Report to the Chairman, Committee on 

Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions, U.S. Senate 

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

October 2004 PUBLIC COMMUNITY 

COLLEGES AND 

TECHNICAL 

SCHOOLS 

Most Schools Use 

Both Credit and 

Noncredit Programs 

for Workforce 

Development 

GAO-05-04 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-4.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact David D. Bellis 

at (415) 904-2272 or bellisd@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-05-4, a report to the 

Chairman, Committee on Health, 

Education, Labor, and Pensions, 

U.S. Senate 

October 2004

PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND 

TECHNICAL SCHOOLS 

Most Schools Use Both Credit and 

Noncredit Programs for Workforce 

Development 

The majority of community colleges and technical schools are offering a 

broad spectrum of academic and training programs—everything from 

traditional courses for degree-seeking students to remedial education and 

contract training customized for individual employers. In addition, 61 

percent of schools offer noncredit occupational, professional, or technical 

training. 

Prevalence of Types of Programs at Community Colleges and Technical Schools in the Fall 

Term of 2002 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

g

f

e

d

c

b

a 93

73

79

96

89

For-credit programs

Academic degree or transfer

Occupational, professional,

or technical training

Below college-level

(remedial)

Contract traininga

Basic skills

Occupational, professional,

or technical training

Noncredit programs

61

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percentage of schools offering programs

a

Contract training data are for the 2002-03 academic year. 

States have long provided the greatest share of funding for public 

community colleges–between 40 and 45 percent of schools’ total revenue, 

while federal funding, exclusive of student financial assistance, has been 

much smaller–about 5 percent. Most states provide more funding for credit 

programs than noncredit programs. 

Most community colleges and technical schools track some education and 

employment outcomes for their students, but differences in state reporting 

requirements preclude aggregating these outcomes nationally. However, 

national studies of representative samples or cohorts of students conducted 

by the National Center for Education Statistics show that between half and 

two-thirds of community college students seeking some type of academic or 

occupational credential succeed in transferring to a 4-year institution or 

earning a degree, license, certificate, or diploma within 6 to 8 years of 

initiating studies. GAO’s survey indicated that more than half of students 

enrolled in remedial and 3 types of basic skills courses completed them 

successfully. 

The goal of most American 

workers—a well-paying job—will 

be increasingly linked to adequate 

training in the coming years. Such 

training will be key to competing 

for the 21 million new jobs the 

Department of Labor projects will 

be created in the 2002 to 2012 

period. People already in, or 

seeking to enter, the workforce 

often turn to the nation’s more than 

1,100 public community colleges 

and technical schools to obtain 

needed skills. Nearly 6 million 

students were enrolled in for-credit 

courses in the fall term 2000 and 

millions more participated in 

noncredit courses at these schools. 

GAO was asked to examine: (1) the 

extent to which community 

colleges and technical schools are 

involved in remedial education and 

workforce training efforts as well 

as academic preparation activities; 

(2) how state and federal funding 

support these academic and 

training efforts; and (3) what is 

known about schools’ efforts to 

measure outcomes, including the 

rates at which students graduate, 

transfer to 4-year institutions, pass 

occupational licensing exams, and 

gain employment. 

The scope of our review included a 

Web-based survey of 1,070 public 

community colleges and technical 

schools, 758 (71 percent) of which 

completed the survey. 
Page i GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3 

Background 5 

Community Colleges and Technical Schools Have Expanded Roles 

in Educating and Training the Nation’s Workforce 6 

State Funding to Schools Dominated but Varied by Type of 

Program; Federal Funding Provided a Much Smaller Share 15 

Differences in Community College and Technical School and State 

Data Collection Efforts Place Reliance on National Studies for 

Measuring Overall Student Outcomes 25 

Concluding Observations 32 

Agency Comments 33 

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 34 

The Survey 34 

The Study Population 35 

Developing the Survey 35 

Administering the Survey 35 

Nonsampling Error 36 

Response Rates 36 

Site Visits 37 

Appendix II GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 38 

GAO Contacts 38 

Staff Acknowledgments 38 

Tables 

Table 1: Overview of Basic Types of Credit and Noncredit 

Programs 2 

Table 2: Funding Received by Community Colleges and Technical 

Schools under Nine Federal Programs as Reported by 

Survey Respondents for Fiscal Year 2003. 22 

Table 3: Percent of Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Tracking Education or Employment Outcomes for Three 

Types of Programs for All Students or a Representative 

Sample in 2002-03 26 

Table 4: Percent of Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Tracking Four Types of Outcomes for Students Who 

Completed below College-Level (Remedial) and Basic 

Contents 
Page ii GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Skills Courses and Percent of Responding Schools That 

Provided Data 27 

Table 5: Percent of Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

That Used Each of Three Methods to Track Outcomes for 

Students Who Completed Three Types of Programs 28 

Table 6: Percent of Students Passing below College-Level 

(Remedial) and Three Types of Basic Skills Courses during 

Fall Term of 2002 and Percent of Responding Schools with 

that Type of Course that Provided Data 32 

Figures 

Figure 1: Prevalence of Types of Programs at Community Colleges 

and Technical Schools in the Fall Term of 2002 7 

Figure 2: Median Percentage of Students Enrolled in Seven 

Programs in the Fall Term of 2002 at 758 Schools 

Completing GAO Survey 9 

Figure 3: Percentage of Students Enrolled in Four Types of Credit 

and Noncredit Programs 11 

Figure 4: Percentage of Contracts Reported by Surveyed Schools 

According to Employer Type in the 2002-03 Academic 

Year 13 

Figure 5: Percentages of Schools’ Contracts with Employers by 

Total Number of Employees 14 

Figure 6: Share of Revenues for Public Community Colleges 16 

Figure 7: Comparison of State Funding Received by Schools for 

Credit and Basic Skills Courses 18 

Figure 8: Comparison of State Funding Received by Schools for 

Credit and Noncredit Occupational, Professional, and 

Technical Training Courses 19 

Figure 9: Degree to Which Schools Received State Funding for 

Contract Training 20 

Figure 10: Comparison of Median Funding Per School and 

Percentage of Schools Reporting Funds, by Federal 

Program 24 
Page iii GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Abbreviations 

ABE Adult Basic Education 

AEFLA Adult Education and Family Literacy Act 

ESL English as a Second Language 

GED General Educational Development 

HEA Higher Education Act 

IPEDS Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System 

NCCET National Council for Continuing Education and Training 

NCES National Center for Education Statistics 

NSF National Science Foundation 

TANF Temporary Assistance for Needy Families 

VR vocational rehabilitation 

WIA Workforce Investment Act 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
Page 1 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

October 18, 2004 

The Honorable Judd Gregg 

Chairman 

Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

 and Pensions 

United States Senate 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

In future years, higher levels of education and training will continue to 

provide one of the best opportunities for the nearly 36 million Americans 

living in poverty1

 to achieve economic well-being and for others who need 

additional skills to retain or improve their employment status. Accessing 

these opportunities will be key for these groups to compete for 21 million 

new jobs that the Department of Labor projects will be created during the 

2002 to 2012 period.2

 The nation’s more than 1,100 public community 

colleges and technical schools are often a resource to which job seekers 

or those currently employed turn for help in this regard. Each year, these 

schools educate nearly half of American undergraduate students and 

provide training for millions of students seeking to upgrade their job skills. 

Nearly 6 million students were enrolled in for-credit courses in the fall 

term of 2000 and millions more participated in noncredit courses. 

While these schools have often been viewed as mainly providing courses 

offering college credit for academic or occupational credentials, the 

educational landscape in which they operate includes a variety of 

noncredit programs as well, as shown in table 1. For example, a school 

might provide training in English as a Second Language to help give 

immigrants this basic skill for the job market, or it might create training 

for a specific company. 

 1

DeNavas-Walt, Carmen, Bernadette D. Proctor, and Robert J. Mills, U.S. Census Bureau, 

Current Population Reports, P60-226, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in 

the United States: 2003, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.: 2004.

