Do college certificate programs pay off? California must find out | Analysis
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- 40% of CA undergrad certificates in federal database failed earnings tests.
- California should create a public dashboard linking completion, transfers and wages.
- Calbright–WGU offers a ladder; transparent outcomes must verify mobility.
When California’s free online community college, Calbright, announced a new partnership with Western Governors University in January, the message was simple: Working adults who start with a certificate could turn that training into a bachelor’s degree and a better-paying career.
Under the partnership, Californians who earn workforce-aligned certificates at Calbright could apply them toward WGU degrees in technology, health care and other fields.
For adults whose education was interrupted by work, caregiving or financial barriers, the collaboration offers a ladder back into higher education that California needs.
Too many working adults start training programs, then stall before achieving degrees that unlock higher pay. But the announcement also raised a question California struggles to answer: Do these certificate programs actually lead to higher wages?
That question is urgent as federal policymakers attempt to measure whether higher education truly delivers economic mobility.
In December, the U.S. Department of Education released data evaluating whether graduates earn more than a typical high school graduate four years after completing a credential. Programs that fail the test risk losing access to federal student loans, and in some cases Pell grants.
Early results revealed a clear pattern: Roughly 30% of undergraduate certificate programs in the federal database failed to yield earnings higher than those of high school graduates.
A national test of program value
Michael Itzkowitz, founder of The HEA Group and an architect of the federal College Scorecard, said the new rule reflects a basic principle that higher education should not leave students worse off financially.
“While there are many certificate programs that serve students extremely well and can also provide a fast path to socio-economic mobility,” Itzkowitz said, “(these) are also some of the riskiest credentials within the higher education ecosystem.”
Of the 536 undergraduate certificate programs listed in California, 211 — nearly 40% — failed the federal earnings benchmark.
Many failing programs clustered at specialized and for-profit schools. For instance, federal data show students at UEI College-Fresno earned nearly $8,000 less than a typical high school grad four years after completing an undergraduate certificate in “allied health and medical assisting.”
The earnings test is a useful and much-needed starting point for identifying failing programs, but the figures don’t always tell the full story.
For instance, one wage gap in the federal data appears to reflect a well-documented skills-pay mismatch. Four years after completing undergraduate certificates, early childhood educators in California earn significantly less than high school graduates. Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry recently introduced legislation to ensure providers receive reimbursement that reflects their true costs.
The earnings test also pointed up programs that appear to deliver outsized returns on time invested: Grads with certificates in criminal justice and corrections from Santa Rosa Junior College and San Diego Miramar College earn $70,000 more than a high school graduate.
Why many CA certificate programs are invisible
Many public community college certificate programs do not appear in the College Scorecard because their students often don’t use federal loans. Calbright’s tuition-free programs would be invisible for that reason.
The result is a major accountability gap. Federal data can flag failing programs in the career-college sector, but it cannot evaluate most public certificate programs.
California taxpayers are funding thousands of workforce training programs without a clear public measure of whether those programs actually improve wages.
When lawmakers created Calbright in 2018, they required an independent review of its progress, including student success and workforce outcomes, by January 2026. That report was not completed on schedule, but the Chancellor’s Office recently commissioned it. This review should assess whether Calbright programs improve earnings and career opportunities.
Zack Mabel, director of research at the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, said that tracking graduates’ earnings is difficult for colleges.
“In the best-case scenario, you have a larger entity, larger than the institution itself, measuring that information and then making it routinely available to institutions so that they can speak about the impact that their institution is having,” he said.
California already has the beginning of that system. The state’s Cradle-to-Career Data System was created to connect education and workforce data so Californians can understand how people move from school into jobs.
Mary Ann Bates, the inaugural executive director of the Cradle-to-Career, or C2C, system, said the goal is to bring together information historically scattered across multiple agencies. C2C, she said, has plans in future to share data on program completion and employment outcomes.
Right now, she said, the board has prioritized two other projects: an outcomes database for transfer students and a privacy-protected data enclave for deeper, independent research.
“We have the data that will enable us to create data tools that show people’s paths, whether they get multiple certificates, whether they get multiple associate’s degrees and what the stackable nature (of degrees and credentials) is,” Bates said in an interview.
The C2C transfer dashboard could yield insights into the Calbright-WGU partnership, and independent research could probe wage gaps.
Still, California should create a public dashboard showing certificate completion rates program by program, advancement to higher degrees and wage outcomes for graduates and those who didn’t finish. (The College Scorecard doesn’t track non-completers.)
Students could compare training options like they compare health plans or mortgage rates. Programs would have the opportunity to prove they deliver upward mobility, and if they don’t, they would face pressure to change or close. And, vital labor groups could use the data to make their case for policy changes.
Calbright is still less than a decade old. More than 90% of its students are over 25, and about one in five recently experienced job loss or declining wages.
Transparent data would allow administrators, policymakers, students and taxpayers to evaluate whether its certificate programs have delivered on their promise.
Leaders at Calbright said they view their partnership with Western Governors University as an opportunity to create exactly the kind of ladder many adult learners need.
“By aligning Calbright certificates to WGU degrees and courses, students can convert what they have already earned into measurable progress toward a bachelor’s degree, reducing time to completion and supporting long-term economic mobility,” the two colleges’ leaders said in a joint email to The Bee.
Such ladders matter. But access alone does not guarantee economic mobility. California should ensure students have clear information about which programs actually lead to higher wages.
The state already has built much of the infrastructure needed. Now it must take the final step: Turn complex education and workforce data into clear, accessible information students can use. Students are expected to show their work. College programs should have to show their results.
