Transfer Students
Postsecondary Institutions Could Promote More Consistent Consideration of Coursework by Not Basing Determinations on Accreditation Gao ID: GAO-06-22 October 18, 2005Each year thousands of students transfer from one postsecondary institution to another. The credit transfer process, to the extent that it delays students' progress, can affect the affordability of postsecondary education and the time it takes students to graduate. Seeking information on the processes and requirements that postsecondary institutions have in place to assess requests to transfer academic credits, Congress asked GAO to examine (1) how postsecondary education institutions decide which credits to accept for transfer, (2) how states and accrediting agencies facilitate the credit transfer process, and (3) the implications for students and the federal government of students' inability to transfer credits.
When deciding which credits to accept from transfer students, receiving institutions consider the sending institution's type of accreditation, whether academic transfer agreements with the institution exist, and the comparability of coursework. However, institutions vary in how they evaluate and apply a student's transferable credits. Many officials from postsecondary institutions with regional accreditation told GAO that they would not accept credits earned from nationally accredited institutions. To streamline the transfer process, most institutions have transfer agreements with other institutions that generally provide for the acceptance of credits from the other institution without further evaluation. In some instances, institutions review student credits--not rejected for other reasons, such as accreditation--to determine comparability to their academic offerings. State legislation, statewide initiatives, and the accreditation standards that accrediting agencies set help facilitate the transfer of academic credits from one postsecondary institution to another. Among other things, states support the establishment of statewide transfer agreements, common core curricula, and common course numbering systems. Accrediting agencies facilitate the transfer process through the standards they set. The accrediting agencies that GAO reviewed generally adhere to the principle that institutions should not accept or deny transfer credit exclusively on the basis of a sending institution's type of accreditation. A student's inability to transfer credit may result in longer enrollment, more tuition payments, and additional federal financial aid, but current data do not allow GAO to quantify its effects on the students or the federal government. Data are not available on the number of credits that do not transfer, making it difficult to assess the actual costs associated with nontransferable credits.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Team: Phone:GAO-06-22, Transfer Students: Postsecondary Institutions Could Promote More Consistent Consideration of Coursework by Not Basing Determinations on Accreditation
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-06-22
entitled 'Transfer Students: Postsecondary Institutions Could Promote
More Consistent Consideration of Coursework by Not Basing
Determinations on Accreditation' which was released on October 18,
2005.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
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. 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.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
October 2005:
Transfer Students:
Postsecondary Institutions Could Promote More Consistent Consideration
of Coursework by Not Basing Determinations on Accreditation:
GAO-06-22:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-06-22, a report to congressional requesters:
Why GAO Did This Study:
Each year thousands of students transfer from one postsecondary
institution to another. The credit transfer process, to the extent that
it delays students‘ progress, can affect the affordability of
postsecondary education and the time it takes students to graduate.
Seeking information on the processes and requirements that
postsecondary institutions have in place to assess requests to transfer
academic credits, Congress asked GAO to examine (1) how postsecondary
education institutions decide which credits to accept for transfer, (2)
how states and accrediting agencies facilitate the credit transfer
process, and (3) the implications for students and the federal
government of students‘ inability to transfer credits.
What GAO Found:
When deciding which credits to accept from transfer students, receiving
institutions consider the sending institution's type of accreditation,
whether academic transfer agreements with the institution exist, and
the comparability of coursework. However, institutions vary in how they
evaluate and apply a student‘s transferable credits. Many officials
from postsecondary institutions with regional accreditation told GAO
that they would not accept credits earned from nationally accredited
institutions. To streamline the transfer process, most institutions
have transfer agreements with other institutions that generally provide
for the acceptance of credits from the other institution without
further evaluation. In some instances, institutions review student
credits”not rejected for other reasons, such as accreditation”to
determine comparability to their academic offerings.
State legislation, statewide initiatives, and the accreditation
standards that accrediting agencies set help facilitate the transfer of
academic credits from one postsecondary institution to another. Among
other things, states support the establishment of statewide transfer
agreements, common core curricula, and common course numbering systems.
Accrediting agencies facilitate the transfer process through the
standards they set. The accrediting agencies that GAO reviewed
generally adhere to the principle that institutions should not accept
or deny transfer credit exclusively on the basis of a sending
institution‘s type of accreditation.
Potential Outcomes for Students Seeking Transfer of Academic Credits:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
A student‘s inability to transfer credit may result in longer
enrollment, more tuition payments, and additional federal financial
aid, but current data do not allow GAO to quantify its effects on the
students or the federal government. Data are not available on the
number of credits that do not transfer, making it difficult to assess
the actual costs associated with nontransferable credits.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO suggests that Congress consider further amending the Higher
Education Act of 1965 to require postsecondary institutions eligible
for Title IV funding to not deny the transfer of credit on the basis of
a sending institution‘s type of accreditation.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-22.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Cornelia Ashby, (202) 512-
7215, ashbyc@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
Institutions Consider Accreditation, Transfer Agreements, and
Coursework Equivalency when Making Credit Transfer Decisions, but
Policies Vary:
Some States and Accrediting Agencies Facilitate the Credit Transfer
Process:
Students' Inability to Transfer Credits May Have Cost Implications, but
Financial Effects on Students and the Federal Government Are Unknown:
Conclusions:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: State Legislation Related to Transfer of Academic Credit:
Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Education:
Appendix IV: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Information from Regional Accrediting Agencies on the Role of
Accreditation in Credit Transfer Decisions:
Table 2: Source and Response Rate of GAO's Sampling of Education's
IPEDS Database:
Figures:
Figure 1: Types of First-Time Transfers between 1995 and 2001:
Figure 2: Percentage of Enrolled Postsecondary Students Enrolled in
Public, Private Nonprofit, and Private For-Profit Institutions
Participating in Title IV:
Figure 3: Institutions Receiving Title IV Federal Financial Aid, by
Type:
Figure 4: The Evaluation Process for Transfer Credits:
Abbreviations:
AACC: American Association of Community Colleges:
AACRAO: American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions
Officers:
BPS: Beginning Postsecondary Students:
CCA: Career College Association:
CHEA: Council for Higher Education Accreditation:
CSU: California State University:
FACT: Florida Academic Counseling and Tracking for Students:
HEA: Higher Education Act:
IPEDS: Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System:
IHEP: Institute for Higher Education Policy:
NATN: National Articulation and Transfer Network:
NCES: National Center for Education Statistics:
NELS: National Educational Longitudinal Study:
SUNY: State University of New York:
UC: University of California:
[End of section]
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
October 18, 2005:
The Honorable Michael B. Enzi:
Chairman:
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions:
United States Senate:
The Honorable John A. Boehner:
Chairman:
Committee on Education and the Workforce:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Howard P. "Buck" McKeon:
Chairman:
Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness:
Committee on Education and the Workforce:
House of Representatives:
Because thousands of students transfer each year from one postsecondary
institution to another, the credit transfer process, to the extent that
it delays students' progress, can affect the affordability of
postsecondary education and the time it takes students to graduate. As
of 2001, 40 percent of students entering college in the 1995-1996
academic year attended at least two institutions during the next 6
school years. Annually, the federal government invests billions of
dollars--$21 billion in 2004--in student financial aid under the Higher
Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA). Because of the federal
government's large investment in student financial aid, it is in the
best interest of taxpayers that transfer students do not unnecessarily
repeat coursework, since such repetition could result in additional
financial aid awards.
Postsecondary institutions, state governments, and accrediting agencies
all play critical roles in the transfer process. As part of the
transfer process, receiving institutions must decide whether the
credits of incoming students are equivalent to those of their own
course offerings. States can influence the transfer process through
legislation and regulation, and accrediting agencies provide general
guidelines regarding the transfer of credit. Congress requires
postsecondary institutions to be accredited by an accrediting agency
recognized by the Department of Education (Education) before its
students can become eligible for federal financial aid.
In recent years, the ability of students to transfer credits has taken
on added importance because of increasing numbers of transfer students
and the changing nature of the types of institutions they attend. In
general, Education recognizes two main types of accrediting agencies--
regional and national. Regional accrediting agencies review
institutions in a region of the United States that includes at least
three states that are reasonably close to one another. National
accrediting agencies review programs or specialized institutions, such
as acupuncture schools or private business schools, on a national
basis. In recent years, some nationally accredited institutions have
broadened their curricula to bring their course offerings into line
with those of traditional 4-year academic institutions. Yet students
from these types of institutions have complained that they have been
denied transfer credits on the basis of accreditation.
As Congress considers the reauthorization of HEA, it has requested
information on the processes and requirements that postsecondary
institutions have in place to assess requests to transfer academic
credits. You asked us to provide information on the credit transfer
process, including how and when decisions are made to accept or reject
credits for transfer. Specifically in this report, we examined (1) how
postsecondary education institutions decide which credits to accept for
transfer, (2) how states and accrediting agencies facilitate the credit
transfer process, and (3) the implications for students and the federal
government of students' inability to transfer credits.
