© Copyright 2025 MarriageFamilyTherapist.org
See how programs report pass rates, what counts as a strong benchmark, and how to compare schools with confidence.
What does a "92% pass rate" on a program's website actually mean? Often, not what it appears to. COAMFTE sets 70% as its minimum acceptable annual average licensure exam pass rate benchmark for accredited master's programs, but schools calculate and report against that benchmark differently, some counting only first attempts, others blending years of cohorts into a single figure.
That inconsistency matters because a published number is only as useful as its methodology. A 100% pass rate from six graduates carries less weight than 85% from sixty.
State licensing boards add another layer of variance, since exam performance data isn't standardized nationally, leaving prospective students to reconcile COAMFTE figures, state board reports, and individual program disclosures before any real comparison is possible.
Choosing between MFT programs often means weighing reputation against hard outcomes, and licensure exam pass rates are one of the most concrete measures you can use. But the way programs report these numbers varies, and understanding the methodology behind them is essential before you start comparing.
When you see a program advertise its licensure exam pass rate, pay attention to what is actually being measured. Some programs report first-attempt pass rates, which capture how many graduates passed the national exam on their initial try. Others report cumulative pass rates, which include graduates who passed after multiple attempts.
These two metrics can paint very different pictures. A program with a 72% first-attempt rate and an 88% cumulative rate has solid outcomes, but a program advertising only that 88% cumulative figure may be obscuring weaker first-attempt performance. Programs naturally tend to publish whichever number looks better, so you should always ask which type of rate you are seeing when evaluating a school.
The Commission on Accreditation for Marriage and Family Therapy Education (COAMFTE) sets accreditation standards that include a licensure outcome benchmark.1 According to the Version 12.5 accreditation manual, programs must demonstrate that 70% of graduates for each cohort achieve some level of MFT licensure.1
This benchmark is cohort-based, meaning the calculation groups graduates who completed the program within a specific timeframe and tracks their licensing outcomes.1 COAMFTE monitors compliance through Annual Reports that programs submit as part of continuing accreditation requirements.1
What happens if a program falls below 70%? A single year under the benchmark does not automatically trigger loss of accreditation, but persistent underperformance raises red flags. Programs that repeatedly miss the threshold may face additional scrutiny, required improvement plans, or ultimately risk their accredited status.1 The benchmark exists to ensure that accredited programs are actually preparing graduates to enter the profession, not just awarding degrees.1
Before drawing conclusions from any single pass rate, consider the number of graduates behind that percentage. A program with 8 graduates where 6 passed has a 75% rate. Another program with 80 graduates where 60 passed also has a 75% rate. But one bad outcome in the smaller cohort would drop its rate to 62.5%, while the larger program would barely budge.
Small cohorts produce volatile statistics. A strong year may reflect luck or timing rather than consistent program quality, and a weak year may not indicate systemic problems. When comparing programs, look for multi-year trends rather than fixating on a single reporting period. Programs that consistently meet or exceed the 70% benchmark across several cohorts are demonstrating reliable preparation, while programs with erratic year-to-year swings warrant closer investigation into what might be causing the inconsistency.
There is no single passing score on the AMFTRB National MFT Examination. The threshold is reset for each exam form by expert judges using a modified Angoff method, so it varies from one administration to the next. AMFTRB also does not publish an official national pass rate, which means program-level data is your best comparison tool.
MFT licensure exam pass rates vary by state, but comparing them directly is harder than it looks. Some boards publish detailed quarterly breakdowns, others report only the number of licenses issued, and still others rely on a multi-state exam performance table compiled by a different state's licensing board. The figures below reflect the best publicly available data as of mid-2026. Where a state does not publish a first-time pass rate specific to MFT candidates, that gap is noted so you can see exactly where the data stands.