2

Monthly Labor Review, Employment Outlook: 2002-12, Industry Output and 

Employment Projections to 2012, Jay M. Berman, February 2004. 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 
Page 2 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Table 1: Overview of Basic Types of Credit and Noncredit Programs 

Type of program Description 

College credit programs 

Academic degree or transfer Courses leading to an Associate of Arts, Associate of Science, or other academic degree or 

eligible for transfer credit to an institution that offers baccalaureate degrees. 

Occupational, professional, or 

technical training 

Courses leading to an Associate of Applied Science or other occupationally related degree, 

certificate, license, or diploma (e.g., dental assistant certificate). 

Noncredit courses or programs 

Occupational, professional, or 

technical training 

Noncredit courses leading to a certificate, license, or diploma (e.g., noncredit certified nursing 

assistant program. 

Below college-level academics 

(remedial) 

Courses, including mathematics, English, and reading that are required before students who 

lack college-level proficiency in those subjects can be accepted in a college-level program. 

Basic skills Courses, including Adult Basic Education, English as a Second Language, and those 

preparing students for the General Educational Development examination. 

Contract training Employee training provided under contract to businesses, government entities, or other 

employers. 

Other Includes personal enrichment courses and any other courses not in the above categories. 

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004. 

Little is known about the full spectrum of credit and noncredit academic 

and training programs established at community colleges and technical 

schools. At your request, we conducted a study to determine: (1) the 

extent to which community colleges and technical schools are involved in 

remedial education and workforce training efforts as well as academic 

preparation activities; (2) how state and federal funding support these 

academic and training efforts; and (3) what is known about schools’ 

efforts to measure outcomes, including the rates at which students 

graduate, transfer to 4-year institutions, pass occupational licensing 

exams, and gain employment. 

Our answers are based in part on a Web-based survey we conducted of 

public community colleges and technical schools nationwide. Survey data 

for all programs, except contract training, was for the fall term of 2002. 

(We did not include proprietary schools, such as for-profit technical 

schools, in our survey population.) We activated the survey Web site, 

notified the 1,070 public community colleges and technical schools in our 

survey population, and received responses from 758 community colleges 
Page 3 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

and technical schools (71 percent).3 We checked the survey responses for 

obvious errors and problems, but did not independently verify the 

accuracy of the information these schools provided. We also obtained and 

relied on data from the National Center for Education Statistics’ (NCES) 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) to identify our 

study population. We assessed the reliability of the IPEDS data, reviewing 

NCES’s methods for testing the internal consistency of data reported by 

schools. We supplemented our survey data with visits to community 

college and state officials in three states—Florida, Texas, and 

Washington—and interviewed officials in a fourth state, North Carolina, by 

telephone.4

 Using the recommendations of education and workforce 

experts at community colleges and professional organizations, we chose 

these states because they differed in such ways as the extent of state 

funding for credit and noncredit courses, the tracking of student education 

and employment outcomes, the types of workforce development efforts, 

and geographic location. We examined two or more schools in each state, 

except for Texas where we only visited one school, selecting them on the 

basis of expert recommendations to obtain a mix based on differences in 

level of student enrollment and urban and rural locale. We also relied on 

the findings of national outcomes studies regarded to be authoritative by 

researchers and other experts in the field. We reviewed these studies to 

assess the validity of their findings and found them to be valid. We 

conducted our study from May 2003 through August 2004 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Our survey results indicate that the majority of community colleges and 

technical schools are offering a broad spectrum of academic and training 

programs—everything from traditional courses for degree-seeking 

students to remedial education and specialized training customized for 

business clients. While the education and training options are many, the 

primary focus of schools and students remains academic credit programs 

that may lead to a degree, credential, or transfer to a 4-year institution. 

Noncredit training is substantial at some schools, however, and while 

 3

The 758 respondents to our survey included 634 community colleges, 94 vocational or 

technical schools, 3 high schools offering postsecondary programs, 23 other schools (e.g., 

junior colleges), and 4 schools that did not provide their school type, all of which were 

included in our analysis. Throughout this report, we refer to all these respondents as 

“community colleges and technical schools.” 

4

We also visited community colleges and technical schools in California, Maryland, Oregon, 

and Virginia to pretest the survey. 

Results in Brief 
Page 4 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

some of these programs are less well known, they provide some 

advantages to the colleges, students, and employers alike. In particular, 

more than three-fourths of schools were involved in contract training—

providing existing or customized programs to give incumbent workers 

new or upgraded skills. One community college in Florida, for example, 

annually contracts with 300 companies to train about 5,000 employees. 

Aside from training under specific contracts, 61 percent of schools 

responding to our survey report offering noncredit occupational, 

professional, or technical training. A community college in Texas, for 

example, offers a series of courses that, while not providing college credit, 

leads to a certificate in the medical coding system that hospitals use to 

obtain reimbursements from the government and insurers. Offering such 

training on a noncredit basis allows schools to use shorter training periods 

and more quickly add or delete courses to meet local training needs. 

Regardless of whether programs were credit or noncredit, schools most 

frequently offered occupational, professional, or technical training 

programs in three fields projected by the Department of Labor to have 

high growth in future years—health care, business, and information 

technology. 

States historically have provided the greatest share of funding for public 

community colleges, while federal funding has been comparatively much 

smaller. On average, Department of Education data show that between 

1992-93 and 2000-01, states provided between 40 and 45 percent of schools’ 

total revenue—about twice as much as provided by local taxes and 

student tuition and fees, respectively. Federal funding, exclusive of 

student financial assistance, provided about 5 percent. On a program-byprogram basis, state funding varied considerably between credit and 

noncredit programs. While about one-third of schools responding to our 

survey reported receiving about the same level of state funding for credit 

and noncredit occupational, professional, and technical training programs, 

most states fund noncredit courses to a lesser degree—and in some cases 

not at all. Similarly, schools reported large differences in amounts 

received under each of nine different federal programs. Most schools 

received federal funding—a median of about $300,000—from the Perkins 

Vocational Education program. Overall, seven of the nine programs each 

provided a median of under $200,000 to the one-third or less of colleges 

and schools reporting such data. 

Most community colleges and technical schools reported tracking some 

education and employment outcomes for their students, but differences in 

state reporting requirements preclude aggregating these performance data 

to report on the proportion of students nationwide that graduate, transfer 
Page 5 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

to 4-year institutions, pass licensing examinations, or gain employment. In 

addition, while the Department of Education collects graduation and 

completion rates for full-time, degree-seeking students at most schools, 

most community college students do not meet this definition and are not 

included. Graduation data reported by one community college in 

Washington State, for example, represented 20 percent of students who 

entered school in the fall term. The best national outcome data are from 

studies of representative samples or cohorts of students conducted by the 

National Center for Education Statistics. Two of these studies indicate that 

between half and two-thirds of community college students seeking some 

type of academic or occupational credential succeed in transferring to a 

4-year institution or earning a degree, license, certificate, or diploma 

within 6 to 8 years of initiating studies. For community college students 

enrolled in remedial academic courses, our survey results mirrored those 

reported by NCES in 1995—a median of about two-thirds of students 

successfully completed such courses. Our survey also indicated that a 

median of 60 percent or more of students enrolled in General Educational 

Development or other Adult Basic Education courses completed them 

successfully. 

Since the first public 2-year college opened more than 100 years ago, 

community colleges have experienced considerable change in their 

purpose and mission. They have expanded beyond their original academic 

or vocational focus to meet a wide variety of educational, economic, and 

social needs. Community colleges have kept their “transfer function,” 

preparing students for 4-year institutions, while assuming a role in 

occupational skills training and adult basic education. With open 

admissions and low tuition policies, community colleges serve the needs 

of a diverse student body, ranging from people without any type of 

educational credential to those with advanced academic degrees. Between 

1980 and 2000, the number of community colleges grew about 14 percent 

with enrollments increasing about 32 percent;5

 enrollments are projected 

to increase about 14 percent from 2001 to 2013.6

 According to data 

 5

Enrollments for 1996 and later years are for degree-granting institutions (institutions that 

award degrees at the associate level or higher and were eligible to participate in Title IV 

federal financial aid programs). All other years are for institutions of higher education. 

