Detailed Information on the
Federal Support for Gallaudet University Assessment

Ensure that Gallaudet takes affirmative steps to improve student outcomes related to persistence.

Ensure that Gallaudet takes affirmative steps to improve student outcomes related to graduation.

Implement a new measure on post-school outcomes for students graduating from the Model Secondary School for the Deaf (MSSD).

Develop targets for the efficiency measures related to Federal cost per successful outcome and total educational cost per successful outcome.

Conduct a monitoring visit to Gallaudet in fiscal year 2008.

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

The Department will take affirmative steps to assess the scope and quality of the programs at Gallaudet University that are funded through the appropriation to ensure that they are operating effectively, addressing their statutory purpose, and achieving results.

Measure: The percent of first-time, full-time degree seeking undergraduate students who were in their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous year and are enrolled in the current year.

Explanation:The method for calculating the undergraduate student persistence rate has been changed from calculating the persistence of all undergraduates, including upperclassmen, who return from one fall semester to the next fall semester to calculating the first-year persistence of first-time, full-time students from the fall semester of their freshmen year to the next. The change would make the methodology for this measure consistent with the methodology used by IPEDS to measure persistence. The University has provided actual data using this methodology, which was used to set the target for FY 2007 and beyond. The methodology for the graduate student persistence measure has not changed and includes the rate of return for all graduate students enrolled in a program at Gallaudet. IPEDS does not track graduate student persistence.

Measure: The Gallaudet University graduate student persistence rate.

Explanation:Graduate student persistence rates are calculated as the ratio of the number of returning graduate students in a particular fall to the number of graduate students available to return the following fall.

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

Explanation:The source of this data is institutional records based on an annual survey of the employment and advanced education status of students who have graduated from Gallaudet within the previous year.

Measure: The percentage of Model Secondary School for the Deaf (MSSD) graduates who are employed (1st column), in postsecondary education or training (2nd column), or not employed or in postsecondary education or training (3rd column) during their first year after graduation.

Explanation:he data on post-school outcomes is derived from an annual survey of students who graduated from MSSD the previous year. The percentages of students who are employed and percentage of students in postsecondary education or training during their first year after graduation may total more than 100% because some respondents may be employed while enrolled in a program of advanced education or training. This indicator replaces an indicator on employment and postsecondary education or training.

Measure: The number of programs and/or institutions adopting innovative curricula and other products or modify their strategies as a result of Model and Kendall school leadership will be increased.

Explanation:The figures represent the number of programs adopting Model/Kendall strategies or curricula.

Measure: Enrollments: The number of students enrolled in university-level programs (1st column) and the number of students enrolled in the Model Secondary School for the Deaf (MSSD) and Kendall Demonstration Elementary School (KDES)(2nd column).

Explanation:The FY 2008 target for the number of students enrolled in Gallaudet's university-level programs reflects a change in the method used to calculate graduate, graduate special, and professional studies student enrollments. The University made the change in order to eliminate potential double-counting. The new method was used in calculating enrollment for FY 2004 and beyond.

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, Federal grants and contracts, tuition, and other private funds received by the University are not included in this calculation. Graduates include students receiving bachelor's degrees, graduate certificates, master's degrees, specialists, and doctoral degrees.

Measure: Total 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 bachelor's degrees, graduate certificates, master's degrees, specialists, and doctorate 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: The percentage of first-time, full-time, degree-seeking undergraduate students who graduate within six years of enrollment.

Explanation:This measure used the IPEDS methodology of the percentage of all incoming first-time, full-time, degree-seeking freshmen students in the fall semester who have graduated by the end of six years after entry.

Measure: The number of full-time, degree-seeking undergraduate students enrolled at Gallaudet University.

Explanation:This measure includes the number of full-time, degree-seeking undergraduate students enrolled at Gallaudet University, consistent with the IPEDS methodology

Measure: Enrollments: The number of students enrolled in graduate programs at Gallaudet University.