To answer these questions, we reviewed transfer of credit policies from
a nationally representative random sample of 2-year public and 4-year
public and private institutions. In addition, we conducted site visits
in California, Florida, Missouri, New Jersey, and New York, where we
interviewed officials from public, private nonprofit, and private for-
profit postsecondary institutions that were nationally and regionally
accredited. In order to get a broad perspective on the challenges that
students face when transferring credit, we selected states with large
transfer student populations and varying levels of involvement in the
credit transfer process. We also interviewed officials from state
education agencies regarding institutional transfer policies and state
initiatives to facilitate credit transfer. We also interviewed
officials from accrediting agencies and national experts on credit
transfer. Further, we reviewed state legislation and accrediting
agencies' standards concerning transfer of credits. Finally, we
examined Education's databases on postsecondary institutions. We
reviewed documentation about the various methodologies used to collect
the data in the databases and conducted interviews to establish the
reliability of the data. We conducted our work from January 2005
through September 2005 in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards. For a more detailed explanation of our methodology,
see appendix I.
Results in Brief:
When deciding which credits to accept from transfer students, receiving
institutions consider the sending institution's type of accreditation,
whether academic transfer agreements with the sending institution
exist, and the comparability of coursework, but policies vary in how
they evaluate and apply a student's transferable credits. About 84
percent of institutions consider whether the sending institution is
accredited, and many consider the type of accreditation--national or
regional--when determining which transfer credits to accept. Many
institutions' transfer policies specify that they only accept credits
from a regionally accredited institution. As a result, students from
nationally accredited institutions may have their credits denied on the
basis of their previous institution's type of accreditation. About 69
percent of the institutions have agreements with other institutions to
streamline the transfer process. In these agreements, receiving
institutions, after reviewing the sending institution's coursework and
faculty credentials, agree to accept credits directly from the sending
institution without further evaluation. If agreements do not exist,
many institutions review student coursework to determine its
equivalency and applicability toward a degree. The processes
institutions follow when evaluating the transferability of prior
coursework and accepting credits for transfer vary. Specifically,
institutions vary in how they evaluate credits, who makes the decisions
to accept credits, and when credit transfer decisions are made. For
example, some institutions evaluate transfer credits prior to student
transfer, while others make final credit transfer decisions after
student enrollment.
State legislation, statewide initiatives, and the accreditation
standards that accrediting agencies set help facilitate the transfer of
academic credits from one postsecondary institution to another. Some
states facilitate the transfer of credit among their public
institutions through a variety of statewide legislation and initiatives
that, among other things, support the establishment of statewide
transfer agreements, common core curricula, and common course numbering
systems, and encourage institutions and others to make transfer
information available to the public. Accrediting agencies facilitate
the transfer process through the standards they set. The accrediting
agencies we reviewed set standards for accreditation that require
institutions to review the educational quality of the sending
institution, the comparability of credit to be transferred to the
receiving institution, and applicability of the credit in relation to
the programs being offered at the receiving institution. In addition,
the six regional accrediting agencies that we reviewed generally
encourage member institutions not to use the sending institution's type
of accreditation as the sole factor in determining which credits to
accept for transfer.
A student's inability to transfer credit may result in longer
enrollment, more tuition payments, and additional federal financial
aid, but the full extent to which these occur cannot be determined
because institutions told us that they do not collect specific data on
students unable to transfer credit. If the receiving institution
decides that few or no credits earned at the sending institution are
equivalent to its course offerings, the student may need to repeat
coursework that could result in enrolling for one or more additional
terms. National data indicate that graduates who transferred from a
community college take on average 10 more credits and 3 more months
than nontransfer graduates. Transfer graduates may take more credits
for reasons, such as changing majors, which are not related to their
decision to transfer. We could not determine the extent to which
transfer students differ from nontransfer students in these areas.
However, a student taking additional credits as a result of being
unable to transfer credits will likely have to pay additional tuition,
ranging from $150 per credit hour at public institutions to $520 per
credit hour at private institutions. The extent to which these costs
are borne by the student or the federal government varies depending on
the student's eligibility for financial aid.
In this report, we suggest that Congress consider amending the Higher
Education Act of 1965 to require postsecondary institutions eligible
for federal financial aid to issue a statement in their transfer of
credit policy that they will not deny the transfer of credit on the
basis of a sending institution's type of accreditation.
Background:
Patterns of enrollment in postsecondary education reflect that students
frequently enroll in more than one postsecondary institution.
Education's National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) found
that 40 percent of students who entered college in the 1995-1996
academic year attended at least two institutions in the following six
years. Many students enroll in community colleges with a plan for
eventually transferring to a 4-year baccalaureate program. As a result,
4-year institutions face pressure to award transfer credit for
coursework taken at another institution.
Data show that students transfer in numerous directions. Traditional
transfer is typically from a 2-year institution to a 4-year
institution. However, students also transfer from 4-year institutions
to 2-year institutions, known as reverse transfer, as well as laterally
between similar institutions (e.g., 2-year to 2-year or 4-year to 4-
year). As shown in figure 1, traditional transfer accounts for at least
one-third of first transfer activity.
Figure 1: Types of First-Time Transfers between 1995 and 2001:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
When students want to transfer their earned academic credits from one
institution to another, they must submit a transcript showing their
coursework and earned grades to the receiving institution. The
receiving institution may then evaluate the transcript and assess the
educational quality of the student's learning experience, compare the
level and content of the learning experience with those of the learning
experience offered by the receiving institution, and determine the
applicability of the student's coursework to the degree or programs
offered at the receiving institution. To help streamline the evaluation
process, sending and receiving institutions enter into voluntary
transfer agreements, which contain criteria for credits to transfer.
Today, many students who begin their studies at private, for-profit
institutions transfer to public or private nonprofit 4-year
institutions. To meet this demand, many private, for-profit
institutions have revamped their curricula, transforming what had
chiefly been vocational training aimed at job placement to a core
educational curriculum that prepares students to pursue associate's,
bachelor's, and even graduate degrees.
The Department of Education administers federal postsecondary education
programs, including the Title IV federal financial aid programs under
the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. To be eligible for
federal financial aid, a postsecondary institution must be accredited
by an accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary of Education.
Accrediting agencies are private educational associations of regional
or national scope that develop evaluation standards and conduct site
visits to evaluate postsecondary institutions. To become recognized, an
accrediting agency must submit a written application to Education that
lays out its standards for accrediting institutions as well as its
procedures for ensuring that institutions follow those standards.
Education requires accrediting agencies to set standards that instruct
institutions to have the resources and policies in place to provide a
quality education. Education applies the same requirements to both
regional and national accrediting agencies. Education has recognized
eight regional accrediting agencies that generally accredit academic
degree granting institutions in their specific region of the country,
and about 50 national accrediting agencies that accredit various kinds
of specialized postsecondary institutions, such as technological or
religious institutions, and programs such as nursing and engineering.
The most current national data on students show that in September 2003,
an estimated 15.2 million students were enrolled in postsecondary
institutions; 77 percent of these students were enrolled in public
institutions, 17 percent in private nonprofit institutions, and 6
percent enrolled in private for-profit institutions.[Footnote 1]
Additionally, about 6,900 degree-and non-degree-granting postsecondary
education institutions had students that were receiving federal
financial aid. Figure 2 shows the percentage of students attending
public, private nonprofit, and private for-profit institutions, and
figure 3 shows the type of institutions receiving these funds.
Figure 2: Percentage of Enrolled Postsecondary Students Enrolled in
Public, Private Nonprofit, and Private For-Profit Institutions
Participating in Title IV:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Figure 3: Institutions Receiving Title IV Federal Financial Aid, by
Type:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
In order to acquire federal financial aid, students are required, among
other things, to demonstrate financial need, demonstrate qualifications
to enroll in postsecondary education, be working toward an eligible
degree or certificate, be a U.S. citizen or eligible noncitizen, and
maintain satisfactory academic progress while in school. Education uses
a formula to determine the amount of a student's financial need and his
or her expected family contribution toward tuition, taking into account
a number of factors including the student's or family's resources and
the costs of attending an institution. In their financial aid packages,
students may receive federal grants or loans, with the neediest
students receiving about $4,000 per year in a Pell grant and up to
$4,000 in loans under the Perkins loan program. Additionally, all
students qualify to receive Stafford loans for which the government may
subsidize or defer the loan interest while students remain enrolled in
school.
Institutions Consider Accreditation, Transfer Agreements, and
Coursework Equivalency when Making Credit Transfer Decisions, but
Policies Vary:
Prior to granting credit for courses taken at another institution,
institutions may consider a variety of criteria, such as accreditation,
transfer agreements, and course equivalency. Many institutions consider
the accreditation of the sending institution, including the type of
accreditation--national or regional--when determining which transfer
credits to accept. Institutions may also assess the equivalency of
coursework taken at other institutions, either through establishing
transfer agreements covering a number of courses or on a course-by-
course basis. Though reviewing courses can be time-consuming and
maintaining transfer agreements requires an ongoing commitment,
officials said that transfer agreements do facilitate the transfer
process. Institutions also vary in who makes the final decision on
which credits to accept--administrative official or departmental
faculty--and when they inform a student of their decision.