6

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Digest of Education Statistics 2002, 

June 2003 and NCES, Projections of Education Statistics to 2013, Washington, D.C.: 

October 2003. 

Background 
Page 6 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

compiled by NCES, community college students are more likely than 

4-year college students to be 24 years of age or older, not enroll directly 

after high school, attend part-time and work full-time while enrolled, be 

financially independent for federal financial aid purposes, have 

dependents, be a single parent, or not have a high school diploma. 

Community colleges and technical schools have a wide variety of program 

types from which to draw. The programs include traditional academic 

courses for students intending to obtain an associate degree or transfer to 

a baccalaureate-granting institution as well as remedial education to bring 

students to college-level proficiency and basic skills training for people 

who want to improve their employability or pass the General Educational 

Development examination. Separate from these program types, other 

programs offer credit and noncredit occupational, professional, and 

technical training leading to degrees, certificates, licenses, or diplomas for 

new and existing workers; training developed for specific employers; and 

other programs to meet the personal and professional interests of the local 

community. Such training can range from a 2-year program that prepares 

students to take a certification test to single, short-term introductory 

courses in a subject such as introduction to the Internet. 

Community colleges and technical schools offered a mix of credit and 

noncredit education and training programs that served to help students 

transition from high schools to postsecondary institutions, prepare people 

for college-level learning, and provide new and existing workers with new 

or upgraded job skills. While the education and training options are many, 

the primary focus of schools and students remains academic credit 

programs that may lead to a degree, credential, or transfer to a 4-year 

institution. Noncredit training is substantial at some schools, however, and 

most colleges and schools offer contract training that can be customized 

for employers seeking new or upgraded skills for their employees. 

The majority of community colleges and technical schools responding to 

our survey reported offering a wide range of academic and training 

programs in addition to their college credit curriculum. Nearly all schools 

reported offering two types of credit programs—those that lead either to a 

2-year degree or transfer to a baccalaureate-granting institution 

(93 percent), and those that lead to an occupational, professional, or 

technical credential (96 percent). Each of the four types of noncredit 

programs was offered by at least 61 percent of the schools that responded 

to our survey. These programs provided skill proficiency ranging from 

Community Colleges 

and Technical Schools 

Have Expanded Roles 

in Educating and 

Training the Nation’s 

Workforce 

Most Colleges and Schools 

Offer a Mix of Credit and 

Noncredit Academic and 

Training Programs 
Page 7 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

better academic preparation to training that leads to an occupational 

license or certificate (see fig. 1). 

Figure 1: Prevalence of Types of Programs at Community Colleges and Technical 

Schools in the Fall Term of 2002

a

Contract training data are for the 2002-03 academic year. 

Some officials we talked with during site visits indicated that states and 

colleges consider occupation projections when establishing training 

programs. Two states we visited had strategies to help guide schools in 

establishing programs that address the needs of local businesses and the 

workforce. Florida, for example, created a targeted occupations list to 

guide program offerings at community colleges. Colleges may offer 

programs from the list without obtaining special permission or review 

from the state. In Washington State, community college officials said that 

colleges proposing new professional or technical programs must show 

that the estimated output of the proposed program along with similar 

programs statewide does not exceed the projected employment need. Our 

survey data show many schools offer programs in occupations with 

projected growth. Schools reported that the most frequently offered fields 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

g

f

e

d

c

b

a

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004.

93

73

79

96

89

For-credit programs

Academic degree or transfer

Occupational, professional,

or technical training

Below college-level

(remedial)

Contract traininga

Basic skills

Occupational, professional,

or technical training

Noncredit programs

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percentage of schools offering programs

61
Page 8 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

of study, whether offered for credit or noncredit, were in the areas of 

health, business, and computer/information technology.7

 According to 

Department of Labor projections, these three fields should experience 

high growth in employment. 

Credit programs were the most likely programs to be offered by the 

758 community colleges and technical schools that responded to our 

survey and they were also the program areas with the greatest median 

number of enrolled students. While students were often enrolled in more 

than one type of program,8

 the median percent of students enrolled in 

academic credit programs was 49 percent, and the median percent of 

students enrolled in occupational, professional, or technical training 

programs for credit was 33 percent. The median percent of students 

enrolled in five noncredit programs ranged from 1 to 14 percent. (See 

fig. 2.) 

 7

Other frequently reported offerings at the surveyed schools were engineering technologies 

and technicians, agriculture and related sciences, security and protective services, and 

personal and culinary services.

8

For example, students enrolled in academic credit programs may also be enrolled in 

remedial math or English. 

Credit Programs Remain a 

Major Focus for Most 

Schools and Students 
Page 9 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Figure 2: Median Percentage of Students Enrolled in Seven Programs in the Fall 

Term of 2002 at 758 Schools Completing GAO Survey 

Most community colleges and technical schools made their credit 

curriculums available to high school students through transition programs 

that link secondary and postsecondary academic and vocational 

education. Among schools responding to our survey almost all community 

colleges and technical schools were involved in at least one of three such 

programs: 

• Over 90 percent of schools participated in dual or concurrent enrollment 

programs that allowed high school students to attend college-level classes 

and earn both high school and college credit. 

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004.

49

1

33

For-credit programs

Academic degree or transfer

Occupational, professional,

or technical training

Below college-level

(remedial)

Adult Basic Education

English as a Second

Language

Occupational, professional,

or technical training

Noncredit programs

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Median percentage of students enrolled

2

General Educational

Development

1

1

14
Page 10 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

• Nearly 75 percent of schools had “Tech-Prep” programs9 that consist of 2 

years of high school and 2 years of higher education or an apprenticeship 

program leading to a credential in specific career fields such as welding or 

accounting. 

• Slightly less than half of schools participated in school-to-career programs 

that link the high school with the business community to improve student 

transitions to work.10

At the schools we visited, the demand for these programs could be seen in 

the size of the enrollments. Concurrent enrollment at one community 

college in Texas, for example, included more than 1,400 high school 

students in spring 2002 and was expected to exceed 1,800 the next fall. 

These students could earn up to 1 year of college credit prior to high 

school graduation. A community college in Washington State with a total 

headcount enrollment of 39,020 was serving 816 high school students 

under a dual credit program in the 2002-03 academic year. 

While schools reported higher student enrollment in credit courses 

overall, at some schools large proportions of students were enrolled in 

noncredit programs. Figure 3 shows the relative number of students 

enrolled in four types of credit and noncredit programs in the fall term of 

2002, as reported by the surveyed schools. 

 9

Funded in part through the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education 

Amendments of 1998. 

10About 87 percent of survey respondents provided data for this question. 

Noncredit Programs Enroll 

Substantial Numbers of 

Students at Some Schools 
Page 11 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Figure 3: Percentage of Students Enrolled in Four Types of Credit and Noncredit 

Programs 

Noncredit programs offer various benefits to schools and employers. 

School administrators have found that noncredit courses allow them to 

address shifts in local labor markets, often in a short time. They can 

develop and deliver noncredit courses more quickly than credit courses 

because noncredit courses have a less complicated review and approval 

process. Schools may use noncredit courses as a transition to adding or 

deleting programs from the curriculum. In Florida, for example, a 

community college official said the college collaborated with a local 

hospital to develop a course for interpretive services that train 

intermediaries to work between English speaking staff and foreign 

language patients. The college started the course as noncredit with the 

view of later converting the course to credit if interest and enrollment 

grew. In contrast, declining numbers of students in a real estate program 

led the college to change it from credit to noncredit. 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Percent of schools responding to survey

Academic degree or transfer - 707 schools

For-credit occupational, professional, or technical training - 728 schools

Noncredit occupational, professional, or technical training - 460 schools

Below college-level (remedial) - 676 schools

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004.

