VTNE Pass Rates by School: 2023–2025 Data Audit

By the Castleport Test Prep Editorial Team Last verified: August 5, 2026 · Dataset version 1.0

Castleport Test Prep is an independent publisher of exam preparation materials. Its /research section is an independent research and reference resource.

VTNE pass rates by school are scattered across individual program websites, not published in one current public national table that Castleport could locate. We audited 81 official school and program disclosures for January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2025. Twenty-six—32.1%—cannot be reproduced from the first-time candidate count and pass percentage the school itself published.

Among the 55 disclosures that do reconcile, the median first-time VTNE pass rate was 74.0% across 2,404 candidates.

That is the finding. The rest of this page shows you the numbers, the arithmetic, the sources, the policy change behind the reporting period, and exactly how far to trust any of it.

The numbers, up front

Dataset file: 81-row CSV, version 1.0

Two things in that table deserve a second look before you scroll.

The first: nearly a third of the public disclosures do not reconcile. That does not prove the underlying exam results are wrong. It means the candidate count and percentage displayed together cannot both be reproduced at the precision shown.

The second: the accreditation language behind these numbers changed. The January 2025 CVTEA manual said the three-year rate must be 50% or higher. The current March 2026 manual says it should meet or exceed the national average for first-time test takers within one year of graduation. We read both versions. The side-by-side comparison is below.

What are the VTNE pass rates by school for 2023–2025?

Answer: We located 81 official disclosures stating the exact January 1, 2023–December 31, 2025 window, a first-time candidate count, and a pass percentage. Fifty-five had figures we could reproduce mathematically; they ranged from 33.33% to 100%, with a median of 74.0% across 2,404 candidates. The other 26 are listed separately, because a percentage you cannot reproduce from its own denominator should not sit in the same table as one you can.

First, a definition, because the whole page depends on it. The VTNE—the Veterinary Technician National Examination—is owned and administered by the AAVSB, the American Association of Veterinary State Boards. AAVSB says the exam evaluates veterinary-technician competency and that most states and provinces require a passing result as part of credentialing. Programs are accredited separately by the CVTEA, the AVMA Committee on Veterinary Technician Education and Activities.

A first-time candidate is someone taking the VTNE for the first time; repeat attempts are excluded. Under the current CVTEA reporting rule, the public three-year rate covers first-time test takers within one year of graduation and uses a January-through-December reporting year.

A note on how we counted. We treat each separately disclosed reporting unit as its own row. A campus, joint program, or distinct delivery mode gets its own line. We did not merge on-campus and distance results unless the institution published only a combined figure. Purdue publishes its on-campus and distance programs separately, so it appears twice. Baker College reports four campuses, so it appears four times.

Reproducible 2023–2025 disclosures

For all 55 rows below, exactly one whole number of passing candidates reproduces the published percentage when rounded to the number of decimal places the school displayed. The “implied passes” column is that derived number. Most schools publish only the candidate count and percentage.

Two rows deserve a note because their official sources disclose more than a bare percentage.

Iowa Lakes Community College publishes the full count: 24 first-time candidates, 11 passes, and 13 failures. Eleven divided by 24 is 45.83%, so the public fields reconcile directly.

Platt College–Riverside publishes 30 passes among 68 candidates, or 44.12%, and also states that the “within one year of graduation” definition began with 2025 reporting while earlier periods used the previous reporting method. We retain the row because the exact current window, numerator, denominator, and rate are visible and reproducible. The note matters because the rolling three-year result spans a reporting-definition change.

Which disclosures did not reconcile?

Answer: Twenty-six exact-window disclosures published a candidate count and percentage that cannot both be reproduced at the precision displayed. There is no whole number of passing candidates that produces the stated rate from the stated denominator. Fourteen gaps are under half a percentage point, eight are from 0.5 to under 1.0 point, and four are at least 1.0 point.

Here is what a flag does and does not mean, because this distinction matters.

A flag does not mean the school’s actual VTNE results are wrong. It does not mean the school acted improperly. It means one specific thing: the two public numbers, taken together, are not arithmetically consistent. Possible explanations include a typo, a stale count paired with an updated rate, an undocumented denominator, or a source-system mismatch. The public pages do not identify the cause, and this audit does not guess.

