Career orientation for transfer students, adult learners, and workforce-development cohorts.

The assessments work for adult learners — item language is calibrated for ages 14 and up and reads fine to a 40-year-old returning after a decade out. What does not exist is a "returning learner" preset: there is no community-college variant, no mode that surfaces transferable skills from prior work experience, and no fast-track-credential logic. Every student sees the same flow. The Skills Audit and Career Match are genuinely the two most useful for a returning adult, because they are about what someone can already do rather than what they studied — but that is a property of the instruments, not a switch we set for your cohort.

Partly, and the honest version is narrower than the question implies. After Career Match, the Career Guide shows a career ladder for the top matches — the rungs are job roles, with indicative salary bands and the skills each rung expects. Those bands are national composites drawn from BLS, ONS and Eurostat survey data, not local labour-market figures. What the ladder is NOT is an academic pathway: it does not list required courses, it does not know your catalogue, and it has no data on which four-year institutions accept transfer credit for which programme. There is also no printable transfer-planning export — a counsellor gets the org CSV and the student gets their own PDF report from the $29 tier upward. Mapping a career rung to your transfer agreements is advising work, and we do not pretend to do it for you.

Lightly, and it is worth being exact about where the line falls. Students sign in with Google — Google Workspace for Education accounts included, because those are Google accounts — and that is the only identity provider: no Microsoft, no institutional SAML, no SCIM. Results land in a counsellor dashboard and export as CSV. There is no SIS write-back to Banner, Workday Student or PeopleSoft, and no roster import from any of them; the Assessment API on the Scale tier is what your IT team builds against if you want results moved into another system, and that is development work rather than a connector we switch on.

O*NET tools are excellent foundational research and we cite them throughout. The real differences are narrower than a vendor comparison usually implies, and they are not course mapping, pathway tracking or programme-level outcome analytics — none of those exist here. What is actually different: (1) the output is personal rather than a catalogue — a student gets a Career Guide built from their own Big Five, RIASEC and Skills Audit results, with the skills they are missing for each match, instead of a static occupation profile they have to find themselves; (2) a counsellor sees the cohort in one place — who was invited, who finished, and each person's results in readable form, rather than asking students to screenshot a public tool; (3) results export as one CSV you can join to anything you already run. JobCannon does not know your course catalogue, cannot tell a student which of your classes leads where, and produces no programme-level outcome analytics.

The budget lines colleges normally reach for are Perkins V (programme of study planning), WIOA (workforce-development partnerships), TAA grants for trade-affected workers, and state workforce-development funds — a $199/mo line item, covering 200 assessments a month, sits inside all four without ceremony, and a whole-enrolment year is an Education Licence priced per student rather than a bigger monthly plan. We will write you a quote letter and a rationale document for the submission. Two things to say plainly rather than let a procurement page imply: we have no aggregate export formatted to any grant or state reporting schema, and we are not going to tell you what other colleges did with their budget, because we do not measure that. Students can use the free tier indefinitely at no cost either way, so running one term before you commit budget costs you nothing.

It works as an intake step, with one important limit. A prospective student takes RIASEC and Skills Audit through a code you hand out, and your workforce office sees who completed and what they got. What JobCannon cannot do is recommend your certificate programmes: nothing ingests a college programme catalogue, so the platform has no idea what you offer. Matching a Holland code to your welding certificate is your staff reading the results, not the platform routing anyone. There is also no leads dashboard as a separate product; it is the same cohort view as everywhere else. And we publish no enrolment-lift figure for this, because we have not measured one.