Primary tabs

Status message

No visible changes

Key to Changes

This text is Revised text

This word has been added to the text

This text is Last Published text

This word has been removed from the text

Modifed styling with no visual changes

FY 16-17: Agency Priority Goal

Enhancing Indian Education

Priority Goal

Improve the graduation rate of tribal high school students and facilitate tribal self-determination in shaping the educational curriculum for students.

By September 30, 2017, the Department of the Interior will increase the percentage of tribal students attending bureau funded schools who complete high school with a regular diploma within four years of their 9^thgrade entry date by 5% (relative to 2014-2015 school year) and convert 4 schools from bureau to tribal operated.

Themes:

Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services Community and Regional Development

DOI.gov

XML

CSV

Expand All

Performance Indicators

Percentage of tribal students completing high school within four years of their ninth grade entry date

The following indicators will track the overall progress made across the initiative on an annual basis:

Percentage of tribal students completing high school within four years of their ninth grade entry date.

This performance indicator covers the 183 federally funded (BIE) schools. Graduation rate data, required under 34 C.F.R. § 200.19(b), becomes available to BIE on an annual basis typically by the September following the conclusion of the school year;
Baseline graduation rate for the 2014-2015 school year was 55%;
Year 1 of Goal: BIE will provide 2015-2016 graduation rates for those students who entered 9^th grade in the 2012-2013 school year;
Year 2 of Goal: BIE will provide 2016-2017 graduation rates for those students who entered 9^th grade in the 2013-2014 school year.

Data Accuracy and Reliability

The Department ensures the accuracy and reliability of the performance data in measuring progress towards its Agency Priority Goals, in accordance with the five data quality specifications in the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 for:

Means used to verify and validate measured values: All performance data reported on http://www.performance.gov/ by the Department is subject to the data verification and validation standards initially published in 2003 and reissued in 2007 (see https://www.doi.gov/performance/data-validation-and-verification). Implementing organization heads or chief officials confirm in writing the validity of the data. In the case of Agency Priority (Performance) Goals, senior officials in the implementing organization personally present the data on a quarterly basis to the senior Departmental leadership.

Sources for the data: In response to data calls, bureau program managers provide performance data based on their observations that can include extrapolations of selected representative samples or past history adjusted for estimates of changing conditions. These data are tracked and maintained in separate systems, including spreadsheets. Following review by the providing bureau, data is collected, reviewed, integrated, and maintained by the Department’s Office of Planning and Performance Management on the www.performance.gov website.

Level of accuracy required for the intended use of the data: Performance data reported in the Annual Performance Plan & Report and on http://www.performance.gov/ is used for management purposes, as a representative indicator of progress in relation to a target or goal established by the corresponding implementing organization. The accuracy of the data is that which is considered necessary to provide a reasonable representation of the progress made relative to a target or goal for discussion purposes, so as to help:
- determine if the progress is considered adequate
- provide understanding of the ability for the processes and methods being implemented to achieve the goal
- indicate if any further exploration or evaluation is needed to better ensure achievement of the goal; and
- whether alternative action, including adjusting funding levels, facilities, workforce, IT capabilities, etc., is needed to help better ensure achievement of the goal.

Limitations to the data at the required level of accuracy: Performance data is subject to potential errors from: the use of estimations and extrapolations, especially where direct measurement is impractical and/or considered too costly; individual observation; miscommunication; and/or failure to effectively employ the guidance described in the “Indicator” description in http://www.performance.gov/. However, based on multiple review levels and accuracy certifications, we do not believe these limitations to significant.
How the agency has compensated for such limitations if needed to reach the required level of accuracy: Along with the implementing organization’s official assurance of faithfully employing the data verification and validation standards, submitted data is reviewed within the context of the scope and nature of the activity, plans, and past experience to help confirm accuracy. Following review and verification by the submitting bureau or office, the data is reviewed within its corresponding trends and programmatic context by the Department’s Office of Planning and Performance Management to determine if further consultation with the data provider is necessary to adjust or correct the reported data before publication. Senior management and leadership consider this level of accuracy to be acceptable in their use of the data. Past experience in using the data, historical trend and programmatic context assessments, and bureau data quality certifications indicate that the limitations are considered minor and compensating measures are not considered necessary.