Institutions Consider Accreditation when Deciding Which Transfer
Credits to Accept and Commonly Accept Credits Earned at Regionally
Accredited Institutions:
We found that when making decisions about whether or not to accept
transfer credits, institutions often used the sending institution's
accreditation as the initial measure of the quality of the institution
and its coursework. We found that about 84 percent of postsecondary
institutions had policies to consider the accreditation of the sending
institution when assessing transfer credits.[Footnote 2] About 63
percent of these institutions specified that accreditation from any
regional accrediting agency was acceptable, and about 14 percent
specified that they accepted national accreditation.[Footnote 3]
Institutions indicating that they accepted regional accreditation told
us that they also provide students with other options for getting their
credits transferred, such as passing a competency examination before
their credits would be granted. Many also said that they would allow
any student to appeal a decision, and an appeal would result in a more
thorough review of the student's transcript.
Several officials from postsecondary institutions with regional
accreditation told us that as a rule, they did not accept credits
earned at institutions with national accreditation. For example, an
official at one institution told us that the institution did not accept
credits from nationally accredited institutions because the coursework
was technical and not academic. Similarly, an official at a regionally
accredited institution told us that the institution could not accept
credits from nationally accredited institutions unless the accrediting
standards of the sending institution paralleled their own standards.
One reason given by regional accrediting agency official for the
incomparability of credits earned at nationally accredited institutions
was that these institutions follow less stringent standards regarding
such factors as faculty qualifications and library resources. However,
our review of the standards from the regional accrediting agencies
found that no regional accrediting agency explicitly stated in its
written policy that credits from nationally accredited institutions
should be denied.
We found that about 11 percent of institutions have policies that
explicitly state that they will accept both regionally and nationally
accredited credits. For example, one institution's credit transfer
policy states that it will accept credits from "universities and
colleges with accreditations by one of the regional accrediting
associations,— community and technical colleges with accreditation by
one of the regional accrediting associations,— and technical colleges,
business colleges and other schools lacking regional accreditation but
having accreditation by another agency recognized by the Council for
Higher Education Accreditation [CHEA]."[Footnote 4] Officials from a
regionally accredited institution told us that they would accept
credits regardless of accreditation and would review all credits the
same way. However, this process was more time-consuming than relying
solely on accreditation. To save time, some institutions had developed
databases to track previously approved courses in order to remove the
need to reevaluate them.
Officials at a nationally accredited institution told us that their
students often have difficulty transferring credits and that they are
taking actions to assist their prospective transfer students. They told
us that regionally accredited institutions did not always accept
courses taken at the nationally accredited institution. They advised
students to assume that credits would not transfer to regionally
accredited institutions. Two nationally accredited institutions we
visited have responded to the credit transfer difficulties by
attaining, or seeking to attain, regional accreditation in order to
improve their students' ability to transfer credits. One of the three
nationally accredited institutions we visited--the institution with
dual national-regional accreditation--reported having no problems with
transferring its students to 4-year institutions. In lieu of seeking
dual accreditation, another nationally accredited institution we
visited is reaching out to regionally accredited institutions to
develop transfer agreements to facilitate the transfer process.
Institutions Said That Transfer Agreements, though Time-Consuming, Do
Facilitate Transfers:
While many institutions use accreditation as a factor to assess
transfer credits, about 69 percent of postsecondary institutions have
entered into voluntary transfer agreements with other
institutions.[Footnote 5] Typically, institutions we visited establish
transfer agreements with institutions that send large numbers of
transfer students. For example, Columbia College in Missouri--a college
with campuses in 11 states--has transfer agreements with 18 community
colleges throughout the country. In these agreements, receiving
institutions review a number of courses from sending institutions and
agree to accept comparable credits from that institution. For example,
the State University of New York system has a transfer agreement among
all of its institutions specifying that all 4 year universities will
accept associate degrees from community colleges within its system,
thus guaranteeing a baccalaureate degree with the completion of 60
additional credits. Agreements can also cover individual courses, such
as mathematics and science courses that are required prerequisites for
upper-level courses.
Institution officials told us that although maintaining transfer
agreements requires considerable commitment, these agreements are
useful because they make the transfer process more transparent and
allow it to operate more smoothly. The agreements require receiving
institutions to review the course content of each partner institution
to determine its comparability and applicability to meeting the degree
program requirements. Maintaining these agreements requires regular
ongoing communication between participating institutions to keep
apprised of all new course offerings or any changes to current courses
or degree requirements. According to officials from several of the
schools we visited, the process of establishing the agreements and
keeping them current requires considerable commitment because
institutions frequently revise their courses and degree requirements.
For example, it took one private institution in New Jersey a full year
to review courses for every community college with which it had
established new transfer agreements. At another institution we visited,
the official responsible for credit evaluation told us that the time
required for maintaining transfer agreements had led the institution to
reduce the number of its transfer agreements by about 25 percent. While
transfer agreements can be time-consuming, they help make the transfer
process more transparent. For example, in New Jersey, many 4-year
institutions have established transfer agreements with community
colleges in the state. Community college students may also access a Web
page listing courses at their institution that will transfer to
participating 4-year institutions in New Jersey, allowing students to
know which credits will transfer before they apply to a new
institution. One official told us that the transfer agreements, once
established, allow the credit transfer process to operate smoothly
between the partnering institutions, because it becomes a matter of
checking a list to determine which credits to accept or deny.
Officials offered a variety of reasons for pursuing transfer
agreements. In some instances, transfer agreements were mandated in
state law or facilitated by state agencies, but these types of
agreements were usually between public institutions only. In other
instances, institutions sought to establish transfer agreements out of
convenience because of the significant number of students that moved
between their institutions. In addition to states and institutions,
another organization we visited is also involved in facilitating the
establishment of transfer agreements. To improve access to
baccalaureate programs for certain populations of minority students,
the National Articulation and Transfer Network has facilitated transfer
agreements between community colleges and minority-serving institutions
across the country. [Footnote 6]
Institutions Review the Comparability of Coursework but Vary in How
They Administer This Process:
Some institutions review students' transcripts to determine the
comparability of the students' coursework. Specifically, institutions
consider the characteristics of individual courses, such as the
similarity of courses on a student's transcript to courses offered at
the receiving institutions and the applicability of the courses to the
student's intended major. Institutions may ask for a course description
or a class syllabus to support their assessment. To expedite this
review, some institutions maintain a historical list of transfer
courses that they have accepted in the past. While not always a
guarantee of transferability, listed courses have a greater likelihood
of acceptance than unlisted courses.
At the institutions we visited, two groups of reviewing officials are
generally responsible for determining which courses to accept for
transfer: (1) an admissions or other administrative officer, who
determines which courses meet general requirements, and (2) academic
department faculty members, who determine which courses meet degree
requirements within their departments. When reviewing officials
consider the student's official transcript, they may review transfer
agreements and historical lists of accepted courses, request the
syllabus or a list of books used in the course, or discuss the course
with a representative from the sending institution or use an Internet
service, such as the one maintained by the American Association of
Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, to obtain a syllabus and
description of the course, among other things. This process is shown in
figure 4.
Figure 4: The Evaluation Process for Transfer Credits:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Some 4-year institutions, citing time constraints and a significant
backlog, have taken steps to limit the number of courses they review.
Some institutions have established criteria for transferable courses,
such as determining the minimum grade or course level for which credits
will be accepted. Several 4-year institutions told us that they did not
accept for transfer any remedial (developmental) courses, technical
courses, or upper-level courses taken at a 2-year institution. Because
of the backlog created by the number of transcripts to review, not all
institutions succeed in providing students with an official report of
transfer credits accepted before classes begin. Officials at one
institution told us that they provide the report within 1 year of the
student's matriculation and encourage students to take upper-level
general education courses in the interim until the report is received.
Some States and Accrediting Agencies Facilitate the Credit Transfer
Process:
To facilitate the transfer of academic credits, states enact a variety
of legislation and implement statewide initiatives covering primarily
public postsecondary institutions, and accrediting agencies set
accreditation standards. Many states have passed legislation that
requires public community colleges and 4-year public institutions to
establish transfer agreements and authorizes common curricula to ease
the transfer of credits. Some states have established a common course
numbering system for public institutions within the state and created
statewide committees to oversee the transfer of credit process within
the state. In other states, state law requires university systems to
initiate and form transfer agreements with institutions within the
system to enhance the transferability of credits. Some states have also
launched statewide initiatives to encourage transfer between 2-year and
4-year public institutions, including offering guarantees that credit
will transfer. For their part, accrediting agencies facilitate the
transfer process through the standards they set for affiliated
institutions. Accrediting agencies that we reviewed have set standards
for accreditation that require institutions to make their credit
transfer policy publicly available. The six regional accrediting
agencies that we reviewed generally encourage their member institutions
not to accept or deny transfer credit exclusively on the basis of the
accreditation of the sending institution. Some accrediting agencies
have incorporated this criterion into their standards; others have
issued policy or position statements.
