2. Mission of the Office of Migrant Education To provide excellent leadership, technical assistance, and financial support to improve the educational opportunities and academic success of migrant children, youth, agricultural workers, fishers, and their families. HEP-CAMP TOP 10 U.S. Department of Education Office of Migrant Education HEP-CAMP Annual Directors Meeting Alexandria, VA July 17-19, 2012

3. Top 10 HEP Projects for GPRA 1, GPRA 2 and Efficiency 2

4. Top 10 HEP Projects for GPRA 1, GPRA 2, and Efficiency 3

5. Top 10 HEP Projects for GPRA 1  Highest performing HEP grantees for GED attainers.  Three grantees are new to this list for 2010-2011, and are denoted by an asterisk (*).  Four grantees have placed on both lists, and they are underlined in blue. 4

6. Top 10 HEP Projects for GPRA 1  Heritage University, Toppenish, WA (99%)  University of Oregon, Eugene, OR (95%)*  Center for Human Services, Bethesda, MD (92%)*  SER-Jobs for Progress, Fresno, CA (92%)  University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (92%)  Boise State University, Boise, ID (89%)  Crowder College, Neosho, MO (88%)  Fort Scott Community College, Fort Scott, KS (87%)  University of Colorado, Boulder, CO (87%)  Chemeketa Community College, Salem, OR (82%)* 5

7. Top 10 HEP Projects for GPRA 2  Highest performing HEP Grantees for GED attainers that are placed.  MUST have met the GPRA 1 national target of 69%.  Five grantees are new to this list for 2010-2011, and are denoted by an asterisk (*).  Four grantees have placed on both lists, and they are underlined in blue. 6

8. Top 10 HEP Projects for GPRA 2  Mendocino Lake Community College, Ukiah, CA (100%)*  Northern New Mexico College, Espanola, NM (100%)*  Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI (92%)  Crowder College, Neosho, MO (86%)  University of Colorado, Boulder, CO (86%)*  Fort Scott Community College, Fort Scott, KS (85%)  West Hills Community College, Coalinga, CA (85%)*  ARC Associates, Oakland, CA (84%)*  Central Valley Opportunity Center, Winton, CA (84%)*  Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA (84%)  Chemeketa Community College, Salem, OR (84%)  Texas State Technical College, Harlingen, TX (84%) 7

9. Effective and Efficient HEP Projects Met both GPRA 1 and GPRA 2 targets, and efficiency measure (cost per GED) was below the average, $5,572 (GPRA-excluding 2010 cohort).  University of Colorado, Boulder, CO ($1,564)*  Chemeketa Community College, Salem, OR ($4,507)  Central Valley Opportunity Center, Winton, CA ($4,633)*  Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA ($4,712)  Crowder College, Neosho, MO ($4,865)  Fort Scott Community College, Fort Scott, KS ($5,169) 8

10. INTRODUCING… Top 10 CAMP Projects for GPRA 1, GPRA 2 And Efficiency 9

11. Top 10 CAMP Projects for GPRA 1 and GPRA 2 10

12. Top 10 CAMP Projects for GPRA 1  Highest performing CAMP grantees for 1 st Yr. Completers.  Six grantees are new to this list for 2010-2011, and are denoted by an asterisk (*).  Six grantees have placed on both lists, and they are underlined in blue. 11

13. Top 10 CAMP Projects for GPRA 1 Top 10 CAMP Projects for GPRA 1  Wenatchee Valley College, Wenatchee, WA (100%)*  CSU at Sacramento, Sacramento, CA (99%)  Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA (98%)*  Eastern Washington University, Cheney, WA (98%)  University of Washington, Seattle, WA (98%)*  University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (97%)*  Washington State University, Pullman, WA (97%)  CSU at San Marcos, San Marcos, CA (96%)  Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR (96%)*  CSU at Bakersfield, Bakersfield, CA (95%)*  CSU at Monterey Bay, Seaside, CA (95%) 12

14. Top 10 CAMP Projects for GPRA 2  Highest performing CAMP Grantees for 1 st Yr. Completers who Continue.  MUST have met the GPRA 1 national target of 86%.  Eight grantees are new to this list for 2010-2011, and are denoted by an asterisk (*).  Six grantees have placed on both lists, and they are underlined in blue. 13

15. Top 10 CAMP Projects for GPRA 2  CSU at Bakersfield, Bakersfield, CA (100%)*  CSU at Long Beach, Long Beach, CA (100%)  CSU at Monterey Bay, Seaside, CA (100%)*  CSU at Sacramento, Sacramento, CA (100%)*  CSU at San Marcos, San Marcos, CA (100%)  Chemeketa Community College, Salem, OR (100%)*  Mendocino Lake Community College, Ukiah, CA (100%)*  Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR (100%)  Rancho Santiago, Santa Ana, CA (100%)*  University of Idaho, Moscow, ID (100%)*  University of South Florida, Tampa, FL (100%)* 14

16. Effective and Efficient CAMP Projects Met both GPRA 1 and GPRA 2 targets, and efficiency measure (cost per first year completer that continued) was below the average, $8,209 (GPRA, excluding 2010 cohort).  CSU at Sacramento, Sacramento, CA ($5,287)*  CSU at Bakersfield, Bakersfield, CA ($5,822)  West Hills Community College, Coalinga, CA ($6,226)*  Washington State University, Pullman, WA ($6,247)  University of Texas Pan American, Edinburg, TX ($6,439)  CSU at Monterey Bay, Seaside, CA ($7,016)  CSU at Fresno, Fresno, CA ($7,083)  Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI ($7,713)* 15

17. Thank you for making the difference!!! …for all that you do that improves the lives of students you serve in the HEP and CAMP programs. 16