The “nearest attainable rate” is a diagnostic, not a proposed correction. It shows the closest percentage any whole number of passes could produce from the published denominator.

The distribution is the useful part. The median gap is 0.45 percentage points. Fourteen flags are under 0.5 points, eight are from 0.5 to under 1.0, and four are at least 1.0 point.

Vermont State University is the largest gap. With 19 candidates, the attainable rates jump from 84.21% at 16 passes to 89.47% at 17 passes. The published 86.63% sits between them, where no whole number of passes can land.

What can—and can’t—explain the mismatches?

Answer: CVTEA implemented an emergency conditions policy effective July 2, 2025 after documenting concerns about the availability, accuracy, and reliability of VTNE score reports. Public reporting resumed by April 15, 2026 after CVTEA said the AAVSB portal data had undergone independent third-party validation. Those facts provide important context, but no primary source connects that episode to the 26 arithmetic flags on this page.

The CVTEA special notice dated February 6, 2026 uses the exact phrase “documented concerns regarding the availability, accuracy, and reliability of VTNE score reports.” It says CVTEA later received confirmation of independent third-party validation and would resume the affected reporting requirements by April 15, 2026.

The temporary emergency notice identifies July 2, 2025 as the policy’s effective date and names Standard 11a, 11c, and 11d.

That record does not establish why any school page fails the arithmetic test. It does not tell us whether a mismatch arose at the school, in a copied report, in a denominator definition, during an update, or somewhere else. The audit establishes the public mismatch. The CVTEA notices establish the separate reporting-system history. They should not be collapsed into a causal claim.

The practical takeaway is still plain: a number on a program outcomes page is a disclosure, not an independently audited statistic. Check the denominator, the window, and the arithmetic before quoting it.

What is the national VTNE pass rate for 2023–2025?

Answer: Purdue University’s current disclosure reports a national first-time pass rate of 67.4% across 14,465 candidates for January 1, 2023–December 31, 2025. Other exact-window institutional pages verified for this audit display 67.69% and 67.7%. The pages do not explain the difference, so Castleport preserves the source values instead of manufacturing one harmonized figure.

Castleport did not locate a public AAVSB page publishing one current national first-time rate directly. The current figures we found are public because individual programs posted the national comparator supplied with their own reporting materials.

Among the 55 reproducible disclosures, 36—65.5%—reported a rate at or above 67.7%, the highest exact-window comparator in the table. That is a descriptive result for this audited set, not a national estimate. The set is not a census, and inclusion depended on locating a public exact-window disclosure with enough information to test.

What changed in the accreditation standard behind these numbers?

Answer: Standard 11d used to set a hard numerical floor. In the January 2025 CVTEA manual, a program’s three-year rolling first-time pass percentage “must be 50% or higher.” In the current March 2026 manual, it “should meet or exceed the national average” for first-time test takers within one year of graduation. The numerical reference moved upward while the force of the wording softened.

We read both manuals. Here is the clause side by side.

CVTEA’s own definitions matter here. “Must” and “shall” identify mandatory requirements. “Should” means compliance is expected unless extraordinary and justifiable circumstances preclude it. That makes the current standard softer than the former hard floor, but it is not the same as saying the outcome standard disappeared.

The deleted notification trigger is the quieter half. The January 2025 substantive-change section expressly included non-compliance with Standard 11d—a three-year pass rate below 50%—among changes reportable within 30 calendar days. That specific item does not appear in the current list.

Seven reproducible current disclosures are below 50%:

Under the face of the former 50% rule, those figures sit below the old numerical floor. That is an arithmetic illustration, not a retroactive compliance finding. The reporting definition, source data, review date, and accreditor’s own assessment process matter.

Why did school pass rates disappear from websites during 2025?

Answer: Because CVTEA temporarily suspended the affected Standard 11 requirements. The emergency conditions policy took effect July 2, 2025 and covered Standard 11a, 11c, and 11d. Public reporting resumed by April 15, 2026, and the current rules require annual job-placement and graduation percentages alongside the three-year VTNE figures.