Some State Legislation and Statewide Initiatives Ease Credit Transfer:
States facilitate the transfer of credits among public institutions
through various statewide legislation and initiatives that, among other
things, support the establishment of statewide transfer agreements,
common core curricula, and common course numbering systems, and
encourage institutions and others to make transfer information
available to the public. We identified 39 states that had legislation
pertaining to the transfer of credit between postsecondary public
institutions. In general, most of the legislation focuses on
facilitating the transfer of credit for students transferring from
community colleges to 4-year public institutions.
Some states require or encourage the establishment of statewide
transfer agreements. For example, a Massachusetts statute empowers its
board of higher education to develop and implement a statewide transfer
agreement to facilitate the transfer of students without the loss of
academic credit or standing from one public institution to another.
Arizona law requires institutions to cooperate in operating a statewide
transfer network to facilitate the transfer of community college
students to Arizona public universities without a loss of credit toward
a baccalaureate degree. An Indiana statute requires the state's
Commission for Higher Education to develop statewide transfer of credit
agreements for courses that are most frequently taken by
undergraduates. Colorado's statewide transfer policy guarantees that as
many as 37 credits of approved general education courses taken at a
Colorado public college or university will transfer among all 2-year
and 4-year institutions in the state.
Some states require or encourage the establishment of common core
curricula. A California statute directed the governing boards of the
University of California, the California State University, and the
California community colleges to jointly develop and adopt a common
core curriculum in general education for the purpose of transfer. These
efforts led to California's general education transfer curriculum,
which identifies courses that community college students may complete
to satisfy general education requirements at campuses of both the
University of California and California State University systems. An
Arkansas statute requires the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating
Board to consult with colleges and universities to establish a minimum
core of courses that applies toward the general education core
curriculum requirements and is fully transferable between state
institutions.
Some states require or encourage the establishment of a common course
numbering system. Florida has developed a statewide course numbering
system that provides a database of equivalent postsecondary courses at
public vocational technical centers, community colleges, universities,
and participating nonpublic institutions. More than 100 institutions in
Texas participate in the state's voluntary course numbering program,
which provides a shared, uniform set of course designations for
students and their advisers to use in determining both course
equivalency and degree applicability of transfer credits on a statewide
basis.
Some state statutes identify the types of courses or blocks of courses
that are transferable. For example, Missouri officials told us that
they interpret their state law as requiring all institutions to accept
associate degrees from any source as evidence that general education
courses have been completed. Additionally, to facilitate student
transfer among Missouri institutions and to increase institutions'
accountability for student performance in general education, the
Coordinating Board for Higher Education designed a 42-semester-hour
block of general education.[Footnote 7] Similarly, a Texas statute
states that if a student successfully completes a field-of-study
curriculum developed by the state's board of higher education, that
block of courses may be transferred and must be substituted for the
receiving institution's lower division requirements for the comparable
degree program, and the student must receive full academic credit.
Likewise a Kentucky statute mandates that all lower division academic
courses offered by community colleges be transferable for academic
credit to any and all 4-year public colleges and universities in the
state.
Some state higher education agencies make information on transfer
agreements and course equivalency guides available to the public. For
example, some states, such as California, Maryland, and Florida, have
placed course equivalencies online for easy access and reference.
California maintains an online student transfer system called ASSIST
that serves as the official repository of transfer agreements for all
public postsecondary institutions in California and facilitates
transfer from a California community college to a University of
California or California State University campus. Maryland's
interactive online transfer information source called ARTSYS allows
students to find course equivalencies between institutions, evaluate
their transcripts, search for majors, and explore recommended transfer
programs. In addition, it provides faculty access to update courses and
provide course evaluations. The Florida Academic Counseling and
Tracking for Students (FACTS) system offers a comprehensive range of
transfer services, including a transfer student bill of rights, links
to statewide transfer agreements, and an interactive transfer
evaluation tool.[Footnote 8] A Pennsylvania statute supports the
implementation of a Web-based application that makes all transfer
agreements among higher education institutions available on the
Internet. Similarly, Virginia requires its state council of higher
education to publicize all general education courses offered at public
2-year institutions, designating the courses accepted for transfer
credit at 4-year public and private postsecondary institutions in
Virginia. Ohio implemented a framework that guarantees students a
statewide transfer and published a transfer assurance guide to advise
students of the 38 different baccalaureate degree pathways available
for them to pursue anywhere within the public higher education system
and in Ohio's participating private institutions, and to identify which
courses are guaranteed to transfer and apply to requirements within the
system.
While state legislation regarding credit transfer is generally intended
to facilitate the transfer of credits among public institutions, a few
state statutes require or encourage the involvement of private
institutions. For example, the Louisiana Board of Supervisors of
Community and Technical Colleges is required to continue development of
articulation agreements between institutions under the management of
the board and institutions managed by other postsecondary management
boards, both public and private. A Minnesota statute requests the
governing boards of private institutions that grant associate and
baccalaureate degrees and have a high frequency of transfer students to
participate in the development of required course equivalency guides. A
West Virginia statute requires the state's Council for Community and
Technical College Education to establish and implement policies and
procedures that ensure that students may transfer and apply the credits
earned at any regionally accredited in-state or out-of-state higher
education institution.
Accrediting Agencies Set Accreditation Standards, and Some Encourage
Institutions to Promote the Consistent Evaluation of Transfer Credit:
Accrediting agencies' standards for evaluating transfer credit
generally reflect the three criteria specified in a 1978 joint national
statement on the transfer and award of credit: the educational quality
of the sending institution, the comparability of credit to be
transferred to the receiving institution, and applicability of the
credit in relation to the programs being offered at the receiving
institution.[Footnote 9] These agencies' accrediting standards
generally require receiving institutions to consider if courses are
equivalent with their own curricula and standards. In 2000, CHEA issued
an updated statement that offered four additional criteria that
accrediting agencies and institutions should consider when making
decisions about transfer of credit and academic quality. Specifically,
these criteria emphasized the need for institutions and accrediting
agencies to:
(1) ensure that transfer decisions are not solely based on the source
of accreditation of a sending program or institution,
(2) reaffirm that the considerations that inform transfer decisions are
applied consistently in the context of changing student attendance
patterns and emerging new providers of higher education,
(3) ensure that students and the public are fully and accurately
informed about their respective transfer policies and practices, and:
(4) be flexible and open in considering alternative approaches to
managing transfer when these approaches will benefit students.
The accrediting standards and transfer policies of the 6 regional and
10 national accrediting agencies that we reviewed generally reflect the
original criteria included in the 1978 joint statement.[Footnote 10] In
addition, some accrediting agencies incorporated into their standards
the CHEA criteria added in 2000 that the institutions' process for
accepting transfer credit be fair, consistently applied, and publicly
communicated.
The 6 regional accrediting agencies that we reviewed all support CHEA's
statement on the role of accreditation in the credit transfer decision-
making process. As shown in table 1, some accrediting agencies have
incorporated this criterion into their standards; others have issued
policy or position statements.
Table 1: Information from Regional Accrediting Agencies on the Role of
Accreditation in Credit Transfer Decisions:
Agency: Middle States Commission on Higher Education;
Information source: Standards;
Specific language: "The acceptance or denial of transfer credit will
not be determined exclusively on the basis of the accreditation of the
sending institution or the mode of delivery, but rather will consider
if the course is equivalent, including expected learning outcomes with
those of the receiving institution's curricula and standards. Such
criteria will be fair, consistently applied, and publicly
communicated."
Agency: New England Association of Schools and Colleges;
Information source: Standards;
Specific language: "Accreditation speaks to the probability but does
not guarantee that students have met acceptable standards of
educational accomplishment. . . . Since accreditation does not address
[comparability and applicability], the information must be obtained
from catalogs and other materials and from direct contact between
knowledgeable and experienced faculty and staff at both the receiving
and sending institutions."
Agency: North Central Association of Colleges and Schools;
Information source: Position Statement;
Specific language: "The Commission does not dictate organizational
policies and procedures for accepting transfer credits, but it holds
that good practice requires the consideration of more than the source
of the accreditation of a sending program or institution."
Agency: Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities;
Information source: Standards;
Specific language: "Accreditation speaks to the probability but does
not guarantee that students have met acceptable standards of
educational accomplishment. . . . Since accreditation does not address
[comparability and applicability], the information must be obtained
from catalogs and other materials and from direct contact between
knowledgeable and experienced faculty and staff at both the receiving
and sending institutions."
Agency: Southern Association of Colleges and Schools;
Information source: Position statement;
Specific language: "The accreditation standards do not mandate that
institutions accept transfer credit only from regionally accredited
institutions. When an institution relies on another institution's
regional accreditation as an indicator for acceptability of credit, it
should not be the only criterion used for acceptability nor should it
be represented as a requirement of this accreditation agency, which it
is not."
