Data sourced from EdAssist's 2025 Tuition Assistance Benchmarking. Skills projections from the World Economic Forum Future of Jobs Report. Policy information reflects federal legislation effective July 2026.
If your organization already offers tuition assistance as part of your education benefits, you're ahead of the curve. But offering a program and running a high-impact education benefits strategy are two very different things.
Most organizations set an annual tuition cap, publish a reimbursement policy, and consider the box checked. Meanwhile, some employers are strategically using education benefits to reduce hiring costs, fill critical skill gaps, and build the kind of loyalty that survives a competitive job market.
So, what separates those two groups? Read on for benchmarking insights to help you design a high-performing program.
Looking at Cross-Industry Benchmarking for Education Benefits
High-performing companies are designing integrated education benefits programs that address how employees learn, how they pay for it, and what happens to their debt after they graduate.
EdAssist's 2025 Tuition Assistance Benchmarking draws from data across hundreds of employer programs and offers a rare cross-industry view into what's actually working, where spend is shifting, and how leading companies are designing education benefits that deliver measurable returns.
Here's what the data reveals, including what recent policy changes mean for tuition assistance and education benefits program.
Get in touch to see industry-specific benchmarking for your program.
Tuition assistance is only one piece of a larger education benefits strategy
The term "tuition assistance" still dominates HR conversations, but the most effective employer education programs have expanded well beyond it. Today's high-performing programs typically combine several components:
- Tuition assistance: funding for current employees pursuing degrees, certificates, or individual courses
- Student loan repayment assistance: contributions toward existing education debt, which affects recruitment and retention differently than tuition benefits do
- Non-degree and certification pathways: shorter, targeted learning options that address immediate skill gaps faster than traditional academic programs
- Custom provider relationships: negotiated partnerships with education institutions that reduce cost and align curriculum to workforce needs
These aren't separate benefits that happen to share a budget line. When designed as a integrated program, they address the full arc of an employee's education journey and reach workforce segments that tuition assistance alone never touches.
The retention numbers reflect this. Participants in EdAssist student loan assistance programs show a 93% retention rate, a figure that puts the cost of program administration in sharp perspective against the cost of turnover.
What are the three areas driving education benefit program evolution?
The organizations seeing the strongest ROI are designing around three specific business priorities:
- Workforce cost efficiency: reducing cost per participant while aligning spend to actual workforce needs.
- Talent pipeline development: using education benefits to fill critical roles and build skills from within.
- Accessibility and engagement: structuring programs so employees actually use them, improving retention and employer brand in the process.
39% of core job skills projected to shift by 2030 (World Economic Forum) makes it clear that companies that treat education benefits as a static perk will find themselves with a workforce increasingly misaligned with where the business needs to go.
Upcoming policy changes to consider for your program
Additionally, upcoming policy changes from the OBBB enhance the long-term value and reach of education benefits programs. Starting in 2027, the $5,250 annual tax‑free cap for tuition assistance and student loan repayment will be indexed to inflation, allowing benefits to grow in real value over time.
In July 2026, Pell Grants will expand to cover short‑term, non‑degree training programs, opening federal funding opportunities for frontline and hourly workers who were previously excluded. These two policy changes reward employers that proactively redesign their programs with flexibility and awareness, enabling greater employee access, stronger recruitment and retention outcomes, and better alignment with workforce reskilling needs.
Why are companies moving away from degree-only programs?
One of the most significant shifts visible in EdAssist’s benchmarking data is the move toward non-degree learning. This shift is driven by hard economics and cost-containment considerations, not just flexibility trends.
Here’s what you need to know:
- 86% of EdAssist employers now offer non-degree learning options, including certificates, professional certifications, and individual courses.
- The average EdAssist employer spends 67% less per participant on non-degree programs compared to traditional degree pathways.
For programs serving hundreds or thousands of employees, that gap in cost-per-participant translates directly to either significant savings or the ability to serve a much larger portion of the workforce on the same budget.
Beyond cost, non-degree programs provide the speed for upskilling and reskilling that degree programs structurally can't. And when a critical skill gap emerges, like new technology, a regulatory change, or an evolving customer need? A targeted certification program can address it in weeks or months compared to a traditional degree program.
Cost savings are even more compelling when set against the alternative. Companies that reskill existing employees instead of hiring externally reduce replacement costs by up to 92%. Non-degree pathways accelerate that return on investment.
What this means for your program: If your education benefits policy still treats degree programs as the default and non-degree learning as an exception, it's worth examining whether that structure reflects your actual workforce development needs or just historical assumptions about what "education" looks like.
Discover how your education benefits program compares to industry standards
What skills are employers actually prioritizing in practice?
The shift away from degree-only programs is closely connected to a more strategic question: what specific capabilities does the organization need to build?
