Detailed Information on the
Federal Support for the National Technical Institute for the Deaf Assessment

The Department shall work with Congress to incorporate a requirement for formal audited financial statements of NTID, separate from the host institution, the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT), into the Education of the Deaf Act.

Collect initial data, consistent with the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) methodology, on the persistence of sub-baccalaureate and baccalaureate students.

Collect initial data for a new graduation rate measure implemented in fiscal year 2007.

Conduct an on-site monitoring visit to NTID in fiscal year 2008.

NTID shall take affirmative steps to improve student outcomes related to persistence.

NTID shall take affirmative steps to improve student outcomes related to graduation.

NTID shall take affirmative steps to improve post-school outcomes for graduates related to employment and pursuit of higher level degrees.

The Department will develop a formal mechanism and schedule for monitoring the programs' compliance with the Education of the Deaf Act.

The Department will take affirmative steps to assess the scope and quality of the programs at the Rochester Institute of Technology that are funded through the appropriation to ensure that they are operating effectively, addressing their statutory purpose, and achieving a high level of results for students.

Measure: The persistence percentage of sub-baccalaureate students (1st column) and baccalaureate students (2nd column), including transfer students.

Explanation:The persistence rate is an average of three years of cohorts who are moving from their first-year into their second year and includes transfer students who are in their first year at NTID and return the following year.

Measure: The percentage of sub-baccalaureate (1st column) and baccalaureate students (2nd column) who graduate within seven years.

Explanation:The measures for the sub-baccalaureate and baccalaureate graduation rates cover all students who earn degrees, including transfer students, uses a 7-year time limit on the amount of time from entry to graduation for sub-baccalaureate students and baccalaureate students, and reports percentages according to a 3-year rolling average.

Measure: The percentage of first-time, full-time, degree-seeking sub-baccalaureate students (1st column) and baccalaureate students (2nd column) who graduate within 150% of the program-based length of time.

Explanation:This measure is consistent with the methodology used by the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and other Department programs to measure graduation. It is being added in order to obtain data that is comparable with what is being submitted by other institutions. Program-based length of time refers to whether the stated program length for sub-baccalaureates is 2 or 3 years and for baccalaureates is 4 or 5 years. The 5-year program includes an internship year. This measure is in addition to the current graduation measure, which provides historical trend data and includes students, such as transfer students, who are not accounted for under the IPEDS methodology.

Measure: Maintain a minimum student body of undergraduates, graduates, and interpreters, as established by NTID.

Explanation:The PART indicator combines enrollments for undergraduates, graduates, and interpreters. The enrollment targets for undergraduates and graduates would not change. The FY 2008 target for the number of students enrolled at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf's educational interpreter training program is revised from 100 to 120. As such, the total enrollment figure for 2008 would be revised from 1,300 to 1,320.

Measure: Total educational cost per successful outcome, where the successful outcome is defined as graduation.

Explanation:The efficiency measure is calculated by dividing the total annual student expenditures by the number of graduates in that school year. Graduates include students receiving certificates, diplomas, associate degrees, bachelor's degrees, and master's degrees. The cost is calculated as the total program budget excluding costs associated with research, public services, auxiliary enterprises, construction, and the Endowment Grant program.

Measure: Federal cost per successful outcome, where the successful outcome is defined as graduation.

Explanation:The efficiency measure is calculated by dividing the Federal appropriation by the number of graduates in that school year. Federal student financial aid, vocational rehabilitation payments, other Federal support for students, and Federal grants and contracts are not included in this calculation. Federal funds for construction are also excluded. Graduates include students receiving certificates, diplomas, associate degrees, bachelor's degrees, and master's degrees.

Measure: The percentages of graduates who are employed (1st column), in advanced education or training (2nd column), or are neither employed or enrolled in advanced education or training (3rd column) during their first year after graduation.

Explanation:

Measure: The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking sub-baccalaureate students (1st column) and baccalaureate students (2nd column) who were in their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous year and are enrolled in the current year.