The record, from CVTEA’s own notices and manuals:

Two details change how you should read a pass-rate page.

The first is timing. A program page still showing 2022–2024 is now one full reporting cycle behind the current 2023–2025 window, even though the temporary suspension helps explain why some pages lagged.

The second is definitional. The current rule specifies first-time test takers within one year of graduation. Platt College–Riverside’s current disclosure expressly notes that this definition began with 2025 reporting and that prior periods used previous methods. A rolling three-year figure can therefore contain years assembled under different reporting definitions.

The current manual requires an accredited program to publish:

• Annual job-placement percentage.
• Annual graduation-rate percentage.
• The three-year first-time VTNE pass percentage for candidates within one year of graduation.
• The corresponding number of first-time candidates.

The information must be current, readily accessible, accurate, and updated no later than April 15 each year.

Pierce College in Washington is a clean example of the full current disclosure: 81% across 48 first-time candidates for 2023–2025, annual completion figures, and annual job-placement figures. Its 2025 job-placement entry says “Unavailable” rather than supplying a number the page does not have.

Did the probationary-accreditation share also change?

Answer: Yes. AVMA reported 218 CVTEA-accredited programs in January 2025, with 19% on probationary accreditation. In July 2026 it reported 219 programs, with 3% on probationary accreditation. That is a 16-point drop and an 84% relative decline in the published share. AVMA does not attribute the change to Standard 11d, the temporary emergency policy, or any single accreditation standard.

Those parenthetical counts are estimates. AVMA published rounded percentages, not exact category counts. Nineteen percent of 218 is about 41 programs; 3% of 219 is about 7. Turning those estimates into exact counts would invent precision.

The timing overlaps the suspension and rewrite of Standard 11d, but timing is not attribution. Programs can receive probationary accreditation for deficiencies across multiple standards, and the cited AVMA reports do not publish a deficiency-by-standard breakdown that would isolate the cause of the change.

Which schools reported the highest and lowest pass rates?

Answer: Four reproducible disclosures reported 100%, but all four together represent 57 candidates, and one rests on four. The lowest reproducible figure was 33.33% across 12 candidates. This is why the page does not turn the percentages into a league table and why every percentage sits next to its denominator.

The four 100% results in the verified set are:

• Central Oregon Community College: 15 candidates.
• Southern Regional Technical College: 15 candidates.
• Yakima Valley College: 23 candidates.
• University of Puerto Rico–Medical Sciences Campus: 4 candidates.

Those are the published results. But 100% across four candidates and 100% across 400 are not the same statistical claim.

A larger-cohort view changes the spread without making the results fully comparable. Among the 14 reproducible disclosures with at least 50 first-time candidates, the median was 74.1% and the range was 44.12% to 88.42%. The high end was San Juan College’s distance program at 88.42% across 95 candidates. Purdue reported 86.1% across 79 on-campus candidates and 81.4% across 113 distance candidates. St. Petersburg College reported 82% across 172 candidates, the largest cohort in the audited set.

Requiring at least 50 candidates narrows the observed range from 66.67 points to 44.30 points—a reduction of 22.37 points. A wide spread remains. The filter does not establish why programs differ.

A low three-year rate can coexist with a small cohort, different admissions practices, different student populations, different test timing, or a real program problem. The percentage alone does not distinguish among those explanations.

What does California’s government-published VTNE dataset show?

Answer: The California Veterinary Medical Board publishes school-level first-time VTNE passes and failures by fiscal year. It is the only government-published, school-level VTNE dataset Castleport located. It is California-only and was last updated July 15, 2024, so it does not answer the current 2023–2025 question. It does let readers recompute each rate from independently published counts.

Everything in the main 2023–2025 audit comes from programs reporting on themselves. This table does not, which is why it belongs here despite using an older period.

California publishes counts rather than one pooled three-year rate. We pooled them: total passes divided by total first-time exams across FY2021/22, FY2022/23, and FY2023/24. Before publishing a row, we reconciled the transcription to the board’s printed subtotals. The totals match exactly: 1,675 exams and 949 passes for accredited programs, 821 and 376 for alternate-route pathways, and 2,496 and 1,325 combined.

