Compared to the organization of two-year education in other states, Pennsylvania can be said to have a "non-system" in which local determination predominates and state planning and coordination agencies are little more than advisory bodies. California, for example, has a much larger and more regulated system than Pennsylvania, with the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges coordinating 107 public and private institutions. New York's community colleges are well organized in a hierarchical state system, while Texas maintains a well-defined 2+2+2 system. Florida and Illinois also differ from Pennsylvania through the existence of a central governing board for community colleges, while Ohio and Michigan differ in that colleges are planned to be geographically accessible by all residents. In Pennsylvania, however, two-year institutions are not strategically located in terms of geography or population; individual institutions report to their local board of trustees, rather than the central state body; and the two-year schools actually began before passage of the state's Community College Act in 1963, with many branch campuses originally separate from their main campuses. The organization of five of the first community colleges in the state, initiated by local counties and based on local support, illustrate the problems of the decentralized system. As the colleges were formed, two lawsuits were filed by residents in separate counties to block their establishment and resulting relations between institutions have been competitive and confusing. Contains 35 references. (HAA)