COLLEGE 

COMPLETION 

TOOL KIT

U . S . D E PA RT M E N T O F E D U C AT I O N

College Completion Tool Kit

United States Department of Education

March 2011
U.S. Department of Education

Arne Duncan

Secretary of Education

March 2011

This publication is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. 

While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U.S. Department of 

Education, College Completion Tool Kit, Washington, D.C., 2011.

This document contains contacts and website addresses for information created and maintained by 

other public and private organizations. This information is provided for the reader’s convenience. The 

U.S. Department of Education does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or 

completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of information or addresses, or websites 

for particular items does not reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, 

or products or services offered.

This publication is available at the Department’s website at http://www.ed.gov/college-completion/

governing-win

ii
Contents

List of Figures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

 

Governing to Win. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Leading the College Completion Agenda. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

 Promising State and Local Practices and U.S. Department of Education Resources 

 That Can Support Them. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Action Strategies for Governors to Consider. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

 Strategy 1: Set Goals; Develop an Action Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

 Strategy 2: Embrace Performance-Based Funding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

 Strategy 3: Align High School Standards with College Entrance and Placement Standards . . 8

 Strategy 4: Make it Easier for Students to Transfer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

 Strategy 5: Use Data to Drive Decision Making. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

 Strategy 6: Accelerate Learning and Reduce Costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

 Strategy 7: Target Adults, especially those with “Some College, but No Degree”. . . . . . . . . . . 17

Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Additional Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

iii
Figures

Education Requirements for Jobs, 2018. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Earnings & Tax Payments by Educational Attainment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

Percentage of Adults Age 25-34 with Tertiary Education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

100 Students Start 9th Grade—29 Graduate College. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

Most Students Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 

Percent in Dollar Growth Rate Since 1982-84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 

Adults as a Completion Target . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

iv
Less than high school

 10%

High school graduate

28%

Associate's degree

17%

Some college 12%

Bachelor's degree

23%

Graduate degree

10%

Education Requirements for Jobs, 2018

Georgetown University, Center on Education and the Workforce, Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education

Requirements Through 2018, 2010. Page 14. http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/FullReport.pdf

Leading the College Completion Agenda

Promising State and Local Practices and U.S. 

Department of Education Resources That Can 

Support Them

The days of being able to rely on high school 

graduates to provide economic stability and vitality 

are over. More than half of all new jobs in the next 

decade will require a postsecondary certificate 

or degree. Accordingly, boosting the number of 

college graduates should be a central goal in every 

state’s workforce and economic development plan. 

Raising college completion rates should be a central 

part of the strategy for reaching that goal.

The best jobs and fastest growing firms, whether 

in biosciences, technology, manufacturing, trade, 

or entertainment, will gravitate to communities, 

regions, and states with a highly qualified 

workforce.

In the coming decade, individuals with professional 

certificates and postsecondary education degrees 

at the associate, bachelor’s, and graduate levels are 

projected to continue to experience higher levels of 

employment and wage growth than those without. 

Benefits will accrue not only to individuals but also 

to businesses in the form of higher earnings and to 

state, federal, and local governments in the form 

of increased tax revenue. Each four-year college 

graduate generates, on average, $5,900 more per 

year in state, federal, and local tax revenue than 

each high school graduate. Over a lifetime, each 

generates, on average, $177,000 more in tax revenue 

than those with only a high school degree. For a state like 

Mississippi, increasing its bachelor’s degree attainment 

level by 10 percent would mean over $200 million dollars 

in additional tax revenue each year. In short, there is an 

economic imperative for states to increase the number of 

high school and college graduates over the next 10 years.

Governing to Win

1
Recognizing job growth and earnings trends, 

nearly three-quarters of today’s young adults 

pursue some form of postsecondary education. 

But fewer than half of those who begin 

postsecondary training earn a certificate or degree 

within six years of initial enrollment. Causes 

include poor academic and skill preparation in 

middle and high school, inadequate financial 

support, inattention to the college dropout 

problem on too many campuses, and structural 

deficiencies with various transition points in our 

education system. 

The good news is that many institutions of higher 

education are increasing college completion rates 

without increasing their budgets. Higher levels of 

certificate and degree attainment can be achieved 

by directing current resources toward promising 

practices to increase postsecondary education 

persistence and completion. There are various 

governmental and nongovernmental resources 

from which governors, campus leaders, and 

state officials can draw. This tool kit highlights 

key strategies for governors and others to 

consider, models to learn from, and financial and 

nonfinancial resources that might be helpful. 

A number of states are leading efforts to help the 

nation as a whole regain its world leadership in 

college completion and attainment. The federal 

government can provide a supporting role to 

accelerate and expand on that state-led work. 

2

$100,000

Taxes Paid

After Tax 

Earnings

No High 

School

High 

School

Some 

College

Associate’s 

Degree

Bachelor’s 

Degree

Master’s 

Degree

Doctoral 

Degree

Professional 

Degree

$120,000

$100,000

$80,000

$60,000

$40,000

$20,000

$0

Earnings & Tax Payments by Educational Attainment

Source: 

The College Board, 

Education Pays, 

2010.

$ 24,300 

$33,800

$39,700 $42,000

$55,700 

$67,300

$91,900
Should a governor choose to champion college 

completion, he or she, along with state education 

and economic leaders, will determine strategies, 

action plans, and new policies needed to increase 

college completion. Secretary of Education Arne 

Duncan and his leadership team stand ready to 

support “State College Completion Summits” 

led by governors who commit to a completion 

agenda supportive of our national goal to increase 

58  56  55  55 

48  46  45  43  42  42  42  42  41  41  40  39  39  38  38  38  36  34  33  32  30  28 

24  24  23 

20  20  19  18  18 

15 

11 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

!"#$%#&'()#!*+!,-./'0!,)#!12345!67'8!9#$:($;!<-.%(:*&!

,-C/ -0u2a45n a7 a 89an2e 2010 

;a<9e =1.3a ? @5Au9a45n BC7D ;er4ary -0u2a45n 2008 

G=ss52Ca7e /eIree 5r JCIDer Cn U.S., Aer 2008 Curren7 @5Au9a45n

Survey, U.S .Census Bureau)  

by 50 percent the number of Americans with a 

postsecondary certificate, credential, or degree 

by 2020. The U.S. Department of Education 

will provide technical assistance, target available 

resources to assist states in their college completion 

efforts, and report by January 1, 2012, where states 

stand in terms of college completion goals, numeric 

objectives, plans, and early achievements. 