In addition to employing the Department’s data validation and verification standards, and internal reviews of submitted data, the best “test” of the data’s accuracy is in its use. Agency Priority (Performance) Goal data is reviewed during quarterly status reviews where senior officials report their data directly to the Department’s senior leadership and is made publicly available through http://www.performance.gov/.

Indicator target and actual value information
Fiscal Year Quarter	Period Ending (Month, Year)	Target Value	Actual Value	Explanation of Actual
2016-Q4	September, 2016		49
2017-Q4	September, 2017

Indicator Statement:

Improve the graduation rate of tribal high school students and facilitate tribal self-determination in shaping the educational curriculum for students.

Indicator Overview:

The following indicators will track the overall progress made across the initiative on an annual basis:

Percentage of tribal students completing high school within four years of their ninth grade entry date.

This performance indicator covers the 183 federally funded (BIE) schools. Graduation rate data, required under 34 C.F.R. § 200.19(b), becomes available to BIE on an annual basis typically by the September following the conclusion of the school year;
Baseline graduation rate for the 2014-2015 school year was 55%;
Year 1 of Goal: BIE will provide 2015-2016 graduation rates for those students who entered 9^th grade in the 2012-2013 school year;
Year 2 of Goal: BIE will provide 2016-2017 graduation rates for those students who entered 9^th grade in the 2013-2014 school year.

Data Accuracy and Reliability

Means used to verify and validate measured values: All performance data reported on http://www.performance.gov/ by the Department is subject to the data verification and validation standards initially published in 2003 and reissued in 2007 (see https://www.doi.gov/performance/data-validation-and-verification). Implementing organization heads or chief officials confirm in writing the validity of the data. In the case of Agency Priority (Performance) Goals, senior officials in the implementing organization personally present the data on a quarterly basis to the senior Departmental leadership.

Sources for the data: In response to data calls, bureau program managers provide performance data based on their observations that can include extrapolations of selected representative samples or past history adjusted for estimates of changing conditions. These data are tracked and maintained in separate systems, including spreadsheets. Following review by the providing bureau, data is collected, reviewed, integrated, and maintained by the Department’s Office of Planning and Performance Management on the www.performance.gov website.

Level of accuracy required for the intended use of the data: Performance data reported in the Annual Performance Plan & Report and on http://www.performance.gov/ is used for management purposes, as a representative indicator of progress in relation to a target or goal established by the corresponding implementing organization. The accuracy of the data is that which is considered necessary to provide a reasonable representation of the progress made relative to a target or goal for discussion purposes, so as to help:
- determine if the progress is considered adequate
- provide understanding of the ability for the processes and methods being implemented to achieve the goal
- indicate if any further exploration or evaluation is needed to better ensure achievement of the goal; and
- whether alternative action, including adjusting funding levels, facilities, workforce, IT capabilities, etc., is needed to help better ensure achievement of the goal.

Limitations to the data at the required level of accuracy: Performance data is subject to potential errors from: the use of estimations and extrapolations, especially where direct measurement is impractical and/or considered too costly; individual observation; miscommunication; and/or failure to effectively employ the guidance described in the “Indicator” description in http://www.performance.gov/. However, based on multiple review levels and accuracy certifications, we do not believe these limitations to significant.
How the agency has compensated for such limitations if needed to reach the required level of accuracy: Along with the implementing organization’s official assurance of faithfully employing the data verification and validation standards, submitted data is reviewed within the context of the scope and nature of the activity, plans, and past experience to help confirm accuracy. Following review and verification by the submitting bureau or office, the data is reviewed within its corresponding trends and programmatic context by the Department’s Office of Planning and Performance Management to determine if further consultation with the data provider is necessary to adjust or correct the reported data before publication. Senior management and leadership consider this level of accuracy to be acceptable in their use of the data. Past experience in using the data, historical trend and programmatic context assessments, and bureau data quality certifications indicate that the limitations are considered minor and compensating measures are not considered necessary.

