional staff through

meetings, correspondence, and Internet

exchange.

! NIFL project officer will make

presentations on policy issues at

meetings and conferences nationwide.

Creating a cutting edge information and communication infrastructure for the literacy field that supports improved teaching and learning

4. Provide the adult literacy

community with a state-of-theart information and

communication system on the

Internet through LINCS.

4.1 Communication services. By fall 1999, there

will be a 50% increase in the number of

subscribers to LINCS on-line discussion

groups on a variety of adult literacy-related

subjects. Current baseline is 3,500.

4.2 Expansion of LINCS. By fall 1999, the

number of local programs participating in

LINCS will have doubled. Current baseline 

is 200.

4.1 LINCS internal

monitoring system; listserv

moderator organization

databases, ongoing, 1999.

4.2 LINCS internal

monitoring system;

Regional Hub statistics;

Hub, state, and local home

pages, ongoing, 1999.

! Develop and maintain listservs on a

variety of literacy topics in partnership

with major adult literacy organizations

at national, state and local level.

! Improve the quantity and quality of 

resources in partnership with the LINCS

regional hubs, state member

organizations, and national

organizations.

5. Provide a national hotline to

inform potential students and

tutors of programs in their

areas. Use this resource to

disseminate NIFL and other

materials that target the

hotline’s frequently asked

questions.

5.1 Satisfaction with referrals and materials.

There will be an 80% customer satisfaction

rating among hotline users in terms of

referrals and materials provided. 

5.1 Customer satisfaction

contract, 1999.

! Use the hotline to provide materials for

public awareness campaign, and

disseminate NIFL products widely and

efficiently.
National Institute for Literacy —$6,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To lead the national effort to assure opportunities for all adults with literacy needs to receive effective and responsive services resulting in success in the

family, at work, and in the community.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 168

Building the capacity of organizations and programs to provide high quality services that meet the needs of all adult learners

6. Equipped for the Future (EFF).

Develop content standards,

performance standards, and

assessments tied to the standards

that will create a consensus

about the purpose of the literacy

system and increase its

effectiveness.

6.1 Participation of EFF Partners. At least 20

states and local literacy programs will have

joined with NIFL as Partners and will attend

an annual meeting, as well as participate in

regular communications via LINCS by

January 1999. Currently, no such partners

exist.

6.2 Assessment identification and development. 

All existing assessments relevant to EFF

standards will be reviewed as to their fit with

the standards. If needed, at least one

assessment will be under development by

March 1999. Currently no assessments have

been reviewed.

6.1 NIFL internal

management system; final

reports of grantees,

ongoing and annual, 1999.

6.2 Report of EFF Technical

Committee, 1999.

! NIFL will convene annual meetings of

EFF network beginning July 1998 to

provide opportunities for information

and resource sharing, training, and

technical assistance.

! NIFL will work with the EFF Technical

Committee in 1998 to discuss

implications of EFF standards for

curriculum and assessment materials.

Building the capacity of organizations and programs to provide high quality services that meet the needs of all adult learners

7. National Adult Literacy and

Learning Disability Center. 

Maintain a national center for

the collection and dissemination

of the most current and reliable

information, materials, and

instructional methods related to 

learning disabilities (LD) as they

affect adult literacy.

7.1 Training services. Selected literacy and

other human resource systems in 20 states will

participate in training to adapt service

delivery systems to better meet the needs of

adults with LD by fall 1998. Currently no

states have participated in these activities.

7.2 Satisfaction with center services. 70% of

users of the National Adult Literacy and

Learning Disability Center services will

express satisfaction with the utility and quality

of services. Baseline is under development.

7.1 NIFL internal

management system; 

Center and Learning

Disabilities Training and

Dissemination (LDTD)

Hub reports; Center

external evaluation,

ongoing, 1998.

7.2 NIFL internal

management system; 

Center listserv moderator

reports , ongoing, 1998.

! The Center, with the LDTD Hub, will

implement a plan to help states achieve

systemic change in the provision of

services to adults with LD.

! The Center will collect and disseminate

the most current and reliable

information about LD, in terms of both

research and practice.
National Institute for Literacy —$6,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To lead the national effort to assure opportunities for all adults with literacy needs to receive effective and responsive services resulting in success in the

family, at work, and in the community.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 169

8. Learning Disabilities Training

and Dissemination (LDTD)

Hubs. Establish a network of

projects for providing training

and technical assistance to

literacy and other human

resource development programs

about how to achieve systemic

change to better serve adults

with LD.

8.1 Training services. Selected literacy and

other systems in all Hubs’ targeted states will

have participated in activities related to the

Center’s Tool Kit and adapting service

delivery systems to better meet the needs of

adults with LD by fall ‘98. Currently no

states have participated in these activities.

8.2 Satisfaction with Hub services. 70% of hub

users will be satisfied with quality of services. 

Baseline under development.

8.1 NIFL internal

management system;

Center and Hub reports,

ongoing, 1998.

8.2 NIFL internal

management system;

Center and Hub reports,

ongoing, 1998.

! LDTD Hubs will collaborate with the

Center to implement a comprehensive

plan for helping states achieve systemic

change in the provision of services to

adults with LD.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 170

Literacy Programs for Prisoners and Grants to States for Workplace and Community Transition for Incarcerated Youth Offenders — $0

(FY 99)

Goal: To increase access to and achievement in correctional education programs that will aid in the reintegration of prisoners into their communities.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Student achievement

1. Grantees will develop and

implement improved educational

programs that include literacy,

life skills, and vocational 

training, including school-towork type activities.

1.1 Improved completion rates. By the year

2000 the number of students completing

educational programs within adult prisons and

pre-release facilities will increase.

1.2 Improved participation in post-release

assistance programs. By the year 2000 the

number of participants taking part in postrelease assistance will increase.

1.1 Annual reports and site

visits, 1998-1999.

1.2 Annual reports and site

visits, 1998-1999.

! The Office of Correctional Education

(OCE) will continue to coordinate

Department-wide correctional education

activities through its coordinating

committee on correctional education.

! Facilitate the exchange of information

between grantees by establishing a

network for the communication of

effective strategies and best practices.

! Through technical assistance activities,

work with grantees to improve data

collection and begin to compile base line

information on participants and

completions rates.

Access to services

2. Improve access to postsecondary

education for incarcerated

persons.

2.1 Improved inmate participation in GED

programs. By the year 2000, the number of

inmates completing their GED thus making

them eligible to participate in postsecondary

programs will increase.

2.2 Improved access to information on

postsecondary programs including distance

learning. External peer reviews/customer

satisfaction surveys of OCE technical support

and mail response will show increasing

satisfaction with quality of information

provided.

2.1 Annual reports and site

visits, 1998- 1999.

2.2 Grantee feedback from

technical support

meetings, telephone and

mail correspondence and

site visits, ongoing.

! Encourage grantees to provide

participants with information on

postsecondary education and work

programs specific to their regions.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 171

Student Financial Assistance
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 172
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 173

Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE): Office-Wide Performance Indicators

Goal: To ensure access to postsecondary education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Low- and middle-income

students will have the same

access to postsecondary

education as high-income

students.

1.1 Percent of unmet need. Considering all

sources of financial aid, the percent of unmet

need, especially for low-income students, will

show continuous decreases over time. In

1994-95, percent of unmet need was 27% for

all students ranging from 44% for low-income

independent students to 6% for upper-income

dependent students. The gap for low-income

independent students decreased by 10% since

1992-93 when it was 54%.

1.2 College enrollment rates. Postsecondary

education enrollment rates will increase each

year for all students, while the enrollment gap

between low- and high-income and minority

and non-minority high school graduates will

decrease each year. In 1996, there was a 30.2

percent gap between low- and high-income

high school graduates aged 18-19 enrolled in

college. This represents a 4.9 percent

decrease from 1995 when the gap was 35.1

percent. 

High income (top 20%) 79.3 %

Middle income (middle 60%) 58.2 %

Low income (bottom 20%) 49.1%

1.3 Student-focused system to support

postsecondary education. By October 2001,

there will be a single point of contact that

allows students to get information on federal

student aid, apply for aid, and have their

eligibility for aid determined within four days

of electronic application, cutting in half the

current processing time.

1.1 National Postsecondary

Student Aid Study

(NPSAS) 1995/96 survey,

2001.

1.2 Current Population

Statistics (CPS), 1997, and

annual.

1.3 OPE Program Data, 1997.

! Work to implement the HOPE

Scholarship initiative and tax deduction

for postsecondary education and lifelong

learning.

! Further expand funding for the Pell

Grant Program and College Work Study

Program. Work to assure that TRIO and

other support programs are effective and

available to needy students.

! Expand upon the current information

dissemination strategies.

! Monitor loan availability and assess the

adequacy of current loan limits.

! Monitor enrollment and population

trends and identify any problems in

enrollment of low-income students.

! Develop procedures to give students and

families a simple mechanism for

electronically applying for student

financial aid through the WWW

(legislative authority may be needed for

full implementation). 
Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE): Office-Wide Performance Indicators

Goal: To ensure access to postsecondary education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 174

2. More students will persist in

postsecondary education and

attain degrees and certificates.

2.1 Completion rate. Completion rates for all

full-time, eligible, degree-seeking students in

four-year and two-year colleges will improve,

while the gap in completion rates between

low- and high- income and minority and nonminority students will decrease. As a

baseline, BPS data indicate a gap of

approximately 23% in four-year college

completion within five years between low and

high income students. For students entering

four-year colleges in 1990, the percentage

that had completed by 1994, is as follows:

Highest income quartile: 57.2%

Second income quartile: 47.4%

Third income quartile: 40.4%

Lowest income quartile: 34.4%

2.1 Beginning Postsecondary

Students (BPS) Survey

(completion rates), 2001.

! Enhance the effectiveness of TRIO

projects through (1) implementation of

recommendations arising from the ongoing evaluation of the programs and,

(2) through more effective monitoring

and dissemination of information

regarding effective practices.

3. Taxpayers will have a positive

return on investment in the

federal student financial

assistance programs.

3.1 Employment rate. Title IV recipients will

maintain employment at rates at least equal to

non-recipients. BPS data suggest that

employment rates of Title IV recipients and

non-recipients are equal for both graduates

and non-graduates.

3.2 Return on investment. The benefits of the

student aid programs, in terms of increased

tax revenues, will continue to exceed their

costs. ED study found that for every dollar

spent on borrowers to obtain two years of

college, $2.19 was returned to the treasury

for men and $1.24 for women. The

comparable return to treasury for each

dollar spent in obtaining four years of

college was $5.86 for men and $2.65 for

women.

3.1 BPS, 1998 (employment of

those attaining a certificate

or associate degree) and

Baccalaureate and Beyond

(B&B), 2001 (employment

of those attaining a

bachelors degree)

3.2 Analysis of Census data by

Office of the Under

Secretary’s Planning and

Evaluation Service (PES),

1998.

! Continue to monitor trends regarding

costs/benefits and lifetime earnings.

! Carry out activities described above to

increase persistence, degree attainment,

and job placement which have direct

impact on investment.
Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE): Office-Wide Performance Indicators

Goal: To ensure access to postsecondary education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 175

4. Ensure high quality program

management by institutions. 

4.1 QA program participation rate. Increase

the number of institutions participating in the

Quality Assurance Program to 200 by the year

2000. Currently there are 130 institutions

participating in the program.

4.2 Compliance rate. The percentage of

postsecondary institutional found to be in

compliance with federal requirements will

increase each year. Calculated as the number

of schools that have had no adverse action

(fines, termination, etc.) taken against them

compared to the number of schools

monitored. A dollar rate based on student aid

amounts awarded will also be calculated.

Baseline to be determined by November 1998.

4.3 Customer satisfaction. Surveys of

institutions will show satisfaction with OPE

efforts to ensure increases in management

flexibility and reduced burden. Baseline to be

determined by July 1998.

4.1 IPOS data, annual, 1997.

4.2 Contractor and IPOS data;

annual, 1998.

4.3 OPE/PES customer survey,

annual, 1998.

! See key strategies on following page

regarding case management and risk

analysis.

Other strategies include:

! Promote prevention-based Quality

Assurance strategies.

! Continue efforts to reduce regulatory

burden, where appropriate.

! Implement incentive-based approach to

default prevention (Guaranty Agencies).

! Continue to provide leadership in the

community in support of the national

priority for quality education. 

5. Provide effective program

management to ensure that

programs are efficiently

administered and are costeffective.

5.1 Application data quality. The accuracy and

integrity of data supplied by students to

determine aid eligibility, will show continuous

yearly improvements. Baseline to be

determined by July 1998.

5.2 Timely delivery of the programs. Continue

to meet Master Calendar established rates. 

Baseline is 100%.

5.1 Central Processor System

data, Quality Assurance

Program statistics; annual,

1997.

5.2 OPE program data;

annual, 1997.

! Continue Project EASI as well as

shorter-term initiatives to increase use of

electronic data transmission.

! Pursue data matching with the IRS to

improve data quality and reduce burden

for Title IV applicants.

! Continue Title IV-wide initiative to

improve quality in data systems.
Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE): Office-Wide Performance Indicators

Goal: To ensure access to postsecondary education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 176

5.3 Reduce cost of major student aid computer

systems. Per unit contract costs of operation

and maintenance of the mission critical

systems, including NSLDS, will decrease over

time. Baseline to be developed by July 1998.

5.4 Effectiveness of case management

targeting. The effectiveness of Institutional

Participation and Oversight Service (IPOS)

targeting activities will show continuous

improvement over baseline. Effectiveness will

be measured by the percentage of targeted

schools that face adverse action within one

year of targeting. A dollar rate will also be

computed. Baseline to be determined by

November, 1998.

5.5 Sustainment rate. The rate at which adverse

findings (e.g., audit liabilities, terminations,

fines, program review liabilities) are sustained

will show continuous improvement over

baseline. Calculated as the percentage of

adverse findings upheld/sustained and as the

percentage of the amount of fines/liabilities

assessed to the amount imposed within one

year. Baseline to be developed by November

1998.

5.3 OPE program data;

annual, 1997.

5.4 IPOS data (risk analysis

system), annual, 1997.

5.5 IPOS data, 1998, and

annual; Postsecondary

Education Participant

System, 1998, and annual.

! Expand performance-based contracting.

! Improve responsiveness to customers

(e.g. grants reengineering) and regular

measurement of customer satisfaction.

! Implement Case Management team

monitoring approach in the IPOS to

improve school eligibility processes.

! Complete testing of the Risk Analysis

model by 09/30/97, modify model, as

needed, and implement across IPOS.

! Encourage improved accreditation

processes as a means of eliminating

poorly performing institutions from

participation in the Title IV Programs. 

! Promote expanded performance

measurement in the administration of

the Title IV Programs to better assess

and monitor institutional performance. 

! More aggressively monitor school and

program cash management and

accountability performance.

! Integrate the multiple student aid

databases based on student level records.

! Use mutually agreed-upon industry

standards for data exchanges to stabilize

data requirements, improve data

integrity, and reduce costly errors.
Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE): Office-Wide Performance Indicators

Goal: To ensure access to postsecondary education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 177

5.6 Institutional cash management. Cash

management ratios, such as 30-day reporting

rates and disbursements to draw down rates,

calculated for individual schools and the

program as a whole will show the degree to

which schools expend their funds according to

regulation (e.g within three days of receipt). 

These ratios will improve over time. 

Baseline to be developed by May, 1998.

5.7 Increased use of electronic student aid

applications. The annual number of students

and families submitting or renewing their

federal student aid applications electronically

will continue to increase each year, almost

doubling to 3 million by October 2001.

5.8 System architecture for enhanced aid

delivery. By September 1998, ED will have a

complete system architecture development and

transition strategy for the delivery of federal

student financial aid; implementing this

design will improve customer service and

increase control over federal costs.

5.9 Administrative cost. On a per unit basis,

administrative costs will be benchmarked

against other comparable programs, e.g. Sallie

Mae. Baseline under development.

5.6 OPE Program data,

quarterly, 1998.

5.7 OPE Program Data, 1997

and annual.

5.8 OPE Data, 1998.

5.9 OPE/Budget Service,

annual, 1997.
Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE): Office-Wide Performance Indicators

Goal: To ensure access to postsecondary education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 178

6. Ensure greater integrity in the

National Student Loan Data

System (NSLDS) and guarantor

and lender reporting systems.

6.1 Data quality. Improvements will be realized

in data quality including reliability of data

provided by Guaranty Agencies (GAs) and

institutions to the NSLDS and data reported

by lenders and GAs for ED reporting systems. 

All potential baselines for NSLDS data

quality improved significantly during 1997. 

Edit failure rates decreased from 15.0 percent

to 3.6 percent during the year. Percentage of

accounts with current principal balances

increased from 50.8% percent to 68.3%. 

Final decisions on baselines to be selected for

data quality will be developed by July 1998.

6.1 Analysis of NSLDS and

other systems, ongoing

(error rates will be

compared with the “to be

developed” baseline),

1998.

! An NSLDS data integrity plan is under

development. Adherence to this plan is

expected to increase data quality

considerably. Also, the guaranty

agencies have recently pledged their

support by making their partnership

with OPE in resolving NSLDS data

problems a high priority.

