Despite their vital role in open-access, two-year colleges, remedial education efforts have increasingly come under attack by legislators and the public, who view such programs as duplicating the appropriate function of high schools, and who believe that limited state resources should be devoted to more prestigious programs. For a college to effectively defend such a program, it is crucial that it be linked to the institution's mission. In addition, a college's accountability analysis of its remedial programs should focus on the program population, rather than on a description of the program. At Anne Arundel Community College (AACC) in Arnold, Maryland, a comparison of remedial students with the general student population revealed that minority students, transfer-oriented students, and full-timers were all over-represented among remedial students. This data can help the college convince a skeptical public that its remedial programs are improving retention rates for minority students and full-time, transfer-oriented students, both populations the programs were intended to help. Appropriate outcomes assessments are also vital in demonstrating a program's importance. At AACC, outcomes measures have shown that: (1) over half of remedial students successfully complete developmental courses; (2) first-time remedial students have higher fall-to-spring retention rates than first-time students as a whole; and (3) most remedial English students successfully complete subsequent college-level courses. Finally, cost analyses can help demonstrate a program's value. At AACC, such analyses have shown that developmental courses had lower costs per student than the average general education course. Tables are included. (PAA)