Unit Of Measurement: Graduation rate

Indicator Reporting Frequency: Annually

Indicator Direction: INCREASING

Number of schools that convert from bureau to tribal operation

The following indicators will track the overall progress made across the initiative on an annual basis:

Number of schools that convert from bureau to tribal operation

Under P.L. 100-297, Tribally Controlled Schools Act, tribes can decide whether to take over operation of schools currently under BIE administration and management.
The Navajo Nation notified Interior that it is exploring conversion of all 32 Bureau Operated schools under one reform effort rather than 32 individual conversions. Therefore, the remaining 25 BIE operated schools are addressed in this priority goal.
Baseline = 25 non-Navajo BIE operated schools
Goal = 21 non-Navajo BIE operated schools
1. Quarterly Milestones
  1. Attendance - The percentage of K-12 students in BIE-funded schools who have missed less than five percent of the school year.
  2. Onsite Monitoring –Number of completed onsite school assessments each quarter
    1. Staff of the BIE shall conduct onsite monitoring of at least 61 schools each school year (9 months), and within 30 days of the onsite visit issue a written report summarizing the findings and ordering, as necessary, required actions to correct noted deficiencies.

Data Accuracy and Reliability

Means used to verify and validate measured values: All performance data reported on http://www.performance.gov/ by the Department is subject to the data verification and validation standards initially published in 2003 and reissued in 2007 (see https://www.doi.gov/performance/data-validation-and-verification). Implementing organization heads or chief officials confirm in writing the validity of the data. In the case of Agency Priority (Performance) Goals, senior officials in the implementing organization personally present the data on a quarterly basis to the senior Departmental leadership.

Sources for the data: In response to data calls, bureau program managers provide performance data based on their observations that can include extrapolations of selected representative samples or past history adjusted for estimates of changing conditions. These data are tracked and maintained in separate systems, including spreadsheets. Following review by the providing bureau, data is collected, reviewed, integrated, and maintained by the Department’s Office of Planning and Performance Management on the www.performance.gov website.

Level of accuracy required for the intended use of the data: Performance data reported in the Annual Performance Plan & Report and on http://www.performance.gov/ is used for management purposes, as a representative indicator of progress in relation to a target or goal established by the corresponding implementing organization. The accuracy of the data is that which is considered necessary to provide a reasonable representation of the progress made relative to a target or goal for discussion purposes, so as to help:
- determine if the progress is considered adequate
- provide understanding of the ability for the processes and methods being implemented to achieve the goal
- indicate if any further exploration or evaluation is needed to better ensure achievement of the goal; and
- whether alternative action, including adjusting funding levels, facilities, workforce, IT capabilities, etc., is needed to help better ensure achievement of the goal.

Limitations to the data at the required level of accuracy: Performance data is subject to potential errors from: the use of estimations and extrapolations, especially where direct measurement is impractical and/or considered too costly; individual observation; miscommunication; and/or failure to effectively employ the guidance described in the “Indicator” description in http://www.performance.gov/. However, based on multiple review levels and accuracy certifications, we do not believe these limitations to significant.
How the agency has compensated for such limitations if needed to reach the required level of accuracy: Along with the implementing organization’s official assurance of faithfully employing the data verification and validation standards, submitted data is reviewed within the context of the scope and nature of the activity, plans, and past experience to help confirm accuracy. Following review and verification by the submitting bureau or office, the data is reviewed within its corresponding trends and programmatic context by the Department’s Office of Planning and Performance Management to determine if further consultation with the data provider is necessary to adjust or correct the reported data before publication. Senior management and leadership consider this level of accuracy to be acceptable in their use of the data. Past experience in using the data, historical trend and programmatic context assessments, and bureau data quality certifications indicate that the limitations are considered minor and compensating measures are not considered necessary.

Indicator target and actual value information
Fiscal Year Quarter	Period Ending (Month, Year)	Actual Value	Explanation of Actual
2016-Q1	December, 2015	0	For school conversion from BIE to tribal operated, a total of six schools have been identified for conversion in July, 2016. One of the schools, Santa Clara Day School, has signed a Tribal Resolution for conversion; BIE continues to work with the remaining five schools on the Tribal Resolution and conversion terms/plans.
2016-Q2	March, 2016	0	For school conversion from BIE to tribal operated, six schools have been identified for conversion in July, 2016.
2016-Q3	June, 2016	1
2016-Q4	September, 2016	1
2017-Q1	December, 2016
2017-Q2	March, 2017
2017-Q3	June, 2017
2017-Q4	September, 2017

Indicator Statement:

Improve the graduation rate of tribal high school students and facilitate tribal self-determination in shaping the educational curriculum for students.