Explanation:This program includes all full- and part-time students enrolled in degree-granting programs at the certificate, master's, specialist, and doctoral levels.

Measure: Enrollments: The number of students enrolled part-time in degree programs or in non-degree granting programs at Gallaudet University.

Explanation:Starting in FY 2008, this measure was changed to cover all students not counted in IPEDS, including undergraduate students enrolled in the English Language Institute, graduate students enrolled in the professional studies program, which grants continuing education credit, and part-time students enrolled in degree granting programs.

Measure: Enrollments: The number of students enrolled in the Model Secondary School for the Deaf (MSSD) and Kendall Demonstration Elementary School (KDES).

Explanation:

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The Education of the Deaf Act spells out the purpose of the Federal appropriation for Gallaudet University, which is to provide education and training to individuals who are deaf and otherwise to further the education of individuals who are deaf. The appropriation provides partial support for university operations, which include a traditional liberal arts curriculum for students who are deaf and graduate programs in fields related to deafness for students who are deaf and students who are hearing. Gallaudet also conducts a wide variety of basic and applied deafness research and public service programs and provides communications training, counseling, and other support services for its students. In addition, Gallaudet operates two federally funded elementary and secondary education programs on the main campus of the University through its Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center and research and dissemination activities related to elementary and secondary education.

Evidence: The Education of the Deaf Act of 1986, as amended, sections 101 - 111.

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

Explanation: The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 have opened doors to higher education for individuals who are deaf throughout the country. However, some students are not able to achieve at regular institutions of higher education, even with appropriate accommodations. Gallaudet provides intensive specialized services for individuals who are deaf to assist these individuals to obtain a baccalaureate or advanced degree. In addition, some students who are deaf prefer the communications access and community aspects of an institution primarily serving individuals who are deaf. Gallaudet provides an option along the continuum of educational options. The Department requests funding for Gallaudet in order to promote educational options and help promote educational and employment opportunities for persons who are deaf.

Evidence: The Department conducted a 1994 study on Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in Postsecondary Education which indicated that about 10% of these students who are enrolled in higher education attended Gallaudet. 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. The National Longitudinal Transition Study sponsored by OSEP estimates that approximately 67% of youth with hearing impairments enroll in some postsecondary education 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, Gallaudet enrolled 315 new undergraduates, amounting to about 7% of the potential pool of students with hearing impairments and 13% 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: Gallaudet has been authorized to confer college degrees since 1864. For over a century, it was the only postsecondary option for persons who are deaf. However, there are many more opportunities today. For example, the Federal Government also supports the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID), which provides postsecondary technical training and educational opportunities through the Rochester Institute of Technology. Also, while Gallaudet may be the only university totally devoted to serving students who are deaf, there are many public and private postsecondary educational options available for these students. The Department's 1994 study found approximately 1,850 institutions that provided special support services. These institutions served 4,520 deaf students, 7,770 hard of hearing students, and 7,750 students with hearing impairments. More recently, Gallaudet and NTID conducted a 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 provided 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 for their students who are deaf and hard of hearing.

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: Department monitoring efforts indicate that Gallaudet operates in accordance with its authorizing legislation, the Education of the Deaf Act (EDA), and maintains appropriate management structures and procedures necessary to administer its programs. However, the EDA provides Federal funding to Gallaudet University without regard to the benefits of competition. The competitive process helps ensure program oversight and focus on performance. Without competition and with funding earmarked for Gallaudet, there is no direct Federal funding incentive for the University to improve program performance. The Department has not conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness or efficiency of Gallaudet's programs or whether the direct appropriation to Gallaudet is the best mechanism available to serve the target population. While enrollments at Gallaudet have declined over time, the bulk of the Department's dedicated dollars for postsecondary education for the deaf continue to go to Gallaudet.