Explanation:This measure is consistent with the methodology used by the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and other Department programs to measure persistence. It is being added in order to obtain data that is comparable with what is being submitted by other institutions. This measure is in addition to the current persistence measure, which provides historical trend data and includes students, such as transfer students, who are not accounted for under the IPEDS methodology.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The Education of the Deaf Act spells out the purpose of the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID), which is to promote the employment of persons who are deaf by providing them with technical and professional education. The Education of the Deaf Act of 1986 (EDA) continued the authority of the Department to contract with a host institution for the operation of a residential facility and to provide a Federal subsidy for NTID. NTID offers a variety of technical programs at the sub-baccalaureate degree level (certificates, diplomas, and associate degrees). NTID students also may participate in 200+ educational programs available through its host, the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). Students are provided a wide range of support services and special programs, including tutoring, remedial and language enrichment, counseling, interpreting, mentoring, specialized educational media, and specialized job placement. In addition, NTID conducts applied research on occupational and employment-related aspects of deafness and conducts training workshops and seminars related to deafness.

Evidence: The National Technical Institute for the Deaf Act; Education of the Deaf Act of 1986, as amended, section 112; and agreement with RIT for the operation of NTID.

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Americans with Disabilities Act have opened the doors to higher education for many individuals who are deaf. However, some students are not able to achieve at mainstream institutions, even with appropriate accommodations. NTID provides an option of a large program specifically targeted to individuals who are deaf that is embedded in an university that primarily serves nondisabled students. NTID provides intensive specialized services to help students obtain a degree and provides them a wide range of technical career options through its own programs and those of RIT. Some students who are deaf prefer the communications access and community aspects of a school such as NTID. The Department requests funding for NTID in order to promote educational options and expand educational and employment opportunities for persons who are deaf.

Evidence: The Department conducted a study in 1994 on Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in Postsecondary Education which indicated that about 5% of students who were deaf and hard of hearing and enrolled in higher education attended NTID in 1993. More recent data are not available. However, according to the Office of Special Education Programs' (OSEP), approximately 6,600 students with hearing impairments exited special education in school year 2001-02. OSEP's 2004 National Longitudinal Transition Study estimates that approximately 67% of youth with hearing impairments enroll in postsecondary school within 2 years of leaving high school and 37% enroll in a 4-year college. Applying these percentages would result in about 4,442 students enrolling in postsecondary school in 2002, with 2,442 students enrolling in 4-year colleges. In 2002, NTID enrolled 355 new deaf students. That year, approximately 43% of NTID students were enrolled in baccalaureate programs. The NTID enrollments amount to roughly 8% of the potential pool of students with hearing impairments enrolled in postsecondary school and 6% of the students enrolled in 4-year colleges.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: NTID was created in 1965 to provide a technical education alternative to the liberal arts education provided by Gallaudet University. Today, in addition to NTID and Gallaudet, there are many public and private postsecondary programs available to students who are deaf or hard of hearing. The Department's 1994 study showed that approximately 1,850 postsecondary education institutions provided special support services which served 4,520 deaf students, 7,770 hard of hearing students, and 7,750 students with hearing impairments (those who did not distinguish between deaf or hard of hearing). More recently, Gallaudet and NTID conducted an informal survey of college and career programs for students who are deaf and published a guide to programs that responded to the survey in 2001. This guide provides detailed descriptions of 126 postsecondary education programs around the country that have specialized programs for students who are deaf. However, this is just a subset of the schools that provide specialized services.

Evidence: The Department's 1994 study on "Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in Postsecondary Education;" Gallaudet and NTID's College and Career Programs for Deaf Students, 2001; and OSEP records.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: Information provided to the Department indicates that RIT operates NTID in accordance with its governing legislation, the Education of the Deaf Act (EDA), and that RIT maintains appropriate management structures and procedures necessary to administer NTID and its programs. However, by statute, NTID is the only entity eligible to receive Federal support through this program. While the EDA requires NTID to maintain a national advisory group to advise NTID in formulating and carrying out policies governing the operation of NTID, this group is only advisory. Management and programmatic decisions are all under the purview of NTID, RIT, and RIT's Board of Directors. As a result of the statutory structure of the program, funding is awarded to one specified grantee without regard to performance, and the provisions in the authorizing statute related to Federal oversight are limited. The competitive process helps ensure program oversight and focus on performance. Without competition and with funding earmarked for NTID, there is no direct Federal funding incentive for the Institute to improve program performance. Programs that are competed are ensured extensive review during each competition. There has been no external evaluation of the effectiveness or efficiency of NTID programs or whether the direct appropriation to NTID is still the best mechanism available to serve the target population or use of Federal funds. Though enrollments at NTID have been stagnant for many years, it continues to receive the second largest share of the Department's dedicated dollars for postsecondary education for individuals who are deaf (after Gallaudet).

