A r c h i v e d I n f o r m a t i o n

U.S. Department of Education FY 1999 Annual Plan - February 27, 1998

Education for the Disadvantaged

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 eighth-graders 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.
2.2 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.
2.1 Title I Performance Report, 1998.
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.
• 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;
cosponsoring regional conferences on schoolwide and comprehensive school reform with the technical assistance centers and other partners;
improving dissemination of information on effective standards-based reforms in schoolwide and targeted assistance programs
collaborating with Title I state programs; and
identifying and disseminating 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.

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 I-supported 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 materials, 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.
4.3 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.
4.1 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.
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.
• 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.

• 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.

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 at-risk children.

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

Goal: To help break the cycle of poverty and illiteracy by improving the educational 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 large-sized 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.

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.

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, cost-effective 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.

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.

Improving coordination of services to migrant children

3. The MEP will 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.
3.5 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.
3.1 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 toll-free 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.
3.5 Study of the Participation of Migrant Children in Title I Schoolwide Programs (PES), 1997; LSS, 1999; MEP State Performance Reports, 1998.
• 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 non-competing 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 non-competing 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.

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 non-competing 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.

-###-

[Elementary and Secondary Education]

[Impact Aid]

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 eighth-graders 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. 2.2 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.	2.1 Title I Performance Report, 1998. 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.	• 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; cosponsoring regional conferences on schoolwide and comprehensive school reform with the technical assistance centers and other partners; improving dissemination of information on effective standards-based reforms in schoolwide and targeted assistance programs collaborating with Title I state programs; and identifying and disseminating 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.
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 I-supported 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 materials, 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. 4.3 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.	4.1 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. 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.	• 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. • 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.
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 at-risk children.

Even Start Family Literacy Program -- $114,992,000 (FY 99)
Goal: To help break the cycle of poverty and illiteracy by improving the educational 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 large-sized 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.
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.
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, cost-effective 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.

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.
Improving coordination of services to migrant children
3. The MEP will 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. 3.5 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.	3.1 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 toll-free 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. 3.5 Study of the Participation of Migrant Children in Title I Schoolwide Programs (PES), 1997; LSS, 1999; MEP State Performance Reports, 1998.	• 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.
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.

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.
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.

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.

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.

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 non-competing 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 non-competing 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.
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 non-competing 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.