States › Mississippi › Picayune, MS › Pearl River Community College › Liberal Arts & Humanities › Liberal Arts and Sciences General Studies and Humanities.

Liberal Arts and Sciences General Studies and Humanities.

Pearl River Community College · Poplarville, MS · CIP 2401 · Associate

Passes DOE model

This grouping passes the DOE earnings model in the public rulemaking data.

⚠ Data caution

This record reflects a 4-digit CIP grouping (2401) used in DOE's public modeling file. Actual enforcement under the proposed rule would operate at the 6-digit CIP level. The specific programs inside this grouping depend on institution-assigned CIP coding and may not map neatly to how Pearl River Community College markets its majors.

This CIP area is classification-sensitive — similar programs at other institutions are commonly coded differently.

Earnings data

Median earnings (yr 4 after completion)

$37,857

n=352

DOE earnings benchmark

$30,408

$7,449 above benchmark

Benchmark type

Same-State HS Median

Program context

Enrollment & completion

Program enrollment

4256 (2024–25)
4089 (2023–24)

Completers

318 (2024–25)
388 (2023–24)

Non-completion rate

17.5%

713 non-completers (2022–23)

Completers with earnings data

352

used in DOE earnings test

Debt & financial aid

Median federal debt at graduation

$6,500

n=236

Loan recipients

1521 (2024–25)
1418 (2023–24)

Total loan volume

$7,838,166 (2024–25)
$7,074,483 (2023–24)

Pell recipients

2975 (2024–25)
2715 (2023–24)

Student demographics (2018–19 enrollment)

Women

64.6%

Black / African American

30.9%

Hispanic

3.8%

White

62.0%

Enrollment and financial aid data are from the PPD:2026 source files. Demographics reflect 2018–19 program enrollees. Privacy-suppressed values are not shown.

Story angle tags

area studies classification risk humanities rural

Reporting prompts

How many 6-digit programs sit inside CIP 2401 at this institution?
How does Pearl River Community College map this CIP grouping to named majors?
Could similar-looking programs at peer institutions be coded differently?
What share of students in this program borrow? What is their typical debt load?
Do many completers pursue graduate school within four years?
Has the institution reviewed its own 6-digit program structure under the proposed rule?
How does the institution think this proposed rule would affect programs in this field?

Methodology

What PPD:2026 is: The Department of Education's Program Performance Data file, released as part of the 2026 rulemaking. It models program outcomes at the institution × credential × 4-digit CIP level.

Why modeled exposure is not a final result: These are modeled estimates from a single cohort snapshot. They cannot account for future appeals, teach-outs, institutional changes, or student behavior changes.

The 4-digit vs. 6-digit gap: The public file uses 4-digit CIP codes. The actual proposed rule would use 6-digit codes. About 83% of 4-digit CIPs contain only one 6-digit CIP, but the rest may contain many.

Institution-assigned CIP codes: Institutions assign CIP codes to their own programs. Similar majors at different colleges can be classified under different CIP codes, especially for interdisciplinary or area-studies programs.

Earnings measurement: Earnings are measured roughly four years after program completion, which may undercount lifetime earnings in fields with slower early-career income growth.

Benchmarks: Undergraduate programs are benchmarked against working adults aged 25–34 with only a high school diploma. Graduate programs use a more complex bachelor's-degree benchmark.

Plain-language summary (copy for notes)

DOE's public rulemaking file suggests the broad program grouping Liberal Arts and Sciences General Studies and Humanities. (CIP 2401, Associate) at Pearl River Community College carries a Passes DOE model designation under the proposed earnings-accountability rule. This grouping is defined at the institution × credential × 4-digit CIP level, while the actual proposal would operate at the 6-digit CIP level. This CIP area is also classification-sensitive — similar programs at peer institutions may be coded differently. This should be treated as a reporting lead rather than a definitive regulatory finding.