States › Iowa › Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA › Hawkeye Community College › Liberal Arts & Humanities › Liberal Arts and Sciences General Studies and Humanities.

Liberal Arts and Sciences General Studies and Humanities.

Hawkeye Community College · Waterloo, IA · 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 Hawkeye 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)

$46,225

n=337

DOE earnings benchmark

$36,082

$10,143 above benchmark

Benchmark type

Same-State HS Median

Program context

Enrollment & completion

Program enrollment

1513 (2024–25)
1417 (2023–24)

Completers

146 (2024–25)
136 (2023–24)

Non-completion rate

19.4%

293 non-completers (2022–23)

Completers with earnings data

337

used in DOE earnings test

Debt & financial aid

Median federal debt at graduation

$11,884

n=326

Loan recipients

794 (2024–25)
785 (2023–24)

Total loan volume

$3,316,159 (2024–25)
$3,275,636 (2023–24)

Pell recipients

919 (2024–25)
732 (2023–24)

Student demographics (2018–19 enrollment)

Women

58.8%

Black / African American

5.8%

Hispanic

5.0%

White

84.1%

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

Reporting prompts

How many 6-digit programs sit inside CIP 2401 at this institution?
How does Hawkeye 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 Hawkeye 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.