Percent of school’s total students enrolled in program 

0

5

13

23

1

7

11

26

12

16

39

26

80

63

29

18

0<25 >25<50 >50<75 >75<100
Page 12 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Benefits to students enrolled in noncredit programs often include low or 

no tuition and fees, simpler enrollment procedures, less formal classroom 

settings, and more flexible class schedules. Noncredit education helps 

students wanting to upgrade skills, retrain for a new career, prepare for a 

licensing exam, or pursue vocational interests. An administrator at a 

North Carolina community college noted that many noncredit courses are 

intended for students who do not want or need a degree—or another 

degree. For some people, completion of a few short-term noncredit 

courses serves as a transition to the credit academic or occupational 

pathway that leads to a degree or certificate. 

Perhaps one of the biggest benefits of noncredit programs is to provide 

transitional education for people who leave high school unprepared for 

college-level programs. Community colleges, with their open admissions 

policies, are a prime source of instruction for the great number of students 

needing remediation. Overall, more than a dozen states estimated that half 

of students entering community colleges required some type of remedial 

education, according to a state survey conducted by the 

Education Commission of the States in 2001.11 The remaining 14 states 

providing such data estimated the proportion of entering students needing 

remediation ranged from a low of 10 to a high of 49 percent. States report 

continuing demand for remedial education. Washington State, for 

example, reported in 2004 that about half of students entering community 

colleges and technical schools within 3 years of high school take at least 

one remedial course, most often in math. 

One other type of noncredit program—contract training—is treated 

separately here because many colleges administer their contract training 

separately from other college programs, and less may be known about it. 

Contract training programs typically offer flexibility and responsiveness in 

meeting the needs and schedules of trainees and their employers. In 

consultation with the business or organization, the school may provide an 

existing or specially created course, hold the training at the worksite or on 

campus, and use existing faculty or hire instructors. Training may focus on 

management, computer, language, customer service, or any other subject 

that an employer considers important to improving its workforce. 

 11Education Commission of the States, State Policies on Community College Remedial 

Education: Findings from a National Survey, Denver, Colorado: September 2002. 

Schools Offer Contract 

Training That Can Be 

Customized for Employers 

Seeking New or Upgraded 

Skills for Employees 
Page 13 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

More than three-quarters of schools responding to our survey offered 

contract training in the 2002-03 academic year. Schools responding to our 

survey reported serving a total of over 1 million trainees through contract 

training during the 2002-03 academic year, with a median of 982 trainees 

per school. More than half of the reported contracts were with private 

companies, but schools also contracted with government and nonprofit 

agencies. (See fig. 4.) 

Figure 4: Percentage of Contracts Reported by Surveyed Schools According to 

Employer Type in the 2002-03 Academic Year 

Note: Computed only for schools providing data on employer type. 

Contract training was provided to employers with 100 or fewer employees 

about one-quarter of the time. (See fig. 5.) A workforce development 

expert we spoke with said that larger employers are more likely to provide 

the minimum class size that community colleges need to make customized 

training financially viable. 

6%

12%

53%

9%

Municipalities or other government 

agencies

Other

Nonprofit organizations

Unspecified

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004.

20%

Private businesses
Page 14 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Figure 5: Percentages of Schools’ Contracts with Employers by Total Number of 

Employees 

Note: Computed only for schools providing data on employer size. 

Community colleges and technical schools have pursued contract training 

for such reasons as the following: to meet the training needs of local 

employers, to cultivate potential employers for their students, and to 

develop an additional revenue source. However, contract training presents 

an entrepreneurial challenge to community colleges and technical schools 

since employers are free to choose other training sources, including inhouse instructors, private contractors or consultants, 4-year colleges, or 

other community colleges. This competition provides an incentive for 

community colleges to develop networks among local employers and 

market their training services. For example, a community college 

administrator in Florida stressed the importance of partnerships with local 

businesses and chambers of commerce in identifying potential clients. 

27%

19%

21%

12%

101-500

More than 500

100 or less

Business size unknown

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004.

21%

Business size unspecified
Page 15 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

States have historically contributed the largest share of funding for public 

community colleges compared with other public and private funding 

sources. State funding policies generally differ among programs, however, 

in that states often provide less funding to support schools’ noncredit 

education and training programs. Overall the share of federal funding to 

public community colleges has been stable, but comparatively small. The 

level of federal funding each school receives generally depends on 

participation in a number of grant programs and may flow directly to 

schools or indirectly through grants to states or other entities. 

State funding has been a major source of revenue for public community 

colleges for years. Data collected by the National Center for Education 

Statistics show that the share of their revenue from state governments has 

remained relatively stable between 40 and 45 percent of all revenue from 

1992-93 through 2000-01, the latest year that published NCES data are 

available. As figure 6 shows, states provide about double the amounts 

received from student tuition and fees and local governments, which are 

the next two largest revenue sources. 

State Funding to 

Schools Dominated 

but Varied by Type of 

Program; Federal 

Funding Provided a 

Much Smaller Share 

States Are the Largest 

Funding Source, but Many 

Schools Reported 

Receiving Less State 

Funding for Some Types of 

Noncredit Courses 
Page 16 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Figure 6: Share of Revenues for Public Community Colleges 

a

Published data unavailable for 1997-98 and 1998-99. 

Every public community college system in the country receives some level 

of state support. Survey results reported by the Education Commission of 

the States in 2000 showed that 29 states used funding formulas12 to 

determine the amount to be appropriated for community colleges as a 

whole, the amount to be distributed to each college, or both. The primary 

elements used in the state formulas were enrollment, space utilization, and 

comparison with peer institutions. 

Community colleges receive less funding for noncredit academic and 

occupational training programs than for credit programs for two main 

reasons. First, less than half of all states, according to national surveys 

 12Formulas were developed through a legislative process or by an entity such as the state 

higher education coordinating board. 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1999-00a 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97

Percentage share

State

Student tuition and fees

Local

Other

Federal

Source: National Center for Education Statistics.

Years

2000-01
Page 17 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

conducted by the Education Commission of the States13 and the National 

Council for Continuing Education and Training,14 fund noncredit programs 

at community colleges. Second, most of those states that do provide 

funding for noncredit programs based on numbers of full-time equivalent 

students provide funding at a lower rate–generally 50 to 75 percent of the 

rate provided for credit programs. Our survey responses indicated that 

states often provided lower levels of funding for courses offered without 

college credit in three areas—basic skills; noncredit occupational, 

professional, and technical training; and contract training. 

Nearly 40 percent of schools responding to our survey reported receiving 

less state funding for basic skills courses (Adult Basic Education, English 

as a Second Language, and General Educational Development) compared 

with funding received for credit courses (see fig. 7). A somewhat lower 

percentage of schools reported receiving about the same or higher level of 

state funding for these courses. 

 13Education Commission of the States, State Funding for Community Colleges: A 50-State 

Survey, Denver, Colorado: November 2000. 

14Study conducted for the National Council for Continuing Education and Training 

(NCCET) by Larry J. Warford, assisted by NCCET 2000-01 regional representatives. 

Basic Skills 
Page 18 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Figure 7: Comparison of State Funding Received by Schools for Credit and Basic 

Skills Courses 

Schools often rely heavily on state and federal funding sources to support 

their basic skills programs, as these developmental courses are often 

offered at little or no cost to students in order to increase accessibility to 

all populations. However, increased demand for such services has created 

challenges for schools in states such as Texas, where state funding for 

adult education and literacy has been insufficient to meet current and 

growing demand for these services, according to a 2003 state report.15

Nearly two-thirds of community colleges and technical schools responding 

to our survey reported receiving state funds for noncredit occupational, 

professional, or technical training courses, while nearly one-fifth reported 

that they were not permitted to use state funds to support these training 

courses. As shown in figure 8, of the schools that did receive direct state 

funding, over half reported receiving lesser amounts for these noncredit 

training courses than courses offered for credit. About one-third of 

 15In Texas, nearly all public community and technical colleges serve as adult education 

partners in the delivery of basic skills programs. 