Three things this dataset shows that the self-reported current disclosures cannot.

The program-level spread is wide even after removing very small cohorts. Among the 23 accredited programs with data, pooled rates run from 93.42% to 30.95%, a 62.47-point spread. Restricting the table to programs with at least 30 pooled candidates leaves the same endpoints.

Nine of the 23 programs with data pooled below 50%, and two more landed on exactly 50.00%. That makes 11 of 23 at or below the former CVTEA floor. This is an illustration, not a compliance finding: California’s fiscal-year counts and CVTEA’s own reporting data are not necessarily the same input.

California’s alternate-route group pooled lower than its accredited-program group. Alternate-route candidates pooled to 45.80%, compared with 56.66% for accredited-program candidates—a 10.86-point difference. Alternate-route first-time exam volume rose from 203 in FY2021/22 to 376 in FY2023/24. That result describes California’s published groups for this period. It does not establish what population is included in any national comparator.

One methodological detail changes the answer. Pooling counts is not the same as averaging annual percentages. Carrington College–Citrus Heights reported annual rates of 39%, 89%, and 36%. Their simple average is 54.67%. Pooling the actual counts—27 passes across 47 exams—produces 57.45%, a 2.78-point difference. The simple average silently gives each year equal weight even when the annual cohort sizes differ.

We use the pooled method for the California counts. For the main 2023–2025 audit, we publish both an unweighted program-level median and a pooled candidate-level rate rather than treating them as the same statistic.

Do two official sources agree on the same school’s pass rate?

Answer: Not in the one exact-window cross-check we could perform. For Mount San Antonio College from July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2024, the AAVSB Official CVTEA School Report published by the college shows 81 first-time candidates, 73 passes, and 90.12%. The California board’s fiscal-year table shows 76 exams, 71 passes, and 93.42%. Same program, same dates, different totals.

The public documents do not provide a crosswalk or explanation, so the source of the discrepancy is unresolved. It may reflect a difference in definitions or reporting rules, but the documents reviewed do not establish which one.

The practical consequence is the point. A school-by-school comparison assembled from AAVSB-sourced program disclosures may not match one assembled from state-published data. We tested exactly one program with identical dates and usable figures, so we do not know how often this occurs.

The AAVSB report also states that it is for internal use and is not to be used as a benchmark for accreditation standards, while the document is titled “Official CVTEA School Report.” Both labels appear on the same report.

How should VTNE pass rates by school be compared?

Answer: Compare the same reporting window, the same candidate definition, and the same campus or delivery mode—and never read a percentage without its denominator. In a cohort of four candidates, one result moves the rate 25 points. In a cohort of 172, it moves the rate 0.58 points.

Five things to check on any pass-rate page:

1. The exact window. Current disclosures should cover January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2025. A page showing 2022–2024 is one cycle behind. A page showing July–June uses the former reporting convention. A four-year span is not the current three-year rolling window.

2. The candidate count. A percentage without a denominator cannot be interpreted honestly.

3. Whether the numbers reconcile. Test every possible whole-number pass count against the published denominator. If none reproduces the displayed percentage at the displayed precision, the two fields do not reconcile. Twenty-six of the 81 exact-window disclosures in this audit fail that test.

4. The delivery mode. On-campus and distance cohorts can differ within the same institution. Purdue separately reports 86.1% for 79 on-campus candidates and 81.4% for 113 distance candidates. A combined institutional figure can hide that difference.

5. Whether job-placement and graduation rates are present. The current CVTEA rule requires both, along with the VTNE figures. Their presence does not prove program quality, but it tells you whether the page contains the full current disclosure.

Two definitional traps remain.

First-time versus repeat attempts: the current school figures cover first attempts. In the older AAVSB report reviewed for this page, all first-time candidates passed at 58.67% and repeaters at 41.00%. Mixing them would create a third number describing neither group cleanly.

Three-year rolling versus one-year: a rolling rate carries two prior years forward. A sharp recent improvement or decline will not appear as a clean one-year movement.

How we produced this dataset

We searched for public VTNE outcome disclosures issued by veterinary technology and veterinary nursing programs and kept only official institutional webpages or official institutional PDFs. Secondary lists, aggregator sites, and prep-company summaries were excluded regardless of how plausible their figures looked.

