A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Satisfaction with TRIO Programs
Executive Summary

Planning and Evaluation Service
Office of the Under Secretary
U.S. Department of Education
December 1999

In general, applicants, both funded and non-funded, were highly satisfied with the federal TRIO programs.

• Eighty-five percent of the applicants reported being satisfied with the TRIO programs with 26 percent reporting they were very satisfied.
• Only 9 percent of applicants reported that they were dissatisfied with the program and 7 percent were neutral.

• Eighty-five percent were satisfied with the application materials.
• Sixty-six percent were satisfied with the award notification process.
• Eighty-two percent were satisfied with the technical assistance provided by ED staff.
• Ninety-six percent were satisfied with the training sessions provided.

• Applicants who received funding tended to be more satisfied with information covered in pre-application workshops than those who were not funded. Levels of satisfaction with pre-application workshops ranged from 81 percent to 89 percent satisfied, for those who received funding, compared to 68 to 84 percent satisfied for those who did not receive funding.
• Applicants differed considerably in their evaluation of the application materials. Eighty-six percent of those applicants who received funding were satisfied with the materials provided compared to only 69 percent of those who were not funded.
• Applicants also differed considerably in their evaluation of the award notification process and documents. Funded applicants expressed higher levels of satisfaction than non-funded applicants in each of the eight areas reported. Differences between the two groups ranged from a low of 11 percentage points for timeliness to a high of 38 percentage points for comprehensiveness of notification documents.

• Levels of satisfaction ranged from 84 percent satisfied with the convenience of the training locations to 96 percent satisfied with the amount of time available to ask questions during the training sessions.

• Nearly three-quarters (71 percent) of the grantees who completed a performance report felt that it collected appropriate information. (Ninety-five percent of the grantees had completed at least one performance report.)
• Between 60 and 70 percent of the grantees expressed satisfaction with: clarity, comprehensiveness, and timeliness of reporting requirements. Only 41 percent of grantees reported that the Department of Education used the information in the reports to provide "feedback" to grantees.

• The highest level of satisfaction (71 percent) was expressed on the appropriateness of the information collected. In contrast, only 41 percent felt the information in the reports was used to provide feedback to grantees.

• Ninety-four percent of these grantees felt the information was helpful. Only 14 percent felt it conflicted with information provided by ED.

• First-time applicants were less aware than repeat applicants of technical assistance (82 percent versus 94 percent, respectively) provided by ED and were less likely to be satisfied with their interaction with ED staff.

Links

The complete report (1.7 MB).

Strategic Plan, 1998-2002 (41KB), Table 3: Support for Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives by Department of Education Programs. The TRIO programs are the first column of the last page.

Fiscal Year 2000 Annual Plan (837KB) of the U.S. Department of Education. Page 155 covers the TRIO programs.

Biennial Evaluation Report: Upward Bound (57KB) of the U.S. Department of Education, 1995-96, Chapter 508. This Chapter and those follow ones contain legislative and funding history for six TRIO programs, as well an analysis of program performance dealing with the goals and objectives of the programs and strategies to achieve the goals. The Chapters also give information on other studies and voice mail numbers of Department contacts.
Biennial Evaluation Report: Talent Search (22KB) of the U.S. Department of Education, 1995-96, Chapter 509.
Biennial Evaluation Report: Educational Opportunity Centers (17KB) of the U.S. Department of Education, 1995-96, Chapter 510.
Biennial Evaluation Report: Student Support Services (22KB) of the U.S. Department of Education, 1995-96, Chapter 511.
Biennial Evaluation Report: Training Program for Federal TRIO Programs (8KB) of the U.S. Department of Education, 1995-96, Chapter 512.
Biennial Evaluation Report: Ronald E. McNair Postbacculaureate Acheivement Program (10KB) of the U.S. Department of Education, 1995-96, Chapter 513.

The Office of Higher Education Programs, in the Office of Postsecondary Education of the U.S. Department of Education, administers the TRIO programs. This link gives further information about the programs, including how to apply.

The President's Fiscal Year 2001 Budget Request for the U.S. Deparmtent of Education. This link shows the TRIO programs.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. This Catalog comes from the General Services Administration. Type in the catalog number for this particular program, which is 84.047 for the Upward Bound TRIO program, and press enter to retrieve information about this program. The catalog numbers for the other programs are 84.044, 84.066, 84.042, 84.103, and 84.217, resp.

United States Code: Authorizing Statute for the TRIO programs . The link is to a piece of Title 20 of the United States Code (the compilation of the laws of the United States), which deals with education.

Thomas: Legislative Information on the Internet is a general search engine developed by the Library of Congress. The progress of a law from Subcommittee Hearings to signing by the President can be followed here.

Program regulations can be found in Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter VI: Office of Postsecondary Education, U.S. Department of Education. Click the links there to the specific TRIO programs.

For a printed copy of this document, call (1-877-4-ED-Pubs) (877-433-7827) or the TTY/TDD toll free number: 1-877-576-7734.

Please send questions or comments to daniel.goldenberg@ed.gov

[ Return to Higher Education Programs Evaluation ]