Noncredit Occupational, 

Professional, and 

Technical Training 

6%

28%

38% 28% Funded about the same

Other (none of the above, do not know, no 

response)

Funded more for basic skills courses

Funded less for basic skills courses

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004.
Page 19 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

schools received the same level of state support for credit and noncredit 

occupational programs. 

Figure 8: Comparison of State Funding Received by Schools for Credit and 

Noncredit Occupational, Professional, and Technical Training Courses 

Lower levels of state funding for noncredit training courses provided both 

challenges and benefits to schools, according to college officials. An 

official from the North Carolina Community College System said that 

because the state funds noncredit occupational programs at 75 percent of 

credit programs, schools face challenges in operating training programs in 

areas (such as biotechnology) that have high demand among local 

employers but also higher operating costs in terms of teacher salaries and 

equipment.16 On the other hand, a representative from a community college 

in North Carolina said that lower state funding for noncredit programs 

encouraged the school to charge tuition at a level that would make the 

program self-supporting, providing an additional revenue stream as 

schools in this state are allowed to keep tuition received instead of 

returning it to the state. 

 16Similarly, the President of a Washington State community college cited challenges 

identifying funding sources for high start-up costs associated with some new training 

programs. 

33%

52%

13%

Funded about the same

Other (none of the above, do not know, no 

response)

2%

Funded more for noncredit courses

Funded less for noncredit courses

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004.
Page 20 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Nearly two-thirds of community colleges and technical schools responding 

to our survey reported receiving state funds to defray costs of delivering 

employee training under contract to businesses, government entities, or 

other employers, as shown in figure 9. For the majority of schools 

(54 percent), the state funded only a portion (about half or less) of their 

contract training costs, while a few (11 percent) received state funds 

covering all or most of their costs in providing contract services to 

customers. 

Figure 9: Degree to Which Schools Received State Funding for Contract Training 

States we visited funded contract training at community colleges 

differently from their other academic and training programs. Some states 

had established separate grant programs for this purpose. Florida, for 

example, funds contract training primarily through two state grant 

programs. The first of these—the Quick Response Training Program—is 

designed to retain and attract businesses creating new high-quality jobs. A 

representative from one Florida community college said that the college 

used a Quick Response Training grant to prepare a labor pool as an 

incentive for DHL, an express shipping company, to relocate to the county. 

The second program—the Incumbent Worker Training Program—is 

targeted to maintain the competitiveness of existing businesses by 

upgrading employee skills. Since their inception in 1993 and 1999, 

respectively, these programs have funded training for over 100,000 

employees across the state. 

Contract Training 

54%

14%

21%

11%

Other (none of the above, do not know, no 

response)

Funded all or most of college costs

Funded about half or some of college costs

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004.

Did not fund any of college costs
Page 21 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

In North Carolina, the state funds contract training at community colleges 

for companies creating 12 or more new jobs in a 1-year period through the 

New and Expanding Industry Training Program, first established in 1958. 

During fiscal year 2001-02, this state-funded program served nearly 15,000 

trainees. In addition, the state’s Focused Industrial Training program 

allows industries related to manufacturing, computers, and 

telecommunications to upgrade employees’ technological skills. State 

funding under this program allowed community colleges throughout the 

state to train more than 10,000 employees of over 750 companies during 

fiscal year 2001-02. 

The federal share of public community college funding has been fairly 

stable over time, but relatively small compared with other funding sources. 

Excluding federal student financial aid, federal funding provided about 

5 percent of total public community college revenue between 1992-93 and 

2000-01 as previously shown in figure 6.17 These revenues are provided 

through a number of federal programs operated by various agencies, 

including the Departments of Education and Labor. However, information 

on the extent that community colleges receive federal funds through each 

of these programs is limited at the federal level. While some funds–such as 

those available under Title III of the Higher Education Act—-are provided 

directly from federal agencies to schools, other funds—such as those 

under the Workforce Investment Act—are provided to states that 

subsequently determine whether community colleges or other entities will 

receive funding. There are no clear federal requirements to report this 

information back to the federal agency—the Department of Labor—

distributing these state-based grants. 

We surveyed community colleges and technical schools to determine the 

level of federal support through each of nine different programs.18 Our 

results, however, are not comprehensive because only 71 percent of 

schools responded to our survey, and of those schools—between 22 and 

41 percent of respondents—did not provide data for individual federal 

 17Published data are unavailable for 1997-98 and 1998-99. 

18We chose these nine programs in consultation with community college experts and a 

review of the relevant literature. Schools were asked to include all federal funding received 

through each of the nine programs, including federal funding that was passed through the 

state. About 18 percent of survey respondents did not respond as to whether or not they 

included federal funding passed through the state. 

Federal Funding Is 

Comparatively Small and 

Comes from Many 

Programs 
Page 22 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

funding sources. What our survey results did show was that these nine 

programs provided a minimum of nearly $700 million, or about 4 percent 

of total revenues, to the schools that reported receiving funds. As shown 

in table 2, less than 30 percent of federal funds from these 9 programs 

were provided directly to community colleges; the rest was provided 

indirectly through the states. Community colleges and technical schools 

that responded to our survey, on average, each received funds from three 

of these nine federal sources. 

Table 2: Funding Received by Community Colleges and Technical Schools under Nine Federal Programs as Reported by 

Survey Respondents for Fiscal Year 2003 

Dollars in millions 

Program name Purpose 

Total federal 

program 

funding

Funding 

received by all 

community 

colleges and 

technical 

schools 

responding to 

survey

Percentage of 

all colleges and 

schools 

responding to 

survey that 

reported amount 

of program 

fundinga

Program funds provided indirectly 

through states (72%) 

Perkins Vocational Education Program 

(Vocational Education) 

Reauthorized in 1998, provides 

assistance for secondary and 

postsecondary vocational 

education (mostly less-than-4-

year postsecondary institutions). $1,329 $205.9 78%

Workforce Investment Act (WIA) - Title II 

Program (Adult Education and Family 

Literacy Act - AEFLA) 

Part of the WIA of 1998, supports 

adult basic skill programs, high 

school completion programs, and 

programs that enable adults to 

become more employable, 

productive, and responsible. $569 $77.8 66%

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families 

(TANF) Program 

Enacted in 1996, provides grants 

to states for assistance to needy 

families. At state option, 

assistance can be used for 

training programs to help 

recipients move from welfare to 

work. $16,488 $63.0 63%

Dislocated Worker Activities under 

Workforce Investment Act (WIA) - Title I 

Established in 1998, provides 

training to individuals who have 

lost their jobs and are unlikely to 

return to those jobs or similar 

jobs in the same industry. $1,501 $54.7b

64%b
Page 23 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Dollars in millions 

Program name Purpose 

Total federal 

program 

funding

Funding 

received by all 

community 

colleges and 

technical 

schools 

responding to 

survey

Percentage of 

all colleges and 

schools 

responding to 

survey that 

reported amount 

of program 

fundinga

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Program Enacted in 1973, provides grants 

to states for comprehensive 

vocational rehabilitation services 

to help persons with physical and 

mental disabilities become 

employable and achieve full 

integration into society. $2,533 $34.3 61%

Youth Activities under Workforce 

Investment Act (WIA) - Title I 

Enacted in 1998, provides 

training to low-income youth age 

14-21. $995 $30.4b

61%b

Adult Activities under Workforce Investment 

Act (WIA) - Title I 

Enacted in 1998, provides 

training to individuals age 18 and 

older. 