3
Strategies for Governors to Consider

1: Set Goals; Develop an Action Plan 

2: Embrace Performance-Based Funding 

3: Align High School Standards with College 

Entrance and Placement Standards 

4: Make it Easier for Students to Transfer 

5: Use Data to Drive Decision Making

6: Accelerate Learning and Reduce Costs

7: Target Adults, especially those with “Some 

College, but No Degree”

There are a number of low-cost structural and state 

policy improvements that can markedly increase 

college completion levels. While these strategies 

do not require large financial investments, they do 

require new ways of doing business and leadership 

that inspires new levels of collaboration among 

various stakeholders. 

Strategy 1: Set College Completion Goals; 

 Develop an Action Plan

Why? Setting high profile, quantifiable, and 

annual postsecondary education completion 

goals for your state and each institution 

of higher education in your state focuses 

state policymakers and institution leaders 

on increasing attainment levels. Large 

education funders, including foundations 

such as the Bill & Melinda Gates 

Foundation and the Lumina Foundation 

for Education, and the U.S. Departments 

of Education and Labor are now making 

college completion efforts a priority in 

their grant making. A prerequisite for 

awards often is goal setting for states and 

institutions of higher education within 

states, as appropriate. 

How? Twenty-four states have partnered 

with Complete College America, an 

independent nonprofit organization, which 

helps states establish short- and long-term 

college completion goals and accompanying 

performance indicators. Some states, such 

as West Virginia, have worked with the 

National Governors Association (NGA) 

and Complete College America to establish 

goals not just for their state, but also for 

each institution of higher education within 

their state. At their best, these goals: (i) 

are year-by-year; (ii) are disaggregated 

for subgroups, including racial and ethnic 

minorities, nontraditional adult learners, 

and low-income students (as evidenced by 

the receipt of a Federal Pell Grant); and 

(iii) emphasize closing the “attainment gap” 

among target populations. 

Governors should consider utilizing 

or forming P-20 councils that involve 

early education, K-12 education, higher 

education, adult education, workforce 

training, and business leaders to develop 

state completion goals and associated state

action plans. Several states, including 

Rhode Island and Washington State, are 

viewed as having model P-20 councils. 

State action plans to meet short- and 

long-term college completion goals can 

be created by any number of state entities, 

including solely the governor’s office, but 

broadly constructed P-16 or P-20 councils 

can serve as a vehicle to ensure that state 

action plans are comprehensive and make 

full use of multiple resource streams.

4
In general, governors also can exert greater 

influence than they traditionally have over 

individual college goal-setting and related 

individual institution of higher education 

action plans through explicit use of their 

role in appointing or recommending for 

appointment both system and institution 

of higher education leaders. In the past, 

appointed institution of higher education 

leaders and their executive officers have 

prioritized enrollment and resources 

over student completion. In making 

appointments and reappointments, however, 

governors can demand a commitment to 

statewide and individual institution college 

completion goals, insist that individual 

institution action plans be created, and 

condition reappointment on progress in 

meeting system goals. Governors could 

go even further and simultaneously 

demand that institution leaders conduct 

an evaluation of the rigor of their courses 

and programs as they relate to labor market 

outcomes to ensure quality is maintained 

as degree output increases. Completion 

growth should not come at the expense of 

quality.

Later this year, the U.S. Department of 

Education’s Office of the Under Secretary 

will post online: current postsecondary 

attainment numbers and rates for each 

state, sample college completion targets, 

and leading state college completion 

plans. The NGA Center for Best Practices 

offers specific progress and outcome 

metrics for states and institutions, which 

include tracking the number of degrees 

and certificates awarded statewide and by 

institution of higher education, graduation 

rates, successful transfer rates, and time and 

credits needed toward a degree. Most of 

these data are currently available through 

the U.S. Department of Education’s 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data 

System (IPEDS). 

U.S. Department of Education staff 

can suggest ways to make strategic use 

of state-level set-aside funds associated 

with Title I and Title II of the federal 

Workforce Investment Act (WIA). States 

can use those funds to create discretionary 

initiatives that link workforce training 

and education. Wisconsin, for example, 

uses its adult education discretionary 

funds to carry out a Regional Industry 

Skills Education (RISE) program that 

grants literacy-deficient adult students, 

including recent legal immigrants who have 

advanced training in their native languages, 

with college-level credit for combined 

academic, English, and occupational skills 

training. Michigan’s “No Worker Left 

Behind” program uses WIA and Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (TAA) funds to 

offer scholarships to adults seeking degrees 

in high-demand fields. 

For a relatively small investment, governors 

or local foundations also can aid individual 

colleges in carrying out institution-specific 

action plans. States and others, for example, 

can provide aid for grant-writing assistance 

to under-resourced institutions of higher 

education, including most community 

colleges and Historically Black Colleges 

and Universities, to assist them in applying 

for federal and non-federal competitive 

grant awards directed at promoting college 

completion.

5

O

O
most vulnerable populations have adequate 

resources to meet student needs. 

How? Washington State, Ohio, Indiana, 

Tennessee, Texas, and other states have 

revised their higher education funding 

formulas to consider, in addition to 

enrollment, performance measures, such as 

institutional achievement judged against:

•	 General outcome indicators, including 

levels of and improvement in the 

numbers and percentages of certificates 

and degrees conferred.1

•	 Subgroup outcome indicators, including 

levels of and improvement in the 

numbers and percentages of certificates 

and degrees conferred to Pell Grant 

recipients, adult students, minority 

students, and students who enter 

with low skills, as well as levels of and 

progress in closing attainment gaps 

between these groups and their peers.

• High-need subject outcome indicators, 

including levels of and improvement 

in the numbers and percentages of 

certificates and degrees conferred in 

priority fields, such as mathematics, 

science, engineering, and nursing.

•	 Progress indicators, including an 

institution’s number and percentage 

of students who: transfer successfully, 

transition successfully from 

developmental (i.e. remedial) to 

college-level course enrollment, and 

complete their certificate or degree 

programs on time. 

