Skip main navigation.
 U.S. Department of Education: Promoting Educational Excellence for all Americans - Link to ED.gov Home Page
ESEA: Migrant State Agency Program - FY 2005


CFDA Number: 84.011 - Migrant Education_State Grant Program

Program Goal: To assist all migrant students in meeting challenging academic standards and achieving graduation from high school (or a GED program) with an education that prepares them for responsible citizenship, further learning, and productive employment.

Objective 1 of 1: Along with other federal programs and state and local reform efforts, the Migrant Education Program (MEP) will contribute to improved school performance of migrant children.
Indicator 1.1 of 6: Meeting or Exceeding State Performance Standards: In an increasing number of states, an increasing percentage of migrant students at the elementary school level will meet or exceed the proficient level on state assessments in reading.
 
Measure 1.1.1 of 1: Number of states meeting an annually set performance target in reading at the elementary level for migrant students.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
States meeting target States that reported results
States meeting target States that reported results
1996
4 10
   
1997
4 15
   
1998
7 18
   
1999
2 19
   
2000
5 26
   
2001
6 23
   
2002
8 29
8 27
2003
15 43
10 32
2004
   
14 36
2005
   
16 38

Source: Consolidated State Performance Report.

Frequency: Annually.

Next Data Available: December 2005

Data Validated By: No Formal Verification.

Limitations: Information that directly measures the impact of the Title I, Migrant Education Program is not available. However, each state has its own assessment to measure and determine student proficiency. Student achievement across states cannot be compared directly, but the results for migrant students can be tracked over time, providing the state proficiency levels and assessments' content remain consistent and the disaggregation of assessment data by subgroup is accurate.

Improvements: This indicator will have greater validity and reliability over time as state assessment systems stabilize, include all migrant students in testing, and properly dissaggregate and report results.
 
Explanation: The annually set state target for 2003 through 2005 is 50 percent or more of migrant students at the proficient or advanced level. The FY 2003 target was exceeded. The actual number of states (15) that had 50 percent or more of their migrant students at the proficient or advanced level (of 43 states reporting assessment results for migrant students) exceeded the FY 2003 target (10 states) by 50 percent. These results also document an 88 percent increase in the number of states that met the target in the prior reporting period. [Note: For the reporting period (2002-2003), only 19 states set the state performance target at having 50 percent or more of ALL students at the proficient or advanced levels. The Department is currently reviewing the 2003-2004 assessment data submitted by the states. Following validation, the table will be updated with the 2003-2004 data. In addition, once 80 percent of all states have met the performance target of 50 percent of migrant students at or above the proficient level, the performance target will be raised in increments of 5 percent.]
 
Indicator 1.2 of 6: Meeting or Exceeding State Performance Standards: In an increasing number of states, an increasing percentage of migrant students at the middle school level will meet or exceed the proficient level on state assessments in reading.
 
Measure 1.2.1 of 1: Number of states meeting an annually set performance target in reading for middle school migrant students.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
States meeting target States that reported results
States meeting target States that reported results
1996
2 10
   
1997
3 15
   
1998
6 18
   
1999
4 18
   
2000
2 23
   
2001
7 21
   
2002
6 27
9 25
2003
9 45
11 29
2004
   
15 32
2005
   
17 34

Source: Consolidated State Performance Report.

Frequency: Annually.

Next Data Available: December 2005

Data Validated By: No Formal Verification.

Limitations: Information that directly measures the impact of the Title I, Migrant Education Program is not available. However, each state has its own assessment to measure and determine student proficiency. Student achievement across the states cannot be compared directly, but the results for migrant students can be tracked over time, providing the state proficiency levels and assessments' content remain consistent and the disaggregation of assessment data by subgroup is accurate.

Improvements: This indicator will have greater validity and reliability over time as state assessment systems stabilize, include all migrant students in testing, and properly dissaggregate and report results.
 
Explanation: The annually set state target for 2003 through 2005 is 50 percent or more of migrant students at the proficient or advanced level. While progress was made, the FY 2003 target was not met. The actual number of states (9) that had 50 percent or more of their migrant students at the proficient or advanced level (of 45 states reporting assessment results for migrant students) did not meet the FY 2003 target (11 states). These results do document, however, a 50 percent increase in the number of states that met the target in the prior reporting period. [Note: For the reporting period (2002-2003), only 16 states set the state performance target at having 50 percent or more of ALL students at the proficient or advanced levels. The Department is currently reviewing the 2003-2004 assessment data submitted by the states. Following validation, the table will be updated with the 2003-2004 data. In addition, once 80 percent of all states have met the performance target of 50 percent of migrant students at or above the proficient level, the performance target will be raised in increments of 5 percent.]
 
Indicator 1.3 of 6: Meeting or Exceeding State Performance Standards: In an increasing number of states, an increasing percentage of migrant students at the elementary school level will meet or exceed the proficient level on state assessments in mathematics.
 
Measure 1.3.1 of 1: Number of states meeting an annually set performance target in math for elementary school migrant students.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
States meeting target States that reported results
States meeting target States that reported results
1996
4 10
   
1997
5 15
   
1998
9 18
   
1999
6 19
   
2000
7 25
   
2001
10 23
   
2002
6 29
12 27
2003
21 44
14 32
2004
   
18 36
2005
   
20 38

Source: Consolidated State Performance Report.

Frequency: Annually.

Next Data Available: December 2005

Data Validated By: No Formal Verification.

Limitations: Information that directly measures the impact of the Title I, Migrant Education Program is not available. However, each State has its own assessment to measure and determine student proficiency. Student achievement across the States cannot be compared directly, but the results for migrant students can be tracked over time, providing the State proficiency levels and assessments' content remain consistent and the disaggregation of assessment data by subgroup is accurate.