| State or Board | Recent First-Time Pass Rate | Reporting Period | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas (AMFTRB national clinical exam, first-time takers) | 74.2% | Q3 of FY 2023-2024 | Reported in a California BBS multi-state exam performance table for Texas LMFT candidates, not by the Texas board itself. |
| Texas (AMFTRB national clinical exam, all takers) | 63.5% | Q3 of FY 2023-2024 | Includes both first-time and repeat takers. The gap between this figure and the first-time rate illustrates how repeat attempts pull the overall number down. |
| Tennessee (AMFTRB national clinical exam, first-time takers) | 84.2% | Q3 of FY 2023-2024 | Also drawn from the California BBS multi-state table. Tennessee's higher rate may reflect smaller candidate volume or program differences. |
| National AMFTRB exam (all jurisdictions, first-time takers) | Approximately 70 to 80% | General range cited in a 2025 licensing overview | This is a broad national estimate rather than a single-year board-published figure. It appears in a summary of Florida LMFT licensing requirements on CareersInPsychology.org. |
| Florida (Board of Clinical Social Work, MFT, and Mental Health Counseling) | Quarterly PDFs available but no single consolidated figure published | Q1 2020 through at least Q4 2023 | Florida's board releases pass-rate data in quarterly PDF reports organized by profession and exam type. Extracting a precise MFT first-time rate requires reviewing each individual file. |
| New York | Not published as an exam pass rate | Licensing data through 2025 | New York's Office of the Professions reports the number of MFT licenses issued each year (e.g., 177 in 2023, 148 in 2024, 292 in 2025) but does not disclose exam pass-rate percentages. |
| California | Reported separately by the Board of Behavioral Sciences | Varies by quarter and exam type | California's BBS publishes its own exam performance tables and also compiles multi-state comparison data for the national AMFTRB clinical exam, which is how several figures in this table were sourced. California uses a state-specific clinical exam in addition to the national exam, making its reporting structure different from most other states. |
Comparing programs on pass rate alone is where most prospective students go wrong, since a single number rarely tells the whole story. A four-step framework helps separate genuine program strength from statistical noise.
First-attempt pass rates and cumulative pass rates measure different things, and programs sometimes favor whichever looks better. A cumulative rate counting every retake will almost always exceed a first-attempt figure, so always check which one you're looking at before comparing two schools side by side.
A program reporting 100% for a single year sounds impressive until you learn only four graduates sat for the exam. Small cohorts produce volatile numbers that swing wildly year to year. A moderate rate in the 70s or 80s sustained across five graduating classes of twenty or more candidates is a far more trustworthy signal than one perfect year from a tiny group. Look for multi-year data whenever a program publishes it, and treat single-year snapshots with caution.
Accreditation status affects both reporting obligations and, often, program quality. Confirm current standing directly rather than relying on a program's own marketing language, since accreditation can lapse or change between application cycles.
A program's self-published number is a starting point, not the final word. Where possible, compare it against the licensing board's own reporting for graduates of that program. State boards sometimes track outcomes differently than programs do, and discrepancies are worth asking about directly during an admissions call.
One of the most common mistakes is stacking a first-attempt rate from one program against a cumulative rate from another, or comparing a program that reports every graduate against one that only reports candidates who sat within a set window. Different reporting standards make raw comparisons misleading unless you adjust for methodology first. When in doubt, ask each program directly how its number is calculated before putting too much weight on it.
Not every COAMFTE-accredited program publishes its national exam pass rate in the same place, and the numbers themselves vary more than you might expect. The table below presents verified, publicly disclosed figures from a range of accredited master's programs. Each entry notes where the data was published so you can look it up yourself.
| Program | Accreditation Status | Published Pass Rate | Where Published |
|---|---|---|---|
| University of Southern Mississippi, M.S. in Marriage and Family Therapy | COAMFTE-accredited | 100% | Program graduate achievement webpage and program news release |
| Seattle University, Couples and Family Therapy, M.A. | COAMFTE-accredited | 100% | Program licensure page |
| Oklahoma State University, Marriage and Family Therapy | COAMFTE-accredited | 100% (multiple reported years) | Accreditation webpage table |
| Indiana Wesleyan University, Marriage and Family Therapy (Indianapolis campus) | COAMFTE-accredited | 89.47% | COAMFTE self-study narrative |
| Lee University, Marriage and Family Therapy (2016 to 2017 cohort) | COAMFTE-accredited | 89% | Professional licensure passage rates PDF |
| Indiana Wesleyan University, Marriage and Family Therapy (Marion campus) | COAMFTE-accredited | 85% | COAMFTE self-study narrative |
| Lee University, Marriage and Family Therapy (2017 to 2018 cohort) | COAMFTE-accredited | 75% | Professional licensure passage rates PDF |
Why do two programs with similar tuition and similar accreditation status report such different exam outcomes? The answer usually depends on who gets admitted, how the curriculum is built, and how much structure surrounds exam preparation.
Programs that screen applicants through minimum GPA thresholds, writing samples, and faculty interviews tend to admit students who are already academically consistent. That consistency shows up later as steadier first-attempt pass rates, since fewer students are entering with foundational gaps in research methods, ethics, or clinical theory. Programs with open or minimally selective admissions may serve a broader population, which is valuable, but it also introduces more variability into cohort-level outcomes.
The number and quality of supervised clinical hours matters as much as coursework. Programs that pair rigorous coursework with closely supervised, well-documented clinical experience tend to produce graduates who walk into the exam room with more practical pattern recognition, not just memorized theory. Thin supervision or loosely tracked hours can leave graduates academically prepared but clinically undertested.
