Archived: ESEA: Mentoring Program (MS Word)

Archived Information

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, Mentoring Program, Annual Grantee Performance Reports.

Frequency of Data Collection.Annual

Data Quality.Of 100 reports sampled (from a total of 165 in the 2004 cohort), 65% (n=65) provided valid, aggregable, data for this measure. In order to be valid and aggregable, grantees needed to report on matches that were sustained for at least 12 months (for example, some grantees provided the number of matches that were sustained for nine months, and we were not able to include this in the calculation). Additionally, grantees needed to provide the total number of matches made, regardless of duration, as a denominator on which to calculate the percentage.

Target Context.

The grant application for the 2004 Mentoring Program laid out the following targets for this measure:
The percentage of student/mentor matches that are sustained for a period of twelve months will increase by:

• 0% by 2005;
• 25% by 2006;
• 50% by 2007.

Explanation.44.86 percent (2092 of 4663 total matches) of the student-mentor partnershipsby the grantees providing valid, aggregable data were sustained for at least 12 months.

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, Mentoring Program, Annual Grantee Performance Reports.

Frequency of Data Collection.Annual

Data Quality.Of 100 reports sampled (from a total of 165 in the 2004 cohort), 58% (n=58) provided valid, aggregable, data for this measure. In order to be valid and aggregable, grantees needed to report on the number of students whose GPA in core academic subjects improved during the 12 months preceding the performance report. Some inconsistencies which may affect data quality include:
-Some grantees reported on improvement during the school year, rather than comparing grades over a 12-month period. For practical reasons, these data were included in the aggregate.
-Some reports only provided data that were disaggregated by academic subject (i.e., reading, math, language arts). In this case, for consistency's sake, we used the percentage of students whose GPA in reading had improved.

Target Context.

The application for the 2004 Mentoring Program stated the following targets for this measure:
The percentage of mentored students who demonstrate improvement in core academic subjects as measured by grade point average after 12 months will increase:
-5% by 2005;
-15% by 2006;
-30% by 2007.

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, Mentoring Program, Annual Grantee Performance Reports.

Frequency of Data Collection.Annual

Data Quality.

Of 100 reports sampled (from a total of 165 in the 2004 cohort), 43% (n=43) provided valid, aggregable, data for this measure. In order to be valid and aggregable, grantees needed to report on the number of students with unexcused absences during the reporting period.Some grantees provided data for all absences, for number of suspensions, or for the number of students who improved their attendance;we were not able to include these in the aggregate, resulting in the low response rate.

Target Context.The application for the 2004 Mentoring program included the following target:
The percentage of mentored students who have unexcused absences from school wil decrease:
-10% by 2005
-30% by 2006
-40% by 2007
Decreases will be measured from baseline data. Based on these targets, the target for 2006 was 28 percent. The program did not meet this target. The target for 2007 is 24 percent.

Explanation.47.81 percent-- or 1246 of 2606--of students served byMentoring grants submitting valid, aggregable data had at least one unexcused absence during the reporting period.

Source.U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, Mentoring Program, Annual Grantee Performance Reports.

Frequency of Data Collection.Annual

Data Quality.

This data should be interpreted with caution due to the low response rate and thesmall amount of validaggregable data provided by grantees. Of 80 reports examined from the 2005 cohort, 8 (10%) provided valid, aggregable data.

Explanation.78.01 percent, or 330 of 425 students served by mentoring grants reporting valid, aggregable data for this measure had at least one unexcused absence during the reporting period.