Agency: Western Association of Schools and Colleges;
Information source: Policy;
Specific language: "Accreditation speaks to the probability but does
not guarantee that students have met applicable standards of
educational accomplishment. . . . Since accreditation does not address
[comparability and applicability], the information must be obtained
from catalogs and other materials and from direct contact between
knowledgeable and experienced faculty and staff at both the receiving
and sending institutions."
Source: GAO analysis of regional accrediting agencies' standards.
[End of table]
Regional accrediting agencies recognize that the institutions are
responsible for determining their own policies and practices with
regard to the transfer and award of credit. Accrediting agencies will
not know whether an institution is following the standards and general
guidelines until the institution is reviewed. Officials at one
accrediting agency told us that because of the nature of the review
cycle, it could take several years to review all of the institutions
and thereby ensure that they had implemented the standards.
Students' Inability to Transfer Credits May Have Cost Implications, but
Financial Effects on Students and the Federal Government Are Unknown:
The inability to transfer credits may result in longer enrollment, more
tuition payments, and additional federal financial aid awards, but the
full extent to which such results occur cannot be determined because
institutions told us they do not collect specific data on students that
are unable to transfer credit. For example, a 1996 study of Arizona's
public university transfer practices found that community college
transfer students may be required to take additional courses in order
to complete their degrees because academic departments do not always
accept community college courses as prerequisites.[Footnote 11] The
study found that the accumulation of excess college credit hours could
lead to additional years in school, added taxpayer expense such as
financial aid awards, or a failure to complete a degree. Officials at
selected nationally accredited institutions also told us that denials
based on accreditation can result in students taking additional
coursework in order to graduate. For example, one nationally accredited
institution told us that one of its recent graduates had been required
to repeat 2 years of coursework at a regionally accredited institution
before he could be admitted to a graduate program. While credit
transfer denials likely affect transfer students in a number of ways,
the effect that these denials have on students' enrollment duration,
success in completing a baccalaureate program, or the affordability of
postsecondary education cannot be determined with available data.
Institution officials told us that they did not maintain data on the
number of credits they have denied for transfer because it would be too
cumbersome to maintain these files.
Our analysis of Education's postsecondary education data found that
transfer students fare differently from nontransfer students. The
national data indicate that, on average, transfer graduates take about
10 more credits[Footnote 12] and 3 more months[Footnote 13] to complete
their baccalaureate degree than nontransfer graduates. However,
transfer students could take longer to graduate for a variety of
reasons that may or may not be related to their decision to transfer.
For example, a student who changes majors may need to take additional
courses in order to graduate. We could not determine the extent to
which transfer students differ from nontransfer students in these
areas. Nonetheless, students taking additional credits as a result of
being unable to transfer credits will likely have to pay additional
tuition. Based on national averages, these tuition payments could range
from about $150 per credit hour for students attending public
institutions to about $520 for those attending private schools. The
extent to which these costs are borne by the student or the federal
government would vary depending on the student's eligibility for
financial aid.
Conclusions:
Postsecondary institutions differ in how they assess transfer credits,
and as a result, the current credit transfer process does not ensure
the consistent consideration of student coursework. To facilitate the
credit transfer process, many states have enacted legislation and
implemented statewide initiatives covering primarily public
postsecondary institutions within their respective states. However,
state efforts have limited influence over students transferring to and
from the nation's private institutions or institutions located outside
state boundaries. Also, all regional accrediting agencies subscribe to
the principle that credits should not be accepted or denied on the
basis of the type of accreditation, but not all of them have set
standards requiring their member institutions to do so. When such
standards have been set, it takes accrediting agencies years to review
their member institutions' policies to confirm their compliance.
To preserve their institutional reputations and maintain quality,
postsecondary institutions want their graduates to meet certain
academic standards. The federal government sets the same standards for
regional and national accrediting agencies to ensure that postsecondary
institutions provide a quality education. At the same time, it is in
the federal government's interest to ensure that students receiving
assistance through federal aid programs, who have earned credits at an
approved accredited institution, do not have to repeat coursework when
transferring to another institution meeting the same standards.
However, some institutions continue to deny credits from institutions
with national accreditation without reviewing student coursework
despite the fact that these institutions are accredited by federally
recognized national accrediting bodies. Consequently, qualified
students could be denied credit for comparable coursework, leading them
to incur further educational costs that they may need to offset with
additional federal financial aid.
Matter for Congressional Consideration:
In order to ensure consistent consideration of students' previous
coursework, Congress should consider further amending the Higher
Education Act of 1965 to require postsecondary institutions eligible
for Title IV funding to not deny transfer credits on the basis of the
type of accreditation.
Agency Comments:
We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Education for
review and comment. In its written response, included as appendix III,
Education said our report was useful and informative.
As arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce its
contents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until
30 days from the issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this
report to the Secretary of Education, interested congressional
committees, and other interested parties. We will also make copies of
this report available to others on request. In addition, the report
will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202)
512-7215 or ashbyc@gao.gov. Staff acknowledgments are listed in
appendix IV.
Signed by:
Cornelia M. Ashby:
Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
To describe how the transfer of credit operates among postsecondary
institutions, we examined transfer of credit policies for a nationally
representative sample of institutions and interviewed officials
responsible for credit transfer evaluations from public, private,
nonprofit, and private for-profit institutions. At each institution, we
interviewed officials and asked them questions related to their
policies and practices on transfer of credit, such as their criteria
for accepting transfer credits, their process for evaluating
transcripts, and if students had appeal rights once a decision was
made. We also interviewed officials from the Council for Higher
Education Accreditation (CHEA), the American Association of Collegiate
Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO), and the Institute for
Higher Education Policy (IHEP). We reviewed publications and studies
conducted by these organizations, the American Association of Community
Colleges (AACC), and the Career College Association (CCA).
To learn about how states and accrediting agencies facilitate the
transfer of credit process, we searched legal databases for state
statutes in all 50 states to determine if the states had legislation
related to transfer of credit. We also interviewed officials
responsible for higher education from five states, officials from
national and regional accrediting agencies, and the Department of
Education (Education). We reviewed standards for accreditation from 10
national accrediting agencies that accredit institutions that grant
degrees and the 6 regional accrediting agencies that accredit senior or
4-year institutions. The 5 states we visited were California, Florida,
Missouri, New Jersey, and New York. In order to get a broad perspective
on the challenges that students face when transferring credit, we
selected states based on their varying levels of involvement in the
credit transfer process and with large transfer student populations.
To understand the implications for students and the federal government
of students' inability to transfer credit, we reviewed some of
Education's national databases to describe the typical transfer
student. We reviewed the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
(IPEDS) database to analyze the average cost of attendance at various
types of institutions and the Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS)
database to learn about the transfer trends. We also used data from the
National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS). In addition, we
spoke with national experts and reviewed national studies related to
the implications for students and the federal government of student's
inability to transfer credits.
Sampling Strategy:
In order to collect information about the ways in which institutions of
higher education treated transfer credits, we undertook a data
collection effort from a random sample of 270 institutions of higher
education. The sample was obtained from the IPEDS database. The IPEDS
data were from the 2000-2001 time period. IPEDS is the Department of
Education's core postsecondary education data collection program. It is
a single, comprehensive system that encompasses all identified
institutions with the primary purpose of providing postsecondary
education. IPEDS is designed to produce national-, state-, and
institution-level data for most postsecondary institutions.
We conducted a stratified random sample from the IPEDS database. The
sample represented 270 institutions, with 90 institutions from each of
three categories of postsecondary institutions. The three categories we
sampled included 4-year public, 4-year private nonprofit, and 2-year
public institutions. These three types of institutions represent 3,096
institutions and over 95 percent of students attending higher education
institutions. GAO did not sample 4-year private, for-profit
institutions and 2-year private institutions. These types of
institutions represented 1,264 institutions but less than 5 percent of
students attending higher education institutions.
Of the 270 institutions that were randomly selected, 6 were found to be
out of scope because our research indicated that they did not grant
degrees or granted only graduate degrees. These 6 institutions were not
included in the eventual results. Table 2 describes our source and
response rates for our sample of institutions.
Table 2: Source and Response Rate of GAO's Sampling of Education's
IPEDS Database:
Type of institution: 4-year public;
Total institutions in IPEDS database: 624;
GAO sample size: 90;
Response rate for GAO Web or telephone data collection instrument:
100%.
Type of institution: 4-year private nonprofit;
Total institutions in IPEDS database: 1,326;
GAO sample size: 88;
Response rate for GAO Web or telephone data collection instrument:
100%.
Type of institution: 2-year public;
Total institutions in IPEDS database: 1,146;
GAO sample size: 86;
Response rate for GAO Web or telephone data collection instrument:
100%.
Source: GAO analysis of IPEDS database.
