Extreme heat is a major occupational hazard with far-reaching impacts on the national economy as well as worker health and safety. Extreme heat costs an estimated $100 billion per year in lost productivity, and causes an average of at least 3,389 heat-related injuries and 33 heat-related fatalities annually – numbers that are likely vast undercounts. To protect workers, Congress must mandate a federal heat standard, retain federal workers with expertise in heat stress management strategies, and establish Centers of Excellence to support research, training, and sector-specific mitigation strategies. Through investments in infrastructure for heat safety, Congress can save lives, protect the economy, and enhance resilience nationwide.

Heat-Related Risks are Heightened in Many Work Environments

Extreme heat puts workers of all types at risk: OSHA has documented hospitalizations and heat-related deaths in close to 275 industries. Some work environments present extreme heat risk, particularly those involving high exposures to the outdoors and limited access to cooling. With roughly one in three U.S. employees regularly working outdoors, a large share of the workforce is at elevated risk during summer months. Indoor workers also face high exposure, especially in kitchens, warehouses, manufacturing plants, and other poorly ventilated environments because heat and humidity easily build up in enclosed spaces without adequate air flow and climate-control. 

Business and Economic Impacts of High Heat Exposure in the Workplace 

On top of the $100 billion in direct annual losses, high temperatures are also linked to increased healthcare costs for employers and workers’ compensation claims, with claim frequencies rising by up to 10% during temperature extremes. Some industries are more exposed than others; for example, agriculture, construction, and utility companies face twice the risk of incurring increased healthcare claims due to extreme weather and other environmental conditions. This growing number of claims increases companies’ experience modification rates, which insurers use as a key factor for calculating higher future premiums. Higher premiums translate to greater insurance and overall operating costs, which is especially burdensome for small and low-margin businesses. Despite all these risks, many employers continue to underestimate the financial burden of extreme heat and other weather-related health impacts. 

Many Military Personnel and Federal Workers Face Above-Average Risks of Heat-Related Illness

Military personnel, federal law enforcement officers, border patrol officers, wildland firefighters, federal transportation workers like railroad inspectors, and postal employees are all in positions that require long, labor-intensive hours outdoors, raising the risk for heat-related illness. In 2024, heat-related illnesses were among the top five most reported medical events among U.S. active duty service members. Without consistent standards in place to protect these workers from extreme heat, military and other federal operations will continue to be vulnerable to disruption and reduced workforce capacity.

Advancing Solutions: Establish a Strong Federal Heat Standard and Sector-Specific Centers of Excellence for Heat Workplace Safety

To begin to address heat-related injuries and illnesses in workplaces, OSHA in 2022 established the National Emphasis Program (NEP) on Outdoor and Indoor Heat-Related Hazards, which remains in effect until April 2026. As of 2025, OSHA reports that this NEP has conducted nearly 7,000 inspections connected to heat risks, which lead to 60 heat citations and nearly 1,400 “hazard alert” letters being sent to employers.

However, in the absence of a federal mandate for effective heat safety practices, most workplaces rely on voluntary guidance that is not tailored to specific job conditions, backed by consistent data, or subject to enforcement. This puts both workers and businesses at risk. OSHA’s proposed Heat Injury and Illness Prevention rule would be a critical step forward to establishing common-sense baseline protections. According to the agency’s projections, compliance with this standard could prevent thousands of heat-related illnesses and deaths. The projected benefits from reduced fatalities, illness, and injury amount to $9.18 billion per year. Importantly, this action has broad public backing: 90% of American voters support the implementation of federal protections from extreme heat in the workplace. 

Congress should act swiftly to ensure OSHA finalizes and enforces a strong, evidence-based heat standard. To do this effectively, it is essential that funding for experts at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is retained in the FY26 budget request, as these critical workers develop criteria for recommended standards on occupational heat stress. These experts have been impacted by reductions in force at NIOSH, and as of July 2025 have not been brought back by the agency.

Some employers have raised concerns about the technical and financial feasibility of the proposed rule. To address these concerns, Congress should pair regulation with practical support by creating federally funded, sector-specific Centers of Excellence (CoEs)for Heat Workplace Safety. These Centers would develop and implement evidence-based solutions tailored to different work environments, such as agriculture and construction. The CoE approach includes comprehensive data collection at worksites that form the basis of occupational safety and health protocols best practices and policies to enhance productivity, prevent injury and illness, and ensure a return on investment. Once strategies are developed, CoEs implement them, track their impact, and work with workers, employers, and cross-sector partners to ensure long-term success.

By leveraging advanced technology, predictive analytics, and continuously updated industry standards, CoEs can help modernize OSHA regulations and make them more aligned with current workplace realities that go beyond simple compliance or post-injury responses.  Federal agencies and other industries with sizable workforces that receive government contracts are key places to develop best practices, technologies, and public-private partnerships for these interventions, all while reducing fiscal risk to the federal government.  

FAS shares the following formal comment in the Federal Register and asks that the scientific community, and the people across the nation who benefit from their research, to do the same.

The Federation of American Scientists opposes the proposed “Schedule Policy/Career” (“Schedule PC”) in present form because it rescinds civil servant employment protections, placing unnecessary and undesirable political pressure on highly specialized scientific and technical career professionals serving in government.

FAS encourages the Office of Personnel Management to rescind or substantially overhaul the Proposed Rule on Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service. We ask that OPM respond to the following comments and reflect how it will revise the Proposed Rule or abandon it.

New Employment Category is Unnecessary

Instead of creating a new employment category – the Schedule P/C for federal civil servants – the same goals can be accomplished by requiring agencies to regularly review and update critical elements in the performance appraisal system and their rating factors. Changing performance elements will have the impact of ensuring attention to accountability and responsiveness to policy without the ambiguity or determining assignment to the Schedule or the taxpayer expense of defending it.

The Administration is already taking this action by changing the performance appraisal system for the Senior Executive Service to make senior executives more responsive to Executive-branch priorities and policies. FAS advocates for updates to performance standards and rating factors appropriate for non-executives–based on the best available evidence–to achieve the intended accountability and responsiveness goals in this Proposed Rule. 

Proposed Rule Conflates Accountability with Administration

The Proposed Rule makes several errors in interpretation of the Civil Service Act of 1978, including the one potentially most detrimental to scientific enquiry, innovation, and exploration:

• The proposed rule is about accountability to the President and his/her  Administration policies, not about performance on the job and accountability to the Constitution. By conflating the two, Schedule P/C takes away individual appeal rights for anyone reassigned to this categorization rather than focusing on removing poor performers. An employee’s poor performance is more commonly related to a lack of quality, accuracy, and/or timeliness of their job tasks, according to the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. As written, Schedule P/C also discourages dissent, evidence-based policymaking, performance management to understand and track results, and program evaluation to understand outcomes.

• The proposed rule newly defines Policy-Influencing Roles for merit-based civil servants, while underutilizing existing regulations for other Policy-Making roles like political appointees and those with excepted service employment. 
  
  • Newly designating “Policy-influencing” positions as Schedule P/C provides such a breadth of interpretation for federal agencies that it could encompass most federal jobs, which  currently rely on a non-partisan, merit based civil service and their associated civil service protections. Already, a Social Security Administration (SSA) leader has voiced the intent to designate nearly all SSA career employees as Schedule P/C. Furthermore, the lack of guidance to agencies in identifying “policy influencing” roles will create inconsistencies in its application across agencies and confusion in comparing similar occupations and their duties.
    
  • Moreover, the Proposed Rule deviates from the accepted definitions for “policy determining,” “policy advocating,” and “policy influencing” roles identified in the Civil Service Act of 1978, and assigned to political appointees and excepted service employment categories. If the proposed rule were limited to “policy determining” and “policy making”, most of these positions would already be part of the Senior Executive Service (SES). These federal employment Schedules already carry the requisite responsiveness and accountability to Administration policies and priorities needed to ensure alignment of federal programs with legislative and executive branch intent. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the Nation’s regulator of civilian nuclear technologies, should shift agency staff, resources, and operations more flexibly based on emergent regulatory demands. The nuclear power industry is demonstrating commercialization progress on new reactor concepts that will challenge the NRC’s licensing and oversight functions. Rulemaking on new licensing frameworks is in progress, but such regulation will fall short without changes to the NRC’s staffing. Since the NRC is exempt from civil service laws under the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, the agency should use AEA flexible hiring authorities to launch the Next Nuclear Corps, a staffing program to shift capacity based on emergent, short-term workforce needs. The NRC should also better enable hiring managers to meet medium-term workforce needs by clarifying guidance on NRC’s direct hire authority.