By September 30, 2017, increase the percentage of tribal students attending bureau funded schools who complete high school with a regular diploma within four years of their 9^thgrade entry date by 5% (relative to 2014-2015 school year) and convert 4 schools from bureau to tribal operated.

Indicator Overview:

The following indicators will track the overall progress made across the initiative on an annual basis:

Number of schools that convert from bureau to tribal operation

Under P.L. 100-297, Tribally Controlled Schools Act, tribes can decide whether to take over operation of schools currently under BIE administration and management.
The Navajo Nation notified Interior that it is exploring conversion of all 32 Bureau Operated schools under one reform effort rather than 32 individual conversions. Therefore, the remaining 25 BIE operated schools are addressed in this priority goal.
Baseline = 25 non-Navajo BIE operated schools
Goal = 21 non-Navajo BIE operated schools
1. Quarterly Milestones
  1. Attendance - The percentage of K-12 students in BIE-funded schools who have missed less than five percent of the school year.
  2. Onsite Monitoring –Number of completed onsite school assessments each quarter
    1. Staff of the BIE shall conduct onsite monitoring of at least 61 schools each school year (9 months), and within 30 days of the onsite visit issue a written report summarizing the findings and ordering, as necessary, required actions to correct noted deficiencies.

Data Accuracy and Reliability

Means used to verify and validate measured values: All performance data reported on http://www.performance.gov/ by the Department is subject to the data verification and validation standards initially published in 2003 and reissued in 2007 (see https://www.doi.gov/performance/data-validation-and-verification). Implementing organization heads or chief officials confirm in writing the validity of the data. In the case of Agency Priority (Performance) Goals, senior officials in the implementing organization personally present the data on a quarterly basis to the senior Departmental leadership.

Sources for the data: In response to data calls, bureau program managers provide performance data based on their observations that can include extrapolations of selected representative samples or past history adjusted for estimates of changing conditions. These data are tracked and maintained in separate systems, including spreadsheets. Following review by the providing bureau, data is collected, reviewed, integrated, and maintained by the Department’s Office of Planning and Performance Management on the www.performance.gov website.

Level of accuracy required for the intended use of the data: Performance data reported in the Annual Performance Plan & Report and on http://www.performance.gov/ is used for management purposes, as a representative indicator of progress in relation to a target or goal established by the corresponding implementing organization. The accuracy of the data is that which is considered necessary to provide a reasonable representation of the progress made relative to a target or goal for discussion purposes, so as to help:
- determine if the progress is considered adequate
- provide understanding of the ability for the processes and methods being implemented to achieve the goal
- indicate if any further exploration or evaluation is needed to better ensure achievement of the goal; and
- whether alternative action, including adjusting funding levels, facilities, workforce, IT capabilities, etc., is needed to help better ensure achievement of the goal.

Limitations to the data at the required level of accuracy: Performance data is subject to potential errors from: the use of estimations and extrapolations, especially where direct measurement is impractical and/or considered too costly; individual observation; miscommunication; and/or failure to effectively employ the guidance described in the “Indicator” description in http://www.performance.gov/. However, based on multiple review levels and accuracy certifications, we do not believe these limitations to significant.
How the agency has compensated for such limitations if needed to reach the required level of accuracy: Along with the implementing organization’s official assurance of faithfully employing the data verification and validation standards, submitted data is reviewed within the context of the scope and nature of the activity, plans, and past experience to help confirm accuracy. Following review and verification by the submitting bureau or office, the data is reviewed within its corresponding trends and programmatic context by the Department’s Office of Planning and Performance Management to determine if further consultation with the data provider is necessary to adjust or correct the reported data before publication. Senior management and leadership consider this level of accuracy to be acceptable in their use of the data. Past experience in using the data, historical trend and programmatic context assessments, and bureau data quality certifications indicate that the limitations are considered minor and compensating measures are not considered necessary.

Unit Of Measurement: Number of schools

Indicator Reporting Frequency: Quarterly

Indicator Direction: INCREASING