$895 $24.1b

59%b

Program funds provided directly to 

schools (28%) 

Higher Education Act (HEA)- Title III 

Program (Aid for Institutional Development) 

First enacted in 1965, provides 

grants to higher education 

institutions to strengthen 

academic quality, institutional 

management, and financial 

stability. $389 $168.7 63%

National Science Foundation (NSF) 

Research Grant Program 

Created in 1950, NSF supports 

science and engineering in 

general and funds basic research 

across many disciplines, mostly 

at U.S. colleges and universities. $903 $25.5 63%

Total $25,602 $684.4

Sources: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004, and Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 

2005, Appendix. 

a

Total number of schools responding to our overall survey was 758 out of 1,070 public community 

colleges and technical schools, including schools that reported receiving $0 program funds. 

b

Amounts received under the WIA dislocated worker program, youth program, and adult program are 

likely to be understated because only 30 percent, 18 percent, and 18 percent of the survey 

respondents, respectively, reported funding above $0, while the percent of schools reporting 

participation in these programs was about 2, 1.5, and 3.4 times higher, respectively. Between 83 and 

86 percent of survey respondents provided data on participation in the three WIA programs. 
Page 24 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Community colleges and technical schools reported considerable 

differences in the amounts received under each of the nine different 

federal programs. Colleges and schools reported receiving the least 

amount of median funding from the Vocational Rehabilitation program 

(median of about $40,000) and the most median funding from programs 

under Title III of the Higher Education Act (median of over $350,000). 

Overall, seven of the nine programs provided a median of under $200,000 

to the one-third or less of colleges and schools responding to our survey 

that reported receiving revenue from these programs. 

Figure 10: Comparison of Median Funding Per School and Percentage of Schools 

Reporting Funds, by Federal Program 

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

Dollars

Median program funding per school

Percentage of schools that reported receiving program funds

Source: GAO survey of community college and technical schools, 2004. 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

AEFLA

TANF

WIA-Dislocated

worker

VR

WIA-Youth

NSF

WIA-Adult

HEA-Title III 

Percent

Vocational

Education
Page 25 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Most community colleges and technical schools responding to our survey 

have systems in place to measure education and employment outcomes 

for students enrolled in at least some programs, but differences in how 

these schools and states measure and report such data preclude using 

them to report nationally on the proportion of community college and 

technical school students who graduate, transfer to 4-year institutions, 

pass licensing examinations, or gain employment. Likewise, while several 

federal programs each have a methodology to collect outcomes such as 

graduation rates from schools, this methodology is often applied to 

relatively few students and, therefore, the results may not represent 

outcomes for students nationwide. The best national outcome data, which 

stem from studies conducted by the National Center for Education 

Statistics, show that between half and two-thirds of community college 

students seeking an academic credential were successful in doing so or in 

transferring to a 4-year institution within 6 to 8 years of enrolling in 

community college programs. 

Almost all community colleges and technical schools responding to our 

survey developed some type of student education or employment outcome 

measures for their students, but they most frequently collected such data 

for students enrolled in for-credit academic and occupational, 

professional, or technical training programs. For example, as shown in 

table 3, over half of community college and technical schools responding 

to our survey tracked both education and employment outcomes for both 

types of for-credit programs, but only about a sixth of community colleges 

and technical schools tracked these data for noncredit occupational, 

professional, or technical training programs. 

Differences in 

Community College 

and Technical School 

and State Data 

Collection Efforts 

Place Reliance on 

National Studies for 

Measuring Overall 

Student Outcomes 

Community Colleges and 

Technical Schools and 

States Differ in Measuring 

and Reporting Education 

and Employment 

Outcomes 
Page 26 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Table 3: Percent of Community Colleges and Technical Schools Tracking Education 

or Employment Outcomes for Three Types of Programs for All Students or a 

Representative Sample in 2002-03 

 Types of outcomes tracked 

Type of program 

completed 

Both 

education 

and 

employment

Education 

only 

Employment 

only

Neither 

education 

nor 

employment 

For-credit academica 52 20 10 12

For-credit occupational, 

professional, or technical 

training 59 11 17 8

Noncredit occupational, 

professional, or technical 

training 17 13 7 49

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004. 

Note: Rows do not add to 100 percent because some schools did not respond to the survey question 

or said they did not know the answer. 

a

Programs completed by students who earned an academic degree (e.g., Associate of Arts or 

Associate of Science) or transferred to an institution that offers baccalaureate degrees. 

To some extent, the difference in community colleges’ and technical 

schools’ data collection for credit and noncredit programs reflects the 

extent to which such data are needed to meet federal and state reporting 

requirements. For example, a community college official in Oregon said 

that his community college collects and reports student completion and 

graduation rates for credit courses to meet eligibility requirements for 

participation in federal student aid programs, but the school is less likely 

to collect such information for noncredit courses. In the absence of 

specific federal requirements to collect and report outcome data, some 

states have developed outcome measures for noncredit programs, but 

these outcome measures may differ from those used to measure credit 

programs. Community college officials from North Carolina, for example, 

said that most student outcome measures, including those required by the 

state, are focused on credit courses, and the success of noncredit 

programs is measured by conducting satisfaction surveys of businesses 

whose employees have attended classes. 

While less than half of community colleges and technical schools 

measured outcomes for noncredit occupational, professional, or technical 

training programs, they were much more likely to measure outcomes for 

students enrolled in noncredit remedial courses (such as mathematics, 

English, or reading) or basic skills courses (such as English as a Second 
Page 27 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Language). As table 4 shows, community colleges and technical schools 

were more likely to report education outcomes for students, such as 

enrollment in college-level programs and degree attainment, than 

outcomes related to employment and wages. 

Table 4: Percent of Community Colleges and Technical Schools Tracking Four 

Types of Outcomes for Students Who Completed below College-Level (Remedial) 

and Basic Skills Courses and Percent of Responding Schools That Provided Data 

Type of outcomes tracked/percent of responding schools that 

provided data 

Type of student 

Enrollment in 

college-level 

programs

Degree 

attainment 

Employment 

status Wages

Below college-level 

(remedial) 65/96 37/91 10/88 6/87

Basic skills 56/90 27/85 30/87 7/83

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004. 

Community colleges and technical schools used several different methods 

to collect education and employment data for students who had been 

enrolled in academic and occupational, professional, or technical training 

programs but, as table 5 shows, relied most heavily on student selfreported data obtained through follow-up surveys for each type of 

program. Many community colleges and technical schools supplemented 

this data source for education and employment outcomes by obtaining 

data from institutions students had transferred to and, to a much lesser 

extent, tracking unemployment insurance wage data. 
Page 28 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Table 5: Percent of Community Colleges and Technical Schools That Used Each of 

Three Methods to Track Outcomes for Students Who Completed Three Types of 

Programs 

 Tracking mechanism 

Type of program 

completed 

School conducted 

student follow-up 

surveys

School tracked 

unemployment 

insurance wage 

data 

School collected 

data from 

educational 

institutions on 

students who had 

transferred

For-credit academic 72 14 54

For-credit 

occupational, 

professional, or 

technical training 80 18 45

Noncredit 

occupational, 

professional, or 

technical traininga 34 7 4

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004. 

Note: Rows do not add to 100 percent because schools may be using more than one tracking 

mechanism. 

a

Between 86 and 88 percent of survey respondents provided data for noncredit occupational, 

professional, or technical training programs. 

While many community colleges and technical schools reported measuring 

both education and employment outcomes through student surveys, one 

study showed that the specific performance measures that individual 

states require their schools to report on differed substantially from each 

other.19 The Education Commission of the States reported in 

November 2000 that 27 states required community colleges to report on 

performance measures and indicated that each state required schools to 

use a different set of measures. While 19 states had no performance 

measures in use or under development, others used more than 30. The 

most common performance measures (rates for graduation, certificates 

and degrees awarded, transfer to 4-year institutions, and job placement) 

were required in only 16 or 17 states. 

 19Education Commission of the States, State Funding for Community Colleges: A 50-State 

Survey, Denver, Colorado: November 2000. 
Page 29 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

While methodological differences preclude aggregating performance data 

for national use, 6 states we visited or contacted required community 

colleges to report on specific performance measures. The Texas Higher 

Education Coordinating Board, for example, collected information on 

student pass rates from agencies and professional organizations 

responsible for administering 45 licensure/certification examinations, 

including aircraft mechanic, court reporter, and nuclear medicine 

technician.20 These licensing examination pass rates were used as part of 

the Board’s overall assessment of the effectiveness of vocational 

education programs at community and technical colleges in the state. 

Similarly, for 15 years the North Carolina Community College System has 

annually published school performance measures for purposes of 

accountability and performance funding and for use in evaluating the 

College System’s strategic plan.21 In February 1999, the North Carolina 

Board of Community Colleges adopted 12 performance measures for 

accountability, including pass rates on licensure and certification 

examinations, employment status of graduates, pass rates of students in 

developmental courses, as well as employer satisfaction with graduates. 

The federal government has some reporting requirements for measuring 

education and employment outcomes across schools and states, but these 

requirements sometimes pertain only to participants in a federal program 

and results may not be nationally representative of all community college 

students and schools. For example: 

• Postsecondary institutions eligible for federal student aid are required to 

disclose completion or graduation rates and transfer rates of first-time, 

certificate- or degree-seeking, full-time students who begin their studies in 

the fall term. These data are collected annually by the National Center for 

Education Statistics through its Integrated Postsecondary Education Data 

System. Outcome data from community colleges and technical schools 

that do participate in this annual survey are not representative of student 

outcomes as a whole because most students do not fall under the 

reporting requirement. For example, in the 1999-2000 school year, only 

 20Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Community and Technical Colleges 

Division, 2003 Statewide Annual Licensure Report, August 2003, Austin, Texas. 

21The College System has issued performance reports each year since 1990. For the most 

current report, see North Carolina Community College System, Planning, Accountability, 

Research & Evaluation, 2004 Critical Success Factors for the North Carolina Community 

College System, Fifteenth Annual Report, June 2004, Raleigh, North Carolina. 

Data Collected under 

Federal Programs Are Not 

Representative of 

Outcomes for All Students 

and Schools 
Page 30 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

about a third of community college and technical school students attended 

school full-time.22 A community college in Washington, for example, 

estimated that less than 20 percent of students who entered school in fall, 

1996, were included in the IPEDS reporting requirements. 

• The Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act provide 

grants to states to help provide vocational-technical education programs 

and services to youths and adults at the secondary and postsecondary 

level. Under the Perkins Act, states are required to develop measures of 

student performance such as competency attainment, job or work-skill 

attainment, and retention in school or placement in a school, job, or the 

military. Our survey showed that less than three-fourths of community 

colleges and technical schools reported receiving vocational education 

funds and would, therefore, be required to report such outcomes. Further, 

while several states have created data links between unemployment 

insurance earnings information and community college administrative 

records to collect earnings data, each state varies in its ability to collect 

such data because state laws, reporting procedures and higher education 

agency organizations differ by state. 

• Job training programs under Title I of the Workforce Investment Act 

require states and localities to track participant performance. The 

performance measures gauge program results in areas of job placement, 

employment retention and earnings changes, as well as skill attainment 

and customer satisfaction. Our survey results, however, showed that only 

27, 62, and 63 percent of community colleges and technical schools 

reported participating in WIA Youth, Adult Education and Dislocated 

Worker programs, respectively, and are thus subject to these reporting 

requirements. In addition, as we previously reported, these data are not 

comparable across states for a variety of reasons.23

 22U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Descriptive 

Summary of 1995-1996 Beginning Postsecondary Students: Three Years Later (NCES 

2000-154) L. Becker, L. Horn, M. Clune. Washington, D.C.: 2000 and U.S. Department of 

Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Nontraditional Undergraduates 

(NCES 2002-012) Susan Choy. Washington, D.C.: 2002. 

23See GAO, Workforce Investment Act: Improvements Needed in Performance Measures to 

Provide a More Accurate Picture of WIA’s Effectiveness, GAO-02-275 (Washington, D.C.: 

February 1, 2002). 
Page 31 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Given the differences in outcome data collection efforts by schools, states, 

and federal programs, the most reliable data on community college 

student outcomes flow from national studies conducted by the National 

Center for Education Statistics. National data are unavailable showing 

education and employment outcomes for students enrolled in noncredit 

occupational programs. However, NCES has conducted several studies 

that provide some insight on the extent to which community college 

students who are enrolled in accredited academic and occupational 

programs meet their educational or employment goals. An NCES report 

issued in June 2003 draws upon three earlier studies to provide data on 

student outcomes based on representative samples or cohorts of students 

that attended community colleges.24 The findings of this report suggest that 

the national success rate for community college students, as measured by 

transfer to a 4-year institution or completion of a degree or certificate, is 

between half and two-thirds of students who enroll with intentions to 

transfer or earn a credential. For example: 

• Results from one study showed that 51 percent of community college 

students seeking some type of academic credential either received a 

degree or certificate (39 percent) or transferred to a 4-year institution (12 

percent) within 6 years of initiating their studies.25

• A second study26 found that for a group of 1992 high school graduates that 

enrolled in public 2-year institutions by December 1994, 63 percent of 

students seeking an academic credential either received a degree, 

certificate, or license (50 percent) or had attended a 4-year institution (13 

percent) as of 2000. 

Both studies asked students who did and did not achieve their goals to 

assess the impact of their postsecondary education on a variety of labor 

market outcomes. Results showed that students who completed a degree 

or certificate were more likely to say that their postsecondary education 

 24U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Community 

College Students: Goals, Academic Preparation, and Outcomes, NCES 2003-164 by 

Gary Hoachlander, Anna C. Sikora, and Laura Horn. Project Officer: C. Dennis Carroll. 

Washington, D.C.: 2003. 

25U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996/01 

Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study, (BPS: 96/01). 

26U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National 

Education Longitudinal Study of 1998 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, 2000, Data 

Analysis System.”

National Studies of Credit 

Programs Indicate that 

Over Half of Community 

College Students Meet 

Their Goals 
Page 32 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

increased their employment prospects (job opportunities, job 

responsibilities, or salary) than those who left without obtaining a 

credential. 

In 1995, NCES conducted a survey on remedial education in higher 

education institutions and found that about two-thirds or more of 

community college students successfully completed remedial courses 

taken in reading (72 percent), writing (71 percent), and mathematics 

(66 percent).27 Our recent survey of community colleges and technical 

schools found similar results, as shown in table 6, for both remedial and 

three types of basic skills courses. 

Table 6: Percent of Students Passing below College-Level (Remedial) and Three 

Types of Basic Skills Courses during Fall Term of 2002 and Percent of Responding 

Schools with that Type of Course that Provided Data 

Type of course 

Median percent of students 

passing/percent of responding schools 

that provided data

Below college-level (remedial) 66/95

Adult Basic Education (ABE) 60/82

English as a Second Language (ESL) 71/85

General Educational Development (GED) 

examination preparation 65/85

Source: GAO survey of community colleges and technical schools, 2004. 

Community colleges and technical schools are playing an important role in 

helping to build and sustain the U.S. workforce. In the coming decade, this 

role may take on greater importance as both the demand for educated and 

trained workers and the number of Americans needing additional 

education and training to escape poverty continue to increase. These 

institutions can adapt quickly to changing local economic needs, in part, 

through noncredit programs and contract training that offer both 

individuals and employers an array of education and vocational 

experiences needed to support shifting workforce demands. At the same 

time, these schools are maintaining their position as a critical vehicle for 

students seeking 2-year degrees or moving on to 4-year institutions. 

 27U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Remedial 

Education at Higher Education Institutions in Fall 1995, (NCES 97-584) 

Washington, D.C.: 1996. 

Concluding 

Observations 
Page 33 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

National studies conducted by the Department of Education provide some 

information about community college student outcomes for those enrolled 

in these degree programs. However, much less is known about the 

outcomes of contract and noncredit training initiatives—and because 

many of these efforts are customized to meet specific local employer 

needs, national studies may not be the most appropriate methodology. 

Rigorous, localized research studies may provide information about the 

extent to which these efforts are addressing the needs of local economies 

and the employers and workers in them. 

We provided a draft of this report to the Departments of Education, Health 

and Human Services, and Labor for their review and comment. The 

Departments of Education and Labor had no comments on the report. The 

Department of Health and Human Services provided technical comments, 

which we incorporated as appropriate. 

We will send copies of this report to the Secretaries of Education, Health 

and Human Services, and Labor; to appropriate congressional committees; 

and to other interested parties. In addition, the report will be available at 

no charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions or wish to discuss this material, 

please call me at (415) 904-2272 or Cindy Ayers at (206) 654-5591. 

Sincerely yours, 

David D. Bellis 

Director, Education, Workforce, 

 and Income Security Issues

Agency Comments 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Page 34 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

In conducting our work, we administered a Web-based survey to all public, 

regionally accredited, less than 4-year institutions throughout the country; 

conducted telephone interviews of community college experts and 

relevant associations; visited 3 states; and interviewed representatives 

from a fourth state by telephone. We also interviewed officials at the 

Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Labor, and 

reviewed existing data and literature to gather what is known about 

community colleges and technical schools, their outcomes and the policies 

and funding sources that support academic preparation and workforce 

development at these schools. We relied on the findings of national 

outcomes studies regarded to be authoritative by researchers and other 

experts in the field. A social science analyst examined each study to assess 

the validity and reliability of selected results for use as evidence in this 

report. We examined descriptive information from the National Center for 

Education Statistics, including the Beginning Postsecondary Students 

Longitudinal Study and the Digest of Education Statistics. The American 

Association of Community Colleges and the Association for Career and 

Technical Education provided letters of support for our national survey. 

We conducted our work from May 2003 to August 2004 in accordance with 

generally accepted government auditing standards. 

To document the academic preparation and workforce training programs 

offered by public community colleges and technical schools, the students 

they serve, the education and employment outcomes of former students in 

these programs and efforts to measure outcomes, as well as to obtain 

information on the state policies and federal funds that support schools’ 

workforce development activities, we conducted a Web-based survey of all 

public, regionally accredited, less than 4-year institutions throughout the 

country and received a 71 percent response rate.28 We sent the survey to 

keyholders of the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, and 

asked them to coordinate responses with school officials most 

knowledgeable about particular issues raised in the survey. While we did 

not independently verify the accuracy of the self-reported information 

provided by these schools, we took a series of steps, from survey design 

through data analysis and interpretation, to minimize potential errors and 

problems. We analyzed the survey data by calculating descriptive statistics 

of community colleges and technical schools. 

 28We received responses from 758 of the 1,070 public community colleges and technical 

schools in our survey population. 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

The Survey 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Page 35 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

We used 2000-01 data from the Department of Education’s Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System to identify the study population. 

Education administers IPEDS surveys to collect data from all primary 

providers of postsecondary education. In order to identify our study 

population of 2-year public community colleges and technical schools 

from this list, we systematically eliminated the records of institutions that 

were inactive, that were private, that offered 4-year degrees, and that were 

not regionally accredited. There were 1,070 institutions that met these 

criteria and that became our study population. We assessed the reliability 

of the IPEDS database through a review of related documentation and by 

conducting electronic checks, and we found it to be sufficient for the 

purpose of identifying the study population. 

To identify potential questions, we spoke with numerous researchers as 

well as officials at organizations relevant to community colleges and 

technical schools, including the American Association of Community 

Colleges, Association for Career and Technical Education, Community 

College Research Center, League for Innovation in the Community 

College, National Governors Association, National Association of 

Manufacturers, and the US Chamber of Commerce, among others. During 

these discussions, we focused on (1) the general categories of programs 

offered by community colleges and technical schools; (2) various 

measurements of the extent of a school’s offerings in a given program 

category; and (3) limitations of existing data on community colleges and 

technical schools and areas for further exploration. We received formal 

endorsement for our survey from the American Association of Community 

Colleges and the Association for Career and Technical Education through 

letters of support to their member institutions encouraging participation in 

our forthcoming survey. In addition, throughout our survey design, we 

sought feedback on the questionnaire from community colleges and 

technical schools themselves, many of which participated in various 

survey pretests and a full-scale pilot survey test sent to a small random 

sample of 12 community colleges and technical schools that represented 

different sizes and levels of state support in November 2003. 

We conducted the survey between February and May 2004 via the World 

Wide Web. We sent a link to the survey via e-mail to the IPEDS keyholder 

at each of the schools. IPEDS keyholders are responsible for responding 

to the IPEDS surveys. We obtained the e-mail addresses of these 

keyholders from the IPEDS database. 

The Study Population 

Developing the 

Survey 

Administering the 

Survey 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Page 36 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

The practical difficulties of conducting any survey can result in 

nonsampling errors. For example, measurement errors can be introduced 

if respondents have difficulty interpreting a particular question, if they do 

not have access to information necessary to answer a particular question, 

or if they make errors in navigating a Web-based questionnaire. In order to 

minimize these errors, we conducted in-depth pre-testing of the 

questionnaire with IPEDS keyholders and their designees. During these 

pretests, we assessed the extent to which questions and response 

categories were interpreted in a consistent manner, the length of time 

needed to complete the survey, and the extent to which respondents had 

information available to answer our survey questions. In addition to 

conducting pretests, we performed computer analyses of completed 

questionnaires in order to identify obvious errors and internal 

inconsistencies among responses. Depending upon the extent of a 

particular error, we either corrected responses or deleted responses 

altogether. Finally, all computer syntax used to both identify inaccurate 

responses and to calculate summary statistics presented in this report was 

verified by independent programmers to ensure that it was written and 

executed correctly. 

We took several steps to maximize response rates. We sent our study 

population two follow-up email messages, one on February 26, 2004, and 

the other on March 8, 2004. Each of these messages contained instructions 

for completing the survey and contact information to submit questions. We 

extended the initial deadline from March 12, 2004, to May 7, 2004, in order 

to allow additional institutions to submit completed questionnaires. 

Finally, we hired contractors to telephone institutions that had not yet 

responded between April 6, 2004, and April 13, 2004, to remind them to 

complete the questionnaire. 

Of the 1,070 questionnaires sent to our study population, we received 

758, for a total response rate of 71 percent. In spite of this overall response 

rate, many of the questionnaires were incomplete with item response rates 

ranging from 51 to 100 percent. Because we found evidence of pre-existing 

differences between respondents and nonrespondents and excessive 

missing data on some questions, we did not use the survey data to 

generalize to the entire study population. Rather, our conclusions reflect 

the responses of those who participated in the survey and provided 

substantive answers to our questions. We noted in the report the number 

of responses to any questions with item response rates less than 

90 percent. 

Nonsampling Error 

Response Rates 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Page 37 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

We supplemented our survey data with in-depth information from state 

officials and community colleges and technical schools in Florida, North 

Carolina, Texas, and Washington. We chose these states based on 

recommendations that considered factors such as credit and noncredit 

course funding, outcome tracking, workforce development efforts, and 

geographic location. We interviewed a variety of officials from state 

education and labor agencies in order to understand the unique interplay 

between community colleges and technical schools and workforce 

development programs and policies at the state and local levels. We also 

examined two or more schools in each state, except for Texas where we 

visited one, basing our decisions on recommendations from community 

college, technical school, and workforce experts; school enrollment; and 

locale. In addition, we visited community colleges in four other states—

California, Maryland, Oregon and Virginia—to pretest the survey. In all, we 

pretested the survey at 14 schools in 6 states across the country, which 

included a mix of community colleges and technical schools, and an adult 

education center. 

Site Visits 
Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Page 38 GAO-05-04 Public Community Colleges and Technical Schools 

Cindy Ayers (206) 654-5591 (ayersl@gao.gov) 

Robert Miller (206) 287-4812 (millerr@gao.gov) 

In addition to the individuals named above, Carolyn Boyce, Mark Braza, 

Ellen Chu, Susan Lawless, Avani Locke, Brittni Milam, John Mingus, 

Charles Novak, and Stanley G. Stenersen made key contributions to this 

report. 

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contacts 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(130273) 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to 

www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.”

Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Congressional 

Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548

Public Affairs Susan Becker, Acting Manager, BeckerS@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548