For the primary audit, a disclosure had to visibly establish three things:

1. A reporting period of January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2025.
2. A first-time candidate count.
3. A three-year pass percentage.

Missing or conflicting fields sent the source to the exclusion log instead of either arithmetic table.

We treated separately disclosed campuses and delivery modes as separate reporting units and did not combine on-campus and distance results unless the institution itself published only a combined figure.

The arithmetic test

We applied the standard relationship:

Pass percentage = first-time candidates who passed ÷ first-time candidates who tested × 100

A disclosure passed when exactly one whole-number pass count reproduced the institution’s displayed percentage after rounding to the number of decimal places shown. Whole-number percentages were tested at whole-number precision, one-decimal percentages at one decimal, and two-decimal percentages at two decimals. For an exact midpoint, we used decimal round-half-up.

We recomputed every row in a second validation pass using a separate interval test. All 55 reproducible rows returned exactly one integer pass count. All 26 flagged rows returned none. One row lands exactly on a midpoint: the University of Massachusetts Amherst reports 81.3% across 48 candidates, and 39 ÷ 48 is 81.25%. It is classified as reproducible under the stated round-half-up rule.

How we handled source conflicts

The visible rendered source controlled. Search snippets and PDF text layers were used to locate material, but not to override what a reader could actually see.

That rule changed the dataset. Columbia State Community College’s PDF search layer describes 2023–2025 figures, while the visible rendered page still shows July 1, 2021–June 30, 2024. The row was excluded. Jefferson College’s search-index text exposes a current count and rate, but the PDF could not be opened for rendered verification during this audit, so it was not promoted into the main table.

Summary calculations

Summary statistics use only the 55 disclosures that passed the arithmetic test.

• The median is unweighted across reporting units: 74.0%.
• The pooled rate is total implied passes divided by total candidates: 1,751 of 2,404, or 72.84%.
• The pooled rate is not a national estimate. This is not a census or probability sample.
• “At or above the national comparator” uses 67.7%, the highest exact-window comparator in the source table, so a row counted there is at or above every exact-window value we list.

For the California section, we transcribed the state board’s fiscal-year counts, pooled them, and validated the transcription by reproducing the board’s printed subtotals.

Every row in the two main tables links to the official source used.

Data dictionary

Which disclosures did we exclude, and why?

Answer: Thirteen institutions had public VTNE material that we could not normalize into either arithmetic table. We list them rather than silently dropping them, because an audit that hides its exclusions is measuring its own selection choices instead of the data.

Three exclusion types matter.

Three-field conflict: SUNY Ulster publishes candidates, passes, and a percentage, but the percentage does not follow from the other two fields. That is not the same as a two-field arithmetic flag because the page supplies its own numerator.

Conflicting official versions: Penn Foster, Mount San Antonio College, and Harcum College each have official current materials that disagree. Picking one version would hide the conflict instead of resolving it.

Source-rendering conflict: Columbia State’s searchable PDF text and visible rendered page describe different reporting periods and values. The visible source is what a human reader sees, so the row stays out until the institution publishes one internally consistent current document.

We also cannot state what percentage of all accredited programs this audit covers. AVMA’s current accredited-program directory displays 220 programs, while its July 21, 2026 news report says 219. Any coverage percentage built on an unreconciled denominator would be false precision.

What does this data show—and what doesn’t it show?

A school’s VTNE pass rate is a cohort-level outcome. It is not an individual applicant’s probability of passing, and it is not a complete measure of program quality.

The rates do not control for admissions selectivity, student demographics, completion rates, transfer policies, when graduates attempt the exam, academic support, tuition, job placement, or differences between delivery modes. A selective program with a small, well-supported cohort and an open-admissions program serving working adults are not measured on the same footing by this percentage.

Small cohorts produce extreme rates. A 100% result on four candidates does not carry the same stability as an 82% result on 172. Every main table on this page shows the denominator for that reason.

This is not a census. It contains the exact-window official disclosures Castleport could locate, render, verify, and classify as of August 5, 2026. Sources with stale, inaccessible, incomplete, conflicting, or ambiguously labeled data appear in the exclusion log rather than being estimated or quietly omitted.