7. Provide effective information to

prospective students and their

families about the true cost of

obtaining a postsecondary

education and the availability of

student financial aid. 

7.1 Early understanding. Increasing

percentages of students from age 12 through

high school and their parents will have an

accurate assessment of the cost of attending

college and the aid available for college by

2002. Baseline to be developed by October

1998.

7.2 Understanding of student academic

responsibilities. The percentage of students

from age 12 through high school who are

aware of the academic requirements for

college or postsecondary vocational

enrollment will increase annually. Baseline

to be developed by October 1998.

7.1 Polling data, annual, 1998.

7.2 Polling data, 1998, and

annual.

! Develop partnerships with secondary

and middle school counseling

organizations, and expand efforts to

develop outreach and early awareness

materials that emphasize financial

planning strategies, and relate

postsecondary education costs to

available aid.

! Develop outreach program using public

service announcements, visual media,

and other means to increase student

awareness among low-income and atrisk students.

! Information on postsecondary

educational costs and availability have

been added to the OPE Home Page on

the Internet.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 179

Pell Grant Performance Measures — $7,594,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist financially needy undergraduate students meet their postsecondary education costs.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Recipients

1. Provide continued access to low

income strata students.

1.1 Student income distribution. Pell grant

funds will continue to be targeted to those

students with the greatest financial need. At

least 75% of Pell Grant funds will go to

students below 150% of poverty level.

Currently 76% of Pell Grant funds do so.

1.1 Program data, annual,

1998.

! OPE will help to assure that the

maximum Pell award is high enough so

that the Pell Grant, along with other

financial aid, will ensure access for all

eligible recipients. In addition, we

expect that our reauthorization proposals

will address effective targeting.

2. Maintain a high level of

recipient satisfaction.

2.1 Overall satisfaction with Pell Grant

Program. Satisfaction will show continuous

improvement over time. Baseline measure

will be established via initial survey.

2.1 Office of Postsecondary

Education (OPE)/Office of

the Under Secretary’s

Planning and Evaluation

Service (PES) student aid

applicant survey, annual,

1998.

! Establish a “backup” processing system

that will eliminate the possibility of any

major delays in application processing.

! Improved monitoring of the Central

Processing System and Public Inquiry

Contract to help assure reasonable

turnaround time in application

processing and better communications

with recipients.

Institutions

3. To streamline delivery of funds

to institutions and return high

quality data to the department.

3.1 To continue to reduce the transaction

turnaround time. Decrease the current

transaction turnaround time through

implementation of the just-in- time delivery

system. Current turnaround is 7-10 days.

3.1 Program data, annual,

1998.

! Publication of the “just-in-time”

payment regulations will serve to

streamline delivery of funds.

! Elimination of the paper Financial Aid

Transcripts as well as implementation of

the “just-in-time” delivery system,

should increase school satisfaction.

4. Maintain a high level of

institutional satisfaction.

4.1 Overall satisfaction with the Pell Grant

Program. Institutions have a high degree of

satisfaction with the delivery of the program.

Initial survey will establish baseline

satisfaction rate.

4.1 Survey, annual, 1998.
Pell Grant Performance Measures — $7,594,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist financially needy undergraduate students meet their postsecondary education costs.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 180

Taxpayers

5. Provide a program that is costeffective for the taxpayer.5.1 Contractor performance. All major

deliverables will meet established quality

standards and be produced on time and within

cost. Prototype contractor report is under

development.

5.1 Evaluation by GCS and

COTR, monthly, 1998.

! Incorporation of performance based

provisions in the major Pell contracts, as

the procurements come up for

recompetition, will make the program

more cost-effective for the taxpayer.

6. Provide strong fiscal

management of the program.

6.1 Positive audits results, (no material internal

control weaknesses for the Pell Grant

Program). No material internal control

weaknesses identified in the Pell Grant

portion of ED’s Department-wide financial

statement audit. No material weaknesses were

identified as a result of the most recent

financial statement audit.

6.1 Financial program audits,

annual, 1998.

! Enhancements to data through our Data

Quality Plan as well as increased

automation of financial reporting

through the EDCAPS system will

improve the fiscal management of the

program.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 181

Campus-Based Programs — $1,649,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully manage the Campus-Based Programs in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Students

1. Maintain a high level of student

satisfaction.

1.1 Overall satisfaction with campus-based

programs. Benchmark to be determined via

initial survey.

1.1 Office of Postsecondary

Education (OPE)/ Office of

the Under Secretary’s

Planning and Evaluation

Service (PES) student aid

applicants survey, annual,

1998.

! Students will be more satisfied due to the

increased funding for Federal WorkStudy and our efforts to align jobs better

with academic and career goals. In

addition we are strongly encouraging

schools to make jobs available tutoring

underprivileged children in their

communities. We believe students will

find this tutoring to be very rewarding.

Institutions - all Campus-Based programs

2. Improve institutional utilization

of campus-based program funds.

2.1 Percent of funds available for reallocation. 

Amount of funds available for reallocation

will be maintained at current low level. For

1995-96, reallocations ($12.5 million)

represented about 1% of the funds allocated

($1.3 billion).

2.1 OPE program data,

annual, 1998.

! A workgroup has been formed which

will be instructing schools on the

appropriate expenditure of funding.

3. Maintain a high level of

institutional satisfaction.

3.1 Overall institutional satisfaction with the

campus-based programs. Exceed the overall

satisfaction rate of 75%. Baseline to be

determined via initial survey.

3.1 Performance report,

annual, 1998. Benchmark

data to be established via

survey OPE Customer

Complaints

! Elimination of paper Financial Aid

Transcripts will make schools happier

with our services. Also in FY 1998, we

plan to make the FISAP available to

schools in a windows environment.

Federal Work-Study (FWS) Program

4. Improve the level of

participation in community

service under the FWS Program.

4.1 Percent of program funds spent on

community service. Meet or exceed the

current percent of expenditures used for

community service, especially America Reads.

Preliminary level = 7.93%

4.1 OPE program data,

annual, 1998.

! As an incentive, schools using reading

tutors are waived from having to provide

their “match” to federal funds.

! Assure timely disbursement of funds in

support of America Reads.

5. Improve placement of FWS

students in jobs related to

academic/ career goals.

5.1 Student placement rates. Rates at which

students are placed in related jobs will

increase. Baseline to be developed.

5.1 National Center for

Education Statistics

(NCES) data, survey of

institutions, annual, 1998.

! Our Job Locator and Development

Program uses Federal Work/Study

money to create jobs that are relevant for

students.
Campus-Based Programs — $1,649,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully manage the Campus-Based Programs in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 182

Federal Perkins loan program

6. Improve the management of the

Federal Perkins Loan Program

portfolio.

6.1 Cohort default rate. Rate will decrease from

current level. For borrowers entering

repayment during the 1993-94 award year and

who were more than 240 days in default on

June 30, 1995, the national cohort default

rate is 10.75%. For the previous year, the rate

was 11.42%.

6.2 Collection rate. The program collection rate

will continually increase over baseline.

Baseline to be developed.

6.1 OPE program data,

annual, 1998.

6.2 OPE program data,

annual, 1998.

! Our Default Reduction Assistance

Program serves to help schools in

preventing defaults.

Taxpayers

7. Provide a program that is costeffective for the taxpayer.7.1 Contractor performance. All major

deliverables will meet established quality

standards and be produced on time and within

cost or budget. Prototype contractor report is

under development.

7.1 Evaluation by ED’s Grants

and Contracts Service

(GCS) and OPE’s contract

monitor, monthly, 1998.

! All Task Orders under the new CampusBased Systems and Development

Contract will be performance-based. The

contract also contains an automated

statistically driven quality control/quality

assurance (QC/QA) subsystem. Also

under EDCAPS, we are re-engineering

the Campus-based accounting system

which will promote the continued ability

to reconcile Campus-based expenditures.

8. Provide strong fiscal

management of the program.

8.1 Positive audit results, i.e., no material

weaknesses for the Campus-Based

Programs. No material internal control

weaknesses will be identified in the CampusBased Programs’ portion of ED’s Departmentwide financial statement audit. No material

weaknesses were identified in the FY 1995

Department-wide financial statement audit.

8.1 Financial program audits,

annual, 1998.

! As indicated above, the improved

campus-based accounting system will

result in improved fiscal management.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 183

State Student Incentive Grant (SSIG) Program — $0 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide increased access to postsecondary education for low-income students.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Eligible low- and middle-income

students will have the same

access to postsecondary

education as high-income

students.

1.1 Student income distribution. SSIG Program

funds will continue to be targeted to those

students with the greatest financial need. At

least 70% of SSIG Program funds will go to

students having income of $20,000 or less. 

Currently 72% of SSIG Program funds go to

students having income of $20,000 or less.

1.2 Availability of program funds. SSIG federal

funds will be accurately allocated to states and

state matching will be monitored to ensure

funds are available to eligible students.

Currently, all states participating in SSIG

meet or exceed the required state match.

1.3 Leveraging effects. SSIG federal incentive

funds will leverage increasing amounts of

state grant monies. (Baseline to be

developed.)

1.1 Performance report data,

annual, 1998.

1.2 Performance report data,

annual, 1998.

1.3 Performance report data,

annual, 1998.

! Ensure that state student eligibility

systems target grants to neediest

students.

! Closely monitor state matching.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 184

Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFEL) — $1,764,317,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully deliver and manage the FFEL Program in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Borrowers

1. Undertake initiatives to keep

default rate at a minimum.

1.1 Program default rate. The FFEL cohort

default rate, the percentage of borrowers

leaving school who default within two years,

will decline to a level of 10% or less by 2002

(rate to be compared to other similar

government and consumer ). For FY 1990 -

1995, the rates were 22.4%, 17.8%, 15.0%,,

11.6%, and 10.7%, and 10.4% respectively,

dropping by more than 53% over the five year

period. 

1.1 Office of Postsecondary

Education (OPE) data,

annual, 1998.

! Make it economically attractive for

lenders and guaranty agencies to prevent

defaults. (HEA reauthorization

proposal).

! Hold schools liable for loan costs if a

cohort default rate appeal is

unsuccessful, thus discouraging

frivolous appeals and removing high

default rate schools more quickly.

! Encouraging the use of flexible

repayment options to reduce

delinquencies and defaults.

! Disseminate information to students on

the cost of defaulting.

2. Help students to manage debt

burden.

2.1 Debt burden. The percentage of students

with student loan debt repayments exceeding

10% of their income will remain stable or

decline over time. Among 1992-1993

bachelor’s degree recipients making loan

payments, 29% had required payments that

were more than 10% of their income.

(Analysis of 1994 Baccalaureate and Beyond

Study)

2.2 Cost of flexible repayment. Impact will be

budget neutral.

2.1 Baccalaureate and Beyond

Study, 2001. (Efforts are

also underway to develop

an annual measure of debt

burden).

2.2 Office of the Under

Secretary’s budget service,

annual 1998.

! Monitor debt burden and default rates to

assess the costs and benefits of flexible

repayment options.

! Work to lower the in-school interest

rate, reduce loan origination fees, and

reduce allowable frequency of

capitalization of interest by lenders.

! Allow borrowers who are consolidating

subsidized loans into the FFEL

Consolidation Program to keep the

interest subsidy benefit.

! Provide electronic exit counseling to

assure graduating students will

understand repayment obligations and

be able to manage their debt burden.
Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFEL) — $1,764,317,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully deliver and manage the FFEL Program in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 185

3. Maintain a high level of

borrower satisfaction. 

3.1 Overall satisfaction with the FFEL

Program. FFEL borrower satisfaction will

continue to improve until at least a 90% level

is achieved. One measure of satisfaction with

the loan process - “overall level of ease in

obtaining a loan” - shows that 84% of FFEL

student borrowers found the process to be

somewhat or very easy. Satisfaction measures

related to borrowers in repayment are

currently being collected.

3.1 Program evaluation,

Macro, Inc., 1997.

! Reduce loan processing time by use of a

multi-year promissory note.

! Competition with Direct Loans will lead

to service improvements by lenders and

guaranty agencies.

! Expansion of the “common line”

electronic application process will

reduce borrower burden and application

turnaround time.

Schools, lenders, guaranty agencies

4. Ensure access to loans. 4.1 Continued access to FFEL loans. No

eligible student will be denied access to a

loan. Based on monitoring of borrower

complaints, we are not aware of any major

current problems with eligible student access

to loans.

4.1 Borrower complaint data

(GLOS), ongoing, 1998.

! Strengthen lenders of last resort to

assure no significant access problems

will develop. (HEA reauthorization

proposal). 

! Consult with the community and take

quick action to resolve any access

problems that may arise.

5. Maintain a high level of school

satisfaction.

5.1 Overall satisfaction with the FFEL

Program. Level of satisfaction will meet or

exceed the level of school satisfaction

measured last year. In award year 1995-96,

79% of FFEL schools reported they were

satisfied with the program.

5.1 Program evaluation,

Macro, 1997.

! Enhancements to NSLDS and

elimination of the Financial Aid

Transcripts will improve schools’ ability

to access borrower records and reduce

burden. 

! Ease institutional burden through the

use of a multi-year promissory note and

by requiring a single loan proration

formula and eliminating proration

requirements for programs of study

longer than two years. (HEA

reauthorization proposal)
Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFEL) — $1,764,317,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully deliver and manage the FFEL Program in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 186

Effective program management

6. Provide a program that is costeffective for the taxpayer.6.1 Gross default rate. Projects future defaults

over the life a loan cohort. The rates, for the

FY ‘92-’96 cohorts are currently estimated at

32.4%, 27.5%, 23.4%, 21.1%, and 20%

respectively.

6.2 Loss rate. Projects the overall rate of the

Department’s liability for a cohort of

defaulted loans after taking into account

collections on defaulted loans. The rates for

the FY ‘92-‘96 cohorts are currently

estimated at 8%, 5.2%, 3.5%, 2.6%, and 2.1% 

respectively.

6.3 Annual delinquency rate. Measures the

dollar amount of loans “past due” as a

percentage of dollars in repayment. This rate

will remain level or decrease each year (to be

measured by a floating three year average).

Baseline to be determined by June 1998.

6.4 Annual collection rate. Measures annual net

default dollars collected divided by dollars in

default. This rate will increase each year until

reaching 10 percent. This rate, as of 9/30/97,

is 8.6%, reflecting total collections of over

$2.1 billion compared to total amount owed of

nearly $24.5 billion. 

6.1 Office of the Under

Secretary, Budget Service,

annual, 1997.

6.2 Budget Service, annual,

1997.

6.3 OPE data, annual, 1997.

6.4 OPE data, quarterly, 1997.

! Closely monitor the gross default and

loss rates while striving toward

continuous improvement. Any adverse

trends will be carefully analyzed for

development of appropriate management

corrective action.

! Implement incentive-based approach to

default prevention, as stated under the

first “Borrower” objective. To

minimize the loss on defaults, seek to

(1) access data on employment from the

states, (2) insure that states offset their

employees salaries upon ED’s request,

(3) access data from state licensing

agencies, and, (4) access to information

from all federal agencies for purposes of

debt collection.

! Expand performance-based contracting.

! Seek authority to eliminate bankruptcy

as an option for discharging student

loans in order to save government

resources and provide for more equitable

treatment of borrowers.

! Seek to extend the period for reporting

negative credit information from the

currently allowable seven years to until

the loan is paid in full.

6.5 Contractor performance. All major

deliverables will be produced on time, within

cost or budget, and meet an independent

assessment of quality. Prototype contractor

report is under development.

6.5 Evaluation by contract

monitor, monthly

(exceptions reporting on

deliverables and dollars

expended), 1997.

! Seek authority to compute lender special

allowance on an annual basis instead of

the current quarterly basis and for the

direct collection of lender fees.
Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFEL) — $1,764,317,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully deliver and manage the FFEL Program in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 187

7. Continue to provide strong fiscal

management of the program.

7.1 FFEL financial statements. No material

internal control weaknesses will be identified

for FFEL in ED’s department-wide financial

statement audit (fault free audit). Three

material internal control weaknesses were

cited in the FFEL portion of ED’s 1995

department-wide financial statement audit.

7.2 Lender and guaranty agency audit results.

The percent of lenders and guaranty agencies

that are found to be in compliance in all

significant program areas will approach

100%. Baseline will be development by May,

1998.

7.3 Strengthening quality of audits.

Assessments of guaranty agency and lender

audits will show steadily improved quality

over time. Baseline will be developed by

May, 1998.

7.1 Financial statement audits,

annual, 1997.

7.2 Lender and guaranty

agency audits, annual,

1997.

7.3 OIG, ongoing, 1997.

! Work with ED’s Office of the Inspector

General (OIG) to assure that all audits,

including third party audits, are

conducted in accordance with auditing

standards. 

! Work with OIG and OMB to refine

audit guidance so that program specific

information can be obtained This will

enhance our ability to monitor program 

funds and assets and will improve ED’s

financial statement.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 188

Federal Direct Student Loans Program — $525,484,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully deliver and manage the Direct Loan Program in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

 Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Borrowers

1. Undertake initiatives to keep

default rate at a minimum.