Regardless, governors should consider 

encouraging all colleges within their states 

to compete for some $300 million in higher 

education funds made available through the 

U.S. Department of Education’s Student 

Support Services program. Student Support 

Services is one of the federal government’s 

largest TRIO programs designed to advance 

college access and success. Over 900 new 

awards are provided every five years to 

institutions of higher education that supply 

low-income postsecondary students with 

assistance in applying for financial aid, 

choosing courses, and obtaining academic 

tutoring among other access and completion 

promotion services. 

Strategy 2: Embrace Performance-Based 

 Funding of Higher Education 

 Based on Progress Toward 

 Completion and Other 

 Quality Goals

Why? Currently, most state higher education 

funding formulas reward institutions 

based on student enrollment, not college 

completion. Institutions of higher 

education thus are implicitly rewarded for 

turnover, as large freshman and remedial 

level courses tend to cost less per pupil 

to deliver than smaller, more advancedlevel courses required for completion. 

Different financial incentives, however, 

in state funding formulas are likely to 

prompt actions by individual institutions to 

increase college completion. Appropriately 

implemented, outcome-based formulas take 

into consideration the needs of institutions 

providing support so that those serving the 

1

 The United States Department of Education has suggested additional outcome measures for which higher education programs could be 

held accountable, including student earnings relative to educational debt. See http://www2.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/proprule/2010-

3/072610a.pdf.

O

6
Financial incentives linked to these types of 

performance measures, embedded in state 

higher education funding formulas, should 

drive institutions of higher education to: (i) 

develop and implement aggressive outreach 

strategies to reengage adult students who 

have received some college training short of 

certificate or degree attainment but dropped 

out (such as efforts in Nevada, Texas, and 

West Virginia); (ii) restructure remedial 

education to meet individual student needs 

successfully (such as efforts involving 

Tennessee’s Tech Centers and Washington 

State’s Community & Technical College 

System); and (iii) restructure postsecondary 

education delivery to ensure that students 

complete their degrees in a timely manner 

(such as efforts in Hawaii, Minnesota, 

Montana, and Ohio).

When appropriately implemented, 

performance-based formulas consider 

the needs of institutions and provide 

heightened support to those serving the 

most disadvantaged populations. This 

approach of providing funding where it 

is needed most, coupled with heightened 

institutional responsibility for student 

progress and eventual completion, promises 

to create a fairer, more efficient, and more 

productive system of state higher education 

financing that supports student success.

7

Tennessee: A Comprehensive Approach 

to Increasing College Completion

In January 2010, Tennessee’s state legislature enacted a 

comprehensive set of higher education reforms designed 

to increase the number of citizens with a postsecondary 

credential. The Complete College Tennessee Act passed 

nearly unanimously. Altering the state higher education 

funding formula to emphasize outcomes is a key 

component of the new law.

“At a time when state resources are tighter than ever, we’ve 

got to prioritize how we spend those finite dollars and 

retool our funding formula to make it based on success and

outcomes, including higher degree completion rates....It’s the 

responsible thing to do for the budget and, more importantly,

that change, as much as any other, will drive decisions at the 

campus level and help really focus us on the core mission of 

college completion.” 

 – Former Governor Phil Bredesen

In addition to shifting the formula away from being 

based on enrollments to reward completion, the new 

Tennessee law requires:

•Development of a multi-sector statewide master plan to 

increase educational attainment;

•Creation of a common core associate degree curriculum;

•Guaranteed junior status for any state community 

college student who transfers with an associate degree to 

a public state four-year institution; 

•Establishment of common course numbering within the 

community college system;

•Greater transparency in course-by-course transfer 

policy;

•Establishment of dual-admission and dual-enrollment 

policies at all public two- and four-year institutions of 

higher education;

•Creation of a statewide community college system, 

rather than 13 separately-managed schools; and

•Acceleration of associate degree and certificate 

attainment through creation of highly structured 

programs designed to speed progress and increase 

completion.
Strategy 3: Align High School Graduation, 

 Workforce Training, and 

 Adult Education Expectations 

 to Public College Admission 

 and Placement Requirements

Why? Unfortunately, a high school diploma or 

its equivalent does not always indicate 

that a student is college and career 

ready. Over 40 percent of all degreeseeking, postsecondary education students 

are enrolled in community colleges. 

Approximately 60 percent of those students 

are referred to at least one remedial or 

developmental education course—and less 

than a quarter of those ultimately receive 

a degree or certificate.2 Developmental or 

remedial education at the postsecondary 

level increases the amount of time needed 

to earn a credential or degree, raises 

100 students start 9th grade





                      51% on a “college prep” track

   

75 graduate from high school





   

          



51 enter college





       38% need remediation





29 graduate college











Source: U.S. Department of Education 2011 using data from the National Center for Education Statistics Common Core of Data as well as 

research conducted by The College Board.

college costs for individual students, and 

dramatically increases the likelihood 

of dropping out prior to completion. 

Students should not have to pay to learn 

in college what they should have learned 

in high school. According to two major 

U.S. Department of Education studies, the 

number one indicator of college completion 

is high school academic rigor; it is more 

influential than race, family income, or 

parent education.3

How? Governors can direct and encourage 

secondary education, workforce training, 

adult education, and postsecondary 

education systems to work together to 

ensure that high school course offerings, 

high school exit requirements, and college 

entrance requirements are well aligned. 

They can:

2

 See Wirt, J. et al. (2004). The Condition of Education 2004. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2004077

3

 See, e.g. Adelman, C. (2004). Answers in the Toolbox. U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C., page 3.

8
•	 Adopt college- and career-ready

standards to ensure high and consistent 

expectations and outcomes for K-12

and adult education students. Over 

40 states have adopted the Common 

Core Standards, a state-led effort of 

the National Governors Association 

and the Council of Chief State School 

Officers to identify what K-12 students 

should know and be able to do. The 

standards provide a clear and consistent 

framework designed to help ensure that 

students graduate from high school 

ready to succeed in college and careers. 

They also can be incorporated in adult 

education settings to ensure that 

nontraditional students are similarly 

equipped with the knowledge and skills 

necessary to succeed in college and 

careers.

