Noncredit Research Collaborative
States are beginning to implement the new Workforce Pell Grant program, but only a small number of short-term training programs have been approved so far as states and institutions work through new eligibility, approval, and data-reporting requirements. The authors emphasizes that it is too early to judge the program’s impact, with experts expecting adoption to increase gradually as implementation processes mature and more programs qualify.
The authors state that Colorado and New Jersey are developing different approaches to evaluating the quality of nondegree credentials, reflecting each state’s policy priorities, workforce needs, and available data. They highlight how these early efforts can inform other states by demonstrating the importance of aligning quality measures with learner outcomes, employer demand, and strong data systems.
the authors argue that states and colleges lack critical data on whether learners actually earn many nondegree certifications and licenses because credential attainment is often held by third-party issuers rather than education providers or state agencies. They describe the CredLens initiative as a national data trust designed to securely connect credential attainment, education, and employment data, enabling policymakers and institutions to better evaluate program quality, student outcomes, and the labor market value of nondegree credentials.
How are accreditors are adapting to the growing role of nondegree credentials as federal policy changes, including Workforce Pell, increase demand for quality assurance beyond traditional degree programs? Authors Michelle Van Noy and Thomas Hilliard argue that accreditors will likely play a larger role in evaluating the quality and effectiveness of nondegree offerings while balancing innovation, accountability, and the diverse purposes these credentials serve.
The authors, including Michelle Van Noy, propose creating a standardized “nutrition label” for credentials that clearly communicates what learners gain from a credential—including skills, cost, duration, quality indicators, transferability, and employment outcomes—rather than focusing primarily on what the credential is called. It argues that greater transparency and consistent information would help learners, employers, and policymakers compare credentials, make informed decisions, and better understand their value in the labor marke
Nondegree credentials serve many different purposes—from preparing learners for entry into an occupation to helping incumbent workers build targeted skills or meet continuing education requirements—so they should not be treated as a single category. According to author Michelle Van Noy, because programs are designed with different goals in mind, policymakers and educators should evaluate them using expectations and outcome measures that align with each credential’s intended purpose rather than applying one standard to all.