1.1 Program default rate. The Direct Loan

Program cohort default rate, the percentage of

borrowers leaving school who default within

two years, will remain at a level of 10% or

less through 2002. (Rate will be compared to

other similar government and consumer

loans.) The FY 1995 cohort default rate for

direct loans was 3.8%. This was the first year

a rate was measured for the program as the

repayment portfolio had previously been too

young and not reflective of total population in

a mature portfolio.

1.1 Office of Postsecondary

Education (OPE) data,

annual, beginning in 1998.

! Use performance-based incentives and

disincentives in the servicing contract 

to help reduce the number of delinquent

loans and the number of loans that

default.

! Hold schools liable for loan costs if a

cohort default rate appeal is

unsuccessful, thus discouraging

frivolous appeals and removing high

default rate schools more quickly.

! Encouraging the use of incomecontingent and other flexible repayment

options to reduce delinquencies and

defaults.

! Disseminating information to students

on the cost of defaulting.

2. Help students to manage debt

burden.

2.1 Debt burden. The percentage of students

with student loan debt repayments exceeding

10% of their monthly income will remain

stable or decline over time. Among 1992-

1993 bachelor’s degree recipients making

loan payments, 29% had required payments

that were 10% or more of their income.

(Analysis of 1994 Baccalaureate and Beyond

Study)

2.2 Cost of flexible repayment. Impact will be

budget neutral. Flexible repayment, under

current credit reform accounting rules, are

currently projected to show a cost savings. 

2.1 Baccalaureate and Beyond

Study, 2001. (Efforts are

also underway to develop

an annual measure of debt

burden).

2.2 Office of the Under

Secretary’s budget service,

1998, and annual.

! Monitor debt burden and default rates to

assess the costs and benefits of flexible

repayment options.

.! Work to implement proposals to

lower the in-school interest rate and

reduce loan origination fees.

! Provide electronic exit counseling to

assure graduating students will

understand repayment obligations and

be able to manage their debt burden.
Federal Direct Student Loans Program — $525,484,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully deliver and manage the Direct Loan Program in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

 Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 189

Schools

3. Maintain a high level of

borrower satisfaction.

3.1 Borrowers’ overall satisfaction with Direct

Loan Program. Direct Loan borrower

satisfaction will increase until a rate of at

least 90% is achieved. One measure of

satisfaction with the direct loan

program—“overall level of ease in obtaining

a loan”—shows that 85% of direct loan

student borrowers found the process to be

somewhat or very easy. Satisfaction measures

related to borrowers in repayment are

currently being collected.

3.1 Macro, Inc., program

evaluation, 1997.

! Assure the smooth running of the Direct

Loan origination and servicing

contracts.

! Reduce loan processing time by use of a

multi-year promissory note.

! Develop Direct Plus Loan Repayment

Book to address the specific needs of

parent borrowers.

! Allow borrowers to review and submit

changes to their loan information with

the Direct Loan Servicer via the

Internet.

4. Streamline loan consolidation

process.

4.1 Time taken for consolidation process.

During 1998, the length of time to fully

complete a loan consolidation application will

average no more than 60-90 days.

4.2 Borrower satisfaction with consolidation.

Future surveys of borrowers will show that an

increasing percentage of applicants for loan

consolidation are highly satisfied with the

timeliness and accuracy of the loan

consolidation process.

4.1 OPE data, annual.

4.2 Customer Satisfaction

Surveys, annual beginning

in 1998.

! Assure the smooth running of the loan

consolidation contract by providing

incentives to consolidate loans

accurately within an industry-wide

accepted time frame.

! Improve the loan verification process.

! Work toward electronic payment to

holders of loans being consolidated. A

pilot project with Sallie Mae has begun

where payment by check has been

replaced with electronic payment. 

5. Maintain a high level of school

satisfaction.

5.1 Institutional participation rate. The

institutional Direct Loan participation rate

will continue to increase each year. Current

direct loan participation rate is about 35%..

5.1 OPE Program data,

annual, 1998.

! Maintain a commitment to enhanced

program delivery through integrated

processes and systems that are

responsive to customer needs. 
Federal Direct Student Loans Program — $525,484,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully deliver and manage the Direct Loan Program in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

 Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 190

5.2 Schools’ overall satisfaction with the Direct

Loan Program. Level of satisfaction will

meet or exceed the level of school satisfaction

measured last year. (Will track as a 3-year

average.) In award year 1995-96, 83% of

Direct Loan institutions reported satisfaction

with the program.

5.2 Macro, Inc. program

evaluation, 1997.

! Enhancements to NSLDS and

elimination of the Financial Aid

Transcripts will improve schools’ ability

to access borrower records and reduce

burden. 

! Ease institutional burden through the

use of a multi-year promissory note and

by requiring a single loan proration

formula and eliminating proration

requirements for programs of study

longer than two years. (HEA

reauthorization proposal)

6. Provide a program that is costeffective for the taxpayer.6.1 Gross default rate. Projects future defaults

over the life a loan cohort. The rates for the

FY ‘94-‘96 cohorts are currently estimated at

19.2%, 19.7%, and 21%, respectively. Note:

the upward trend in projected rates here (and

in loss rates below) is largely a result in a shift

in the mix of participating schools. Since the

program’s initial year, many more proprietary

and other higher default rate schools have

joined the program. These rate increases were

not unexpected.

6.2 Loss rate. Projects the overall rate of the

Department’s liability for a cohort of

defaulted loans after taking into account

collections on defaulted loans. The rates for

the FY ‘94-‘96 cohorts are currently

estimated at 6.7%, 6.5%, and 7%, respectively

6.1 Budget Service, annual,

1997.

6.2 Budget Service, annual,

1997.

! Closely monitor the gross default and

loss rates while striving toward

continuous improvement. Any adverse

trends will be carefully analyzed for

development of appropriate management

corrective action.

! Expand performance-based contracting.

! Seek authority to eliminate bankruptcy

as an option for discharging student

loans in order to save government

resources and provide for more equitable

treatment of borrowers.

! Seek to extend the period for reporting

negative credit information from the

currently allowable seven years to until

the loan is paid in full.
Federal Direct Student Loans Program — $525,484,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To successfully deliver and manage the Direct Loan Program in an efficient and cost-effective manner to help students and their parents meet postsecondary

education costs.

 Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 191

6.3 Annual delinquency rate. Measures the

dollar amount of loans “past due” as a

percentage of dollars in repayment. Upon

sufficient maturity of the Direct Loan

repayment portfolio (estimated to be

beginning in 2001), this rate will remain level

or decrease each year (to be measured by a

floating three year average rate). Until then, 

the FFEL delinquency rate will be a ceiling

for Direct Loans. Baseline to be developed by

June 1998.

6.4 Annual collection rate. Measures annual net

default dollars collected divided by dollars in

default. This rate will increase each year until

reaching 10 percent. The annual collection

rate as of 09/30/97 is about 1 percent.

However, the portfolio will not reach

sufficient maturity for the rate to be

meaningful for the next few years. 

6.5 Contractor performance. All major

deliverables will be produced on time, within

budget, and meet an independent assessment

of quality. Prototype contractor report is

under development.

6.3 OPE data, annual, 1997.

6.4 OPE data, annual, 1997.

6.5 Evaluation by contract

monitoring staff, monthly

(exceptions reporting on

deliverables and dollars),

1997.

! To minimize the loss on defaults, seek 

to (1) access data on employment from

the states, (2) insure that states offset

their employees salaries upon ED’s

request, (3) access data from state

licensing agencies, and, (4) access to

information from all federal agencies for

purposes of debt collection.

7. Continue to provide strong fiscal

management of the program.

7.1 Positive audit findings. No material internal

control weaknesses will be identified for the

Direct Loan Program in ED’s Departmentwide financial statement audit. No material

internal control weaknesses were identified in

1995 audit.

7.1 Financial program audits,

1997.

! Assure system design supports the

accurate and timely reporting of direct

loan financial transactions with

emphasis on systems coordination and

maintenance of audit trails.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 192
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 193

Higher Education
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 194
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 195

Aid for Institutional Development - Title III (HEA) — $260,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase self sufficiency and strengthen capacity of participating institutions.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Program Improvement Objectives

Title III - Part A (Strengthening Institutions), Part B (Strengthening Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Strengthening Historically Black Graduate

Institutions), Part D (Hispanic Serving Institutions), and Part E (Tribal Colleges and Universities)

1. Improve academic quality of

participating institutions.

1.1 Faculty development. 1.1a Percentage of

faculty with terminal degrees will increase.

Baseline to be developed. 1.1b Increased

numbers of faculty will introduce technology

into their academic instruction. Baseline to

be developed.

1.2 Transfer, persistence, and graduation rates. 

1.2a Student transfer rates from two-year to

four year colleges, will increase each year (not

applicable to Part B Historically Black

Graduate Institutions). 1.2b Student

persistence rates will increase each year (not

applicable to Part B Historically Black

Graduate institutions). 1.2c Student

graduation rates will increase each year.

1.3 Learning Labs/Academic skills centers. 

Participating students will show gains in

literacy, communication ability, math and

critical thinking (not applicable to Part B

Historically Black Graduate Institutions). 

Baseline to be developed.

1.1 Annual performance

reports; final performance

reports; external

evaluations;

comprehensive

development plans; peer

recognition award-all,

1997.

1.2 Annual performance

reports; final performance

reports; external

evaluations;

comprehensive

development plans;

accreditation reports-all,

1997.

1.3 Annual performance

reports; final performance

reports; comprehensive

development plans-all,

1997.

! Data obtained from performance reports

along with measurable goals and

objectives included in comprehensive

development plan will enable OPE to

gain insight into institutional strategies

that are most effective in fostering

academic skill development and

persistence.

! OPE staff will disseminate information

to the community on effective practices

and strategies for persistence and

academic skill development. 

2. Improve fiscal stability of 

participating institutions.

2.1 Development office. Percentage of funded

development offices that show increase in

revenues over prior year will increase.

Baseline to be developed.

2.1 Annual performance

reports; final performance 

 reports; external 

evaluations;

comprehensive 

development plans-all,

1997.

! Improved fund raising strategies,

including improved corporate

solicitation campaigns and alumni

events and giving programs will

strengthen fiscal stability.
Aid for Institutional Development - Title III (HEA) — $260,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase self sufficiency and strengthen capacity of participating institutions.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 196

2.2 Endowment funds. 2.2a Percentage of

institutions having an endowment fund will

increase each year. 2.2b Total dollar amount

of endowments will increase each year.

2.3 Funds administration. After

implementation, the administration of funds,

using technology, made available to students

under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of

1965, will increase each year.

2.2 Grantee final reports, 

9/30/97; First performance

report, 12/30/97; National

Workshop, 1997; Periodic

Updates.

2.3 Comprehensive

development plans, annual

performance reports, final

reports-all, 1997 Ed/IPOS

Reports, 1997.

! Increased investment in the

technological improvement of the

institution’s administration of funds

made available to students under Title

IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.

3. Improve institutional

management of participating

institutions.

3.1 Management Information and Academic

Delivery Systems. 3.1a After

implementation, grantees will demonstrate a

reduction in time for registering students;

3.1b Number of students referred for special

assistance (e.g. counseling and tutoring) will

increase each year; 3.1c Percentage of faculty

using Internet for course planning and, 3.1d

Percentage of students using Internet for

studies and research will increase; 3.1e

Integration of automated systems will occur in

a greater number of institutions each year. 

Baselines to be developed.

3.2 Audit Findings. A decrease in the number of

negative audit findings. 

3.1 Annual performance

reports; Comprehensive

development plans; final

reports-all, 1997.

3.2 Ed/IPOS Reports, 1997

and annual.

! Improved decision-making in the areas

of budgeting, resource management,

strategic planning, student recruitment

and admissions, course scheduling, and

academic program will result in better

recruitment and higher enrollments.

4. Improve technological

capabilities of participating

institutions

4.1 Faculty, professional staff, and student to

computer ratio. The ratio of faculty (4.1a),

professional staff (4.1b), and student (4.1c) to

computers on campus will decrease. Baseline

to be developed once implemented.

4.1 Comprehensive

development plans, annual

performance reports, final

reports-all, 1997.

! Increased investment in the

technological improvement of the

institution’s administration of funds

made available to students under Title

IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
Aid for Institutional Development - Title III (HEA) — $260,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase self sufficiency and strengthen capacity of participating institutions.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 197

4.2 Percentage of faculty, professional staff,

and students with Internet access. The

percentage of faculty (4.2a), professional staff

(4.2b), and students (4.2c) with Internet

access will increase.

4.3 Campus offices connected to intranet or

local area network. The percentage of

administrative offices connected to an intranet

or local area network will increase.

4.2 Comprehensive

development plans, annual

performance reports, final

reports-all, 1997.

4.3 Comprehensive

development plans, annual

performance reports, final

reports-all, 1997.

5. Support strengthening physical

plant (Objective for Part BHistorically Black Colleges and

Universities, only).

5.1 Improved Physical Plants. Number of

instructional facilities renovated will increase

each year; Number of deferred maintenance

projects will decrease Baseline to be

developed.

5.1 Comprehensive

Development Plans;

Annual performance

reports; Accreditation

Reports; Other Federal

Agencies; IPEDS, all

1997.

! Provide technical assistance on sources

of funding for renovation and

construction as well as requirements for

the use of Title III funds.

6. Strengthen graduate and

professional education

(Objective for Part BHistorically Black Graduate

Institutions, only).

6.1 Minority under representation. The

number of African American students who

obtain advanced degrees in graduation in

fields in which African Americans are underrepresented will increase each year. Baseline

to be developed.

6.1 Final performance reports;

Annual performance

reports; External

evaluation reports;

Comprehensive

development plans-all,

1997.

! Provide technical assistance via

workshops, onsite visits, and conference

calls. Workshops will be conducted on

specific topics and provided on a

regional, statewide, and national basis.

! Feedback will be enhanced by increased

site visits by program staff; regularly

scheduled telecommunications by

program staff and program updates..

! Networking opportunities for grantees

will be provided through workshops and

meetings.
Aid for Institutional Development - Title III (HEA) — $260,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase self sufficiency and strengthen capacity of participating institutions.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 198

! Redesigned performance reports (some

still to be cleared by OMB) will allow

OPE staff to better measure the success

of funded projects in meeting the goals

of Title III. OPE staff will use the data

to provide better feedback to grantees on

the quality and effectiveness of funded

projects.

Program: Title III Part C - Capital Financing Program

Goal: To strengthen the ability of HBCU’s to access low cost capital

1. To provide low cost capital to

HBCU’s to finance the repair,

renovation, construction, or

acquisition of a capital project.

1.1 Number of inquiries. The number of

inquiries received by the designated bonding

authority (DBA) will increase each year.

Baseline to be developed.

1.2 Number of applications. The number of

applications received by will increase each

year. Baseline to be developed.

1.3 Number of loans made. The number of

applications received will increase each year. 

Baseline to be developed.

1.1 Monthly and annual

updates from DBA, 1998.

1.2 Monthly and annual

updates from DBA, 1998.

1.3 Program’s annual report,

1998.

! A marketing plan will be developed to

increase the HBCUs’ access to

information and data regarding the

program. The plan will also address

publicizing the program to increase

participation. Also, the DBA and

Department staff will increase their

participation at workshops and meetings

where HBCUs are represented. A web

site for the program will be created in

1997.

2. To improve service delivery and

customer satisfaction for the

HBCU Capital Financing

Program.

2.1 Streamlined loan process. The time from

receipt of applications to the closing of the

loan will be reduced. Baseline to be

developed.

2.2 Customer satisfaction. Customer evaluation

data will indicate improved satisfaction with

service delivery. Baseline will be developed

from 1997 survey of institutions seeking

services.

2.1 Records of loans processed

each year, 1998.

2.2 Records of institutions

requesting assistance in 

1997.

! OPE and DBA will review the capital

loan process and determine how it can

be streamlined to better serve our

customers. This strategy is consistent

with an OPE initiative to reduce burden,

streamline the Department’s processes,

and increase customer satisfaction.

3. Loan recipients will fulfill

repayment terms of objective.

3.1 Repayments. Loan repayments will be made

on a timely basis. Baseline to be developed.

3.1 Exceptions reporting from

DBA, ongoing.

! Marketing plan and workshops will

stress the importance of timely

repayment.
Aid for Institutional Development - Title III (HEA) — $260,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase self sufficiency and strengthen capacity of participating institutions.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 199

Program: Title 3 Part F- Minority Science Improvement Program

Goal: To effect long-range improvement in science and engineering at predominantly minority education institutions.

1. Improve the participation and

completion rates of minority

students at grantee institutions

in science and engineering

through pre-college activities

and undergraduate education. 

1.1 Postsecondary enrollment/completion in

science and engineering. Pre-college

program and undergraduate participants who

enter and complete undergraduate programs

in science or engineering will complete at

higher rates compared to program baseline.

Baseline to be developed.

1.1 Program funding history;

annual performance

reports; IPEDS, 1997; 

On-line computer database

inventory (to be organized

and completed), 1998.

! Continue to emphasize the importance

of pre-college programs. Encourage

grantees to involve parents through

orientation and other project activities

designed to include them. Stress the

importance of preparation for careers in

the sciences and create an awareness of

special opportunities for majority

students who persist in these fields.