•	 Make “college prep” the default track in

high school. As states move toward 

adopting and implementing collegeand career-ready standards, aligning 

curricula so that students are prepared 

to master heightened standards will be 

critical. States can direct and encourage 

school districts to provide all high 

school students with access to a “college 

prep” curriculum to ensure that they 

are exposed to learning opportunities 

necessary to master heightened 

standards. This typically involves 

providing all students with four years 

of course work in English and at least 

three years in mathematics, science, 

and social studies. A default college 

prep track, however, should not prevent 

schools from experimenting with new 

ways of delivering high quality academic 

content, including use of competencybased programs or internship programs 

developed in partnership with industry. 

When students can demonstrate 

mastery, they should be able to advance. 

Regardless of the approach used to 

deliver content, schools should provide 

all students with courses that prepare 

them to succeed in college.

• 	 Use early assessment of college readiness

to reduce the need for remedial education 

at the postsecondary level. States can 

encourage secondary schools and 

adult education programs to upgrade 

curricular rigor to higher education 

expectations by incorporating college 

placement exam questions into state 

high school tests and requiring public 

colleges to use consistent “cut scores” on 

those tests for placement in freshmanlevel courses. California, for example, 

added a series of college-readiness 

questions to the state’s 11th-grade 

exam. After students take the test, they 

are told whether they are on track for 

credit-bearing classes at colleges in the 

California State University system, so 

that both the student and high school 

can make necessary adjustments in the 

subsequent course of study. Without 

that system, many high school graduates 

and GED holders enter college only to 

take placement tests and discover they 

are not ready for college-level work.

9
•	 Create opportunities for high school and 

adult education students to earn college 

credit. Dual enrollment programs, 

which offer simultaneous secondary and 

postsecondary credit for courses, were 

initially used only for high-achieving 

students. But emerging evidence 

suggests that some form of college 

experience in high school increases 

college going, college readiness, and 

college success among lower-achieving 

populations as well. States can increase 

the likelihood that secondary school 

students will take advantage of these 

opportunities by: (i) extending to 21 

the age at which free public elementary 

and secondary school education will 

be available to all students; and (ii) 

incentivizing K-12 and higher education 

partnerships that ensure college credit 

earned in high school transfers to all 

state institutions of higher education.4

The U.S. Department of Education recently 

funded two consortia of 44 states and the 

District of Columbia to develop K-12 

assessments that are linked to college- and 

career-ready standards. Together, the 

winning consortia represent 85 percent of 

the students in the nation. States continue 

to have the opportunity to join one or both 

consortia.5

The GEAR UP program supplies funds 

to states to increase college enrollment by 

providing academic preparation, advising, 

and scholarships to K-12 students. In 2011, 

the Department expects to make 18 GEAR 

UP state grants totaling $90 million with 

a priority in awards for states that agree 

to implement college- and career-ready 

4

 Similar partnerships can be embraced with respect to adult education programs. For example, Washington State’s I-BEST model and 

other integrated education and training programs enable adults to refine their basic skills while also securing credit for technical courses 

offered at the postsecondary level.

5

 For a list of participating states in each consortium (some states participate in both), go to: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetopassessment/index.html

standards. The program can be a valuable 

source of flexible resources to help students 

finish high school academically prepared for 

college. 

The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical 

Education Act provides over $1.2 billion in 

formula grants to states to support secondary 

and postsecondary education programs 

that build academic as well as career and 

technical skills of young people and adults. 

States can use Perkins funds to ensure 

that the content of career and technical 

education courses is rigorous and aligned 

with college- and career-ready standards. 

Career and technical education students, 

for example, should not just learn how to 

collect a patient’s vital signs; they should also 

learn the anatomy and physiology associated 

with blood pressure, temperature, pulse and 

respiratory rates and the relationship of the 

results to diagnosing and treating diseases 

and disorders.

Similarly, the Adult Education and Family 

Literacy Act (AEFLA) provides over $630 

million in formula funding to states to help 

adults develop basic literacy skills. States 

can use AEFLA funding to ensure that the 

content of adult education courses is aligned 

with postsecondary education requirements. 

College- and career-ready standards should 

guide basic skills and literacy curricula, 

particularly for adult immigrants with 

advanced training in their native country and 

language. Adult education programs should 

make use of college placement exams, dual 

enrollment strategies, and adult education 

bridge courses where basic skills and college 

credit can be earned.

O

O

O

O

10
Note: States and school districts that seek 

to raise standards for high school 

graduation need to make sure they 

provide the necessary support services 

and preparation to enable students 

to succeed. Appropriate professional 

development and teacher preparation 

starting at the elementary school level is 

critical to ensure students are prepared to 

be successful at each successive stage in 

the academic pipeline, particularly when 

they reach high school. In implementing 

a default college prep track policy, for 

example, it is essential to provide support 

for students who need extra academic 

help to reach achievement levels 

necessary to complete a college prep 

course of study successfully. As lessons 

and research from the College Prep for 

All program in Chicago indicate, efforts 

to raise the level of the curriculum need 

to be implemented along with improved 

instruction and strategies that engage 

and motivate students and verify the 

accomplishment of identified learning 

objectives. 

Strategy 4: Make it Easier for Students to 

 Transfer Among Colleges

Why? Two in three postsecondary education 

students attend two or more institutions 

of higher education before obtaining a 

baccalaureate degree—one in five attends 

three or more institutions.6 Unfortunately, 

student and credit transition between 

institutions is frequently complicated 

and difficult to navigate. Students spend 

valuable time and money on courses only 

to find out credits do not fully transfer, 

resulting in their having to retake course 

work. The lack of a coherent, navigable, 

and transparent transfer process both 

increases the cost and time needed to earn 

a degree and diminishes the likelihood of 

completion. 

How? States can create an overarching set of 

policies to promote smooth transition 

among institutions of higher education, 

including: 

!"e %"s'()'o" o"l, -. %"s'()'o"s o"l, -/ree or More %"s'()'o"s 

33.33 46 20

89e": !"e  

College  

34% 

89e": -.o Colleges  

46% 

89e": -/ree or 

More Colleges  

20% 

Most Students Transfer 

6

 See Peter, K. and Cataldi, E.F. (2005). The Road Less Traveled? Students Who Enroll in Multiple Institutions. U.S. Department of Education, 

National Center for Education Statistics. http://www.nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005157.pdf

Source: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005157.pdf

11
• Developing articulation agreements 

that ensure a set of up to 60 credits 

in courses transfer statewide across 

all community colleges and four-year 

public institutions of higher education. 