Evidence: The Education of the Deaf Act and Department monitoring efforts, including reviews of annual reports, audits, and budget materials provided by the Institute and meetings with NTID staff.

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: The target population for this program is specified in the Education of the Deaf Act, which is to provide postsecondary technical training and education for individuals who are deaf in order to prepare them for successful employment. The Institute served 628 technical, 427 undergraduate, 100 interpreter, and 126 graduate students in school year 2004-05. Department reviews of written materials and meetings with NTID staff indicate that the Institute's programs are targeted toward the key purpose of increasing employment opportunities for individuals who are deaf by providing quality training and educational programs for these individuals.

Evidence: The Education of the Deaf Act and Department records.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The Department and NTID have agreed on a primary long-term performance measure, which is, "By 2008, the overall graduation rate for NTID students will reach 60%, rate for sub-baccalaureate students will reach 54%, and rate for baccalaureate students reach 72%." This measure is closely tied with the purpose of the program, significant, directly relates to student outcomes, and quantifiable. In addition, the Institute is providing data on the percentage of its graduates who are employed one year after graduation. By 2006, the target is for 95% of NTID graduates who chose to be employed outside of the home to be gainfully employed. Graduates who chose to continue their education or are not in the workforce, for whatever reason, are not included in the calculation.

Evidence: NTID's annual report and Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) data submitted by the Institute.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: NTID has established ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term performance measures. The overall graduation rate in fiscal year 2004 was 56%. However, the target for 2004 was 57%. The target of 60% by 2008 represents a significant increase over present performance. In order to meet the target for 2008, the actual graduation rate would have to increase an average of 1% per year for the next four reporting periods. These are ambitious targets and timeframes because graduation rates are not readily affected by short-term fixes and take intensive long-term efforts to show improvement. The percentage of students who are employed one year after graduation was 93% for fiscal year 2004. The target for 2004 was 95% and continues to be 95% in the outyears. While the current rate is very close to the target, 95% is considered an excellent rate and an appropriate long-term target.

Evidence: NTID's annual report and GPRA data submitted by NTID.

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: NTID annually submits data related to the long-term measures of graduation rates and employment rates of its students. The Institute also reports on student retention rates and enrollment targets, which contribute to the success of the long-term measures. In addition, data on total educational and Federal costs per successful graduate are available that can be used as indicators related to understanding program efficiency.

Evidence: GPRA data submitted by the Institute.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: The Institute has baseline figures for all annual performance measures, and most of the targets are ambitious, as measured against current performance levels. For example, the long-term measure related to overall graduation rates has annual targets that increase from 57 % for fiscal year 2004 to 60% in fiscal year 2008. The target for the measure related to students who are employed one year after graduation is maintained at 95%, a continuing ambitious target. In addition, NTID enrolled 1,055 undergraduate students in 2005. The target for this measure for 2005 and 2006 is 1,080. The overall retention rate for 2004 was 75% and target was 74%. The target for 2005 and 2006 is 75%.

Evidence: GPRA data submitted by NTID.

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: These measures have been in effect for several years, and NTID is committed to improving its graduation rates and maintaining post-graduation outcomes for students. The Department worked collaboratively with the Institute in developing performance measures and meaningful long-term program goals and continues to work with NTID on modifying the measures and determining appropriate levels of performance.

Evidence: GPRA data submitted by NTID and other Institute reports and data submissions.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The Institute meets all accrediting standards, which is an indication of quality programming. In addition, there were a number of General Accounting Office studies completed related to NTID: (1) Educating Students at Gallaudet and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf: Who are Served and What are the Costs? (1985); (2) Costs and Student Characteristics at Federally Assisted Schools (1986); and (3) Deaf Education: Improved Oversight Needed for the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (1993). However, these analyses were limited in scope and are no longer current. The Department has not proposed or conducted any studies or evaluations of the scope or effectiveness of NTID's programs or how well the Institute is addressing its statutory purpose or the needs of its service population.

Evidence: GAO reports and Department records.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The Department is not able to determine the impact of particular levels of funding on the performance of the Institute in relation to its annual and long-term performance measures. In addition, budget requests from NTID are incremental in nature over the prior year's total. The Department reports on performance data submitted by the Institute, but its budget requests are not explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals for NTID.