2. Increase the participation of

under- represented ethnic

minorities in scientific and

technological careers.

2.1 Employment in technological careers. The

percent of graduates of MSIP Institutions

gaining employment in technological careers

will increase each year. Baseline to be

developed.

2.1 Annual Performance

report, 1998.

! Identify and disseminate information to

minority institutions on financial and

academic resources designed to

strengthen postsecondary science and

engineering programs.

Management improvement objectives

1. Improve service delivery and

customer satisfaction for

program grantees.

1.1 Burden Reduction for Applicants and

Grantees. National and regional technical

assistance workshop evaluation data, to be

collected through formal workshop

evaluations, will indicate whether new

program regulations and redesigned

application packages reduced burden. 

Baseline (to be developed) will assess

applicant and grantee burden by overall

feedback on time and effort required to

understand regulations and to complete

application packages.

1.1 National and regional

workshop evaluation data,

1997, ongoing.

! Continue a number of initiatives to

better serve customers, including

streamlining the grants award process,

developing new program regulations

and application packages to reduce

burden and increase accountability, and

providing increased access to

information.
Aid for Institutional Development - Title III (HEA) — $260,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase self sufficiency and strengthen capacity of participating institutions.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 200

1.2 Streamlined Discretionary Grant Award

Process. The time from receipt of applications

to award to grantees will be reduced. The

current baseline of approximately seven

months from application receipt to grant

award will be reduced to approximately five

months, by the end of FY 1998.

1.3 Customer Satisfaction. Customer evaluation

data will indicate improved satisfaction with

response to information requests, and the

usefulness of the information received. 

Baseline to be developed from first FY97

technical assistance workshops and national

workshops.

1.2 Record of application

(Application Control) and

record of grant award,

1997, annual.

1.3 Workshop surveys, 1998;

planned HEP customer

satisfaction survey, to

begin by December, 1997.

2. Increase communication and

information dissemination to

program grantees.

2.1 Public/Client Access to Information. 

Number of customer requests for Title III

Information will increase each year. Baseline

to be developed.

2.2 Increased Participation in Technical

Assistance Workshops. Number of

workshop participants will increase each year.

Baseline from FY96 workshops is about 925

attendees.

2.1 Number of customer

inquiries: program office,

WWW hits, 1997; HEP

customer assistance line,

planned for 1998.

2.2 Internal workshop

schedules; Special

technical assistance

workshops held annually

in competitive years, 1998.

! Establish a formal mechanism for

exchange of information with Title III

related associations.

! Seek out effective uses of the Internet,

electronic mail, and other

communication avenues.

! Increase the number of technical

assistance workshops.

3. Improve program effectiveness

and extend the impact of the

program beyond the funded

projects.

3.1 Institutional Utilization of Effective 

Practices. Increased utilization of effective

practices by Title III institutions applying for

eligibility. Baseline data to be developed.

3.1 Technical assistance

workshops, 1998; internal

documents, 1997: site

visits, 1997; performance

documents, 1997; data

from grantees, 1997. 

! Continue a number of initiatives to

improve program effectiveness and

dissemination of information on

effective practices, including

implementing improvements in project

management and service delivery.

! Track the number of requests for

information. 
Aid for Institutional Development - Title III (HEA) — $260,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase self sufficiency and strengthen capacity of participating institutions.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 201

3.2 Information Requests. Requests for

information on effective practices will

increase. Historically, very few, if any,

requests for best practices have been

received.

3.2 Monthly logs, planned for 

1997, and ongoing.

! Find out for the first time about the

degree of customer satisfaction with the

quality and usefulness of the Title III

information and training from the

Higher Education Program customer

survey planned to begin by the end of

1997.

! Prepare and disseminate a brochure of

project abstracts to institutions seeking

Title III eligibility.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 202

Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education — $22,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve postsecondary education by making grants to institutions in support of reform and innovation.

Policy Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Enable advancements in

institutional performance and

the quality of teaching. 

1.1 Number of Reforms. Number of innovative

educational reforms tested and implemented

will increase. Currently, 84% of completed

FIPSE projects score “A” = 21% ,“B”= 39%

, or “C” in overall quality. 86% of projects

report that, “The FIPSE project offered an

opportunity for testing ideas that would not

have been provided without FIPSE support.”

1.2 Number of qualifying projects. Number of

completed projects that qualify as national

dissemination models will increase over

previous years. Currently 31 projects qualify

for Lessons Learned from FIPSE Projects III.

1.3 Number of national awards. Number and

variety of national awards to FIPSE projects

will increase over previous years. Currently

15 FIPSE projects received national awards

for excellence.

1.4 Replication of projects. Number of projects

that are adapted in full or in part, or whose

materials are used by other institutions will

increase over previous years. Currently , 85%

of FIPSE grantees report full or partial

project replication. 33% report adaptations at

20 or more sites.

1.1 Final Report Score Card,

August 1998; E-mail

survey of FY 1990-1998

grantees, 1998.

1.2 Lessons Learned data,

August 1998.

1.3 Final Report Score Card,

October 1997. FIPSE

Program Book 1997

information.

1.4 Final Reprort Score Card,

August 1998; Performance

Report Score Card, August

1998; E-mail Survey of

1990-1998 grantees, May

1998.

! Innovative educational reforms that

improve institutional performance and

the quality of teaching will be

highlighted as a major guideline priority

for the Comprehensive Program.

! Support innovative strategies for

increasing institutional performance and

the quality of teaching and disseminate

successful programs nationally.

2. Increase participation and

completion rates of students in

postsecondary education.

2.1 Student completion rate. Participants in

FIPSE persistence-related projects will

complete postsecondary education at higher

rates than previous years. Currently, for

retention projects, 48% report larger numbers

of students persisting and/or completing

degrees.

2.1 E-mail survey of 1990-

1998 grantees, May 1998;

Final Report Score Card,

October 1997.

! Participation and program completion

will be highlighted as a major guideline

priority of the Comprehensive Project. 

Continue to support innovative

strategies for increasing program

completion and disseminate successful

programs nationally.
Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education — $22,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve postsecondary education by making grants to institutions in support of reform and innovation.

Policy Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 203

3. Encourage international

cooperation, student exchanges

and partnerships among higher

education institutions and other

organizations.

3.1 Creation of alliances and consortia. Increase

the number of alliances and consortia

established among higher education

institutions and other organizations over

previous years. Currently, 50 alliances

established.

3.2 Enhanced student mobility. Increase

promotion of the US, the EC and NAFTA

partner countries’ mutual recognition and

portability of credits, tuition reciprocity, and

the exploration of joint curricula. Currently,

among FIPSE international projects, 43%

have developed credit portability, 38% have

tuition reciprocity, and 19% have developed

joint curricula.

3.1 1997 US/EC and Trilateral

Consortia data. Final

Report Score Card, 1998. 

Outside Evaluation, 1998.

3.2 Final Report Score Card,

October 1998/99; Outside

Evaluation, 1998.

! Negotiate for the development of

innovative international cooperation,

student exchange, and partnership

models with other countries.

! Evaluate current international

collaborative grant programs in order to

analyze and improve the current models.

4. Prepare students for work in

new international contexts.

4.1 Improved cultural knowledge. Participants

in FIPSE’s international projects will improve

their knowledge of other cultures and

institutions and increase their level of foreign

language proficiency after completion of

FIPSE’s NAFTA or US/EC programs.

Baseline to be established.

4.2 Work placements. Number of participants

involved in international work placements

will increase over previous years. Baseline to

be established.

4.3 Multinational curriculum. Number of

curricular programs designed to develop

knowledge and skills required for work in a

multinational setting will increase. Currently,

40% of projects have developed new

curricular --not necessarily joint curricular--

programs.

4.1 Final Report Score Card,

October 1998/99; Outside

Evaluation, 1998.

4.2 Final Report Score Card,

October 1998/99; Outside

Evaluation, 1998.

4.3 Final Report Score Card,

October 1998/99; Outside

Evaluation, 1998; NAFTA

project director survey,

1997.

! FIPSE will support a broad scope of

programs that encourage student

preparation for work in international

contexts.
Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education — $22,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve postsecondary education by making grants to institutions in support of reform and innovation.

Policy Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 204

5. Maintain or increase FIPSE

programs’ effectiveness through

dissemination and adaptation.

5.1 Projects’ dissemination activities beyond

own campus. Meet or exceed dissemination

activity level of 92%. Currently, 92% of

FIPSE projects promote improvement

activities beyond own project.

5.2 Project adaptations. Numbers of full or

partial project adaptations at other sites will

be maintained or increased beyond current

level. Currently, 85%.

5.1 Project director survey at

annual meeting, November

1997; staff report of

Dissemination Program,

January 1998; External

report on Dissemination

Program, January 1998.

5.2 E-mail survey of 1990-

1998 grantees, May, 1998;

Final Report Score Card,

October 1997, Project

research for Lessons

Learned series (June

1999).

! The FIPSE Program Book and “Lessons

learned” will be widely disseminated via

the World Wide Web.

6. Institutionalization of FIPSE

programs.

6.1 Projects sustained. Number of projects

sustained at least two years beyond federal

funding will be maintained or increased

beyond current level. Has increased over

1990 report from 70% to 78%.

6.1 E-mail survey of 1990-

1998 grantees, May 1998;

Final Report Score Card,

October 1997; Project

research for Lessons

Learned series, June, 1999.

! Staff will scrutinize institutionalization

strategies prior to award and during the

initial years of the grants. 

! Workshops on institutionalization

strategies will be given during the

project directors’ meeting.

! FIPSE will share innovative

institutionalization strategies via its

WWW site.

7. Increased leverage of grant

funds and outside sources of

support during and/or after

FIPSE funding ends. 

7.1 Project financial support. Numbers of

projects successful in soliciting other financial

support, either internal or external, will be

maintained or increased beyond previous

year’s level. Has increased from 27% reported

by FY ‘95 and ‘96 grantees to 55% reported

by FY ‘97 grantees.

7.1 E-mail survey of 1990 to

1998 grantees, May 1998;

Final Report Score Card,

October 1997; Project

survey, November 1997;

Evaluation of FIPSE

project budgets, November

1997.

! Workshops on strategies to leverage

other sources of funding and support

will be offered during the project

directors’ meeting.
Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education — $22,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve postsecondary education by making grants to institutions in support of reform and innovation.

Policy Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 205

Management improvement objectives

8. Improve service delivery and

customer satisfaction for FIPSE

programs. 

8.1 Project directors’ overall satisfaction with

FIPSE programs and services. Meet or

exceed satisfaction levels from previous year. 

98% of grantees report FIPSE staff provides

full support. 97% rate the annual meeting as

“good,” “very good,” or “outstanding.”

95% of 1997, e-mail survey respondents

report quality of FIPSE staff support as

“Good, Very Good, or Outstanding” --52%

rated the staff support as “outstanding.”

8.2 Reduce turnaround time. Reduce the time

from receipt of application to the

notification/award to grantees with

streamlined grant award process. Currently 10

months for the Comprehensive Program, 5

months for International Programs.

8.1 Evaluation survey of

annual meeting

(November, 1997); Yearly

project survey (November,

1997); E-mail survey of

1990-1998 grantees, 1998.

8.2 GCMS application log and

grant award notification

dates.

! FIPSE will make use of E-mail and

bulletin board discussions to facilitate

more frequent contact between

customers and FIPSE staff.

! FIPSE staff will be trained to complete

all steps of the grant award process.

9. Improve communication and

information dissemination of

FIPSE grant programs.

9.1 WWW services. Increased use of FIPSE’s

WWW services over previous baseline. The

1997 count= 16,339.

9.2 Fax-on-demand services. Increased use of

fax-on-demand services for grant applications.

Baseline = cost of services which reflects use.

Services billed at $635.00 for FY 1997.

9.3 Novice applicant success rate. Meet or

exceed novice success level from previous

year. (Novice: never before directed Federal

grant). In 1996= 25% novices; 1997= 39%

novices. Number of outreach seminars= 20.

9.1 Count of Web hits for

information on grant

programs, October 1997.

9.2 Use rate of applicants for

fax-on-demand November

1997.

9.3 Yearly Project survey,

November, 1997; Number

of Outreach seminars,

November 1997.

! “Lessons learned IV” will be published,

and previous volumes will be broadly

distributed.

! FIPSE’s WWW site will be continuously

updated to include all current

publications and guidelines.

! New electronic venues for outreach

activities will be explored.
Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education — $22,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve postsecondary education by making grants to institutions in support of reform and innovation.

Policy Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 206

10. Maintain high level of

technical assistance for

grantees as well as

unsuccessful applicants.

10.1 Project directors’ overall satisfaction with

FIPSE’s evaluation services. Meet or exceed

satisfaction levels from previous year. 

Evaluation services rated “Very Good” to

“Excellent” by 93% of grantees.

10.2 Applicants overall satisfaction with

proposal review and feedback process. 

Meet or exceed levels from previous year. 

72% of all unsuccessful final proposal

applicants requested and received technical

assistance to improve their proposals.

10.1 Evaluation survey of

annual meeting, November

1997.

10.2 Number of feedback

requests from applicants

honored November, 1997.

! FIPSE will continue, despite lower

staffing levels, to provide full technical

assistance to prospective grantees and

feedback to all unsuccessful applicants.

! FIPSE support staff will be trained to

provide technical assistance to

customers.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 207

International Education Programs — $61,117,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To promote the study of foreign languages, area, and international studies.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Develop and improve knowledge

of other countries and the ability

to communicate in other

languages as a means to promote

mutual understanding and

cooperation between nations.

1.1 Number of new courses/degree

programs/unique foreign language

materials developed. Courses and new

degree areas will continue to be developed in

lesser-taught international areas, and foreign

language studies. Unique materials will

continue to be developed for use in

international, area, and foreign language

studies.

1.1 Grant applications;

performance reports;

studies under the

International Research and

Studies program; The

National Foreign

Language Center ;

pedagogy studies, ongoing.

! Set program priorities where relevant

and consult with international education

constituency to encourage expanded

coverage for under-represented areas

and fields.

2. Increase the development,

expansion, and

institutionalization of instruction

in international studies and

foreign languages.

2.1 Percent of courses/degree

programs/materials institutionalized.

Courses, new degree programs and materials

developed in international, area and foreign

language studies will be institutionalized at

increasing rates. 

2.1 Survey of grantees

currently planned for

1998.

! Disseminate exemplary projects through

a variety of media, including the

Department’s web site, among others.

3. Increase the scope of outreach

activities and improve

knowledge of international and

global issues among the U.S.

population.

3.1 Number of persons impacted. Number of

persons reached by various activities to

improve international understanding will

continue to increase.

3.1 Grant applications, 1997;

Performance reports (new

performance report

outreach tables - 1st

baseline report available

1998); Institutional

publications, ongoing.

! Use a variety of strategies, including the

setting of program priorities,

modification of program criteria, and

increased use of the World Wide Web

and other dissemination technologies.

4. Develop a pool of international

experts and other persons with

international competence to

meet national needs.

4.1 Number of persons trained. Faculty,

students, K-12 teachers, and others (business,

administrators, general public) will be trained

in international, area and foreign language

studies in increasing numbers.

4.1 Study of Doctoral

Dissertation Research

Abroad program and

Foreign Language and

Area Studies fellowship

program, ( both, 1997);

Grant Applications, 1997;

Performance Reports,

1997; Study to follow up

on out-year data, 1998.

! Support through program funds

advanced levels of uncommonly taught

foreign languages; expand disciplinary

offerings in world area and international

studies; support through program funds

outreach programs for K-12 and other

non-collegiate constituencies.
International Education Programs — $61,117,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To promote the study of foreign languages, area, and international studies.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 208

5. Meet high levels of customer

satisfaction with Title VI and

Fulbright-Hays programs.

5.1 Timeliness of awards. Continue to reduce

the time from receipt of application to the

notification/award to grantees with

streamlined grant award process. Current

baseline of seven months for most programs

will be reduced to the optimum level of five

months for most programs by the year 2000.

5.1 Grant award schedule and

award date; Customer

survey, 1999.

! Review and further streamline the grant

award process so that awards for all

programs can be made earlier in the

funding cycle.

! Additional training will be obtained for

staff.

6. Improve management

information system enabling

analysis of data to demonstrate

program effectiveness.

6.1 Cleared, consistent performance reports for

all programs. Develop OMB cleared new

final performance reports for each program to

collect appropriate data.

6.1 New performance reports,

1997.

! Continue the process of developing

appropriate data collection

instruments/performance report

guidelines for all programs with

assistance from program evaluation

experts.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 209

Teacher Recruitment and Preparation (HEA, V - prop. leg.) — $67,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase the number of students completing high-quality teacher education and preparation programs and teaching in underserved communities, by

supporting partnerships to improve teacher preparation that identify and spread best practices in teacher education.

Objectives Indicator Source and Next Update Strategies

Title V Part A, Lighthouse Partnerships

1. Improve the quality of the

teacher preparation programs

at the partner institutions.

1.1 Vision and standards. An increase in the

percentage of partner institutions, each year,

until the percentage reaches 95%, that have a

clearly articulated vision for their teacher

preparation program and show evidence that

every course reflects clear standards for what

teachers should know and be able to do.