Improvements: It is expected that this indicator will have greater validity and reliability, over time, as the state assessment systems stabilize, include all migrant students in testing, and properly dissaggregate and report results.
 
Explanation: The annually set state target for 2003 through 2005 is 50 percent or more of migrant students at the proficient or advanced level. The FY 2003 target was exceeded. The actual number of states (21) that had 50 percent or more of their migrant students at the proficient or advanced level (of 44 states reporting assessment results for migrant students) exceeded the FY 2003 target (14 states) by 50 percent. These results also document a 250 percent increase in the number of states that met the target in the prior reporting period. [Note: For the reporting period (2002-2003), only 14 states set the state performance target at having 50 percent or more of ALL students at the proficient or advanced levels. The Department is currently reviewing the 2003-2004 assessment data submitted by the states. Following validation, the table will be updated with the 2003-2004 data. In addition, once 80 percent of all states have met the performance target of 50 percent of migrant students at or above the proficient level, the performance target will be raised in increments of 5 percent.]
 
Indicator 1.4 of 6: Meeting or Exceeding State Performance Standards: In an increasing number of states, an increasing percentage of migrant students at the middle school level will meet or exceed the proficient level on state assessments in mathematics.
 
Measure 1.4.1 of 1: Number of states meeting an annually set performance target in math for middle school migrant students.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
States meeting target States that reported results
States meeting target States that reported results
1996
3 10
   
1997
3 15
   
1998
7 18
   
1999
4 18
   
2000
2 22
   
2001
4 20
   
2002
4 27
6 24
2003
8 45
8 28
2004
   
12 32
2005
   
14 34

Source: Consolidated State Performance Report.

Frequency: Annually.

Next Data Available: December 2005

Data Validated By: No Formal Verification.

Limitations: Information that directly measures the impact of the Title I, Migrant Education Program is not available. However, each state has its own assessment to measure and determine student proficiency. Student achievement across states cannot be compared directly, but the results for migrant students can be tracked over time, providing the state proficiency levels and assessments' content remain consistent and the disaggregation of assessment data by subgroup is accurate.

Improvements: This indicator will have greater validity and reliability over time as state assessment systems stabilize, include all migrant students in testing, and properly dissaggregate and report results.
 
Explanation: The annually set state target for 2003 through 2005 is 50 percent or more of migrant students at the proficient or advanced level. The FY 2003 target was met. The actual number of states (8) that had 50 percent or more of their migrant students at the proficient or advanced level (of 45 states reporting assessment results for migrant students) exceeded the FY 2003 target (8 states) by 50 percent. These results also document a 100 percent increase in the number of states that met the target in the prior reporting period. [Note: For the reporting period (2002-2003), only 11 states set the state performance target at having 50 percent or more of ALL students at the proficient or advanced levels. The Department is currently reviewing the 2003-2004 assessment data submitted by the states. Following validation, the table will be updated with the 2003-2004 data. In addition, once 80 percent of all states have met the performance target of 50 percent of migrant students at or above the proficient level, the performance target will be raised in increments of 5 percent. ]
 
Indicator 1.5 of 6: Reducing Dropout Rate: More states have a decreasing percentage of migrant students who dropout from secondary school (grades 7 - 12).
 
Measure 1.5.1 of 1: Number of states meeting an annually set performance target for dropout rate for migrant students.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
States meeting target States that reported results
States meeting target States that reported results
2004
   
999 999
2005
   
999 999

Source: Consolidated State Performance Report.

Frequency: Annually.

Next Data Available: December 2005

Data Validated By: No Formal Verification.

Limitations: There are several limitations in collecting and using student dropout data. First, a number of states do not have data collection and reporting systems in place to accurately calculate and disaggegrate student dropout rates for each of the required subgroups. Second, for those states reporting dropout data, there remain significant variations in the definition and calculation of a dropout rate (e.g., rates based on the number of enrolled students who drop out in the 12th grade of high school versus the number of students who were enrolled in the ninth grade of high school and dropped out of school in either the ninth, tenth, eleventh, or twelfth grades).

Improvements: The Department is working with states to improve and standardize the definition and calculation of student dropout rates.
 
Explanation: The annually set state target for 2004 through 2005 is to set the baseline. The FY 2004 target is to establish a baseline. The target for FY 2005 is the baseline plus 1%. [Note: The Department is currently reviewing the 2003-2004 dropout rate data submitted by states. Following validation, the table will be updated with the 2003-2004 data.]
 
Indicator 1.6 of 6: Achieving High School Graduation: In an increasing number of states, an increasing percentage of migrant students will graduate from high school.
 
Measure 1.6.1 of 1: Number of states meeting an annually set performance target for high school graduation of migrant students.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
States meeting target States that reported results
States meeting target States that reported results
2004
   
999 999
2005
   
999 999

Source: Consolidated State Performance Report.

Frequency: Annually.

Next Data Available: December 2005

Data Validated By: No Formal Verification.

Limitations: There are several limitations in collecting and using graduation rate data. First, a number of states do not have data collection and reporting systems in place to accurately calculate and disaggegrate student graduation rates for each of the required subgroups. Second, for those states reporting graduation rate data, there remain significant variations in the the definition and calculation of a graduation rate (e.g., rates based on the number of enrolled students in the 12th grade who graduate from high school versus the number of students who were enrolled in the ninth grade of high school and graduated from high school four years later.

Improvements: The Department is working with the States to improve and standardize the definition and calculation of graduation rates.
 
Explanation: The annually set state target for 2004 through 2005 is to set the baseline. The FY 2004 target is to establish a baseline. The target for FY 2005 is the baseline plus 1%. [Note: The Department is currently reviewing the 2003-2004 graduation rate data submitted by states. Following validation, the table will be updated with the 2003-2004 data.]
 

Return to table of contents