A program graduating eight students in a given year will see its reported pass rate swing wildly based on just one or two individual results. If six of eight pass, that reads as 75 percent, a number that looks weak next to a 200-student program posting 82 percent, even though the smaller program may have equally strong instruction. Always check the underlying graduate count before treating a single year's percentage as a verdict on program quality.
Some programs integrate exam-style practice questions, jurisprudence review, and structured study timelines directly into capstone or final-semester coursework. Others leave prep entirely to the student, pointing graduates toward third-party prep courses after graduation. Programs with embedded prep support tend to see more consistent first-attempt outcomes, since students aren't scrambling to self-organize months of review on top of job searching and licensure paperwork.
No national database separately tracks AMFTRB exam pass rates by program delivery format, so a definitive verdict on which format produces higher scores does not yet exist. COAMFTE holds every accredited program, whether online, hybrid, or campus based, to the same 70% annual average licensure exam pass rate benchmark. The limited data points available suggest that accredited online programs can produce outcomes comparable to their campus counterparts, though individual program quality matters far more than format alone.
| Factor | Online or Hybrid Programs | Campus Based Programs |
|---|---|---|
| COAMFTE Pass Rate Benchmark | Must maintain at least a 70% annual average licensure exam pass rate, identical to all other formats | Must maintain at least a 70% annual average licensure exam pass rate, identical to all other formats |
| Reported Pass Rate Examples | Indiana Wesleyan University (Marion site, which includes distance cohorts) reported an 85% AMFTRB pass rate in its self study narrative (2020) | Indiana Wesleyan University (Indianapolis, primarily campus cohorts) reported approximately 89% in the same period; Whitworth University reports 100%; University of Southern Mississippi reported 93% for 2024 to 2025 |
| National First Time Pass Rate Context | Aggregated first time pass rates across all formats generally fall around 70%, per exam prep providers and state board summaries; no separate online figure is published | Same aggregated range applies; individual campus programs sometimes report rates well above the national average, but small cohort sizes can inflate percentages |
| Supervised Clinical Hours | Students typically arrange practicum and internship placements at approved sites in their home communities; coordination is managed remotely, which requires strong site vetting by the program | Programs often maintain longstanding relationships with local clinics, university counseling centers, and community agencies, which can streamline placement and mentorship |
| Accreditation Scrutiny for Distance Education | COAMFTE reviews technology infrastructure, faculty to student ratios in virtual instruction, and clinical supervision protocols to ensure distance learners receive equivalent training | Reviewed under the same outcome standards; clinical training quality is assessed through on site visits and direct observation opportunities that are inherently built into the format |
| Exam Readiness Support | Many programs offer virtual exam prep workshops, recorded review sessions, and online study groups; effectiveness depends on student engagement and program investment | May include in person review courses, peer study cohorts, and faculty led practice exams; face to face interaction can benefit learners who prefer structured, synchronous preparation |
A standalone graduate certificate and a full master's degree may sit on the same university webpage, but they lead to very different licensure outcomes. Understanding that distinction matters before you enroll, not after.
COAMFTE accredits master's and doctoral programs in marriage and family therapy. It does not accredit standalone graduate certificates as independent credentials. A certificate program might be housed within an accredited department, taught by the same faculty, and use similar coursework, but that proximity does not confer accreditation status on the certificate itself. If pass rate data or accreditation status is the reason you are evaluating a school, make sure you know which credential that data actually describes.
Most state boards will not consider a graduate certificate sufficient for license eligibility on its own. Certificates typically function as an add-on: useful for licensed counselors or social workers seeking MFT-specific coursework, or as a stepping stone paired with a qualifying master's degree. Someone who completes only the certificate, without the accompanying degree, generally has not met the coursework and supervised clinical hour requirements that licensure boards expect.
Because certificate-only completers are not separately tracked in AMFTRB or COAMFTE pass rate reporting, published pass rates reflect degree-seeking cohorts, meaning students enrolled in full master's or doctoral programs. There is no parallel dataset showing how certificate-only students fare on licensure exams, largely because most of them are not sitting for the exam as a standalone credential holder in the first place.
If a certificate program appeals to you, whether for cost, timeline, or flexibility reasons, verify the exact licensure pathway with your target state board before committing. Ask directly whether the certificate, combined with your existing degree, satisfies coursework and hour requirements, or whether a full accredited master's remains necessary. Boards vary enough on this point that assumptions can cost you a year or more of wasted study.
Did you know only about 127 MFT master's and doctoral programs nationwide currently hold COAMFTE accreditation, according to a count of the organization's own program directory as of August 2026. That's a relatively small pool of accredited options, which is exactly why comparing pass rate data across programs matters so much when choosing where to enroll.