Evidence: The Education of the Deaf Act and Department monitoring efforts, including reviews of annual reports, audits, and budget materials provided by the University and meetings with University 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 statute - which is to provide training to individuals who are deaf and otherwise to further the education of individuals who are deaf. The University served 324 elementary and secondary education, 1,207 undergraduate, 451 graduate, and 176 professional studies students in school year 2004-05 and maintains a communication-barrier free campus. Department reviews of written materials and meetings with University staff indicate that all of Gallaudet programs are targeted toward individuals who are deaf and the majority toward the key purposes of providing training to individuals who are deaf and otherwise furthering the education of individuals who are deaf.

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 Gallaudet have agreed on two long-term performance measures, which are that, by 2008, the persistence rate for undergraduate students will reach 80% and the undergraduate graduation rate will reach 48%, and the graduate student and Model Secondary School for the Deaf persistence and graduation rates will be increased or maintained. These measures are closely tied with the purpose of the program, significant, directly relate to student outcomes, and are quantifiable. In addition, the University is providing data on the percentage of its graduates who are employed or in advanced education or training during the first year after graduation. For fiscal year 2006, the target is for 82% of June 2005 graduates to be employed and 41% in advanced education or training within a year after graduation. The percents total more than 100% because some respondents were employed full-or part-time and enrolled in advanced degree programs. We note that the above outcome areas cover the largest programs administered by the University. However, they do not represent all significant Gallaudet activities. Additional information reviewed in 2006 indicates that adequate data on outcomes related to the national mission and educational activities of the Clerc Center are not available. This program represents a sizable amount of funding and effort for the University. In addition, we believe better measures and data may be possible for post-school outcomes.

Evidence: The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) data submitted by the University.

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

Explanation: The University has established ambitious targets and time frames for its long-term performance measures. For example, the undergraduate graduation rate in fiscal year 2005 was 42%. However, the target for 2005 was 46%. In addition, the target of 48% by 2008 represents a significant increase. In order to meet the target for 2008, the actual graduation rate would have to increase an average of 2% per year for the next three reporting periods. The persistence rate for undergraduate students in 2005 was 76%, a 3 point jump from the rate for the prior year and the highest rate ever reported for the institution. However, the target for 2005 was 79% and goes up to 80% in 2008.

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

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: Gallaudet annually submits data related to the long-term measures of persistence rates, graduation rates, and employment and participation in advanced educational programs. In addition, the University reports on other annual performance measures that contribute to the success of the long-term measure, such as enrollment targets. Data on total educational and Federal costs per successful graduate are also available that can be used as indicators related to understanding program efficiency. The above data covers outcomes related to the largest programs administered by the University. However, we believe that better measures and improved data may be possible related to the national mission and educational activities of the Clerc Center and post-school outcomes for students.

Evidence: GPRA and other data submitted by the University.

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

Explanation: The University has baseline figures for all annual performance measures, and most of the targets are ambitious, as measured against current performance levels. As discussed in question 2.2, the long-term measures related to persistence rates, graduation rates, students who are employed or enrolled in advanced education during the first year after graduation increases have ambition targets and timelines. These measures also serve as annual measures. In addition, Gallaudet enrolled 1,207 undergraduate students in 2005. The target for this measure for 2005 and 2006 is 1,250. The undergraduate persistence rate for 2005 was 76% and target 79%. The targets for use of the demonstration schools' expertise had a target of 41 programs and/or institutions adopting curricula or other products from these programs, which was exceeded in 4 of the 5 past years. However, the target for fiscal year 2005 and beyond has been increased to 55, which is closer to recent performance levels.

Evidence: GPRA data submitted by the University.

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 Gallaudet is committed to improving its graduation rates and the post-graduation outcomes for students. The Department has worked collaboratively with the University in developing performance measures and meaningful long-term program goals and continues to work with Gallaudet on modifying the measures and determining appropriate levels of performance. In addition to providing performance data, Gallaudet reports on its efforts toward meeting its performance goals.

Evidence: GPRA data submitted by Gallaudet, other University reports and data submissions, and meetings between Department and Gallaudet staff.

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: Accreditation reviews are critical to ensuring that the breath of offerings and quality of university programs are appropriate, and Gallaudet currently meets all accrediting standards (in November 2006, the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools, Commission on Higher Education raised some concerns about Gallaudet's compliance with some standards and is in the process of working with Gallaudet to review the University's status). Accreditation is a basic requirement that all higher education institutions must meet. The PART assessment does not make any judgments regarding the quality of the academic programs at Gallaudet. The purpose of this question is to ensure that the program or agency conducts unbiased evaluations on a regular or as-needed basis to fill gaps in performance information. These evaluations must be unbiased and independent, of high quality and sufficient scope, and conducted on a regular basis to support program improvement. The Federal Government has not conducted evaluations of the Federally funded programs at Gallaudet to evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need addressed by the program or evaluated the return on the investment of Federal resources. To receive a "yes," the Department must demonstrate that it has chosen and applied evaluation methods that provide the most rigorous evidence of the program's effectiveness that is appropriate and feasible. The evaluation should address areas such as the effectiveness of the University's programs and how well the University is addressing its statutory purpose and the needs of its service population. We note that the President's budget request for fiscal year 2007 includes $600,000 a study to identify barriers to and strategies for improving the University's attainment of desired student outcomes.

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 University in relation to its annual and long-term performance measures. In addition, budget requests from Gallaudet are incremental in nature over the prior year's total. The Department reports on performance data submitted by the University, but its budget requests are not explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals for Gallaudet.

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 Gallaudet to address these deficiencies. For example, the Department and Gallaudet have been actively involved in developing and modifying performance measures for the program. In addition, as progress is made on achieving annual and long-term measures, targets are reassessed and revised, as indicated. The program office participated in a series of meetings with Gallaudet in fiscal years 2004 and 2005 to reevaluate existing measures and examine alternate means to assess performance.

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 University. Gallaudet and the Department actively collaborate 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 Gallaudet, 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 Gallaudet and follows up on any inconsistencies or programmatic concerns with the University.

Evidence: GPRA, annual report, and budget submission data. YES 11%

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 University is also monitored on an annual basis through reviews of annual data submissions and periodic meetings.

Evidence: Department records.

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

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 Gallaudet University. In 2004, the estimated average cost per university-level student was approximately $45,510, and Federal Appropriation represented about 65% of Gallaudet's total revenue at the university level. Two efficiency measures have been developed for this program related to total educational cost per graduate and Federal cost per graduate. These measures will assess already existing data. The Department does not have formal procedures to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution. However, Gallaudet has an extensive budget development process, including a vetting process for all new research projects. The University submits reports on its budget process and research endeavors annually to the Department.

Evidence: Department records and materials submitted by Gallaudet.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The Office of Special Institutions (OSI) is part of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS). OSI and the Office of Special Education Programs, also within OSERS, are collaborating to conduct a major monitoring effort of the Clerc Center elementary and secondary education programs, planned for the fall of 2006. The monitoring will include the Center's compliance with the Education of the Deaf Act (EDA) and with Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provisions applicable to Gallaudet through reference in the EDA. The Department has announced the monitoring and will be providing technical assistance to the Clerc Center on the 2004 Amendments to the IDEA. OSI has also begun to meet with staff from the Office of Postsecondary Education responsible for Howard University and is participating in an interagency committee on early childhood education related to individuals who are deaf. At the program level, Gallaudet participates in the Consortium of Universities of the Washington Metropolitan Area and has a relationship with the National Technical Institute for the Deaf, the Federal Regional Postsecondary Education Programs for the Deaf, and all of the major national deafness organizations. In addition, the Clerc Center provides outreach, technical assistance, and training to elementary and secondary education programs throughout the nation that serve students who are deaf.

Evidence: Department records and information provided by Gallaudet University.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The Department has a system for identifying excessive drawdowns, and can put individual grantees on probation. This would require Departmental approval of all grantee drawdowns. ED uses a number of tools and practices to ensure strong financial management. ED has strengthened its financial management practices, as recommended by GAO in September of 2004, by implementing e-Monitoring on December 22, 2004. E-Monitoring is a new software tool that enables grant program staff to better monitor their grants and helps to prevent potential fraud, waste, and abuse. At the program level, Gallaudet arranges for an annual independent financial and compliance audit of the programs and activities of the University. No internal control weaknesses have been reported by the auditors.

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

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

Explanation: The Department is developing written procedures for monitoring activities related to university level programs and the Clerc Center and is working with Gallaudet to implement these activities. In addition, the Office of Special Institutions and Office of Special Education Programs are planning a major monitoring effort of the Clerc Center regarding the Education of the Deaf Act and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act provisions incorporated by reference into the EDA for the fall of 2006. In addition, we note that the University has followed up on all audit findings from the 2005 audit, and the Office of Special Institutions has reviewed these actions. The Department also took affirmative actions to address outstanding issues related to hearing undergraduate students at the University and has begun meetings to coordinate efforts between the OSI and Office of Postsecondary Education.

Evidence: Data and annual audits submitted by the University and Department records.

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

Explanation: The Office of Special Institutions (OSI) and Budget Service communicate frequently with University representatives, including the Budget Director, Provost, and Clerc Center staff. The liaison officer is an ex-officio member of the Clerc Center's advisory board, which provides guidance on priorities and operations of the Center. The Department requires the University to submit a detailed annual budget, which includes responses to a substantial number of questions on University operations and priorities. Gallaudet provides detailed responses to Department requests for program information throughout the year and a number of annual reports, including the annual report required by the EDA, an enrollment report, a copy of the University's annual independent audit, and a research report. Gallaudet also submits annual updates to the Department's GPRA plan for the institution. The Department is developing written procedures for regular monitoring activities related to university level programs and the Clerc Center and has met with Gallaudet twice to discuss implementation of these activities. In addition, OSI and the Office of Special Education Programs are planning a major monitoring effort of the Clerc Center regarding the EDA and IDEA provisions incorporated by reference into the EDA.

Evidence: Program records, reports submitted by the University, and Gallaudet's annual budget submission.

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 Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services website provide a link to Gallaudet. 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.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/2005plan/edlite-eda-gallaudet.html; www.gallaudet.edu/; nces.ed.gov/ipeds/

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

Explanation: Data reported by Gallaudet indicates that, while the persistence rate for undergraduate students did not meet its target in 2005 or prior years, it reached its highest level in 2005. In addition, the rate for graduate students exceeded the target. The rates for both undergraduate and graduate students also exceeded the average Title IV eligible institutions rate of 67%. Regarding graduation rates, the rate for undergraduate students did not meet the FY 2005 target and has remained stagnant from many years. The rate for graduate students exceeded the target and far exceeded the average for Title IV eligible institutions of 53.8%. However, the undergraduate rate was well below the Title IV average. Gallaudet only met the graduation rate target for MSSD students once in the past 5 years. For employment and participation in advanced educational opportunities, the percentage of students who were employed during the first year after graduation declined each year between 2001 and 2005. The percentages for participation in advanced educational opportunities have also declined. While the above outcome areas cover the largest programs administered by the University, they do not represent all significant Gallaudet activities. Additional information reviewed in 2006 indicates that better measures and data may be possible related to the national mission and educational activities of the Clerc Center. This program represents a sizable amount of funding and effort for the University. In addition, we believe better measures and data may be possible regarding post-school outcomes.

Evidence: GPRA data submitted by the University.

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

Explanation: As discussed in question 4.1 and as indicated in the Department's GPRA reports, Gallaudet has demonstrated mixed performance regarding the targets for students in the key measures of persistence, graduation rates, and post-school outcomes. Regarding other annual measures, graduate enrollments have been well below their targets, but enrollment in undergraduate and professional studies programs met their targets in 2005. The 2005 enrollment in MSSD exceeded the target for the first time in many years. However, the graduation rate for MSSD students was under the target for the fourth year in a row. The number of programs adopting demonstration school strategies/curricula exceeded the target for 2005 and the 3 prior years. The above outcome areas cover the largest programs administered by the University. However, we believe that better measures and improved data may be possible related to the national mission and educational activities of the Clerc Center and post-school outcomes for students.

Evidence: GPRA data submitted by Gallaudet University - www.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/2005plan/edlite-eda-gallaudet.html

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

Explanation: Gallaudet has significantly increased private revenue over time through increases in tuition and fees. Over the past 20 years, the University has increased tuition from $2,024 to $9,630. During this period, the percentage of total funding represented by the Federal appropriation has continuously declined as a percentage of its total operating income, from 85% in 1985 to 69% in 2005. For its first 150 years, all major construction programs at Gallaudet were funded by Federal appropriations. For the past 15 years, all major construction projects at Gallaudet have been funded either by cost sharing with the Federal government, or, as in the case of the last two buildings constructed on the campus, by privately raised funds alone. Fund raising efforts include a recent 3-year capital campaign that resulted in $40 million in donations, and the University is in the midst of another capital campaign. Over the past 18 years, the University's endowment increased from $10 million to $165 million, and operating income from investment now exceeds $4 million annually. The University's current five-year financial plan includes a review of anticipated revenues and expenditures and sets targets for growth in non-Federal revenues. The University undertook a long term staffing reduction program beginning in 1990. The University continues to maintain a strong position control process, and employee numbers have been stable during the past 3 years. The total number of employees on-board in 2005 was 1,138, which is 306 or 21% fewer than in 1989. The University also has been gradually reallocating administrative resources to program funding. Despite increased costs in a number of administrative areas, institutional support declined by 12% between 2002 and 2005. Two efficiency measures have been developed for the University level programs related to total educational cost per graduate and Federal cost per graduate. The measures use already existing data and baselines have been determined. However, targets have not been established for these measures. Sufficient data are available to determine that management practices have resulted in improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in the operations of this program. While many of the efforts described above were not limited to the past year, they show an ongoing commitment to private fund raising and cost containment efforts. However, the Department and Gallaudet need establish targets and determine how the efficiency measures will be used.

Evidence: Annual budget submission and supplemental data submitted by Gallaudet University.

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

Explanation: There are no comparable programs at the institutional level. The Federal Government provides direct funding to one other institution that serves postsecondary students who are deaf. That is the National Technical Institute for the Deaf. However, students at NTID participate in different types of programs than at Gallaudet and at different levels. NTID is part of the Rochester School of Technology, whereas Gallaudet is a freestanding institution. NTID provides technical degrees at the diploma, associate, and baccalaureate degree levels, with the majority of its students at the associate degree level or below. Gallaudet serves liberal arts students at the baccalaureate, master's, and doctoral degree levels. No data are available to compare Gallaudet's outcomes or costs to other programs that serve postsecondary students who are deaf.

Evidence: N/A.

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

Explanation: The Department conducted a descriptive study of the University that was completed in 1993, and the General Accounting Office conducted a number of studies related to Gallaudet: (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) The National Mission of Gallaudet's Elementary and Secondary Schools (1987). However, these analyses were primarily descriptive, were limited in scope, and are no longer current. There have not been any studies or evaluations of the scope of Gallaudet's programs or how well the University is addressing its statutory purpose or the needs of its service population. We note that the Department has requested $600,000 for fiscal year 2007 to conduct a study to identify barriers to and strategies for improving Gallaudet's performance related to student outcomes.

Evidence: GAO reports and Department records.