doug, the information provided in that article means exactly one thing.
as
measured by the percent of their goal, the rate is falling.

Wrong -- it doesn't mean a damn thing, because it's comparing apples and
oranges. It doesn't state what the goal is this year, or what it was last
year, so any comparison of the rates of meeting those goals is completely
without meaning at all. It doesn't measure anything, and it doesn't mean
anything. Nothing. You can draw _no_ conclusions at all, because the data
is
incomplete.


can we agree that this is the crux of the disagreement? that you think that
my comparing the %ages of their goal from two different years means
absolutely nothing and i think it means that the percentage of their goal is
falling? all else seems to come from this from what i can tell...

if not, what is the crux of the issue?

randy