44% of EdAssist clients have implemented targeted programs benefit designs that prioritize specific skills, roles, or credentials rather than funding any approved program an employee chooses.
On the surface, it looks like limiting employee choice for budgetary reasons. But it’s actually about aligning education investment with workforce strategy and a one-size-fits-all approach won’t work here.
The skills employers are building toward should reflect both near-term operational needs and longer-horizon workforce planning. According to the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report, the ten fastest-growing skills through 2030 include:
- AI and big data
- Networks and cybersecurity
- Technological literacy
- Creative thinking
- Resilience, flexibility, and agility
- Curiosity and lifelong learning
- Leadership and social influence
- Talent management
- Analytical thinking
- Environmental stewardship
An employee pursuing a credential in cybersecurity or data analytics represents a very different kind of organizational value than one completing a program unrelated to any current or anticipated business need.
What this means for your program: If you haven't reviewed program eligibility criteria against your organization's current skills priorities, you may be funding learning that doesn't move the needle on your most pressing talent gaps. High-performing programs find ways to support both individual growth and strategic alignment without making the benefit feel transactional or restrictive.
How do you get employees to use the education benefit?
Low utilization is one of the most persistent challenges in education benefits and it's rarely because employees aren’t interested. Instead, the culprit to poor engagement is usually friction and organizational silos.
When employees face out-of-pocket costs upfront, navigate complicated approval processes, or discover that part-time status makes them ineligible, participation rates drop. The program exists on paper but doesn't deliver the retention and development value it was designed to create.
EdAssist’s benchmarking data shows how leading employers are removing those barriers:
- 67% of EdAssist clients extend eligibility to both full-time and part-time employees, which expands access to a workforce segment that's often underserved by traditional benefits.
- 60% provide prepaid tuition options, including direct billing, immediate reimbursement, or virtual credit cards. This eliminates the upfront financial burden that prevents many employees from enrolling in the first place.
- The median annual cap sits at $5,250, which reflects both market norms and the current IRS tax exclusion threshold. That $5,250 figure is about to become more meaningful in 2027 with upcoming policy changes.
What this means for your program: Competitive tuition caps matter, but they're table stakes. The structural choices like who is eligible, when they're paid, and how complex the process is, strongly impacts whether the benefit actually reaches the employees who need it most.
Are you outperforming your industry or falling behind? Get an industry-specific assessment.
Are custom education provider relationships worth it?
For organizations looking to reduce cost per participant without reducing program quality, custom provider arrangements are emerging as one of the highest ROI decisions available.
More than half of EdAssist employers have adopted one or more custom education provider solutions. The financial upside is substantial: custom provider discounts can reach 2x the discount available through standard network pricing.
Beyond cost savings, custom provider relationships allow employers to shape curriculum alignment, ensure quality standards, and create more coherent learning pathways for employees in specific roles or functions.
For organizations with large employee populations in particular skill areas like healthcare, logistics, technology, financial services, this level of customization can dramatically improve both the efficiency and the strategic value of the education benefit.
What this means for your program: If your program relies entirely on a standard provider network, you may be leaving meaningful cost savings and program quality improvements on the table. And as Pell-eligible short-term programs expand, custom provider relationships become even more valuable for identifying and formalizing those pathways.
Questions Worth Asking Before Your Next Program Review
Most companies evaluate their education benefits against a simple benchmark: Is the annual cap competitive? That question matters, but it answers only a fraction of what determines whether a program delivers real business value.
Here are a few questions to consider:
- Are we funding the skills our organization will actually need in two to five years? Or just general programs that employees choose?
- Does our program address the full education journey, including tuition, student loan debt, and non-degree pathways? Or just one piece of it?
- Is our financing structure removing barriers to participation? Or creating them.
- Are we capturing the cost efficiencies available through non-degree learning and custom provider relationships? If not, why?
- Are we prepared for the $5,250 cap to become indexed in 2027? Are we prepared to communicate that change as a benefit enhancement?
- Have we identified which employees in our workforce might qualify for Pell-eligible short-term programs? Have we considered how employer support could amplify that access?
The organizations with the highest-performing programs aren't necessarily spending more. In many cases, they're spending more strategically and the difference shows up in retention rates, internal promotion rates, and the speed at which they can respond to evolving skills needs.
See your how your program compares
EdAssist works with employers across industries to benchmark current program design against what's actually working at scale. To provide the best insights, we also have industry-specific benchmarking data for insurance, telecommunications, biotech, financial services, retail, utilizes, healthcare, technology, aerospace and defense, and consumer products.
If you're heading into a program review or questioning whether your current structure is delivering the return it should, a look at industry-specific benchmarking can help surface the gaps and opportunities that aren't visible from the inside.
Request an industry-specific benchmarking review of your program