Ideally, common requirements for 

select majors accompany statewide 

articulation agreements;

• Developing common lower-division, 

postsecondary general education 

curricula accepted by all public twoand four-year institutions, including 

common course numbering;

• Ensuring that transfer policies are easy 

to understand. Course schedules and 

websites, for example, should indicate 

which courses transfer: (i) for credit 

within a major, or (ii) for “elective” 

credit; and

• Rewarding both sending and receiving 

institutions of higher education for 

students who transfer successfully 

as measured by credential or degree 

attainment, as per a performance-based 

funding strategy. 

According to the Council on Higher 

Education Accreditation, 16 states have 

agreements governing transfer of credit 

among all public and private institutions 

statewide.   Agreements generally involve a 

set of transferable general education courses.   

Twenty-two states have similar arrangements 

involving only public institutions of higher 

education.

Establishing articulation agreements 

to facilitate successful transfer is not 

particularly expensive, and federal aid is 

available to assist in implementation.7 

The federal College Access Challenge 

Grant (CACG) program, for example, 

provides formula aid to every state that 

can be used for a wide variety of activities 

to help at-risk students enroll in and 

complete postsecondary education, 

including developing statewide articulation 

agreements. Delaware has used CACG 

funding to create a “transfer of credit” 

matrix—an online tool cataloging high 

school to college transition and betweencollege transfer information. Similarly, 

North Carolina is using CACG funds 

to disseminate, through an online tool, 

information about course transferability 

between community colleges and four-year 

universities. CACG funding more than 

doubled this year to $150 million nationally. 

In small states, it increased fivefold. The 

minimum grant per state is now $1.5 

million, more than enough to create a 

uniform and clear transfer policy among 

public institutions of higher education in 

almost any state.

Strategy 5: Use Data to Drive Decision 

 Making

Why? Given the fiscal realities facing states, it 

is critical to understand the relationship 

between spending and results as students 

move through the education system and 

into the workforce. Too often, however, 

O

12

7

 The U.S. Department of Education recently awarded discretionary grants, through the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education 

program, to six states to develop career and technical education programs of study that allow students to gain college credit in high school 

and transfer those credits to and among postsecondary institutions on their way to a degree. These projects are to include secondary and 

postsecondary education entities, state workforce agencies, and employers. The creation of statewide or multistate articulation agreements is 

a central component of supported work.
states have multiple, disconnected education 

and workforce data systems—resulting 

in a lack of accountability across sectors. 

Secondary schools don’t know how many of 

their high school graduates are unprepared 

for college-level work; community colleges 

don’t know how many of their students 

transfer and how successful they are at 

four-year institutions; and few secondary or 

postsecondary institutions know how well 

their students fare in the labor market. 

How? With strong statewide data systems, 

like those in Florida and Washington 

State, states and institutions can follow 

the progress and success of different 

types of students and workers across the 

education system and into the labor market, 

empowering leaders who want to target 

resources, reward successful actors, and 

intelligently alter interventions. State data 

systems can help policymakers identify 

the attainment level of any number of 

groups—for example, Hispanic female 

Pell Grant recipients with English 

language deficiencies seeking an associate 

degree in nursing—and the effects of 

interventions on those populations without 

compromising individual student privacy. 

All states have committed to building 

statewide longitudinal data systems as 

a condition of receiving Recovery Act 

funding. We look forward to states 

completing this work by September 30, 

2011, as promised in their State Fiscal 

Stabilization Fund applications, so that 

they can use longitudinal data systems 

as a resource to drive decision making 

and get better results. There are 12 state 

longitudinal data system elements described 

in the America COMPETES Act:

/ A unique identifier for every 

student that does not permit a student 

to be individually identified (except as 

permitted by federal and state law); 

/ School enrollment history, 

demographic characteristics, and a 

program participation record of 

every student; 

/ Information on when a student 

enrolls, transfers, drops out, or 

graduates from a school; 

/ Student scores on tests required 

by the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act; 

/ Information on students who are 

not tested, by grade and subject; 

/ Student scores on tests measuring 

whether they are ready for college; 

/ A way to identify teachers and to 

match teachers to their students; 

/ Information from students’ 

transcripts, specifically 

courses taken and grades earned; 

/ Data on students’ success in college, 

including whether they enrolled in 

remedial courses; 

/ Data on whether K-12 students are 

prepared to succeed in college; 

/ A system of auditing data for 

quality, validity, and 

reliability; and 

/ The ability to share data from 

preschool through postsecondary 

education data systems. 

13
courses and is working with experts to 

develop strategies to improve success rates 

for those students. 

The National Center for Education 

Statistics at the U.S. Department of 

Education can provide technical assistance 

to states in the process of building or 

improving their data systems. External 

groups like the Data Quality Campaign can 

also provide helpful technical assistance. To 

date, the U.S. Departments of Education 

and Labor have provided over half a billion 

dollars to help states develop longitudinal 

data systems that follow students from 

elementary school through employment. 

These systems can and many would 

submit should be used to track whether 

postsecondary education students are 

progressing toward completion on time.

Strategy 6: Accelerate Learning, Reduce 

 Costs, and Stabilize Tuition 

 Growth

Why? Over the last 25 years, “sticker price”

increases in public college tuition and fees 

have outpaced the growth in inflation by 

over 400 percent and the growth in health 

care costs by over 175 percentage points. 

Average net price, after financial aid, has 

outpaced median family income growth. 

Likewise, the cost of college textbooks 

has increased at more than four times the 

rate of inflation for other finished goods. 

Accordingly, student debt more than 

doubled in the last decade. Across the 

nation, state budget shortfalls are leading to 

reductions in state support for public higher 

education and a new round of tuition 

spikes. Students report heightened price is 

a major contributor to non-completion. 