[End of table]
Survey results based on probability samples are subject to sampling
error. Our sample of 264 institutions is only one of a large number of
samples we might have drawn from the total population of postsecondary
institutions. Since each sample could have provided different
estimates, we express our confidence in the precision of our three
results as 95 percent confidence intervals. These are intervals that
would contain the actual population values for 95 percent of the
samples we could have drawn. As a result, we are 95 percent confident
that each of the confidence intervals in this report will include the
true values of the study population. All percentage estimates from this
survey of 4-year public institutions, 4-year private nonprofit
institutions, and 2-year public institutions have sampling errors not
exceeding plus or minus 7 percentage points.
Data Collection Methods:
We collected data from the 264 schools primarily through a data
collection instrument that we filled out after examining the Web sites
of the sampled schools. Before deploying the Web site data collection
instrument, we conducted pretests with Web sites from 5 randomly
sampled schools. We followed up these Web site examinations with
telephone calls to ensure that the information we were obtaining from
the Web sites accurately reflected the transfer credit policies of the
respective schools.
The extent of an institution's policies on transferring credit from
sending institutions varied widely, and the policies were found under
different categories on the institutions' Web sites. For example, some
institutions listed their policies under links to transfer student
information or admissions information, while others listed their
policies only in the college catalog/bulletin that was available at the
Web site. Most college catalogs/bulletins listed the transfer credit
policy. In almost all cases, we printed proof of answers and
highlighted, underlined, or numbered the answers to match the question
number. All results obtained from the Web site data collection
instrument were verified by a second GAO reviewer who independently
examined documentation from the Web site or the information on the Web
site itself.
All but 8 of the 264 institutions had Web sites that we were able to
examine. For those institutions that did not have Web sites, we spoke
with officials from the institutions and asked questions from a
telephone data collection instrument. The results of these telephone
interviews were recorded by GAO interviewers.
Data Reliability Assessments:
For this report we used data from the Integrated Postsecondary
Education Data System database, the National Educational Longitudinal
Study of 1988, and the Beginning Postsecondary Students longitudinal
study database. We reviewed technical and methodological documentation
for all three databases, and in the case of NELS also spoke with a
research methodologist who had worked on the study. We found the data
from the databases to be sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this
engagement.
[End of section]
Appendix II: State Legislation Related to Transfer of Academic Credit:
Alabama; Ala. Code § 16-5-8. Mandates a statewide articulation
agreement under which all applicable credits transferred from a 2-year
institution to a 4-year institution shall fulfill degree requirements
at the 4-year institution as if they were earned at the 4-year
institution.
Alaska; None found.
Arizona; Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 15-1824. Requires that community college
districts and universities cooperate in operating a statewide
articulation and transfer system, including the process of transfer of
lower division general education credits, general elective credits, and
curriculum requirements for approved majors, to facilitate the transfer
of community college students to Arizona public universities without a
loss of credit.
Arkansas; Ark. Code Ann. § 6-53-205. Requires that the Arkansas Higher
Education Coordinating Board develop a plan to maximize transfer
credits of students from institutions within the system, including the
development of a core transfer program for students desiring to obtain
a baccalaureate degree after transferring from an institution within
the 2-year system to the 4-year system; Ark. Code Ann. § 6-61-218.
Requires the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board to establish
in consultation with the colleges and universities a minimum core of
courses that shall apply toward the general education core curriculum
requirements and that shall be fully transferable between state
institutions; A.C. Ark. Code Ann. § 6-61-505. Gives the State Community
College Board the duty and power to work with senior institutions of
the state to develop the criteria for transfer of credits of students
entering senior institutions from community colleges.
California; Cal. Ed. Code § 66720. Requires the Board of Governors of
the California Community Colleges, the Regents of the University of
California, and the Trustees of the California State University to
jointly develop, maintain, and disseminate a common core curriculum in
general education courses for the purposes of transfer; Cal. Ed. Code §
66730 and note. Directs the Regents of the University of California
(UC), the Trustees of the California State University (CSU), and the
Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges to have as a
fundamental policy the maintenance of a healthy and expanded student
transfer system. Community college students must have access to a
viable and efficient transfer agreement program to the California State
University and the University of California for upper division work
toward a baccalaureate degree; Cal. Ed. Code § 66738. Holds the
governing board of each public postsecondary education segment
accountable for the development and implementation of formal systemwide
articulation agreements and transfer agreement programs; Cal. Ed. Code
§ 66739.5. States the intent of the legislature as ensuring that
community colleges students who wish to earn the baccalaureate degree
at California State University are provided with a clear and effective
path to this degree; Cal. Ed. Code § 66740. Requires each department,
school, and major in UC and CSU to develop, in conjunction with
community college faculty in appropriate and associated departments,
discipline-specific articulation agreements and transfer agreements for
those majors that have lower-division prerequisites.
Colorado; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 23-1-108. Requires the Colorado Commission
on Higher Education to establish, after consultation with the governing
boards of institutions, and enforce student transfer agreements between
2-year and 4-year institutions and among 4-year institutions. Such
transfer agreements shall include provisions under which institutions
shall accept all credit hours of acceptable coursework for automatic
transfer to another state-supported institution of higher education in
Colorado. The commission shall also establish and enforce student
transfer agreements between degree programs offered on the same campus
or within the same institutional system; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 23-1-125.
Directs the Colorado Commission on Higher Education, in consultation
with each Colorado public institution of higher education, to outline a
plan to implement a core course concept that defines the general
education course guidelines for all public institutions of higher
education; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 23-5-122. Requires the governing board of
every state-supported institution of higher education to have in place
and enforce policies regarding transfers by students between
undergraduate degree programs that are offered within the same
institution or within the same system; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 23-13-104.
Lists statewide expectations and goals for higher education, including
ensuring that no student's graduation is delayed due to lack of access
to or availability of required and core courses and ensuring that
students who change degree programs lose only those credit hours that
clearly and justifiably cannot apply in the degree programs to which
the student transfers.
Connecticut; Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10a-19a. Directs the Commissioner of
Higher Education, in consultation with the Higher Education
Coordinating Council, to establish a statewide Advisory Council on
Student Transfer and Articulation to maximize the transferability of
course credits.
Delaware; None found.
Florida; Fla. Stat. Ann. § 1007.01. Requires the State Board of
Education, in order to improve and facilitate articulation systemwide,
to develop policies and guidelines with input from statewide K-20
advisory groups established by the Commissioner of Education relating
to a number of issues, including articulation agreements, admissions
requirements, and the transferability of credits among institutions;
Fla. Stat. Ann. § 1007.22. Authorizes university boards of trustees and
community college boards of trustees to establish intrainstitutional
and interinstitutional programs to maximize articulation. These may
include transfer agreements that facilitate the transfer of credits
between public and nonpublic postsecondary institutions and the
concurrent enrollment of students at a community college and a state
university; Fla. Stat. Ann. § 1007.23. Requires the State Board of
Education to establish in rule a statewide articulation agreement,
which must among other things specifically provide that every associate
in arts graduate of a community college shall have met all general
education requirements and must be granted admission to the upper
division of a state university, except for certain listed programs. The
articulation agreement must also guarantee the statewide articulation
of appropriate courses within associate in science degree programs to
baccalaureate degree programs.
Georgia; None found.
Hawaii; None found.
Idaho; None found.
Illinois; 110 Ill. Comp. Stat. 805/2-11. Empowers the State Board in
cooperation with the 4-year colleges to develop articulation procedures
to the end that maximum freedom of transfer among community colleges
and between community colleges and degree-granting institutions be
available.
Indiana; Ind. Code Ann. § 20-12-0.5-8. Requires the Commission for
Higher Education to, among other things, develop through the committee
statewide transfer of credit agreements for courses that are most
frequently taken by undergraduates; develop through the committee
statewide agreements under which associate degrees articulate fully
with related baccalaureate degree programs; and publicize by all
appropriate means, including an Internet Web site, a master list of
course transfer of credit agreements and program articulation
agreements; Ind. Code Ann. § 20-12-17-2. Requires all state-supported
universities to accept the transfer credit of all appropriate courses
successfully completed by any student at any other state-supported
postsecondary educational institution having the same level of
accreditation.
Iowa; None found.
Kansas; Kans. Stat. Ann. § 72-4454. Requires the state board of regents
to adopt a policy requiring articulation agreements among area
vocational schools, area vocational-technical schools, community
colleges, technical colleges, and state educational institutions.
Kentucky; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 164.580. Requires the Kentucky
Community and Technical College System to be responsive to the needs of
students and employers to support the lifelong learning needs of
Kentucky citizens in order to, among other things, facilitate transfers
of credit among certificate, diploma, technical, and associate degree
programs; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 164.583. Requires all lower-division
academic courses offered by the community colleges to be transferable
for academic credit to any and all 4-year public colleges and
universities.