An arithmetic flag does not establish that a school’s underlying exam result is inaccurate. It establishes only that the two public fields do not reconcile at the precision displayed.

The former 50% rule is used here only to describe a historical policy and illustrate where current published figures would sit relative to it. It is not a compliance determination.

The national comparators differ across current exact-window program pages. We preserve the source values. We do not assign a cause the source pages do not supply.

The California dataset is California-only and ends with FY2023/24. It does not describe the current 2023–2025 reporting window.

The AAVSB-versus-California comparison covers one program. It establishes one source discrepancy, not its national frequency.

Finally, this page is educational. Program accreditation, exam eligibility, and credentialing requirements are determined by CVTEA, AAVSB, and individual state or provincial authorities. Verify a current enrollment or credentialing decision with the relevant official body.

How to cite this page

Castleport Test Prep Editorial Team. “VTNE Pass Rates by School: 2023–2025 Data Audit.” Castleport Test Prep Research. Dataset version 1.0. Last updated August 5, 2026. https://castleporttestprep.com/research/vtne-pass-rates-by-school/

Dataset version and last-updated date are included so this specific release can be identified accurately. Castleport-calculated fields are labeled in the table source lines and methodology so they can be recomputed independently.

Frequently asked questions

What is a good VTNE pass rate?

There is no official school-quality threshold. The current CVTEA standard says a program’s three-year rolling first-time pass rate should meet or exceed the national average. Exact-window program pages verified for this audit display national comparators from 67.4% to 67.7%. In the 55-row reproducible subset, the median was 74.0%, and 36 reporting units—65.5%—were at or above 67.7%. Read any rate beside its candidate count and reporting window.

Does the AVMA still require a 50% VTNE pass rate?

No. The January 2025 CVTEA manual said the three-year rolling first-time pass percentage must be 50% or higher. The March 2026 manual says it should meet or exceed the national average for first-time test takers within one year of graduation. The former explicit 30-day notification trigger for a sub-50% rate is no longer in the current substantive-change list.

What is the national VTNE pass rate?

Purdue University’s current disclosure reports 67.4% across 14,465 first-time candidates for January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2025. Other exact-window institutional pages verified for this audit display 67.69% and 67.7%. Castleport did not locate a public AAVSB page publishing one current national figure directly.

Which school has the highest VTNE pass rate?

Four reporting units in the reproducible 2023–2025 set reported 100%, but all four together represent 57 candidates. Among reporting units with at least 50 first-time candidates, San Juan College’s distance program reported the highest rate in the audited set: 88.42% across 95 candidates. This page does not rank program quality.

Why do schools show different national averages for the same period?

Current exact-window program pages verified for this audit display national comparators from 67.4% to 67.7%. The public pages do not explain the difference, so Castleport preserves the source values instead of assigning a cause or manufacturing one harmonized figure.

Are online and on-campus VTNE pass rates comparable?

Only when the institution separates the delivery modes and uses the same reporting window and candidate definition. Purdue reports 86.1% across 79 on-campus candidates and 81.4% across 113 distance candidates for the same 2023–2025 period.

What does an arithmetic flag mean?

It means no whole number of passing candidates can reproduce the published percentage from the published candidate count at the precision displayed. It does not establish that the underlying examination result is wrong or identify the cause of the mismatch.

How often are programs required to update their VTNE pass rates?

The current CVTEA manual says website VTNE data must be updated no later than April 15 of each calendar year and that public information must be current, readily accessible, and accurate. Programs must also publish annual job-placement and graduation-rate percentages.

