This paper reports findings of the first phase of a study conducted to investigate the factors that contribute to the success of partnerships between vocational education and training (VET) providers and community/industry, and the processes partnerships employ to produce quality learning outcomes for individuals and other stakeholders, including enterprises, industries and communities. This phase of the project maps the partnerships that have previously been researched or reported, using a meta-analysis methodology. The literature reviewed here is restricted to the period since 1995. The partnerships identified in this paper are analysed in terms of their status at the time of reporting in the literature. No attempt is made in this phase of the project to determine how the partnerships have since evolved, or if indeed they still exist. A total of 117 partnerships from several sources were identified and analysed. The review of Australian VET partnerships found that industry-provider partnerships were the most common. These kind of partnerships were a mix of Structured Workplace Learning partnerships, Industry development partnerships and Enterprise development partnerships. Industry-provider partnerships were predominant in urban areas, while in rural areas community-industry-provider partnerships were most common. This rural/urban divide was also reflected in different purposes of the partnerships. While urban partnerships were most frequently concerned with industry development, rural partnerships were most frequently concerned with regional development through education and training. Measures of success were found to be determined primarily by stakeholders of partnerships, generally by comparing outcomes with goals and objectives. The most frequently reported outcomes were community development, access and equity and collaboration between stakeholders. The findings of this paper raise several questions about partnerships and quality training outcomes. Further investigation is required to determine what measures (other than customer satisfaction) should be used to evaluate quality of training outcomes.