1.2 Clinically based program. An increase in

the percentage of partner institutions, each

year, until the percentage reaches 95%, that

operate a clinically based teacher preparation

program as evidenced by an increase in the

number of teacher preparation courses that

have a clinical component and/or an increase

in the number of days that students work in

schools throughout their preparation

programs.

1.3 On-going support for new teachers. An

increase in the percentage of partner

institutions, each year, until the percentage

reaches 95%, that have formal processes for

offering continuing professional support and

education to recent graduates of their teacher

education programs. Formal processes can

include courses for beginning teachers, or

professional support groups for new teachers.

1.1 Partnership application,

1999 Institutional

records, 1999 and annual;

Departmental review,

2001 (i.e. end of third year

of grant period); national

evaluation study, 2003.

1.2 Partnership application,

1999 Institutional

records, 1999 and annual;

Departmental review,

2001 (i.e. end of third year

of grant period); national

evaluation study, 2003.

1.3 Partnership application,

1999 Institutional

records, 1999 and annual;

Departmental review,

2001 (i.e. end of third year

of grant period); national

evaluation study, 2003.

! Program supports ED strategic objective

1.4 A Talented and Dedicated Teacher

is in Every Classroom.

! Coordinate efforts with NSF teacher

preparation programs.

! Sponsor activities such as focus groups,

conferences, or workshops where

participating partnerships can

exchange information and ideas to

enhance the success of the program.

1.4 Process for program self-assessment. An

increase in the percentage of partnership

institutions, each year, until the percentage

reaches 95%, that have a formal process for

assessing the quality of their teacher

preparation programs.

1.4 Partnership application,

1999 Institutional

records, 1999 and annual;

Departmental review,

2001 (i.e. end of third year

of grant period); national

evaluation study, 2003.
Teacher Recruitment and Preparation (HEA, V - prop. leg.) — $67,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase the number of students completing high-quality teacher education and preparation programs and teaching in underserved communities, by

supporting partnerships to improve teacher preparation that identify and spread best practices in teacher education.

Objectives Indicator Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 210

2. Improve the placement and

retention rates of graduates

from partner institutions.

2.1 Certification rate. An increase, each year,

in the percentage of graduates from partner

institutions who pass the required certification

exam in their state.

2.2 Retention rate for new teachers. An

increase, each year, in the percentage of

graduates from lighthouse and partner

institutions who remain in teaching positions

after 3 years of teaching.

2.3 Service in high-poverty schools. An

increase, each year, in the percentage of

graduates from lighthouse and partner

institutions who serve in high-poverty

schools.

2.4 Diversity of the student population. Student

population will become more diverse (as

evidenced by increased representations of

minorities and disabled) over time.

2.1 Institutional records, 1999

and annual.

2.2 Institutional records,

2002, and annual

thereafter.

2.3 Institutional records, 1999

and annual.

2.4 Institutional records, 1999

and annual.

! Provide information on teaching

opportunities to students and recent

graduates. 

! Additional strategies under

development.

3. Increase the connections that the

teacher preparation programs

at partnership institutions have

with low-income urban and

rural schools in the surrounding

region.

3.1 Assessment of staffing needs. An increase

in the percentage of partner institutions, each

year, that are involved in assessing the

staffing needs of local school districts through

a formal communication network.

3.2 Practicing teachers on faculty. An increase

in the percentage of partner institutions that

have practicing teachers from local schools

who serve on the faculty of, or are otherwise

meaningfully involved in, the teacher

preparation program.

3.1 Institutional records, 1999

and annual; national

evaluation study, 2003.

3.2 Institutional records, 1999

and annual.

! Provide technical assistance to

partnerships in development of

assessment instruments.
Teacher Recruitment and Preparation (HEA, V - prop. leg.) — $67,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase the number of students completing high-quality teacher education and preparation programs and teaching in underserved communities, by

supporting partnerships to improve teacher preparation that identify and spread best practices in teacher education.

Objectives Indicator Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 211

Title V Part B, Recruiting New Teachers for Underserved Areas

1. Increase the availability of well

prepared teachers for lowincome, urban and rural school

districts.

1.1 Licensure requirements. An increase in the

percentage of individuals who teach in lowincome communities, each year, who satisfy

all State licensure requirements.

1.2 Teacher retention. A decrease in the

percentage of teachers in urban and rural

school districts, each year, who leave the

district during their first three years of

teaching.

1.1 Schools and Staffing

Survey, 2000.

1.2 Schools and Staffing

Survey, 2000.

! Disseminate information on best

practices.

2. Increase the number of

individuals from traditionally

underrepresented groups,

including language minorities

and disabled individuals, who

enter teaching.

2.1 Underrepresented teachers. The percentage

of first-year teachers from underrepresented

groups, including language minority and

disabled individuals, will exceed the

percentage achieved by comparable first-year

teachers not participating in the recruitment

program.

2.1 National evaluation study,

2003.

! Facilitate the sharing of information on

effective strategies across grantee

institutions.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 212

Annual Interest Subsidy Grants — $13,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To continue to help finance construction, reconstruction, or renovation of higher education facilities.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Continue to provide strong fiscal

management of the program.

1.1 Positive audit results. There will be no

material internal control weaknesses

identified in program portion of ED’s

financial statement audit. No material internal

control weaknesses were identified in

program portion of 1996 ED financial

statement audits.

1.1 Financial program audits,

annual, 1997.

! We have made changes and tightened

internal controls which will significantly

improve the overall fiscal reliability of

the operating system. These include:

— Verification of the status and terms

of all underlying loans every two

years. One-half of the grants will

be verified each year.

— An information letter will be sent

to each grantee yearly to remind

them of their obligation to notify

the Department of refinancing

agreements or redemptions.

— Control totals for the number of

grants and the dollar amounts of

each obligation for each fiscal year

have been established and will be

updated as needed.

— To ensure the accuracy of the

system, each year someone other

than the grant manager will

perform an independent

reconciliation of the data base and

the control total spreadsheet.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 213

Urban Community Service Program — $0 (FY 99)

Goal: To facilitate the establishment of sustainable community service programs by urban postsecondary institutions which utilize the resources of the institution

in devising and implementing solutions to pressing needs in their communities.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Ensure funded projects

effectively address local urban

priorities.

1.1 Determination of Progress. All reports

analyzed and determinations of substantial

progress made. Baseline to be developed.

1.2 Project Outcomes. All projects have

realistic, measurable, and substantive outcome

measures. Baseline to be determined.

1.3 Adequacy of technical assistance. Projects’

feedback communicates adequate technical

assistance being provided. Baseline to be

determined.

1.4 Remedial Action. Remedial action plans

developed, implemented and monitored for all

projects failing to demonstrate substantial

progress in establishing effective community

service programs. Baseline to be determined.

1.1 Annual performance

report, 1998.

1.2 Annual performance

report, 1998.

1.3 Annual performance

report, 1998.

1.4 Annual performance

report, 1998.

! Work with grantees to refine and revise

outcome measures, as necessary. 

Review performance reports to assess

progress toward meeting outcomes

identified in project proposal. Provide

assistance through all appropriate

venues (e.g. site visits, meetings,

conferences, Internet access and

communication, resources of other UCS

projects) to enhance outcomes and

improve substandard performance. 

2. Ensure that Federally funded

community service initiatives

achieve ongoing stability within

the institution’s infrastructure.

2.1 Stability of initiatives. The extent to which

grantees maintain and expand institutional

resources and staff to support project’s

community service activities on a permanent

basis. Baseline to be determined

2.2 Institutional integration. The extent to

which grantees’ community service function

initiated through the project are explicitly

reflected in the institution’s infrastructure

(e.g. space/resource allo- cation; use of student

volunteers; place- ments in community service

activities; and institution-wide service

learning programs.) Baseline to be

developed.

2.1 Financial status report, 

annual, 1998; annual

performance report, 1998.

2.2 Financial status report,

annual, 1998; annual

performance report, 1998.

! Establish mentoring relationships

among grantees, especially to help those

having trouble achieving infrastructure

objectives

! Use the listserv and national and

regional meetings to facilitate the

communication of successful efforts

among grantees.

! Review performance reports to assess

progress toward meeting outcomes

related to infrastructure identified in

project proposal. Carefully examine

efforts to achieve integration of projects

into an institution’s infrastructure. 
Urban Community Service Program — $0 (FY 99)

Goal: To facilitate the establishment of sustainable community service programs by urban postsecondary institutions which utilize the resources of the institution

in devising and implementing solutions to pressing needs in their communities.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 214

3. Encourage productive stable and

long lasting partnerships among

urban postsecondary institutions

and community organizations

and agencies.

3.1 Grantee partnerships. Extent to which

grantees establish partnerships, characterized

by shared resources and decision-making,

with community organizations and sustain

these partnerships after the federal grant ends.

Baseline to be determined.

3.1 Annual performance

reports, 1998; staff

follow-up activities,

ongoing, 1998.

! Establish mentoring relationships

among grantees, especially to help those

having trouble establishing effective

partnerships.

! Use the listserv and national and

regional meetings to facilitate the

communication of factors contributing to 

successful partnerships among

postsecondary institutions, communities,

and the public and private sectors.

! Through visits, telephone monitoring,

meetings and referrals, diagnose and

work to resolve obstacles to functional

partnerships.

! Review performance reports to assess

progress toward meeting outcomes

related to developing effective and

sustainable partnerships identified in

project proposal. Carefully examine

efforts to achieve viable partnerships.

4. Develop effective communication 

networks among urban

postsecondary institutions.

4.1 Effective communications. Establishment of

self-sustaining, electronic, interactive network

used regularly by grantees to communicate

problems, solutions, successful practices and

other information.

4.2 Use of web site. Establishment of an

interactive web site publicized and used by

designated urban grant institutions,

community based organizations, cities and

foundations to promote linkages resulting in

effective university partnerships and urban

community service programs.

4.1 Annual performance

report, 1998.

4.2 Annual performance

report, 1998.

! Use the listserv and web page to

communicate regularly and often with

all grantees.

! Establish mentoring arrangements

between grantees to capitalize on

specific expertise afforded by other

grantees. 

! Use electronic conferencing provided by

the San Francisco State University Net

(or other formats as appropriate) to

conduct regular national topical

conferences of grantees and other

groups.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 215

Mary McLeod Bethune Memorial Fine Arts Center — $0 (FY 99)

Goal: Special legislation (PL 102-423) to complete building of the Mary McLeod Cookman Fine Arts Center at Bethune-Cookman College (FL)

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Provide strong management of

the program--- administrative,

fiscal, and engineering.

1.1 Proper expenditure of funds. All project

funds are spent for appropriate purposes and

within the approved project period.

1.1 HEP Program Data,

annual, 1998.

! Continuous review of billing statements

and invoices for grant reimbursement

payments.

! Review of monthly construction project

reports for assessing building progress.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 216

TRIO Programs – $583,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase educational participation of disadvantaged students through effective management of the federal Trio Programs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Student outcomes

1. Increase participation and

completion rates of

disadvantaged persons through

the academic pipeline from

middle and high school through

postsecondary enrollment.

1.1 High School completion. Upward Bound

participants will complete high school at

higher rates than comparable

non-participants. Only 66.6 percent of lowincome persons graduate from high school.

“Postsecondary Education Opportunity,”

November 1995.

1.2 Postsecondary enrollment. 

– Upward Bound participants will enroll in

postsecondary education programs at higher

rates than comparable non-participants.

– The ratio of Talent Search and Educational

Opportunities Centers (EOC) participants who

apply to college and/or apply for student

financial aid compared to the numbers served

will increase.

1.1 Mathematica Upward

Bound evaluation, 1997

(graduation rates of

Upward Bound

participants and

comparison group

available spring 1997);

TRIO projects’ annual

performance reports, 1998

1.2 Mathematica Upward

Bound evaluation, 1997

(postsecondary enrollment

rates of participants and

comparison group

available spring 1997);

TRIO projects’ annual

performance reports,

1998; National

Educational Longitudinal

Survey 1988 (NELS),

1996.

! Redesigned performance reports (some

still to be cleared by OMB) will allow

OPE staff to better measure the success

of funded projects in meeting the goals

of the federal TRIO programs. OPE staff

will use the data to provide better

feedback to grantees on project and

student performance that may be used to

improve the quality and effectiveness of

funded projects. 

! Data obtained from performance reports

will be compared with national data on

low-income, first-generation students. 

! Disseminate information on effective

Practices and strategies obtained from

OERI research and other national

evaluations.
TRIO Programs – $583,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase educational participation of disadvantaged students through effective management of the federal Trio Programs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 217

2. Increase participation and

completion rates of

disadvantaged persons through

the academic pipeline from

middle and high school through

community or four year colleges.

2.1 Postsecondary persistence and completion.

– Upward Bound participants who enroll in

postsecondary education will complete 2 or 4

year postsecondary education programs at

rates higher than comparable nonparticipants.

– Student Support Services participants will

persist and complete 2 or 4 year postsecondary

education programs at higher rates than

comparable non-participants.

– The persistence and graduation rates of

Student Supports Services participants will

increase.

Interim findings indicate that participation in

Student Support Services has a significant

impact on students’ retention in college,

grades, and credits earned 3 years after

entering college (Westat).

2.1 TRIO annual performance

reports, in conjunction

with Title IV Applicant

and Recipient System

(four-year graduation

rates for Upward Bound

participants available

December 2001); Westat,

Inc. data on completion

(graduation) rates

available March 1999;

TRIO annual performance

reports, 1997; Beginning

Postsecondary Students

study (BPS) 1990/94 and

Westat (benchmark data

from July 1996).

! See previous strategy.

3. Increase participation and

completion rates of

disadvantaged persons through

the academic pipeline from

colleges and universities through

graduate school.

3.1 Graduate school enrollment and

completion. 

– McNair participants will enroll in and

complete graduate and doctoral programs at

higher rates than comparable

non-participants.

– The percentage of McNair participants who

enroll in and complete graduate and doctoral

programs will increase.

Only 13.1 percent of low-income, firstgeneration college students with

baccalaureate degrees enroll in graduate

school compared with 18.5 percent of those

who are not low-income, first-generation

college students. (Baccalaureate and Beyond,

1996)

3.1 McNair annual

performance reports, 1997

(preliminary enrollment

data available late

1997;completion rates for

1989-90 cohort group

available March 2001);

Baccalaureate and Beyond

survey, 1998.

! See previous strategy.
TRIO Programs – $583,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase educational participation of disadvantaged students through effective management of the federal Trio Programs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 218

Management improvement

4. Improve service delivery and

customer satisfaction and

increase communication and

information dissemination for

the federal TRIO Programs.

4.1 Burden reduction for applicants and

grantees. Customer survey data will indicate

that new program regulations and redesigned

application packages reduced burden 

Baseline to be developed from first survey.

4.2 Streamlined grants award process. The

time from receipt of applications to the

notification/awards to grantees will be

reduced. The current average time elapsed is

approximately ten months.

4.3 Number of information requests. The

amount of information requested by the

public, including electronic requests and

inquiries, will increase. Baseline to be

developed.

4.1 Customer survey (PES &

OPE), 1998.

4.2 Schedule for grant review

process, annual, 1997.

4.3 Annual data on number of

customer inquiries

(program office, Higher

Education Programs

assistance line, WWW

hits), 1997.

! OPE has undertaken a number of

initiatives to better serve our customers,

including:

– streamlining the grants award

process, 

– developing new program regulations

and application packages to reduce

burden, and increase accountability,

and

– providing increased access to

information. 

! A customer survey planned for fiscal

year 1997 will provide baseline

information that will be used to measure

our progress in meeting these objectives.

! Also, the high quality of the Training

Program for the federal TRIO Programs

will increase the quality and

effectiveness of funded projects.

4.4 Number of applications. The number of

applications received will increase Baselines

for applications are as follows:

– Talent Search, 650 applications, FY 1994

– EOC, 300, FY 1994

– Upward Bound, regular, 820, FY 1995

– Upward Bound, math/science, 212, FY

1995

– McNair, 226, FY 1995

– TRIO Training, 32, FY 1996

– Student Support Services, 1,102, FY 1997

4.5 Customer satisfaction. Customer survey data

will indicate improved satisfaction with

response to information requests, and the

usefulness of the information received.

4.4 Annual data from ED’s

Application Control

Center, Grants and

Contracts Service (in

competitive years), 1997.

4.5 Customer survey (PES &

OPE) annual, 1998.
TRIO Programs – $583,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To increase educational participation of disadvantaged students through effective management of the federal Trio Programs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 219

5. Improve effectiveness of the

federal TRIO programs.

5.1 Use of effective practices. Applications

proposing and programs using effective

practices will increase. Baseline to be

developed.

5.2 Awards to under-served areas. The number

of grants awarded each year to geographical

areas under-served by the TRIO Programs will

increase. Baseline to be developed.

5.1 Review of applications and

annual reports, annual,

1997.

5.2 TRIO annual performance

reports, 1998; Secretary’s

list of under-served areas,

1998.

! Develop a national clearinghouse of

information on effective intervention

and opportunity programs. 

! Disseminate information on effective

practices and strategies obtained from

the national evaluation studies of the

Student Support Services and Upward

Bound Program.

