The rule
The assessment is computed, not judged. The rule is stated here in full so that it can be re-run against the same sources, or disputed on its merits rather than on its results. It is published before the results, and it is not adjusted to suit them.
Sources
Three federal series, all public
| National employment, and the number of states reporting | Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025 |
| Ten-year employment projection | Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Projections 2025–35 |
| Registered apprenticeship sponsors | apprenticeship.gov Partner Finder, 2026 |
| Postsecondary credentials awarded | IPEDS completions, by CIP program, 2000 and 2023 |
The test, in order
Each trade falls through these in sequence
Not assessable. The trade has no occupation code of its own, or its code was folded into a broader one. Any figure that appears against it belongs to the parent occupation and is not a count of this trade. No category is assigned, because none can honestly be computed.
Critically endangered, on either of two tests. A national base under 500 — below that point a training route on paper cannot replace the people leaving, whatever the paperwork says. Or a base under 2,000 with at most one registered sponsor nationally, which is no functioning route at all.
Endangered, if any of the following fire: a base under 10,000 with 30 or fewer registered sponsors nationally; a projected decline of 15 percent or worse over ten years; a base under 25,000 with 100 or fewer sponsors where postsecondary credentials have at least halved since 2000; or no institution awarding a credential in the trade at all.
Currently viable. Base and training route both holding. This is a statement about the next decade of supply, not about the health, pay or dignity of the work.
Choices worth arguing with
Where the rule could be wrong
A registered sponsor is an organization permitted to train, not a person training. The rule treats sponsor counts as meaningful above a few hundred practitioners and meaningless below, on the reasoning that one retirement wave ends a very small trade whatever its paperwork says. A reader who disagrees should re-run the rule without the sponsor tests and see what moves.
The credential test is deliberately asymmetric. It is allowed to move a small trade and not a large one, because 820 sponsors is a working route however the college numbers went. That asymmetry is a judgment, and it is stated rather than hidden in a weighting.
Suppression is recorded, not corrected. Where a state count is withheld for confidentiality the trade is marked suppressed rather than imputed. Suppression is itself a finding: a trade too small to report is a trade too small to see.
The thresholds are round numbers. 500, 2,000, 10,000, 25,000, fifteen percent, half. They were chosen before the data was run and have not been moved since. Round numbers chosen in advance are more honest than precise ones chosen afterward.
Re-run it
The assessment refreshes without intervention: the job re-applies this rule to the federal sources as they publish. The trade list, the crosswalk and the assessment output are all downloadable from the papers page.