• Beyond America COMPETES and 

Recovery Act requirements, there are 

additional elements that states may 

want to consider for robust P-20 

longitudinal data systems, including: (i) 

student-level data for all public colleges 

and universities relating to enrollment, 

demographics, financial aid, transfer, 

persistence, remediation, and degree 

completion; (ii) student-level data for 

adult education, GED testing centers, 

and career and technical education 

programs; and (iii) a data audit system 

to ensure the ongoing validity and 

reliability of data submitted. 

• States and universities can create Webbased “dashboards” or “tote boards” 

that make performance data publicly 

available. These visual tools not only 

enable universities to monitor their own 

performance in a consistent and userfriendly manner, but they also allow 

consumers, public officials, researchers, 

prospective students and parents, and 

members of the general public to 

gauge performance of state systems 

and individual institutions and suggest 

policy innovations. The Accountability 

Dashboard developed by the Minnesota 

State Colleges and Universities System 

offers one example of how dashboards 

have been used successfully to track 

performance and encourage continuous 

progress toward strategic goals. 

CACG funds can be used to help colleges 

implement data-driven plans to improve 

student access, retention, and success. 

Oklahoma is using its CACG funding to 

identify groups of students who have not 

succeeded in developmental or introductory 

O

O

14
How? To stabilize tuition growth, states need 

to: (i) encourage institutions to embrace 

productivity measures that cut costs while 

raising quality, and (ii) stabilize state 

funding for higher education. Below are a 

series of options:

• The National Center for Academic 

Transformation (NCAT) has 

demonstrated that hundreds of 

courses can be redesigned with the 

aid of technology to lower costs and 

improve outcomes at the same time. 

8

 Open education resource methods also can steadily increase the quality of teaching and learning by bringing together teams of instructors 

and students into virtual collaborations where they can share and more rapidly transfer high-impact instructional practices and be exposed 

to a greater diversity of high-quality instructional content than would otherwise be practical. See http://oli.web.cmu.edu/openlearning/

files/theinitiative/publications/jime-2008-14.pdf

Carnegie Mellon University’s Open 

Learning Initiative has demonstrated 

that technology can be used to 

significantly accelerate learning. In 

fact, a recent study documented that 

Carnegie Mellon students completed 

an undergraduate statistics course 

in roughly 50 percent of the time 

consumed by traditional instructional 

methods.8

• A number of institutions of higher 

education and large state systems 

have contracted with independent 

management consultants to identify 

efficiencies that might be embraced 

without undermining academic quality 

(e.g. purchasing energy cooperatively 

through a system or consortium of 

institutions; centralizing information 

technology, human resources, and 

financial services; entering joint 

health care purchasing agreements). 

The University of California system 

audit identified more than $500 

million in savings. The University of 

North Carolina system’s efficiency 

audit identified more than 5 percent 

in operating budget savings. Ohio 

mandates annual efficiency audits.

• To stabilize tuition, Oregon is 

considering capitalizing a portion of 

state higher education funding by 

replacing over time the state’s annual 

appropriation for its flagship public 

institution with a public-private 

endowment. Pending is a proposal 

for state lawmakers to commit to a 

stream of flat state appropriations for 

the University of Oregon over the next 

15

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

300 

350 

400 

450 

Percent in Dollar Growth Rate Since 1982‐84 

College -u//on  Medical Care 

Median Family Income  Housing 

Consumer Price Index  Food 

?rans@or-a/on 

College 

?ui/on and 

Fees 439% 

Medical Care 

251% 

Median Family 

Income 147% 

Consumer 

Price Index 

106% 

EourceF Ga/onal Cen-er Hor PuIlic Policy and HigJer Kduca/on L2008N. Measuring Up 2008: 

   12e 3a45na6 7ep5r8 9ar: 5n ;ig2er <:u=a45n> Page 8. 
30 years. Funds would be dedicated 

to financing debt payments for a new 

general obligation bond of equal length, 

the proceeds of which would serve 

as an endowment for the University. 

Matched dollar-for-dollar in private 

donations, the resulting public-private 

endowment is projected to earn an 

amount more than equal to the current 

annual state appropriation for the 

University beginning in 30 years, thus 

freeing the state at that time from an 

ongoing expense and stabilizing the 

University’s public source resources.

• Families tend to overestimate net 

public college costs and underestimate 

available financial aid. To address the 

information gap and facilitate financial 

planning, various public and private 

institutions of higher education have 

made multiyear price guarantees to 

families. Championed by Governor 

Martin O’Malley, the University of 

Maryland froze tuition for four years. 

The University of North Carolina and a 

group of private institutions have made 

a “no loan” net price commitment to 

low-income families. Rice University 

has indexed tuition growth to inflation. 

A proposal has been made in New York 

to cap annual tuition growth at state 

colleges and universities in exchange for 

granting institutions semi-autonomy in 

price setting.

Decreasing Costs and Increasing Student 

Outcomes: Course Redesign in Maryland

“Course redesign is as close to a magic bullet as we 

have to improve higher ed productivity,” according 

to University of Maryland Chancellor Brit Kirwan. 

Costs go down, and achievement goes up.

In 2007, Kirwan and the National Center for 

Academic Transformation launched a redesign

initiative at the University of Maryland for nine large 

introductory courses in fields as varied as English 

and chemistry. While the nature of redesign varied 

by course, all involved a decrease in passive lecture 

learning and an increase in technology-enabled active 

and individualized learning. 

Maryland’s results are impressive. Costs for 

Maryland’s redesigned Chemistry I course, for 

example, went down by 70 percent — from $268 

to $80 per student. More important, the redesign 

produced an increase in the number of students 

passing with a “C” grade or better from 50 percent 

in the original course to over 70 percent in the 

redesigned version. Students in the redesigned 

course also performed better in and were less likely 

to withdraw from subsequent chemistry courses. 

Maryland is now engaged in a statewide redesign of 

“gatekeeper” courses – including developmental, 

formerly known as remedial, courses. 

Initially faculty was resistant to course redesign 

driven by cost-reduction goals, says Kirwan. 

But once they saw improvements in student 

achievement associated with redesign, they became 

enthusiastic adopters. In fact, faculty members 

now are proposing the redesign of additional 

courses, promising even greater savings and greater 

achievement gains.