Sources

Accreditation standards and notices

• AVMA CVTEA, Accreditation Policies and Procedures, January 2025 — avma.org
• AVMA CVTEA, Accreditation Policies and Procedures, March 2026 — avma.org
• AVMA CVTEA, Special Notice, February 6, 2026 — avma.org
• AVMA CVTEA, temporary emergency conditions notice effective July 2, 2025 — avma.org
• AVMA CVTEA accredited-program directory — avma.org

Accreditation decisions

• AVMA News, “CVTEA announces accreditation decisions,” July 21, 2026 — avma.org
• AVMA News, “CVTEA announces policy changes, decisions,” January 10, 2025 — avma.org

Examination administration

• AAVSB, Veterinary Technician National Examination — aavsb.org
• AAVSB Official CVTEA School Report, prepared by PSI Services LLC and published by Mount San Antonio College — mtsac.edu

Government data

• California Veterinary Medical Board, VTNE Statistics by Fiscal Year for First Time Test Takers, last updated July 15, 2024 — vmb.ca.gov

Institutional disclosures

All 81 disclosures in the two arithmetic tables and all 13 excluded institutional sources are linked individually above.

Related research

• Praxis Pass Rates by College: 2023–24 Pennsylvania Data
• Medical Assistant Scope of Practice by State: 2026 Data

Change log

Version 1.0 — August 5, 2026. Initial publication. 81 official exact-window disclosures reviewed; 55 classified as reproducible and 26 as not reproducible at the displayed precision; 13 institutions logged separately as exclusions. Standard 11d comparison drawn from the January 2025 and March 2026 CVTEA manuals. California counts pooled from the state board’s July 15, 2024 publication.

Next scheduled full review: April 2027, following the April 15 annual reporting deadline, with interim quarterly checks on the CVTEA manual, accreditation actions, and source URLs.

Structured data

Article schema

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Article",
  "@id": "https://castleporttestprep.com/research/vtne-pass-rates-by-school/#article",
  "headline": "VTNE Pass Rates by School: 2023–2025 Data Audit",
  "description": "An audit of 81 official school and program VTNE disclosures for January 2023 through December 2025, including candidate counts, arithmetic checks, sources, policy context, and limitations.",
  "datePublished": "2026-08-05",
  "dateModified": "2026-08-05",
  "author": {
    "@type": "Organization",
    "name": "Castleport Test Prep Editorial Team"
  },
  "publisher": {
    "@type": "Organization",
    "name": "Castleport Test Prep",
    "url": "https://castleporttestprep.com/"
  },
  "mainEntityOfPage": {
    "@type": "WebPage",
    "@id": "https://castleporttestprep.com/research/vtne-pass-rates-by-school/"
  },
  "isPartOf": {
    "@type": "CollectionPage",
    "name": "Castleport Test Prep Research",
    "url": "https://castleporttestprep.com/research/"
  },
  "about": [
    {
      "@type": "Thing",
      "name": "Veterinary Technician National Examination"
    },
    {
      "@type": "Thing",
      "name": "Veterinary technology education"
    },
    {
      "@type": "Organization",
      "name": "American Association of Veterinary State Boards"
    },
    {
      "@type": "Organization",
      "name": "AVMA Committee on Veterinary Technician Education and Activities"
    }
  ],
  "inLanguage": "en-US"
}