Louisiana; La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 17:3129.1. Requires postsecondary
management boards to adopt and implement in the institutions under
their jurisdiction common core courses that articulate from any
institution of public higher education to any other such institution,
taking into consideration the accreditation criteria of the institution
receiving the credit; La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 17:1871. Requires the Board
of Supervisors of Community and Technical Colleges to continue
development of articulation agreements between institutions under the
management of the board and institutions managed by other postsecondary
management boards, both public and private.
Maine; Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A, § 10902. States that one of the
fundamental policies in the state's public higher educational planning
is to provide for a uniform system of transferring credits for
equivalent courses among the various units of the University of Maine
system; Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A, § 10907. Requires the Chancellor
of the University of Maine system to form a committee that shall, among
other things, establish a uniform system to facilitate the transfer of
credits for equivalent courses among the various units of the
University of Maine system.
Maryland; Md. Code Ann., Education § 11-207. Lists among the duties of
the Maryland Higher Education Commission the establishment of
procedures for transfer of students between the public segments of
postsecondary education and the establishment, in conjunction with the
governing boards, of standards for articulation agreements.
Massachusetts; Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 15A, § 9. Gives the board of higher
education the duty and power to, among other things, develop and
implement a transfer compact for the purpose of facilitating and
fostering the transfer of students without the loss of academic credit
or standing from one public institution to another.
Michigan; None found.
Minnesota; Minn. Stat. Ann. § 135A.052. Recognizes as one of the
missions of postsecondary institutions that community colleges shall
offer lower-division instruction in occupational programs in which all
credits earned will be accepted for transfer to a baccalaureate degree
in the same field of study; Minn. Stat. Ann. § 136F.05. Requires the
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Board of Trustees to develop
administrative arrangements that make possible the efficient use of the
facilities and staff of the technical colleges, community colleges, and
state universities so that students may have the benefit of improved
and broader course offerings, ease of transfer among schools and
programs, integrated course credit, coordinated degree programs, and
coordinated financial aid; Minn. Stat. Ann. § 135A.08. Requires the
regents of the University of Minnesota and the trustees of the
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities shall develop and maintain
course equivalency guides for use by institutions that have a high
frequency of transfer. The governing boards of private institutions
that grant associate and baccalaureate degrees and that have a high
frequency of transfer students are requested to participate in
developing these guides.
Mississippi; None found.
Missouri; Mo. Rev. Stat. § 173.005. Requires the coordinating board for
higher education to establish guidelines to promote and facilitate the
transfer of students between institutions of higher education within
the state.
Montana; None found.
Nebraska; Neb. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 85-1413. Requires the Coordinating
Commission for Postsecondary Education to incorporate into the
comprehensive statewide plan for postsecondary education, among other
things, the facilitation of statewide transfer-of-credit guidelines to
be considered by institutional governing boards; Neb. Rev. Stat. Ann. §
85-963. Encourages the community college areas to work in cooperation
with the University of Nebraska and the state colleges for the
articulation of general academic transfer programs of the six community
college areas.
Nevada; Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 396.568. Requires that all credits
earned by a student in a course at a community college within the
system must be accepted and applied toward the coursework required of
the student in his major or minor for the award of a baccalaureate
degree upon graduation from any university or state college within the
system if certain criteria are met.
New Hampshire; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 188-F:6. Requires the department
of regional community-technical colleges and the university system of
New Hampshire to develop mutually agreed upon transfer articulation
agreements.
New Jersey; N.J. Stat. Ann. § 18A:3B-8. Gives responsibility to the New
Jersey Presidents' Council to encourage the formation of regional or
other alliances among institutions, including interinstitutional
transfers, program articulation, cooperative programs and shared
resources and the development of criteria for full faith and credit
transfer agreements between county colleges and other institutions of
higher education.
New Mexico; N.M. Stat. Ann. § 21-1B-3. Requires the commission on
higher education to establish and maintain a comprehensive statewide
plan to provide for the articulation of educational programs and
facilitate the transfer of students between institutions. The
commission shall define, publish, and maintain modules of lower-
division courses accepted for transfer at all institutions; N.M. Stat.
Ann. § 21-1B-4. Requires each institution to accept for transfer course
credits earned by a student at any other institution that are included
in a transfer module; N.M. Stat. Ann. § 21-1B-5. Requires the
commission on higher education to establish and maintain a process to
monitor and improve articulation through frequent and systematic
consultation with institutions. The commission shall establish a
complaint procedure for transfer students who fail to receive credit
and investigate all articulation complaints and render decisions as to
the appropriateness of the actions of the participants.
New York; N.Y. Educ. Law § 351. Lists as one of the missions of the
state university system to exercise care to develop and maintain a
balance of its human and physical resources that promotes appropriate
program articulation between its state-operated institutions and its
community colleges as well as encourages regional networks and
cooperative relationships with other educational and cultural
institutions.
North Carolina; 1995 Sess. Laws, c. 287, §§ 1-3. Provides for the
development, by the Board of Governors of the University of North
Carolina and the State Board of Community Colleges, of a plan for the
transfer of credits among the institutions of the North Carolina
Community College System, and between those institutions and the
constituent institutions of the University of North Carolina, the
intention of the General Assembly to adopt a plan for the transfer of
credits, and the implementation, by the State Board of Community
Colleges, of a common course numbering system; 1995 Sess. Laws, c. 625.
Provides that the Board of Governors of the University of North
Carolina and the State Board of Community Colleges shall develop a plan
to provide students with information regarding the transfer of credits
among community colleges and between community colleges and the
University of North Carolina and shall develop a timetable for
development of guidelines.
North Dakota; None found.
Ohio; Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 3333.16. Requires the Ohio board of regents
to establish policies and procedures applicable to all state
institutions of higher education that ensure that students can begin
higher education at any state institution of higher education and
transfer coursework and degrees to any other state institution of
higher education without unnecessary duplication; the board must also
develop and implement a universal course equivalency classification
system for state institutions so that the transfer of students and the
transfer and articulation of equivalent courses are not inhibited by
inconsistent judgment about the application of transfer credits.
Coursework completed within such a system at one state institution of
higher education and transferred to another institution shall be
applied to the student's degree objective in the same manner as
equivalent coursework completed at the receiving institution. The board
of regents shall develop a system of transfer policies that ensure that
graduates with associate degrees shall be admitted to a state
institution of higher education. The board of regents shall study the
feasibility of credit recognition and transferability to state
institutions of higher education for graduates who have received
associate degrees from a career college.
Oklahoma; Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 70, § 3207.1. States that the intent of
the legislature is that credits earned by students in any institution
of higher education within the Oklahoma State System of Higher
Education be fully accepted at any other institution of higher
education within the system.
Oregon; Or. Rev. Stat. § 348.470. Declares that it is the policy of the
state to encourage cooperation between the Oregon University System and
community colleges on issues affecting students who transfer between
the two segments and that all unnecessary obstacles that restrict
student transfer opportunities between the two segments shall be
eliminated; 1997 Or. Laws ch. 653, § 1. Requires the State Board of
Higher Education to continue to work with the State Board of Education
to develop policies and procedures to ensure maximum transfer of
academic credits between community colleges and state institutions of
higher education.
Pennsylvania; 24 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 15-1504-A. Requires the
Department of Education and the Office of Administration to establish
management teams to distribute funds appropriated for the researching,
planning, and development of the Pennsylvania Education Network, which
can include, when appropriate, implementing a Web-based application
that makes all articulation agreements among higher education
institutions available on the Internet.
Rhode Island; R.I. Gen. Laws § 16-45-1.1. Requires vocational programs
to be organized for maximum articulation between educational levels.
South Carolina; S.C. Code Ann. § 59-52-100. Requires the State Board of
Technical and Comprehensive Education and the Council of College
Presidents, through the Commission on Higher Education, to clarify and
strengthen articulation agreements between associate degree programs
and baccalaureate degree programs.
South Dakota; S.D. Codified Laws § 13-53-43. Requires that all general
education credit hours fulfilling graduation requirements in
institutions accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges
and Secondary Schools be transferable between the universities under
the control of the South Dakota Board of Regents and the technical
institutes governed by the South Dakota Board of Education. General
education course credit hours are transferable between the technical
institutes and universities only for credit for general education
courses.
Tennessee; Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-7-202. Requires the Tennessee Higher
Education Commission to establish and ensure that all postsecondary
institutions in Tennessee cooperatively provide for an integrated
system of postsecondary education. The commission shall guard against
inappropriate and unnecessary conflict and duplication by promoting
transferability of credits and easy access of information among
institutions.
Texas; Tex. Educ. Code Ann. § 61.822. States that if a student
successfully completes the core curriculum at an institution of higher
education, that block of courses may be transferred to any other
institution of higher education and must be substituted for the
receiving institution's core curriculum. A student shall receive
academic credit for each of the courses transferred and generally may
not be required to take additional core curriculum courses at the
receiving institution; Tex. Educ. Code Ann. § 61.823. States that if a
student successfully completes a field of study curriculum developed by
the board, that block of courses may be transferred to a general
academic teaching institution and must be substituted for that
institution's lower division requirements for the degree program for
the field of study into which the student transfers, and the student
shall receive full academic credit toward the degree program for the
block of courses transferred; Tex. Educ. Code Ann. § 61.831. States
that it is the purpose of the statutory subchapter on transfer of
credit to develop a seamless system of higher education with respect to
student transfers between institutions of higher education, including
student transfers from public junior colleges to general academic
teaching institutions.