Evidence: Department budget requests and justifications and GPRA data.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: The Department has identified strategic planning deficiencies and worked with NTID to address these deficiencies. For example, the Department and the Institute have been actively involved in developing and modifying performance measures for this program. In addition, as progress is made on achieving annual and long-term measures, targets are reassessed and revised, as indicated. In fiscal year 2005, program staff evaluated NTID's new strategic plan and wrote to the Institute expressing concerns about how the changes will affect the central mission of the institution and the population that NTID serves and requested additional information. This resulted in an ongoing interchange that helped clarify the relationship of the changes to NTID's mission.

Evidence: GPRA data and Department records.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: The Department regularly receives high quality performance data in a timely manner from the Institute. NTID and the Department have actively collaborated in the process of developing performance goals and measures. While Department budget requests are not explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals for the Institute, the Department uses the data in monitoring activities and to help inform its budget requests for the program. For example, the Department reviews all data submitted by NTID and follows up on any inconsistencies or programmatic concerns with the Institute. The Department also uses this information in discussions with the Institute on how NTID allocates its Federal funds.

Evidence: GPRA, annual report, and budget submission data.

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: Department of Education employees are subject to the EDPAS system, which links employee performance to success in meeting the goals of the Department's strategic plan. Staff associated with this program are provided individual performance agreements that are designed to measure the degree to which the employee contributes to improving program performance. The Institute's performance also is monitored on an annual basis through annual data requests, periodic meetings, and attendance at National Advisory Group meetings.

Evidence: Department records.

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: At the Federal level, all funds are obligated according to an annual spending plan that is established at the beginning of the fiscal year. At the program level, funds are obligated within the timeframe set by the Department, and there are no carryover funds beyond that period.

Evidence: The Department's Office of Management records (Grants Administration Program System (GAPS) and e-Monitoring).

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The Federal Government substantially subsidizes the cost of educating students who are deaf at NTID. In 2004, the estimated average cost per student was approximately $43,017, and the Federal Appropriations represented about 81% of NTID's total revenue. Two efficiency measures have been developed for this program related to total educational cost per graduate and Federal cost per graduate. These measures will use already existing data. The Department does not have formal procedures to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution. However, NTID conducts an annual assessment of information technology (IT) innovations to find the most cost effective technology available and, where possible, uses it in a uniform and comprehensive way across the Institute. NTID has an IT investment review process that ranks all potential IT projects by mission priority.

Evidence: Department records and materials submitted by NTID.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The Office of Special Institutions is placed in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS). However, there is little collaboration or coordination between the Office of Special Institutions, other programs in OSERS, and other Department offices involved in general education or the education of individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing. At the program level, NTID has relationships with Gallaudet, the University of Rochester, the Federal Regional Postsecondary Education Programs for the Deaf Network (PEPNET), and all major national deafness organizations, and provides outreach to secondary schools serving students who are deaf.

Evidence: Department records.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) arranges for an annual independent audit of the university. No internal control weaknesses have been reported by RIT's auditors. However, RIT's audited financial statements only include audited figures for NTID as a single line item and is reported according to the RIT fiscal year, which runs from July through June. While the audit includes some notes regarding NTID, the information is not useful for monitoring because it is not reported according to the Federal fiscal year. At the Department's request, NTID provides a supplementary schedule of expenditures. However, these figures are not audited. In addition, section 203(b) of the EDA requires a financial and compliance audit of NTID, but does not specify the reporting period or information to be provided. The lack of comprehensive audit information limits the ability of the Department to document NTID's use of funds and track actual expenditures.

Evidence: Program financial management records in the GAPS and e-Monitoring systems; GAO's final audit report is titled "Low-Income and Minority Serving Institutions: Department of Education Could Improve Its Monitoring and Assistance" (GAO-04-961); the RIT audit, as required by OMB Circular A-133 and the EDA; program information provided by NTID; and other Department records.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: The Office of Special Institutions does not have a formal mechanism for monitoring NTID operations or a regular schedule for site visits. The Department's liaison officer attends NTID's National Advisory Group meetings. However, the role of the liaison officer at thes meetings primarily consists of information sharing activities. The program office does not have a system for identifying, assessing, and correcting management deficiencies.

Evidence: Department records.

Does the program have oversight practices that provide sufficient knowledge of grantee activities?