16
The U.S. Department of Labor, in close 

coordination with the U.S. Department of 

Education, recently issued an application 

for a new $2 billion grant program to 

improve job training and education 

programs for dislocated workers. The 

Trade Adjustment Assistance Community 

College and Career Training Grant 

Program (TAACCCT) supports the 

creation and continuous improvement 

of Open Educational Resources (OER) 

that can be freely used, customized, and 

improved without the permission of their 

original producers. Those interested in 

using TAACCCT funds to create open 

courseware, courses, and textbooks along 

with new technology-based assessments 

should consult the Federal Register and/

or the Department of Labor website at 

http://www.doleta.gov/grants to obtain 

grant guidelines and the application 

deadline.

The U.S. Department of Education makes 

available an early estimate of individual 

financial aid awards at http://www.

fafsa4caster.ed.gov Students can access a 

net price estimate and multiyear net price 

calculator for thousands of institutions of 

higher education at the Department of 

Education’s College Navigator website: 

http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/. In 

fact, any institution of higher education 

can download a free template of the 

Department of Education’s net price 

calculator and tailor it for placement on its 

home Web page.

Strategy 7: Target Adults, Especially Those 

 with “Some College, but No 

 Degree”

Why? Traditional students aged 18-24 are a 

critical, but insufficient, part of a college 

completion strategy. Nearly 50 percent of 

adults aged 25-64 (over 97 million) have 

a high school degree or equivalent, but 

no postsecondary degree. There are over 

7 million adults aged 25-34 with some 

college, but no degree, according to the U.S. 

Census Bureau. 

One of the fastest, cheapest, and most 

effective ways to increase the number 

of citizens in your state with a college 

certificate or degree is to target adults who 

have “some college, but no degree.” Many 

of these individuals already have sufficient 

credits for an associate degree, and many 

more are just a few credits shy of earning 

an associate or bachelor’s degree. 

How? A number of states have made concerted 

efforts to bring adults who never before 

attended college into higher education for 

the first time. Arkansas, Nevada, Texas, 

South Dakota, and West Virginia all have 

made concerted efforts to target adults with 

some college for reengagement back into 

higher education. States and institutions of 

higher education can:

17

O

O
prior learning credit peers. 

• Develop partnerships between 

institutions of higher education and 

employers to ensure adult students 

receive credit for training provided by 

industry or labor, where appropriate. 

For example, institutions of higher 

education could award academic credit 

for National Institute for Metalworking 

Skills Level III certification supplied 

by employers or apprenticeship 

work conducted with or for labor 

organizations and other workforce 

groups.

• Ensure that assessment and 

placement policies support highly 

targeted intervention and short-term 

developmental program placement. 

Working adults with no college who 

• Make use of “prior learning 

assessments” to grant credit for 

college-level skills learned outside of 

the classroom. These assessments can 

range from national examinations to 

locally administered, institution-specific 

portfolio assessments. Over half of all 

colleges award prior learning credit, but 

few embrace multiple assessments or 

conduct portfolio assessments to award 

it to large numbers of adult students 

beyond those with military experience. 

Yet according to a recent study, adult 

undergraduates who receive “prior 

learning credit” are more than twice 

as likely to graduate as their non-prior 

learning credit peers. Moreover, they 

complete a bachelor’s degree 2.5 to 10 

months faster and an associate degree 

up to 4.5 months faster than their non18

 Adults as a Completion Target

Additional Growth Needed for 2020 Goal

Natural Growth if 50% of Adults

with some college in 2008

Complete their degree by 2020

Natural Growth for Postsecondary

Credentials

U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2008 

Annual Social and Economic Supplement

U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2009 

Annual Social and Economic Supplement
have been out of school for several years 

may not immediately test into creditbearing courses. While some students 

may need intensive remediation, others 

may just need refreshing. Tennessee 

requires multiple diagnostic exams 

to identify and address deficiencies 

with high levels of precision, allowing 

more students to enroll in creditbearing courses immediately with 

academic support services. Bypassing 

developmental or remedial education 

increases the likelihood of course and 

degree completion. More precisely 

tailored assessments and placement 

policies combined with individualized 

instruction thus can increase student 

achievement and decrease the studentand state-borne costs associated with 

semester-long remedial courses.

• Target the 7 million adults who have 

some college but no degree to increase 

relatively quickly the number of citizens 

in your state with a postsecondary 

education credential. State leaders can 

urge institutions of higher education to 

examine student data records to identify 

those with sufficient credits and nearly 

sufficient credits for an associate degree, 

including students who transferred to a 

four-year institution but never received 

either an associate or bachelor’s degree. 

Identified adults can be contacted 

through outreach campaigns and 

urged to claim a degree or complete 

outstanding course work. 

• Develop a model “completion template” 

that institutions of higher education 

can use to create an individual 

completion plan for returning students. 

Items referenced might include: an 

assigned academic advisor or mentor; 

a guarantee of emergency financial 

aid for short-term needs; assurance 

of on-campus, short-term child 

care; independent study options; 

and financial incentives, such as loan 

forgiveness, for degree completion. 

Very flexible CACG funds are being used 

by a variety of states to increase adult 

college completion levels. Oklahoma’s 

Reach Higher program, for example, uses 

CACG funds to provide one-time, needbased grants to those with some college, 

but no degree. Texas uses its CACG 

funds to finance a “Success by Degree” 

program that includes an adult completion 

website, marketing campaign, and specific 

baccalaureate programs geared toward 

returning adult students. CACG grants, 

which are made to every state, can be used 

among other things to:

/ Analyze higher education data of 

those adults with some college, but 

no degree; 

/ Conduct outreach campaigns to 

urge eligible adults to claim a twoyear degree for which they have 

secured sufficient credits or 

engage adults just shy of a four-year 

degree; 

/ Support the development and use 

of prior learning assessments; and 

/ Create policies that ensure the 

awarding of academic credit for 

employer training. 

19
The new Department of Labor Trade 

Adjustment Assistance Community College 

and Career Training Grant program will 

distribute $500 million this year and each 

of the next four years in support of four 

adult worker training priority areas: (i) 

accelerating academic progress of lowskilled and other workers; (ii) improving 

retention and achievement to reduce time to 

completion; (iii) building programs that meet 

industry needs, including developing career 

pathways; and (iv) strengthening online 

and technology-enabled learning. More 

information on how to access these funds, 

which just became available in the winter of 

2010-11, can be found at http://www.doleta.

gov/grants/.

