Skip to main content

Noncredit Research Collaborative

Publications Search

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.

Workforce Pell expands federal aid eligibility to some short-term and noncredit programs, but only those that meet strict requirements related to program length, outcomes, and demonstrated value. These criteria create significant barriers, meaning many existing noncredit programs will not qualify without improved data systems and stronger alignment with workforce and credit pathways. As a result, the policy’s impact on access will depend on institutions’ ability to meet these accountability standards.

Mark D’Amico and Michelle Van Noy explain that Workforce Pell should be viewed as more than a new financial aid program—it is an opportunity for states and community colleges to strengthen the data systems, governance, and accountability needed to support high-quality noncredit workforce education. They urge college trustees to use Workforce Pell as a catalyst for building long-term infrastructure that improves student outcomes, workforce alignment, and the value of short-term credentials beyond the program’s initial implementation.

Di Xu explores how industry-recognized credentials influence workers’ earnings and career mobility. Published in the Journal of Public Economics, the study examines data from approximately 36,000 learners enrolled in Virginia’s FastForward program. Di Xu and her coauthors found that learners who earned an industry-recognized credential increased their quarterly earnings by an average of nearly 10 percent compared to their earnings before enrolling in the program. They were also more likely to transition into higher-paying industries than participants who completed training but did not earn a credential.

Michelle Van Noy and her co-authors explain that defining completion and success in nondegree workforce programs is much more complicated than in traditional degree programs because program lengths, stackable credentials, and student goals vary widely. They believe states and institutions should develop more nuanced definitions of progress and completion—especially in light of Workforce Pell requirements—that recognize meaningful milestones while supporting accurate measurement of student outcomes and labor market success.

Michelle Van Noy and Katherine Hughes state that with nearly two million nondegree credentials available, measuring quality requires a multidimensional framework that considers program design, demonstrated competencies, learner and employer outcomes, and the market systems that make credentials recognizable and valuable. They emphasize that quality information must be communicated clearly—through accessible, consumer-friendly metrics—to help learners, employers, and policymakers make informed decisions and strengthen accountability as Workforce Pell expands.

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.

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

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 Peter Bahr and Mark D’Amico, examine whether community college students who start in noncredit programs later transition into credit coursework in the same field of study, finding that while relatively few students make the transition overall (6% in Iowa and 23% in California), many who do are able to “bridge” into related credit programs—29% of transitioners in Iowa and 53% in California. It concludes that bridging is most common in occupational fields in Iowa and precollege remediation fields in California, suggesting that programs with high enrollment, transition, and bridge rates are promising targets for strengthening pathways from noncredit to credit education.