! Provide training opportunities for

approximately 3,000 TRIO personnel

per year to improve project management

and service delivery.

! Proposed set-aside of up to two percent

of TRIO program funds annually for

innovative or experimental projects.

! Customer survey planned for 1998.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 220

High Hopes for College (College-School Partnerships) (prop. leg.) — $140,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To ensure that disadvantaged middle and junior high school students are prepared for, pursue and succeed in postsecondary education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Student and school outcomes

1. Increase participation rates of

students at participating highpoverty middle and high schools

in postsecondary education.

1.1 High school completion. Program

participants will complete high school at

higher rates than comparable nonparticipants.

1.2 Postsecondary enrollment. Program

participants will enroll in postsecondary

education programs at higher rates than

comparable non-participants.

1.1 Annual program

performance reports and

program evaluation study,

2004 (when first cohort of

recipients will graduate

high school). 

1.2 Annual program

performance reports and

program evaluation study,

2005 (when first cohort of

recipients will enter

college).

! Promote stable partnerships between

colleges, high-poverty middle/junior

high schools and the high schools the

students will later attend, and national

and community-based organizations and

businesses to provide intensive

counseling, tutoring, and mentoring to

students through high school. Services

will also be provided to parents.

! Partnerships will promote curricular and

pedagogical improvements, and provide

opportunities for professional

development related to college

awareness and preparation for partner

school faculty and staff.

2. Increase the academic

preparation for postsecondary

education of disadvantaged

persons.

2.1 Completion of academically challenging

curricula. Program participants will successfully complete college preparatory curricula at

greater rates than comparable nonparticipants.

2.2 Percent of students taking either the SAT

or ACT. Program participants will take

either the SAT or ACT at higher rates than

comparable non-participants.

2.1 Annual program

performance reports and

program evaluation study,

2000.

2.2 Annual program performance reports and

program evaluation study,

2004 (when first cohort of

recipients are seniors).

! See strategy for objective 1 above.

Management objectives

3. Ensure that effective

partnerships are established

among middle and junior high

schools, institutions of higher

education, community-based

organizations and businesses.

3.1 Commitment of resources. Partners will

commit resources to the partnership consistent

with the proposed budget.

3.1 Annual program

performance reports, 2000.

! Monitor grantee finances through

performance reports and site visits.

! Provide assistance through a variety of

venues (e.g. conferences, meetings,

electronic communications, etc.); collect

and share “best practices.”
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 221

National Early Intervention Scholarship and Partnership (NEISP) Program — $0 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve high school completion rates and postsecondary enrollment rates of disadvantaged students

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Increase participation and

completion rates of

disadvantaged students through

the academic pipeline from

middle and secondary school to

postsecondary education.

1.1 Middle and secondary school completion. 

NEISP student participants will complete high

school at higher rates than comparable nonparticipants. As we are in the third year of a

program that, in many cases, started

providing services to 8th graders and below,

it will be a couple of more years before a

meaningful comparison can be made. 

1.2 Postscondary attendance. NEISP student

participants will matriculate at postsecondary

institutions at higher rates than comparable

non-participants. Since this program, which

focuses on 8th graders and below, is only in

its third year of funding, it will be several

years before meaningful data regarding

postsecondary attendance is available.

1.1 Annual performance

report data, 1999.

1.2 Annual performance

report data, 1999.

! Data from annual performance reports 

will provide baseline information on

student success rates that can be

compared with national data on

comparable low income students.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 222

Robert C. Byrd Honors Scholarship Program — $39,288,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To promote student excellence and achievement and to recognize exceptionally abled students who show promise of continued excellence.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Encourage high school graduates

to pursue postsecondary

education and to acquire a

college degree.

1.1 Customer satisfaction. Effective

dissemination of information to potential

candidates will be reflected in high customer

satisfaction. Baseline to be determined.

1.2 Graduation rate. Byrd scholars will

graduate from postsecondary education at

higher rates than the national average.

Baseline to be determined.

1.1 Customer satisfaction

survey, (need ED

resources to complete

survey), 1998.

1.2 Performance Report Data,

1998.

! Develop and conduct a comprehensive

survey to assess:

— Timeliness of Byrd information to

potential applicants; 

— effectiveness of dissemination of

information; 

— retention of Byrd recipients in

postsecondary institutions;

— percentage of Byrd recipients who

attain postsecondary degrees

! Utilize survey results to implement

objective through improved delivery

system.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 223

National Need Graduate Fellowship Program (NNGFP) — $37,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist graduate students in areas of national need, especially under-represented populations, so that they may pursue teaching careers at institutions of

higher education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Updates Strategies

1. Increase the share of students of

superior ability enrolled in

graduate programs in areas of

national need.

1.1 Graduate student enrollment. The

percentage of students enrolling in graduate

programs in areas of national need will

increase over the prior year.

1.2 Test scores. Each year, average test scores of

students enrolling in NNGFP programs in

areas of national need will be above the

national average for entering graduate

students.

1.1 National Center for

Educational Statistics

(NCES) survey of students

enrolled in graduate

programs, annual.

1.2 Performance reports, annual

(see objective 11);

Educational Testing Service

(ETS) data, annual.

! In conjunction with grantee

institutions, develop materials to

publicize the availability of the new

NNGFP fellowships.

! Provide fellowships in areas of

national need as determined by the

Secretary in consultation with

Federal and non-Federal entities.

2. Increase the share of students

from traditionally

underrepresented populations

enrolled in graduate programs in

areas of national need.

2.1 Access of underrepresented populations. 

The percentage of students from traditionally

underrepresented populations enrolling in

graduate programs in areas of national need

will increase over the prior year.

2.1 NCES survey of students

enrolled in graduate

programs, annual.

! In conjunction with grantee

institutions, develop materials aimed

at traditionally underrepresented

populations, to publicize the

availability of the new NNGFP

fellowships.

3. Increase the retention rates of

students enrolled in graduate

programs in areas of national

need.

3.1 Retention rates. Retention rates for students

in programs in areas of national need will

equal or exceed retention rates for students in

similar programs.

3.1 NCES survey of students

enrolled in graduate

programs; performance

reports in 2001 and beyond.

! Continue to develop program

regulations in conjunction with

institutions of higher education

(IHEs) which will encourage

improved student retention rates.

! To encourage institutional efforts to

increase retention, funding priority

will be given to grant applications

which demonstrate high retention

rates.
National Need Graduate Fellowship Program (NNGFP) — $37,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist graduate students in areas of national need, especially under-represented populations, so that they may pursue teaching careers at institutions of

higher education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Updates Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 224

4. Increase the retention rates of

students from traditionally

underrepresented populations

enrolled in graduate programs in

areas of national need.

4.1 Retention of underrepresented students. 

Retention rates for traditionally

underrepresented students in programs in

areas of national need will equal or exceed

retention rates for similar students in similar

programs.

4.1 NCES survey of students

enrolled in graduate

programs; performance

reports in 2001 and beyond.

! Continue to develop program

regulations in conjunction with IHEs

which will encourage improved

retention rates for students from

traditionally underrepresented

populations.

! To encourage institutional efforts to

increase retention, funding priority

will be given to grant applications

which demonstrate high retention

rates.

5. Encourage the timely completion

of graduate programs in areas of

national need.

5.1 Time to degree completion. Average years to

degree of students within NNGFP will be

equal to or less than average years to degree of

graduate students in similar programs.

5.1 NCES survey of students

enrolled in graduate

programs; performance

reports in 2002 and beyond.

! Continue to develop program

regulations in conjunction with IHEs

which will encourage students to

complete programs in a timely

fashion.

6. Increase the percentage of

postbaccalaureate graduates in

areas of national need who come

from traditionally

underrepresented populations. 

6.1 Degree completion of underrepresented

students. An increase in the percentage of

Ph.Ds or terminal masters degrees awarded in

areas of national need to students from

traditionally underrepresented populations, as

compared to prior years.

6.1 NCES survey of

characteristics of Ph.D

program graduates six years

after initiation of NNGFP.

! In conjunction with IHEs, promote

the funding and training available to

students from traditionally

underrepresented populations

through the NNGFP.

7. Place graduates of programs in

areas of national need in faculty

positions at IHEs.

7.1 Entry into faculty positions. Placement rates

of graduates of NNGFP program 6 months

after graduation will equal or exceed

placement rates at similar, non-NNGFP

institutions.

7.1 Performance reports one

year after first NNGFP

cohort has graduated from

their programs (2002);

NCES data.

! Work with career services offices at

grantee institutions to share best

practices and develop models for

placing students at IHEs.

8. Place students from traditionally

underrepresented populations who

graduate from programs in areas

of national need in faculty

positions at IHEs.

8.1 Faculty placement of underrepresented

students. Placement rates of traditionally

underrepresented graduates of NNGFP

program 6 months after graduation will equal

or exceed placement rates of similar students

at similar, non-NNGFP institutions.

8.1 Performance reports one

year after first NNGFP

cohort has graduated from

their programs (2002);

NCES data.

! Work with career services offices at

grantee institutions to share best

practices and develop models for

placing graduates from traditionally

underrepresented populations at

IHEs.
National Need Graduate Fellowship Program (NNGFP) — $37,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To assist graduate students in areas of national need, especially under-represented populations, so that they may pursue teaching careers at institutions of

higher education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Updates Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 225

9. Increase the percentage of IHE

faculty in areas of national need,

who come from traditionally

underrepresented populations. 

9.1 Underrepresented faculty. An increase in

the percentage of IHE faculty from

traditionally underrepresented populations in

areas of national need.

9.1 NCES survey of

characteristics of IHE

faculty seven years after

initiation of NNGFP.

! In conjunction with IHEs, promote

the funding and training available to

students from traditionally

underrepresented populations

through the NNGFP.

10. Develop regulations, application

materials, and guidelines for

the National Need Graduate

Fellowship Program (NNGFP).

10.1 Program materials. Clear, concise, customerfriendly program materials cleared by OMB

by Summer, 1998.

10.2 Application process. Successful and timely

application process.

10.1 Feedback from constituents 

throughout development of

materials, and use of

materials.

10.2 Competition for NNGFP

held in Winter, 1998-99,

and awards made by

summer, 1999.

! As soon as new legislation is enacted, 

begin developing materials for

technical assistance and applications. 

 Utilize existing GAANN

applications as well as prior customer

feedback in development of

materials. Clearance packages will

be sent to OMB for review by

February 1998.

11. Develop an annual performance

report which will impose a

minimum of burden while

collecting the necessary data to

demonstrate performance.

11.1 Performance report. A Performance report,

with all necessary data elements, cleared by

OMB by Spring, 1999.

11.1 Performance Report

completed and mailed to

grantees, summer, 1999. 

Collection of first annual

performance data, summer, 

2000.

! As soon as new legislation is enacted, 

develop materials for performance

reports. Utilize existing GAANN

reports, performance indicator chart,

and prior customer feedback in

development of materials. Clearance

packages will be sent to OMB for

review by August 1998.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 226

College Awareness (Early Awareness Information) — $15,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To ensure that middle and junior high school students and their families have an accurate understanding of the requirements for postsecondary education,

including the academic preparation necessary and the costs of attending a postsecondary institution, and that these students pursue at increasing rates their

participation in postsecondary education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Student and family measures

1. Increase the understanding of

the academic preparation and

financial resources needed for

postsecondary education,

including the availability of

financial assistance, among

middle and junior high school

students and their families.

1.1 Understanding of the financial resources

needed, availability of financial assistance,

and the academic preparation necessary for

postsecondary education. Middle school

students and their families will show an

increasingly more accurate understanding of

the financial resources needed, aid available,

and the academic preparation needed for

postsecondary education.

1.1 Survey, annual, 1999. ! Develop and implement a national

information dissemination program

targeted at middle and junior high

school students and their families to

increase awareness of the growing need

to continue education beyond high

school and to make this target audience

aware of the costs of postsecondary

education, opportunities for financial

assistance, and the academic

requirements for pursuing a

postsecondary education. While

information will be disseminated

nationally, dissemination strategies will

reflect the specific needs of different

audiences, e.g. urban areas, rural areas,

etc.

Management measures

2. Program dissemination

strategies will meet the

information needs of the target

audience.

2.1 Customer satisfaction. Surveys of customers

will show that the information disseminated

via this program fully met the information

needs of the target audience.

2.1 Surveys, annual, 1999. ! Undertake regular assessments of

customer satisfaction through surveys

and focus groups to assess whether

information dissemination strategies

meet customer needs, are effective in

communicating with the target

audiences, and provide relevant

information in a timely manner.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 227

Learning Anytime Anywhere Partnerships (prop. leg.) — $30,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To expand access to postsecondary education and lifelong learning through the use of technology to all citizens who are unable to take advantage of oncampus programs.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Develop partnerships by

providing the opportunity for

educational institutions

(including four-year institutions,

community colleges, technical

institutes, adult literacy and

education programs) to partner

with curriculum and software

developers, network providers,

community agencies, business

and industry, in an effort to

deliver a valuable and quality

education to a variety of

different kinds of students.

1.1 Number of partnerships. The number of

partnerships formed will equal the estimate

provided in the ED’s FY 1999 budget request

and will remain level or increase each year.

ED’s FY 1999 budget request estimated 45

partnerships will be formed.

1.1 Program data, annual. ! Encourage a high level of coordination

and interaction among all of the

partnership entities to expand students’

options beyond the level of what

individual providers currently offer.

! Support the expansion of geographical

and institutional boundaries so that

courses, faculty, development costs, and

network facilities can be shared, creating

economies of scale to make it financially

feasible for providers while substantially

increasing opportunities for students.

2. Increase access to nontraditional education for the

diverse groups to be served by

this program.

2.1 Number of students served. The number of

students served by the partnership will

increase each year. Baseline to be developed

by level of first year participation.

2.1 Program data, annual. ! Establish mechanisms for ensuring that

the educational provider, employer and

student have confidence that the degree

or certificate will provide skills needed

for careers and further education.

3. Enhance quality and

accountability 

within the program to ensure

that students are learning the

specific competencies required

for the desired skills

3.1 Employment rate/earnings. The

employment rate and annual earnings of

students served by Learning Anytime

Anywhere Partnerships (LAAP) will be at

least as great as comparable non-participants.

3.1 Program data, annual,

beginning in 2001; Census

data, annual beginning in

2001.

! Help to coordinate the needs of

employers and the requirement of further

education with the services of

educational providers to ensure that the

Federal investment in this program is

worthwhile.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 228

Access and Retention Innovations (prop. leg.) — $20,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To test in an experimental setting the best ways of packaging student financial aid to encourage college access and retention.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. The program will be

implemented in a

methodologically rigorous and

timely manner.

1.1 Implementation. Methodologically sound

experiments will be in place for the 2000/2001

academic year as will a contract to evaluate the

program.

1.1 Evaluation data, annual,

1999.

! Develop and disseminate program

materials that generate interest in

program participation from a wide-range

of institutions.

! Work with interested institutions to

generate proposals for experiments that

are both interesting and generate

statistically valid results.

2. Projects will generate statistically

valid findings regarding the

effects of various student aid

packages on postsecondary access

and retention.

2.1 Expert Reviews. A panel of experts agree that

the experiments are methodologically sound

and led to valid findings.

2.1 Technical Review Panel,

annual, 2002.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 229

Howard University — $210,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal : To assist Howard University with financial resources needed to carry out its educational mission.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

University Development

1. Maintain and strengthen

academic programs and

achievement by:

— recruiting better students

— improving student

retention

— improving graduation

rates

— promoting excellence in

teaching.

1.1 Better students. Increase the average SAT

scores of incoming freshman by 1% per year. 

Average SAT score in FY 1996 was 903; in

FY 1997 - 941.

1.2 Student retention. Decrease transfers out by

5% per year. Baseline is being calculated.

1.3 Graduation rates. Increase undergraduate

graduate graduation rates by 3% per year. FY

1996 graduation rate is 46%.

1.4 Excellence in teaching. Increase the

participation rate of faculty in activities of the

Center for Teaching and Learning. New

entity; baseline to be developed.

1.5 Excellence in teaching. Increase the number

of faculty recommended for exemplary

teaching awards. Internal faculty teaching

awards in FY 1996: 5. Will also begin to

track external teaching awards.

1.1 University data, annual.

1.2 University data, annual.

1.3 University data, annual.

1.4 University data, annual.

1.5 University data, annual.

! University to finalize and implement

its strategic plan to include items

enumerated under this objective related

to recruitment, retention, graduation,

and excellence in teaching; as well as

to the objective related to excellence in

research which follows.

2. Promote excellence in research. 2.1 Grants received. Increase the number of

grant proposals that are funded. 214 research

grant proposals funded in FY 1996.

2.2 Grant funding. Increase the total funds

received through research grants. In FY

1996 $129,226,356 was received in research

grant funds, including multi-year funding.

2.1 University data, annual.

2.2 NSF data, annual.

! See strategy stated above.
Howard University — $210,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal : To assist Howard University with financial resources needed to carry out its educational mission.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 230

3. Increase the University's

financial strength and

independence from federal

appropriations.

3.1 Endowment. Increase the value of the

endowment each year. Balance of the

endowment as of 6/30/96 was $177 million.