Dataset schema

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Dataset",
  "@id": "https://castleporttestprep.com/research/vtne-pass-rates-by-school/#dataset",
  "name": "Castleport Verified VTNE Disclosure Dataset, Version 1.0",
  "alternateName": "VTNE Pass Rates by School 2023–2025 Data Audit",
  "description": "A source-linked audit of 81 official school and veterinary technology program VTNE disclosures for January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2025: 55 arithmetically reproducible disclosures and 26 disclosures that do not reconcile at the displayed precision. The page also includes a separate pooled analysis of California Veterinary Medical Board school-level counts for FY2021/22 through FY2023/24.",
  "url": "https://castleporttestprep.com/research/vtne-pass-rates-by-school/",
  "creator": {
    "@type": "Organization",
    "name": "Castleport Test Prep Editorial Team"
  },
  "publisher": {
    "@type": "Organization",
    "name": "Castleport Test Prep",
    "url": "https://castleporttestprep.com/"
  },
  "datePublished": "2026-08-05",
  "dateModified": "2026-08-05",
  "version": "1.0",
  "temporalCoverage": "2023-01-01/2025-12-31",
  "spatialCoverage": {
    "@type": "Place",
    "name": "United States and Puerto Rico"
  },
  "measurementTechnique": "Manual extraction from official institutional webpages and rendered PDFs; exact-window normalization; integer-pass arithmetic-reproducibility testing at displayed precision; and a separate pooled recomputation of California government counts.",
  "distribution": [
    {
      "@type": "DataDownload",
      "encodingFormat": "text/csv",
      "contentUrl": "https://castleporttestprep.com/research/data/vtne-pass-rates-by-school-v1-0.csv"
    }
  ],
  "variableMeasured": [
    {
      "@type": "PropertyValue",
      "name": "First-time VTNE candidate count"
    },
    {
      "@type": "PropertyValue",
      "name": "Reported three-year first-time VTNE pass percentage"
    },
    {
      "@type": "PropertyValue",
      "name": "Arithmetic reproducibility status"
    },
    {
      "@type": "PropertyValue",
      "name": "Implied whole-number pass count"
    },
    {
      "@type": "PropertyValue",
      "name": "Nearest attainable pass percentage"
    },
    {
      "@type": "PropertyValue",
      "name": "Campus or delivery mode"
    },
    {
      "@type": "PropertyValue",
      "name": "Source verification date"
    }
  ],
  "isBasedOn": [
    "https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/2026-03/Manual-PP-CVTEA-March-2026.pdf",
    "https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/2024-12/Manual_PP_CVTEA_January_2025.pdf",
    "https://www.vmb.ca.gov/applicants/vtne_pass_rates.pdf"
  ],
  "keywords": [
    "VTNE pass rates by school",
    "VTNE statistics",
    "veterinary technician exam pass rate",
    "veterinary technology program outcomes",
    "first-time VTNE pass rate",
    "AVMA CVTEA Standard 11d"
  ],
  "inLanguage": "en-US"
}

FAQPage schema

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "FAQPage",
  "@id": "https://castleporttestprep.com/research/vtne-pass-rates-by-school/#faq",
  "mainEntity": [
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "What is a good VTNE pass rate?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "There is no official school-quality threshold. The current CVTEA standard says a program's three-year rolling first-time pass rate should meet or exceed the national average. Exact-window program pages verified for this audit display national comparators from 67.4% to 67.7%. In Castleport's 55-row reproducible subset, the median was 74.0%, and 36 reporting units—65.5%—were at or above 67.7%."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "Does the AVMA still require a 50% VTNE pass rate?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "No. The January 2025 CVTEA manual said the three-year rolling first-time pass percentage must be 50% or higher. The March 2026 manual says it should meet or exceed the national average for first-time test takers within one year of graduation. The former explicit 30-day notification trigger for a sub-50% rate is no longer in the current substantive-change list."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "What is the national VTNE pass rate?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Purdue University's current disclosure reports 67.4% across 14,465 first-time candidates for January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2025. Other exact-window institutional pages verified for this audit display 67.69% and 67.7%. Castleport did not locate a public AAVSB page publishing one current national figure directly."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "Which school has the highest VTNE pass rate?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Four reporting units in Castleport's reproducible 2023–2025 set reported 100%, but all four together represent 57 candidates. Among reporting units with at least 50 first-time candidates, San Juan College's distance program reported the highest rate in the audited set: 88.42% across 95 candidates. The page does not rank program quality."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "Why do schools show different national averages for the same period?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Current exact-window program pages verified for this audit display national comparators from 67.4% to 67.7%. The public pages do not explain the difference, so Castleport preserves the source values instead of assigning a cause or manufacturing one harmonized figure."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "Are online and on-campus VTNE pass rates comparable?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Only when the institution separates the delivery modes and uses the same reporting window and candidate definition. Purdue reports 86.1% across 79 on-campus candidates and 81.4% across 113 distance candidates for the same 2023–2025 period."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "What does an arithmetic flag mean?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "It means no whole number of passing candidates can reproduce the published percentage from the published candidate count at the precision displayed. It does not establish that the underlying examination result is wrong or identify the cause of the mismatch."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "How often are programs required to update their VTNE pass rates?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "The current CVTEA manual says website VTNE data must be updated no later than April 15 of each calendar year and that the public information must be current, readily accessible, and accurate. Programs must also publish annual job-placement and graduation-rate percentages."
      }
    }
  ]
}