Explanation: The Office of Special Institutions meets periodically and communicates frequently with NTID representatives. In addition, NTID provides detailed responses to Department requests for program information. However, the Department does not conduct site visits to the program on a regular basis, document the actual use of funds in activity categories, assess program data quality, or assess NTID's compliance with the Institute's governing documents.

Evidence: Program records.

Does the program collect grantee performance data on an annual basis and make it available to the public in a transparent and meaningful manner?

Explanation: Detailed performance data are collected annually and shared with Congress through the budget process. GPRA data are posted on the Department website and provided to Congress. In addition, entries on the OSERS website provide a link to NTID's website. Data are also available through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS).

Evidence: The Department's justification materials submitted to Congress, website link, and GPRA and IPEDS data. See: www.ntid.rit.edu/; nces.ed.gov/ipeds/;

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: Data reported by NTID over the past 7 years indicate a generally increasing trend in graduation rates for sub-baccalaureate and baccalaureate students. For example, the graduation rate for baccalaureate students has steadily increased from 51% in 1997 to 68% in 2004. At the same time, the rates for sub-baccalaureate students show mixed results. After reaching a plateau of 50% from 1997 to 2001, the graduation rate for sub-baccalaureate students increased to 54% in 2002, but then declined to 52% in 2003 and 51% in 2004. However,both of these rates compare very favorably with the Title IV eligible institution graduation rates of 53.8% for 4-year institutions and 25.9% for 2-year institutions. The persistence rate for sub-baccalaureate students was 70% for FY 2004, 4 points under the target, and 86% for baccalaureate students, 2 points over the target. However, both of these rates compare favorably to the average Title IV eligible institutions rate of 67%. Regarding the employment goal, NTID graduates who enter the workforce continue to achieve very high levels of employment one year following graduation, though at a slightly lower rate in 2000 through 2003 than from 1996 through 1999. However, these percentages may not give a complete picture due to the number of students for whom there is no known status following graduation.

Evidence: GPRA data submitted by the University.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: NTID has met or is making substantial progress toward meeting its key annual performance goals, as indicated in the Department's GPRA reports. These include the 2004 targets for enrollment of educational interpreter and graduate level students, baccalaureate student retention, and graduate student graduation. The enrollment target for undergraduate students and the graduation and retention rates for sub-baccalaureate students were not met. However, as described in question 4.1, NTID has maintained high levels of performance on the key outcome indicators of persistence, graduation rates, and post-school outcomes and has taken affirmative steps to increase its performance in all areas. These include aggressive recruitment strategies, implementation of a comprehensive first-year experience program, and extensive outreach and training for prospective employers.

Evidence: GPRA and supplemental data submitted by NTID.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: The estimated average cost per student at NTID is very high ($43,017 in 2004). However, there are a number of mitigating factors such as the need for small classes and special support services for students who are deaf. Two efficiency measures have been developed for this program related to total educational cost per graduate and Federal cost per graduate. The measures use already existing data. However, targets have not been established for these measures. Other indicators of cost effectiveness for this program include a 5-year cost-cutting process initiated by NTID in 2003. NTID saved $1.3 million, including headcount reductions of nine positions in 2003, $1.7 million and reduced the number of positions by 15 in 2004, and plans to reduce expenditures by $1.6 million and 12 positions in 2005.

Evidence: Department records and materials submitted by NTID.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: The Department has not conducted any analyses of NTID's performance relative to other programs serving postsecondary students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Data on performance related to deaf or hard of hearing students enrolled in programs administered by other colleges and universities are not readily available that would permit such a comparison. However, NTID's persistence and graduation rates compare favorably with Gallaudet University and other Title IV eligible institutions, and its total educational cost per graduate and Federal cost per graduate is slightly lower than at Gallaudet.

Evidence: GPRA data and supplemental information submitted to the Department.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: The General Accounting Office conducted a number of studies related to NTID: (1) Educating Students at Gallaudet and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf: Who are Served and What are the Costs? (1985); (2) Costs and Student Characteristics at Federally Assisted Schools (1986); and (3) Deaf Education: Improved Oversight Needed for the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (1993). However, these analyses were limited in scope and are no longer current. There have not been any studies or evaluations of the scope of NTID's programs or how well the Institute is addressing its statutory purpose, complying with its governing documents, or meeting the needs of its service population.

Evidence: GAO reports and Department records.