3.2 Outside support. Increase the funds raised

from all private sources. In FY 1996, $12.5

million was received in private contributions.

3.3 Outside support. Increase the participation

rate of alumni who contribute to the school to

15% in 1998 and 30% in 2001.

3.4 Cost savings. Reduce the difference between

the hospital's net revenue (excluding federal

appropriations) and total expenses by $1

million in FY 1998; targets for subsequent

years to be established. Baseline to be

developed.

3.1 Audited financial reports;

annual.

3.2 University data, annual.

3.3 University data, annual.

3.4 Audited financial reports, 

annual.

! Develop and implement a strategy for

fiscal independence in collaboration

with the University; the University will

develop an effective alumni fund

raising capacity.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 231

Educational Research and Improvement
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 232
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 233

National Education Research Institutes — $53,782,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To contribute to the improvement of education by expanding the knowledge base about teaching and learning.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

Knowledge production

1. Support research and

development that yield findings

that can be used to improve

education.

1.1 Addressing critical problems. Research and

development and field-initiated studies

address critical problems in education.

1.2 Meeting high professional standards for

research. Funded activities are rigorously

designed and meet the highest professional

standards for research and development

activity.

1.1 Board review of research

priorities for centers in

1996 and peer reviewer

evaluations of fieldinitiated studies

proposals, 1999.

1.2 Interim and final peer

reviews of centers and

field-initiated studies,

1998; acceptance of

articles in refereed

scientific journals, 1998.

! With the Board, engage the education

community in an extensive process to

identify specific research priorities.

! Use peer reviews to provide centers and

field-initiated studies with input for

midcourse corrections.

Impact

2. Findings from research and

development activities influence

change in education policy and

practice.

2.1 Influencing budget and legislation. 

Research findings provide valuable input for

the development of budget and legislative

proposals.

2.2 Influencing policy and practice. Research

findings provide valuable input for the

development of State and local education

policies and practices.

2.1 Review of budget and

legislative proposals for

ESEA and HEA, 1998.

2.2 Periodic survey of labs

and centers, 1999;

periodic independent

study to assess impact of

research on policy and

practice, 2001.

! Develop effective strategies for

disseminating research products to

target audiences.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 234

Interagency Research Initiative — $50,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve teaching and achievement in reading and mathematics by generating new knowledge and testing new strategies.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Support rigorous investigations

that yield new theories and

practical applications for

supporting students’ cognitive

development and their

acquisition of reading and math

skills.

1.1 Partnership. The Office of Educational

Research and improvement will form a

partnership with the National Science

Foundation and other relevant agencies to

develop and implement a detailed plan for

this initiative. 

1.2 Addressing critical problems. Projects will

address critical problems related to children’s

cognitive development, the effective use of

educational technology, and children’s

acquisition of reading and math skills.

1.3 Meeting highest professional standards. 

Funded activities are rigorously designed and

will meet the highest professional standards

for research and development activity.

1.1 Review of plan, 1998. 

1.2 Board evaluation of

research agenda, 1999.

1.3 Periodic peer review of

research activities, 2001.

! Meet with staff from the National

Science Foundation (NSF) and the

National Institute of Child Health and

Human Development (NICHD) to

establish a working group and planning

process. 

! Develop agenda in partnership with the

NSF, NICHD researchers, and

education community.

! Establish peer review process in

partnership with NSF.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 235

Regional Educational Laboratories — $56,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To promote knowledge-based educational improvement to help all students meet high standards through development, applied research, dissemination, and

technical assistance conducted with local, state and intermediate agencies.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Field-based development and applied research

1. Develop policies, strategies,

and/or models of comprehensive,

effective reform that are used to

assist states and local school

districts as they implement

programs in which all students

achieve at high levels and/or in

which emerging theories of

teaching and learning are

continually assessed and

validated.

1.1 Number of development sites. An

increasing number of local and/or state sites

will be engaged in collaborative development

and demonstration of comprehensive reform.

1.2 Scope of innovation undertaken at

development sites. Participants and external

reviewers will rate the scope of innovation as

"comprehensive."

1.3 Capacity building. After two years of onsite

development, participants and external

observers will report increased capacity at

sites to apply research and improve practice.

1.4 Student achievement. After a sustained

period of onsite development, local sites will

show increases in student achievement.

1.5 Potential for scaling up. After a sustained

period of onsite development, participants and

external observers will report that the effort as

implemented has high potential for success in

new sites.

1.1 Quarterly laboratory

reports, 1998.

1.2 Annual laboratory client

surveys, 1998; ED external

evaluations, 1998.

1.3 Laboratory client surveys

and external reviews,

1999.

1.4 State or local assessments,

1999; annual laboratory

client surveys, 1999.

1.5 Annual client surveys and

external reviews, 1999.

! Collaborate with state and local

agencies in reform efforts that (1)

implement effective, research-based

strategies and (2) build comprehensive

reform

! Develop tested policies, strategies,

and/or models for more wide-scale

educational improvement

Dissemination and service

2. Identify or produce materials

and strategies for implementing

reform in policy and practice

and improvement throughout

districts and states.

2.1 Availability of resources. A large number of

appropriate products will be available that

respond to customer needs, and more modes

of access will be offered for selected products,

over time.

2.1 Quarterly and annual

laboratory reports, 1998.

! Develop and widely disseminate

research-based products, programs, and

services.
Regional Educational Laboratories — $56,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To promote knowledge-based educational improvement to help all students meet high standards through development, applied research, dissemination, and

technical assistance conducted with local, state and intermediate agencies.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 236

2.2 Customer receipt of products. Increasing

circulation of products and increasing hits on

electronic sites, rising annually from baseline

levels.

2.3 Quality of products. More than 80% of

experts in the field will find laboratory

products and materials to be of high quality.

2.4 Contributions of events, products, and

sustained services. More than 80% of

customers will report contributions to their

knowledge, skills, and professional work.

2.5 Student achievement. In sites receiving

intensive, sustained implementation

assistance, student achievement will increase.

2.2 Laboratory records and

quarterly reports, 1998.

2.3 Annual laboratory client

surveys, 1998; ED external

evaluation, 1998.

2.4 Annual laboratory client

surveys, 1998.

2.5 State or local assessments,

1999; annual client

surveys, 1999.

! Provide a range of technical assistance

services from one-time events through

more sustained services and

relationships, and including both

"convening" and the provision of

information and assistance; provide

more intensive services where

opportunities to contribute to

educational improvement are greatest.

Strategic alliances and learning communities

3. Facilitate, create, and expand

networks, alliances, and

communities of learners that

address significant issues (e.g.,

standards, assessment, use of

technology, etc.) in support of

state and local reform.

3.1 Significant roles of laboratories in strategic

alliances. The total number of alliances in

which laboratories have significant and

sustained roles will increase over time along

with membership in those alliances.

3.2 Significance and impact of alliances. More

that 80% of participants involved in alliances

will perceive that alliances address significant

educational concerns and expand capacity of

participants.

3.3 Cooperative activity with other federally

funded entities. The number of joint events

and ventures with other federally funded

research institutions and providers of

information and technical assistance will

increase annually.

3.1 Laboratory records and

quarterly reports, 1998.

3.2 Annual laboratory client

surveys, 1998.

3.3 Laboratory records and

quarterly reports, 1998.

! Create and expand within-region and

nationwide alliances and networks with

practitioners, service providers, policy

makers, and federally funded research

institutions and providers of information

and technical assistance.

! Leverage resources and scale up

education reform strategies through

strategic alliances.
Regional Educational Laboratories — $56,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To promote knowledge-based educational improvement to help all students meet high standards through development, applied research, dissemination, and

technical assistance conducted with local, state and intermediate agencies.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 237

3.4 Value of joint events and ventures with

other federally funded entities. More than

80% of participants in cooperative activities

will perceive that the activities are of high

quality, address significant educational

concerns, and expand capacity of participants.

3.4 Annual laboratory client

surveys; 1998.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 238

Dissemination — $18,785,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To help the education community access and use the best research-based products and services available to improve American education.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Coordinate dissemination

activities across the Office of

Education Research and

Improvement (OERI) and with

other offices in the Department.

1.1 Eliminate duplication. There will be no

duplication in the products disseminated by

the Department.

1.2 Departmental dissemination coordination.

Dissemination activities of Department offices

will be effectively linked.

1.1 Annual media products

survey, 1998.

1.2 Survey of users, 1998.

! Prepare annual OERI media products

plan, and solicit product plans from

other offices.

2. Target dissemination activities

on the Department’s seven

priorities.

2.1 Products address the Department’s seven

priorities. 75% of OERI products will

address one of the seven priorities.

2.1 OERI media products

plan, 1998.

! Identify products to address the seven

priorities.

3. Serve as a one-stop referral

point for education information.

3.1 Customer usage. Users of National Library

and ERIC increase annually and are satisfied

with services.

3.1 Counts of the users and

annual customer surveys,

1998.

! Actively reach out to the education

community through the Internet,

targeted publication, NLE and

Department 800 numbers, and

information clearinghouses.

4. Identify exemplary and

promising education programs.

4.1 Identify exemplary and promising

practices. Exemplary and promising

practices will be identified in math, science,

reading, technology, and drug prevention.

4.1 Expert panels, 1998

(math).

! First panel established in 1997. 

Establish additional panels in 1998.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 239

Statistics and Assessment — $108,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To collect, analyze, and disseminate information on the condition of education in the U.S. and to provide comparative international statistics.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

Data collection

1. Provide timely, useful, and

comprehensive data that are

relevant to policy and

educational improvement.

1.1 Customer satisfaction. An increasing

percentage of each major type of customer

will agree that National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES) data are timely, relevant,

and comprehensive.

1.1 Planned targeted customer

surveys in FY 1997 to develop

baseline data, winter 1998;

NCES focus group discussions

with targeted customers,

including policymakers,

researchers, and practitioners,

1997; biannual input from

NCES’ advisory council, 1997;

NCES Customer Survey, 1996.

! The NCES will continue to

conduct focus groups discussions

with key customers and targeted

surveys to assess and improve the

timeliness, relevance, and

comprehensiveness of its data. 

! Working group to provide

recommendations on the redesign

of the Schools and Staffing

Survey , conduct a constituency

survey on NAEP. 

2. Collect high-quality data. 2.1 Customer ratings of quality. An increasing

percentage of customers will agree that NCES

data are of high quality in terms of accuracy,

reliability, validity, and completeness.

2.1 Planned targeted customer

surveys in FY 1997 to develop

baseline data, winter 1998;

NCES focus group discussions

with targeted customers

including policymakers,

researchers, and practitioners,

1997; biannual input from

NCES’s advisory council;

NCES Customer Survey, 1996.

! NCES uses a variety of quality

control mechanisms to ensure

data quality. These include a

rigorous adjudication process,

written statistical standards and

advice from technical advisory

groups. 

! NCES will implement

recommendations recently

developed by a quality task force

comprised of NCES and

contractor staff.
Statistics and Assessment — $108,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To collect, analyze, and disseminate information on the condition of education in the U.S. and to provide comparative international statistics.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 240

Data analysis, synthesis, and packaging

3. Develop publications that are

easy to read, useful, and of high

overall quality.

3.1 Ease of reading. An increasing percentage

of customers will rate NCES publications as

easy to read.

3.2 Utility. An increasing percentage of

customers will rate NCES publications as

useful to their work.

3.3 Publication quality. An increasing

percentage of customers will express

satisfaction with the overall quality of NCES

publications.

3.1 Planned targeted customer

surveys in FY 1997 to develop

baseline data, winter 1998;

NCES Customer Survey, 1996

(see prior footnote).

3.2 Same sources.

3.3 Same sources.

! NCES will expand its use of

technical writers/editors to

develop more user friendly

publications.

! NCES's new Communications

Officer will have explicit

responsibility for ensuring that

recommendations from key

customers are incorporated into

NCES's publications.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 241

Eisenhower Federal Activities — $50,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve the teaching and learning of all students through the development and demonstration of high-quality professional development activities, the

provision of high-quality instructional materials and information about effective programs, and the expansion of a cadre of highly accomplished teachers.

Objective Indicators Data Source/Next Update Strategies

Development and demonstration projects

1. Improve classroom instruction

through effective professional

development.

1.1 Teachers' skills and classroom instruction.

A majority of teachers who receive services

from Eisenhower-supported projects over a

sustained period of time will report that their

knowledge, skills, and classroom instruction

improve.(National evaluations of

Development & Demonstration Projects and

the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse are

scheduled to occur between 1999-2001.)

1.2 Student performance. Students whose

teachers receive services from an Eisenhowersupported project will show improvements in

attendance and/or performance by the final

year of federal support for the project.

1.3 Impact on Capacity. Projects will

demonstrate that they have contributed to the

capacity of participating schools and/or school

districts to provide high-quality professional

development to teachers and other educators.

1.1 Project reports, 2001; 

national evaluation, 2001. 

1.2 Project reports, 2001;

national evaluation, 2001 . 

1.3 Project reports, 2001;

national evaluation 2001.

! The ED program office will develop

priorities and monitor projects for

alignment with the Department’s

strategic plan, with principles for highquality professional development, and

with high standards for content and

student performance.

Eisenhower National Clearinghouse for Mathematics and Science Education (ENC)

2. Contribute to the improvement

of the teaching and learning of

all students by providing access

to high-quality instructional

materials and information about

exemplary programs in

mathematics and science

education for elementary and

secondary schools.

2.1 Volume of customer requests. The number

of requests for products available through

ENC and “hits” on electronic sites will

increase by 10 percent annually.

2.2 Utility. At least 80 percent of customers who

use ENC products will report that the

products meet their needs in terms of

accessibility and quality.

2.1 ENC reports, 1998;

national evaluation, 2000.

2.2 Customer surveys, 2000;

national evaluation, 2000.

! The ED program office will work with

the Department’s leadership teams,

NSF, other agencies, and the ENC to

develop comprehensive strategies for

disseminating products to target

audiences, tracking use of products,

and obtaining customer feedback to

ensure that the products are used

effectively to improve mathematics and

science education.
Eisenhower Federal Activities — $50,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve the teaching and learning of all students through the development and demonstration of high-quality professional development activities, the

provision of high-quality instructional materials and information about effective programs, and the expansion of a cadre of highly accomplished teachers.

Objective Indicators Data Source/Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 242

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS)

3. Contribute to the improvement

of the teaching and learning of

all students by expanding the

cadre of highly accomplished

teachers.

3.1 Standards and assessments developed.

Standards and assessments developed,

approved, and offered by the NBPTS will

increase annually, reaching a cumulative total

of at least 25 teaching fields by the year 2002.

By 1998, standards and assessments were

developed, approved, and offered for 7 

teaching fields.

3.2 Teachers certified. The number of teachers

who will be awarded NBPTS will increase

annually, reaching a cumulative total of

105,000 by the year 2006. By 1998, 911

teachers had been awarded NBPTS 

certification.

3.1 NBPTS reports, 1998.

3.2 NBPTS reports, 1998.

! The ED program office will work with

the NBPTS to develop strategies to

utilize NBPTS-certified teachers as

resources for other ED programs and

projects.

! The ED program office will work with

the NBPTS to encourage and enlist

states, local school districts, education

organizations and business and

industry to provide financial aid and

other incentives to teachers seeking

NBPTS certification. 
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 243

Fund for the Improvement of Education — $105,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To support nationally significant and innovative projects for improving education.

Objective Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Support the Department’s

strategic priorities in

elementary and secondary

education.

1.1 High quality. Projects funded will support

the priorities and be of high quality.

1.1 Peer reviewer comments,

1998; annual review by

Assistant Secretary’s

Office, 1998.

! Select highly qualified reviewers.

2. Support the development of

voluntary national tests in

fourth-grade reading and

eighth-grade math.

2.1 National tests. National tests in reading and

math will be developed and tested.

2.1 National Academy of

Sciences evaluation,

1999.

! Provide necessary funding to National

Assessment Governing Board.

3. Recognize effective schools and

teachers.

3.1 Support effective schools and teachers. 

Support will be provided each year for Blue

Ribbon Schools and Christa McAuliffe

Fellowships.

3.1 Annual review of

proposals, 1998.

! Revise national panel review process

for Blue Ribbon Schools.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 244

Javits Gifted And Talented Students Education— $ 6,500,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve the teaching and learning of gifted and talented students through research, demonstration projects, personnel training, and other activities of

national significance.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Conduct research and evaluation

on gifted and talented education

that improve the identification

and teaching of gifted and

talented students, emphasize

high levels of performance for

all students, and promote total

school improvement. 

1.1 Quality of research and evaluations.

Research and evaluations conducted by the

National Center are high quality.

1.2 Effective dissemination. The Center’s

dissemination activities are effective, i.e.,

appropriate audiences are aware of, have

access to, and receive research products and

the results of evaluations in appropriate

formats.

1.3 Utility. More than 80 percent of recipients

will report that the Center’s research products

and evaluation results contribute to their

knowledge, skills, or professional work.

1.1 Expert panel review, 1999.

1.2 Internal quality control

and external reviews,

1998; customer surveys,

1999.