Utah; Utah Code Ann. § 53B-6-105.5. Requires the Technology Initiative
Advisory Board to provide the State Board of Regents with an assessment
and reporting plan that includes an analysis of program articulation
among higher education institutions in engineering, computer science,
and related technology; Utah Code Ann. § 53B-16-105. Requires the Board
of Regents to facilitate articulation and the seamless transfer of
courses within the state system of higher education; develop,
coordinate, and maintain a transfer and articulation system within the
state system of higher education that allows students to transfer
courses among institutions of higher education to meet requirements for
general education and lower-division courses that transfer to
baccalaureate majors and facilitates student acceleration and the
transfer of students and credits between institutions; and identify
common prerequisite courses and course substitutions for degree
programs across all institutions of higher education.
Vermont; None found.
Virginia; Va. Code Ann. § 23-9.6:1. Gives the State Council of Higher
Education the duty, responsibility, and authority to facilitate the
development of dual admissions and articulation agreements between 2-
and 4-year public and private institutions of higher education in
Virginia. Such agreements shall be subject to the admissions
requirements of the 4-year institutions; Va. Code Ann. § 23-9.14:2.
Requires the State Council of Higher Education to develop, in
cooperation with the governing boards of the public 2-and 4-year
institutions of higher education, a State Transfer Module that
designates those general education courses that are offered within
various associate degree programs at the public 2-year institutions
that are transferable for credit or admission with standing as a junior
to the public 4-year institutions. In developing such module, the
council shall also seek the participation of private institutions of
higher education. The council shall also facilitate the development of
dual admissions and articulation agreements between the state's public
and private 2-and 4-year institutions of higher education, which are
subject to the admissions requirements of the 4-year institutions. The
council shall make public all general education courses offered at
public 2-year institutions and designating those that are accepted for
purposes of transfer for course credit at 4-year public and private
institutions of higher education in Virginia.
Washington; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 28B.45.014. Requires higher
education branch campuses to collaborate with the community and
technical colleges in their region to develop articulation agreements
to ensure that branch campuses serve as innovative models of a two plus
two educational system. Areas of collaboration include joint
development of curricula and degree programs; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. §
28B.76.240. Requires the higher education coordinating board to adopt
statewide transfer and articulation policies that ensure efficient
transfer of credits and courses across public 2-and 4-year institutions
of higher education. The intent of the policies is to create a
statewide system of articulation and alignment between 2-and 4-year
institutions; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 28B.76.2401. States that the
statewide transfer of credit policy and agreement must not require or
encourage the standardization of course content or prescribe course
content or the credit value assigned by any institution to the course.
Policies adopted by public 4-year institutions concerning the transfer
of lower-division credit must treat students transferring from public
community colleges the same as students transferring from public 4-year
institutions; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 28B.76.250. Requires the higher
education coordinating board to convene work groups to develop transfer
associate degrees that will satisfy lower-division requirements at
public 4-year institutions of higher education for specific academic
majors. Each transfer associate degree developed under this section
must enable a student to complete the lower-division courses or
competencies for general education requirements and preparation for the
major that a direct-entry student would typically complete in the
freshman and sophomore years for that academic major. Completion of a
transfer associate degree does not guarantee a student admission into
an institution of higher education; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 28B.720.
Requires the higher education coordinating board, in consultation with
the state board for community and technical colleges and the council of
presidents, to recruit and select institutions of higher education to
participate in a pilot project to define transfer standards in selected
academic disciplines on the basis of student competencies. Under the
pilot project, participants shall develop standards, definitions, and
procedures for quality assurance for a transfer system based on student
competencies.
West Virginia; W. Va. Code Ann. § 18B-2B-6. Lists among the powers and
duties of the West Virginia Council for Community and Technical College
Education to establish and implement policies and procedures to ensure
that students may transfer and apply toward the requirements for a
degree the maximum number of credits earned at any regionally
accredited in-state or out-of-state higher education institution; to
cooperate with the governor's P-20 council of West Virginia to remove
barriers relating to transfer and articulation between and among
community and technical colleges, state colleges and universities, and
public education, and to implement a policy jointly with the commission
whereby any course credit earned at a community and technical college
transfers for program credit at any other state institution of higher
education and is not limited to fulfilling a general education
requirement.
Wisconsin; Wis. Stat. Ann. § 36.11. Lists among the powers and duties
of the board of regents to establish policies for the appropriate
transfer of credits between institutions within the system, to
establish policies for the appropriate transfer of credits with other
educational institutions outside the system, and to establish and
maintain a computer-based credit transfer system that shall include all
transfers of credit between institutions within the system and other
courses for which the transfer of credits is accepted.
Wyoming; Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 21-16-602. Requires the Wyoming Education
Planning and Coordination Council to facilitate cooperative
arrangements among state education institutions in the sharing of
facilities, personnel, and technology or otherwise assist in
articulation between the institutions.
Source: GAO analysis of state legislation.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Education:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION:
OFFICE OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION:
THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY:
OCT 6 2005:
Ms. Cornelia M. Ashby:
Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues:
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Ms. Ashby:
Thank you for providing the Department of Education with a copy of the
U.S. Government Accountability Office's (GAO) draft audit report
entitled "Transfer Students: Postsecondary Institutions Could Promote
More Consistent Consideration of Coursework by Not Basing
Determinations on Accreditation" (GAO-06-22). We have reviewed the
draft report and have the following comments.
We appreciate your examining a complex subject area the processes and
requirements that colleges, universities, and other postsecondary
education institutions have established to assess requests by students
to transfer their academic credits-and providing very useful
information. We found your description of the legislative and
administrative efforts by states to facilitate the credit transfer
process especially informative.
We appreciate your examination of this important issue and look forward
to receiving a copy of the final report when it is issued.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Sally L. Stroup:
[End of section]
Appendix IV: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
Cornelia M. Ashby; (202) 512-7215 or ashbyc@gao.gov.
Staff Acknowledgements:
Bryon Gordon, Assistant Director:
Anjali Tekchandani: Analyst-in-Charge:
In addition to those mentioned above, Elizabeth Bax, Richard Burkard,
Sara Edmondson, Jonathan S. McMurray, John Mingus, James Rebbe, Walter
Vance, and Ann T. Walker made significant contributions to this report.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, U.S. Department of
Education.
[2] Less than 1 percent of postsecondary institutions specified that
accreditation is not considered, while about 15 percent did not specify
whether or not accreditation was considered or the information was not
available.
[3] Many institutions' policies toward national accreditation were
unclear and did not specifically refer to national accreditation as
unacceptable. For example, one institution's credit transfer policy
said, "The institution will consider courses from postsecondary
institutions that are regionally accredited or are candidates for
regional accreditation." In this case (and in cases that were similar
to this), we considered the policy on national accreditation to be
unspecified.
[4] CHEA is a nonprofit organization that certifies accrediting
agencies.
[5] About 29 percent of institutions had not specified whether they had
transfer agreements, and the rest, about 2 percent, had no transfer
agreements.
[6] Participating organizations include the American Association of
Community Colleges (AACC), American Council on Education (ACE),
American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), Council of the
Great City Schools (CGCS), Hispanic Association of Colleges and
Universities (HACU), National Association for Equal Opportunity in
Higher Education (NAFEO), American Association of State Colleges and
Universities (AASCU), and the United Negro College Fund (UNCF).
[7] The 42-hour block of general education is required of public
institutions and recommended for private institutions in the state.
[8] Unlike California's and Maryland's systems, which are devoted to
transfer information, Florida's FACTS system assists users in
determining career objectives, choosing the major and institutions that
are best suited for them, applying for admission and financial aid, and
tracking their progress toward a degree or certificate. In addition, it
allows students to access their grades and transcripts online.
[9] The joint statement was developed by the three national
associations whose member institutions are directly involved in the
transfer and award of academic credit: the American Association of
Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, the American Council on
Education, and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
[10] We reviewed accrediting standards of the 6 regional accrediting
agencies that accredit senior institutions (i.e., those that grant
bachelor's degrees) and the 10 national accrediting agencies that
accredit degree-granting institutions, rather than programs.
[11] Wright, M. Irene, and others, Articulation and Transfer:
Definitions, Problems, and Solutions. Tempe, Arizona: Maricopa County
Community College District (January 1996).The study was published prior
to the enactment of Arizona's legislation that required state
institutions to operate a statewide transfer network.
[12] National Education Longitudinal Study, 1988-1994, U.S. Department
of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
[13] Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study: 1996-2001,
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the 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 the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other
graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order
GAO Products" heading.
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:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director,
NelliganJ@gao.gov
(202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office,
441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548:
