ESEA:English Language Acquisition(OELA)

ESEA:English Language Acquisition(OELA)

FY2013Budget Service Program Performance Report(System Print Out)

Program Goal: To help limited English proficient students learn English and reach high academic standards.

Objective: To improve the quality of teachers of LEP students.

Measure1of6: The percentage of pre-service program graduates who are certified, licensed, or endorsed in LEP instruction. (Desired direction: increase) 89a0lj

Year / Target / Actual
(or date expected) / Status
2008 / Set Baseline / 99 / Baseline
2009 / 99.0 / 72.1 / Target Not Met
2010 / 72.1 / 57.9 / Target Not Met
2011 / 72.1 / 42.9 / Target Not Met
2012 / 72.1 / 38.1 / Target Not Met

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, NPD Grant Performance Report.

Frequency of Data Collection:Annual

Data Quality.Data are self reported by grantees.

Target Context.The target for the 2011 report was based on actual data from the 2009 report.

Explanation.Grantees are institutions of higher education that receive funding for 5 years.
Data for the 2012 program year are reported in 2013. To calculate the percentage required for this measure, NCELA counted the number of pre-service graduates that the 19 grantees which served pre-service teachers reported during the 2011–12 project year as a result of the training provided by the grantee. That number, 105, is the denominator. The numerator is the number of participants that actually became certified, licensed, or endorsed in LEP instruction during the 2011–12 project year, as result of the training provided by the grantees. That number is 40. Therefore, the percentage of completers who became certified, licensed, or endorsed is 38.1%. Grantee did not meet original target for this measure because the target was based on the target of a previous cohort. For the 2013 report the program will use targets for this measure that are based on targets established for the 2011 cohort.

Measure2of6: The precentage of pre-service program graduates who are placed in instructional settings serving LEP students within one year of graduation. (Desired direction: increase) 1831

Year / Target / Actual
(or date expected) / Status
2005 / Set Baseline / 93 / Baseline
2006 / 94.0 / 91.3 / Target Not Met
2007 / 95.0 / 89.2 / Target Not Met
2008 / 95.0 / 0 / Target Not Met
2009 / 95.0 / 84.1 / Target Not Met but Improved
2010 / 84.1 / 81.4 / Target Not Met
2011 / 84.1 / 81.3 / Target Not Met
2012 / 84.1 / 0 / Target Not Met

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, NPD Grantee Performance Report.

Frequency of Data Collection:Annual

Data Quality.Data are self reported by grantees.

Target Context.The target for the 2011 report was based on actual data from the 2009 report.

Explanation.Grantees are institutions of higher education that receive funding for 5 years
These data are taken from the first funding year of this project. There are therefore no data on graduates who completed the program in the previous year. Grantee did not meet original target for this measure because the target was based on the target of a previous cohort. For the 2013 Report the program will use targets for this measure that are based on targets established for the 2011 cohort.

Measure2.3of6: The percentage of pre-service program graduates who are providing instructional services to LEP students three years after graduation. (Desired direction: increase) 89a0ll

Year / Target / Actual
(or date expected) / Status
2013 / Set Baseline / (August, 2014) / Pending

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, NPD Grantee Performance Report.

Frequency of Data Collection:Annual

Data Quality.Data are self reported by grantees.

Target Context.n/a

Explanation.Grantees are institutions of higher education that receive funding for 5 years.
This measure applies to grants awarded 2009 onward. This grant will report data on this measure no earlier than 2014.

Measure4of6: The percentage of paraprofessional program completers who meet State qualifications for paraprofessionals working with LEP students. (Desired direction: increase) 89a0lk

Year / Target / Actual
(or date expected) / Status
2008 / Set Baseline / 100 / Baseline
2009 / 100.0 / 100 / Target Met
2010 / 100.0 / 100 / Target Met
2011 / 100.0 / 50 / Target Not Met
2012 / 100.0 / 100 / Target Met
2013 / 100.0 / (August, 2014) / Pending
2014 / 100.0 / (August, 2015) / Pending
2015 / 100.0 / (August, 2016) / Pending

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, NPD Grantee Performance Report.

Frequency of Data Collection:Annual

Data Quality.Data are self reported by grantees.

Target Context.The target for the 2011 report was based on actual data from the 2009 report.

Measure5of6: The percentage of in-service teacher completers who complete certification, licensure or endorsement requirements in LEP instruction as a result of the program. (Desired direction: increase) 89a0lm

Year / Target / Actual
(or date expected) / Status
2008 / Set Baseline / 77 / Baseline
2009 / 77.8 / 56.8 / Target Not Met
2010 / 56.8 / 27 / Target Not Met
2011 / 56.8 / 27 / Target Not Met
2012 / 56.8 / 19.8 / Target Not Met

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, NPD Grantee Performance Report.

Frequency of Data Collection:Annual

Data Quality.Data are self reported by grantees.

Target Context.The target for the 2010 report was based on actual data from the 2009 report.

Explanation.Grantees are institutions of higher education that receive funding for 5 years.
To calculate the percentage required for this measure, NCELA counted the number of paraprofessional completers that the 7 grantees which served paraprofessionals reported for the 2011–2012 academic year. A single grantee reported that 1 participant completed the program; that participant also met state qualifications for paraprofessionals who work with LEP students, a proportion of 100%.

Measure6of6: The percentage of in-service teacher completers under the National Professional Development Program who are providing instructional services to limited English proficient students. (Desired direction: increase) 89a04q

Year / Target / Actual
(or date expected) / Status
2006 / Set Baseline / 90.4 / Baseline
2007 / 95.0 / 94.6 / Target Not Met but Improved
2008 / 95.0 / 85 / Target Not Met
2009 / 95.0 / 88 / Target Not Met but Improved
2010 / 88.0 / 83 / Target Not Met
2011 / 88.0 / 91.4 / Target Exceeded

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, NPD Grantee Performance Report.

Frequency of Data Collection:Annual

Data Quality.Data are self reported by grantees.

Target Context.The target for the 2011 report was based on actual data from the 2009 report.

Explanation.Grantees are institutions of higher education that receive funding for 5 years .
To calculate the percentage required for this measure, NCELA counted the number of in-service completers that the 39 grantees who served this population reported during the 2011–12 project year. That number, 440, is the denominator. The numerator is the number of completers that actually are providing instructional services to limited English proficient students. That number is 403. Therefore,