1.3 Customer surveys, 1999.

! Collaborate with national, state, and

local associations and agencies to

develop research plans to improve gifted

and talented education.

! Conduct internal and external reviews to

assure that the Center’s research plans

are cohesive and comprehensive.

! Strengthen peer reviews and the

monitoring of Center-supported projects

and evaluations to assure that products

are useful and of high-quality.

! Facilitate collaboration between the

Center and the projects it evaluates in

order to foster continuous improvement.

2. Develop models for developing

the talents of students who are

economically disadvantaged, are

limited English proficient,

and/or have disabilities.

2.1 Student identification. Strategies developed

by Javits projects will increase the diversity of

students identified as gifted and talented.

2.2 Classroom instruction. A majority of

teachers who receive Javits services will

report improved capacity to meet the needs of

gifted and talented students.

2.3 Student performance. At least 80 percent of

teachers who receive services from Javits

projects will report improvements in student

attendance, engagement, and/or performance.

2.1 Project reports, 1998; 

national evaluation, 1999.

2.2 Project reports, 1998;

national evaluation and

customer surveys, 1999.

2.3 Project reports, 1998;

national evaluation and

customer surveys, 1999.

! Collaborate with other programs and

agencies to coordinate initiatives in

gifted and talented education.

! Work with national, state, and local

associations and agencies to develop a

national R&D agenda, disseminating

products, and implementing effective

research-based practices.

! Provide online and/or print access to

challenging teaching, content, and

student performance standards and to

exemplary materials in gifted and

talented education.

3. Demonstrate leadership in

supporting and strengthening

gifted and talented education

and broadening its impact on

total school improvement.

3.1 Utility. A majority of recipients of Javits

products and participants in Javits-supported

activities will report that these services

contributed to their work in gifted and

talented education. 

3.1 National evaluation and

customer surveys, 1999.

! Address important issues in gifted and

talented education and facilitate

networking among key practitioners

through activities such as conferences

and technical assistance.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 245

Eisenhower Regional Mathematics and Science Education Consortia — $25,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To contribute to the improvement of mathematics and science education by (1) providing technical assistance to support implementation of teaching methods

and assessment tools, (2) disseminating exemplary mathematics and science education instructional materials, and (3) coordinating resources for improving

mathematics and science education.

Objective Indicators Data Source/Next Update Strategies

Technical assistance

1. Provide high-quality technical

assistance (Includes planning

assistance, technical assistance,

and training.)

1.1 Alignment with standards. The content of

Consortia technical assistance will be

explicitly aligned with high content and

performance standards and/or will be focused

on assisting in the implementation of high

standards and practices related to their

attainment.

1.2 Improvements in participants’ practice.

Teachers, administrators, and providers of

professional development who participate in

the Consortia’s continuing technical

assistance will report improvement in their

practice. Baseline: 62% of participants said

they had incorporated some new behavior into

their jobs as a result of the Consortiasponsored professional development.

(National Evaluation, SRI, International,

1998.)

1.1 Consortia reports, 1998,

1999, 2000); external

evaluation 1999, 2000. 

1.2 Consortia reports, 1998, 

1999, 2000; external

evaluation, 1999, 2000.

! The ED program office will work with

the Department’s initiatives leadership

teams and Executive Management

Council and with the National Science

Foundation to develop and implement

integrated plans for work in

mathematics and science education.

! The ED program office will work with

the Consortia and professional

organizations to align efforts for state

and local mathematics and science

education with high content and

student performance standards.

! With the advice and guidance of their

regional boards, the Consortia shall set

priorities for technical assistance

activities in their regions.
Eisenhower Regional Mathematics and Science Education Consortia — $25,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To contribute to the improvement of mathematics and science education by (1) providing technical assistance to support implementation of teaching methods

and assessment tools, (2) disseminating exemplary mathematics and science education instructional materials, and (3) coordinating resources for improving

mathematics and science education.

Objective Indicators Data Source/Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 246

Dissemination and coordination of resources

2. In coordination with the

Eisenhower National

Clearinghouse (ENC),

disseminate information about

promising and exemplary

practices in mathematics and

science education.

2.1 Utility. A majority of the recipients of 

Consortia and ENC products and resources

will report that the products have contributed

to improving their work.

2.1 Consortia reports, 1998, 

1999, 2000; external

evaluation, 1999, 2000.

C The ED program office will work with

the Consortia and ENC to develop

comprehensive strategies for

disseminating products to target

audiences, tracking use of products,

and obtaining customer feedback.

C With the guidance of their regional

boards, the Consortia shall prepare and

implement a strategic outreach plan to

identify key stakeholders and solicit

their collaboration.

3. Contribute to collaboration and

networking with targeted

groups within and/or across

states.

3.1 Impact on collaboration and networking. At

least 80 percent of members of Consortia

teams and networks will report that value was

added in one or more of the following ways:

strengthening relationships; increasing service

coordination; increasing access to resources;

or leveraging resources. Baseline: As of 1996,

67 % of members of Consortia teams/networks

said membership had helped them obtain

ideas/contacts that would strengthen their

work. (National Evaluation, SRI

International, 1998.)

3.1 Customer surveys, 1999,

2000. 
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 247

21st Century Community Learning Centers Program — $200,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To enable rural and inner-city public elementary and secondary schools, or consortia of such schools, to plan, implement, or expand projects that benefit the

educational, health, social service, cultural and recreational needs of their communities.

Objective Indicator Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Enhance learning opportunities

for children and youth in the

core curriculum areas.

1.1 Reading/literacy. Community Learning

Centers will report higher reading

achievement among students participating in

reading/literacy activities annually beginning

in 1998.

1.2 Mathematics. Centers will report higher

mathematics achievement among students

participating in mathematics activities

annually beginning in 1998.

1.3 Science. Centers will report higher science

achievement among the students participating

in science activities annually beginning in

1998.

1.4 Participant satisfaction. Students

participating in Center programs will report

them to be beneficial, enjoyable and of high

quality. 

1.5 Social/recreational services. Participants

receiving social and recreational services from

Centers will report that those services are

beneficial, of high quality, and supportive of

learning.

1.1 Planned external

evaluation, 1999.

1.2 Planned external

evaluation, 1999.

1.3 Planned external

evaluation, 1999.

1.4 Planned external

evaluation, 1999.

1.5 Planned external

evaluation, 1999.

! Establish an absolute competitive

priority for programs that offer

expanded learning opportunities for

children and that contribute to reduced

drug use and violence.

! Establish a competitive preference to

programs that provide services in core

subjects such as reading, mathematics

or science.

! Establish technical assistance support

network for grantees to ensure quality of

implemented programs.

2.Encourage positive changes in

behavior and attitudes of

participating students.

2.1 Student behavior. Centers will report

positive trends in behavior among participants

on measures such as regular school

attendance, taking of advanced or more

difficult courses, decreasing disciplinary

actions.

2.2 Student attitudes. Center participants will

report positive changes in how they view

school and in their desire to participate in

more Community Learning Center programs.

2.1 Grantee reports, 1999;

planned external

evaluation, 1999.

2.2 Grantee reports, 1999;

planned external

evaluation, 1999.

! Provide quality enhancing workshops

and technical assistance to Center staffs.
21st Century Community Learning Centers Program — $200,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To enable rural and inner-city public elementary and secondary schools, or consortia of such schools, to plan, implement, or expand projects that benefit the

educational, health, social service, cultural and recreational needs of their communities.

Objective Indicator Source and Next Update Strategies

U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 248

3.Encourage positive changes in

attitudes and behavior of parents

and community members.

3.1 Parent attitudes. Parents of Center

participants will report positive changes in

their attitudes about their children=s learning,

safety, behavior and future opportunities.

3.2 Parent and community involvement. 

Parents and community members will report

greater involvement in the schools which have

Community Learning Center programs and

activities.

3.1 Center survey, 1999;

planned external

evaluation, 1999.

3.2 Center survey, 1999;

planned external

evaluation, 1999.

! Provide quality enhancing workshops

and technical assistance to Centers.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 249

National Writing Project — $5,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To improve the quality of student writing and learning, and the teaching of writing as a learning process in the nation's classrooms.

Objective Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Support and promote the

establishment of teacher

training programs designed to

improve the writing skills of

teachers and students.

1.1 Teacher participation. The number of

teachers participating in the National Writing

Project (NWP) will increase annually and will

include teachers from many disciplines.

1.2 Number of project sites. According to peer

reviews, an increasing number of NWP sites

will perform more effectively than in previous

years and at least 75% of sites will meet

NWP's standards for renewal.

1.3 Improved student writing skills. Students

taught by NWP teachers will show improved

student writing skills.

1.1 U.S. Department of

Education monitoring team

annual site visit report

(using baseline data from

1996–97) .

1.2 Annual self-evaluations

from NWP Projects (using

baseline data from

1994–95, and 1995–96

reports).

1.3 The NWP Annual Site

Survey prepared by

Inverness Research

Associates (using baseline

data from 1994–95 and

1995–96 surveys).

! Provide bridge services between the

NWP and other student literacy

programs, including Read*Write*Now/

America Reads Challenge and the

Family Involvement Partnership.

! Monitor the peer review process that

gives participating teacher/leaders the

opportunity to evaluate the

accomplishments of their peers at other

NWP sites .

! NWP conducts annual peer review of

each site and provides new or troubled

sites experienced national reviewers and

advisors. Department provides technical

assistance to review process.

2. Disseminate effective practices

and research findings regarding

the teaching of writing to all

teachers.

2.1 Teachers teaching their colleagues. An

increasing number of NWP teachers will

impart knowledge and skills learned at NWP

summer workshops to other teachers in their

school districts.

2.2 Development of alternative methods of

student evaluations by teachers. An

increasing number of NWP teachers will 

participate in directed research activities to

develop alternative methods of student

assessment in writing.

2.3 Sites adapted for special needs students. 

The NWP will adapt its basic teaching model

to those sites with special needs, including

English as a Second Language (ESL), socioeconomic, or culturally diverse sites in urban

and rural settings.

2.1 U.S. Department of

Education monitoring team

annual site visit report

(using baseline data from

1996–97 report).

2.2 Annual self-evaluations

from NWP projects (using

baseline data from

1994–95, and 1995–96

reports).

2.3 The NWP Project Annual

Site Survey prepared by

Inverness Research

Associates (using baseline

data from 1994–95 and

1995–96 surveys).

! Provide a link between the NWP and

ED customers interested in teaching

methods of writing; make available a

list of NWP sites at meetings,

conferences, and exhibits as part of ED

outreach services; and submit NWP

materials for dissemination through the

National Library of Education and

ERIC

! Collaborate with the NWP to synthesize

and disseminate - through publications,

direct mail, and the Internet - teacher

research produced by the NWP

! Disseminate information concerning the

best practices of NWP project to

encourage high-quality professional

development opportunities
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 250

Civic Education — $6,300,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To enhance the attainment of the third and sixth National Education Goals by educating students about the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Objectives Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

1. Provide quality civic education

curricula to elementary and

secondary school students

through the “We the People:

The Citizen and the

Constitution” program.

1.1 Participation in civic education program.

An increasing number of students will

participate in civic education programs. In the

1997-98 school year 4 million students will

participate in “We the People” program. The

program will be implemented in at least one

school district in each congressional district

in the nation.

1.2 National standards in civics and

government. National standards in civics and

government increasingly will be distributed to

educators and used in the classroom.

1.1 Annual grantee project

report and annual grant

application March 1997,

1998.

1.2 National Standards for

Civics and Government,

Center for Civic

Education, 1994; 1997.

! Disseminate information about the "We

the People..." program through program

coordinators and publications in order

to increase awareness of the value of

civic education among educators.

! Support, along with the Department of

Justice, the development of curricular

materials on the Constitution and the

Bill of Rights.

! Disseminate national standards in the

content area of civics and government,

including over the Internet.

! Participate in planning (see Objective

2).

2. Foster students’ interest and

ability to participate

competently and responsibly

in the democratic process. 

2.1 Student knowledge about democracy and

the Constitution. Students who participate in

the civic education program will develop an

increased understanding of the institutions of

American democracy. External studies find

that the program has positive, significant

effects on students’ knowledge about

government, and the Constitution.

2.2 Citizenship skills. Students’ ability to

participate as citizens in the democratic

process will be enhanced by the program’s

emphasis on problem solving activities,

critical thinking, and improvement of

communication skills. 

2.1 Annual grantee project

report and annual grant

application, March 1997;

1998; Educational Testing

Service controlled

classroom evaluation of

effectiveness of “We the

People” curriculum, 1991;

Council for Basic

Education case study,

1991.

2.2 Annual project report and

grant application, March

1998; Stanford University

1993.

! Participate in planning and

administering the annual national

hearings and student competition for

“We the People” in Washington, D.C.

! Increase awareness of civic education

through Department of Education public

information vehicles.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 251

International Education Program (Student Achievement Institute) — $5,000,000 (FY 99)

Goal: To provide for an international education exchange program and the study of international programs and delivery systems.

Objectives Indicators Source and Next Update Strategies

1. Assist eligible countries in the

adaptation and implementation

of effective curricula and

teacher training programs in

civics and government education

and economic education

developed in the U.S.

1.1 Curriculum and training programs. An

increasing percentage of educators from

eligible countries will implement curriculum

and training programs in civics and

government education as well as economic

education.

1.2 Student knowledge and skills. Participating

students will demonstrate increased

knowledge, skills, and traits of character in

their understanding of civics, and democratic

and economic principles.

1.3 Research and evaluation. To increase the

capacity to evaluate the impact of educational

program on educators and students.

1.1 Annual performance and

evaluation report, 1998.

1.2 Survey of students,

teachers, and scholars

participating in the

exchange of program will

be conducted, 1998 and

1999.

1.3 Annual performance and

evaluation report, 1998;

survey of program

participants 1998 and

1999.

! Disseminate information about

exemplary curricula and teacher

training programs.

! Provide technical assistance to the

grantees on curricula frameworks.

! Conduct an annual site visit of selected

programs in eligible countries to

observe effects and impact of programs.

2. Create and implement

educational programs for United

States students which draw upon

the experiences of emerging

constitutional democracies.

2.1 Implementation of civic and economic

education programs in the U.S. An

increasing percentage of students, and

teachers in the U.S. will participate in

programs based on the experiences of

emerging constitutional democracies.

2.1 Annual Performance

Report, 1998.

! Encourage grantees to share lessons

about the development and

implementation of the educational

programs.

! Monitor program by conducting site

visits of selected programs.

! Encourage grantees to collaborate on

project activities in common sites in

eligible countries.

3. Provide a means for the

exchange of ideas and

experiences in civics and

government education and

economic education among

political, educational, and

private sector leaders of the U.S.

and participating eligible

countries.

3.1 Exchange of ideas. An increasing number of

educators and political and private sector

leaders will participate in conferences,

seminars, training and the exchange of ideas

with participants from eligible countries.

3.1 Annual performance

report, 1998.
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 252
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 253

Civil Rights
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 254
U.S. Department of Education Program Performance Plans - 2/25/98 - page 255

Office for Civil Rights (OCR) —$68,000,000 (FY 99) 

Goal: To ensure equal access to education for all students through the vigorous enforcement of civil rights.

Objective Indicators Sources and Next Update Strategies

Impact on students

1. Maximize the impact of

available resources on civil

rights in education.

1.1 Access. The estimated number of students

with access to high-quality education will

increase.

1.2 Number of students affected. The estimated

number of students positively affected by

OCR's casework will increase.

1.3 Increased compliance. The number of

recipients that change policies, procedures, or

practices to comply with Federal civil rights

law increases.

1.1 OCR Report based on Case

Evaluation Report, OCR’s

survey of Elementary and

Secondary Education

School Civil Rights

Compliance, and

additional data sources to

be determined, FY 2000.

1.2 OCR Case Evaluation

Report based on data from

case files, odd numbered

years, FY 1999.

1.3 Annual data from OCR's

Case Information System,

FY 1999.

! OCR will implement a balanced

enforcement program by responding to

complaints and conducting proactive

compliance reviews that target

resources for maximum impact. 

! OCR will maximize the impact of

available resources by addressing the

most acute problems of discrimination

and by providing tangible assistance to

the greatest number of students

possible.

Empowerment of students and parents

2. Empower others to learn to

solve their own problems of

securing equal access to quality

education.

2.1 Successful partnerships. The number of

stakeholder partnerships that lead to civil

rights compliance increases.

2.1 Annual OCR Case

Evaluation Report,

FY 1998.

! OCR will provide civil rights-related

information, technical expertise and

assistance to a broad range of

stakeholders engaged in collaborative

efforts to ensure equal educational

opportunity.

! OCR will develop case resolution

agreements that provide for the active

participation of parents and other

stakeholders.
For additional copies of the Annual Plan, Volumes 1 or 2:

# Call 1-800-USA-LEARN. If in Washington, D.C., call 202 401-2000.

# Fax a request to 202 401-0689.

# E-mail a request to: strategic_plan@ed.gov.

# Download an HTML or PDF file from the Department’s web site. The Annual

Plan will be located under http://www.ed.gov/pubs/.

# For TTY, call 1-800-437-0833.

# For a Braille or audio-tape version, call 202 260-9895.

For questions on this plan, call Heather Ryner on 202 205-7939.