Finally, through the Educational 

Opportunity Centers program run by the 

U.S. Department of Education’s Office of 

Postsecondary Education, $47 million is 

competitively awarded to institutions of 

higher education, nonprofit organizations, 

and other entities to support adults entering 

or continuing postsecondary education 

programs.  Grant recipients provide 

services such as academic and financial aid 

advising, assistance with admissions and 

aid applications, personal counseling, and 

financial literacy education.  A competition 

for new awards is being held in 2011.9

Conclusion

Despite dramatic economic changes and 

substantial investments in higher education over 

the last 40 years, the percentage of Americans 

with a postsecondary degree or credential is only 

modestly higher than it was in 1970. The earnings 

gap and employment gap, however, between those 

who have completed postsecondary training and 

those who have not are substantially wider.10 In 

fact, the growing earnings gap and employment 

gap strongly indicate that the job market’s demand 

for evidence of higher skill attainment continues to 

rise.

Almost every governor has made job growth a 

top priority. State-by-state policies will differ, 

but the most successful will share a common 

thread: support for a well-educated workforce 

and heightened levels of college completion. 

Resources for higher education are an essential 

element of any state’s job creation strategy, though 

insufficient on their own. It takes a comprehensive 

approach. We hope you find this guide useful in 

crafting your own action plan for higher education 

improvement. Governors and states, like the 

country as a whole, have a choice: to get smarter or 

to risk falling behind. The Secretary of Education 

stands ready to help governors as they take on this 

challenge. 

9

 For more information, including lists of past grantees, go to: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/trioeoc/index.html

O

O

20

10 In November 2010, individuals with a bachelor’s degree or higher had a 76.6 percent labor-force participation rate and a 4.4 percent 

unemployment rate. Those with some college or an associate degree had a 69.9 percent labor-force participation rate and an 8.7 

percent unemployment rate. Those with only a high school diploma had a 61.1 percent labor-force participation rate and a 10 percent 

unemployment rate. And for those with less than a high school diploma, the labor-force participation rate was only 46.6 percent. Their 

unemployment rate was 15.7 percent. 
Additional Resources

Access to Success – a project of the National 

Association of System Heads and The Education 

Trust, works with 24 public higher education 

systems that have pledged to cut the college-going 

and graduation gaps for low-income and minority 

students in half by 2015 - www.edtrust.org/

Achieve, Inc. – created in 1996 by the nation’s 

governors and corporate leaders, Achieve is an 

independent, bipartisan, nonprofit education 

reform organization based in Washington, D.C., 

that seeks to help states raise academic standards 

and graduation requirements, improve assessments, 

and strengthen accountability – www.achieve.org

Achieving the Dream – works to make the student 

success agenda a priority at community colleges 

and with state and national policymakers and 

stakeholders – www.achievingthedream.org

Carolina Counts – The University of North 

Carolina’s initiative to streamline operating 

expenses as per recommendations offered by Bain 

and Company – http://carolinacounts.unc.edu/.

See also http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/

education/15bain.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

College Board’s College Completion Agenda 

and State Policy Guide – created to study the 

educational pipeline as a single continuum and 

identify solutions to increase the number of 

students who graduate from college and are 

prepared to succeed in the 21st century, with 10 

interdependent recommendations to reach its goal 

of ensuring that at least 55 percent of Americans 

hold a postsecondary degree by 2025 – http://

completionagenda.collegeboard.org/reports

Complete College America – a national nonprofit 

working to increase the number of Americans with 

a college degree or credential of value and to close 

attainment gaps for traditionally underrepresented 

populations; currently, 24 states are pledging to 

make college completion a top priority as part of 

CCA’s Alliance of States – www.completecollege.

org

Council for Adult and Experiential Learning – a 

national, nonprofit organization providing tools 

and strategies to institutions of higher education, 

state and local governments, and businesses in 

support of lifelong learning – www.cael.org. See 

also Fueling the Race to Post-Secondary Success: A 48

Institution Study of Prior Learning Assessment and

Adult Student Outcomes, CAEL (March 2010).

Data Quality Campaign – a national, collaborative 

effort that seeks to encourage and support state 

policymakers to improve the availability and use 

of high-quality education data to improve student 

achievement – www.dataqualitycampaign.org

Education Commission of the States – works to 

help states develop effective policy and practice 

for public education by providing data, research, 

analysis, and leadership, and by facilitating 

collaboration, the exchange of ideas among the 

states, and long-range strategic thinking – www.

ecs.org

Education Trust – independent think tank and 

advocacy organization that works to promote 

heightened academic achievement and attainment 

for all students, pre-kindergarten through college – 

www.edtrust.org

21
National Center for Higher Education 

Management – a private nonprofit that seeks 

to improve strategic decision making in higher 

education for states and institutions in the United 

States and abroad – www.nchems.org

Lumina Foundation – a grant-making foundation 

that works to promote higher education access and 

success – www.luminafoundation.org

Minnesota Accountability Dashboard – reports 

on 10 measures of institutional effectiveness, 

including cost, access, and completion – 

http://www.mnscu.edu/board/accountability/index.

html

National Center for Academic Transformation

– independent nonprofit that works to support the 

effective use of information technology to improve 

student outcomes and reduce the cost of higher 

education – www.thencat.org. See also http://

www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0811.

carey.html

National Governors Association – NGA’s Center 

for Best Practices has produced a guide as part 

of its Complete to Compete initiative on college 

completion metrics, including specific outcome and 

progress metrics on completion, as well as an issue 

brief on the same – www.nga.org

University of Oregon’s New Partnership 

Proposal – website that seeks to help develop and 

build support for new governance and a publicprivate endowment building proposal –http://

newpartnership.uoregon.edu/about/

United States Department of Education – 

the National Center for Education Statistics’ 

IPEDS and College Navigator systems include 

detailed, institution-by-institution data on college 

completion and net price – http://nces.ed.gov/

ipeds/

22
23
The Department of Education's mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global 

competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

www.ed.gov