Challenge and Opportunity

Policymakers, investors, and major energy users, such as data centers and industrial plants, are interested in new nuclear power because it promises unique value. New nuclear power technologies could add either additional base load or variable power to electrical systems. Small modular or micro reactors could provide independent power to military bases, many of which are connected to power grids and vulnerable to disruption. Local governments can stimulate economies with high-paying and safe jobs at nuclear plants. The average nuclear power plant also has the lowest lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions compared to other available electricity-generating technologies, including wind, solar, and hydropower. Current efforts to expand nuclear power are different from those of the 1970s and 1980s, the most recent decades of significant building. Proposals today include building plants designed similarly to plants of those decades or even restarting power operations at up to three closed plants; but more activity is focused on commercializing advanced and small modular reactors, diverse concepts incorporating innovations in reactor design, fuel types, and safety systems. The government has partnered with private companies to develop and demonstrate advanced reactors since the inception of nuclear technology in the 1950s, but today several companies demonstrate advanced technical and business progress toward commercialization. 

Innovation in nuclear power challenges the NRC’s status-quo approaches to licensing and oversight. Rulemaking on new regulatory frameworks is necessary and in progress, but changes to the agency’s staffing and operations are also needed. Over time, Congress, the President, and the Commission itself have adjusted the agency’s operations in response to shifts in international postures, comprehensive national energy plans, and accidents or emerging threats at nuclear plants, but the NRC’s ability to respond to sudden changes in the nuclear industry is a long-standing challenge. To become more flexible, NRC initiated Project Aim in 2014 after expectations of significant industry growth, spurred in part by tax incentives in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, were not realized due to record-low natural gas prices. More recent assessments from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and NRC Office of Inspector General (OIG) acknowledge the challenge of workload forecasting in an unpredictable nuclear industry, but counterintuitively, some recommendations focus on improving the ability to workforce plan two years or more in advance. Renewed expectations of growth, spurred by interest from policymakers and energy customers, reinforces a point from the 2015 Project Aim final report that, “…effectiveness, efficiency, agility, flexibility, and performance must improve for the agency to continue to succeed in the future.”

Congress also called on the NRC to become more responsive to current developments as expressed in legislation enacted with bipartisan support. Across the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 and the ADVANCE Act of 2024, Congress requires the NRC to update its mission statement to better reflect the benefits of civilian nuclear technology, establish regulatory frameworks for new technology, streamline environmental review, incentivize licensing of advanced nuclear technologies, and position itself and the United States as a leader in civilian nuclear power. Meeting expectations requires significant operational and workforce changes. Since NRC is exempt from civil service laws and operates an independent competitive merit system, widespread changes to the agency’s hiring practices will be determined by future Commissioners, including the President’s selection of Chair (and by extension, the Chair’s selection of the Executive Director for Operations (EDO)), and modifications to agreements between the NRC and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). In the meantime, NRC is well equipped to increase hiring flexibility using authorities from existing law and regulations.

Plan of Action

Recommendation 1. The NRC EDO should launch the Next Nuclear Corps, a staffing program dedicated to shifting agency capacity based on short-term workforce needs.

The EDO should hire a new director to lead the Corps. The Corps director should report to the EDO and consult with the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) and division heads to develop Corps positions to address near-term priorities in competency areas that do not require in-depth training. Near-term priorities should be informed by the NRC’s existing yearly capacity assessments, but the Corps director should also rely on direct expertise and insights from branch chiefs who have a real-time understanding of industry activity and staffing challenges.

Recommendation 2. Hiring for the Corps should be executed under the special authority to appoint directly to the excepted service under 161B(a) of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA).

The ADVANCE Act of 2024 created new categories of hires to fill critical needs related to licensing, oversight, and matters related to NRC efficiency. The EDO should execute the Corps under the new authorities in section 161B(a) of the AEA as it provides clear direction and structure for the EDO to make personnel appointments outside of the NRC’s independent competitive merit system described in Management Directive 10.1. 161B(a)(A) provides up to 210 hires at any time and 161B(a)(B) provides up to 20 additional hires each fiscal year which are limited to a term of four years. The standard service term should be one year as near-term workforce needs may be temporary because of the nature of the position or uncertainty in future demand.

The EDO should adopt the following practices to allow renewals of some positions from the prior year without reaching the limits described in the AEA:

• 161B(a)(A): Appoint up to 140 new staff each fiscal year and consider staggering appointments to address capacity needs that arise later in the year. After the initial one-year term, up to half of the positions should be eligible for a one-year renewal if the need continues. After the initial cohort off-boards, an additional 140 new staff should be appointed alongside up to 70 renewed staff from the prior cohort without exceeding the maximum of 210 appointments at any time.
• 161B(a)(B): Appoint up to 20 new staff each fiscal year and consider staggering appointments to address capacity needs that arise later in the year. All positions should be eligible for a one-year renewal for up to three additional years if the need continues.

Recommendation 3. The EDO should update Management Directives 10.13 and 10.1 to contain or reference the standard operating procedure for NRC’s mirrored version of OPM’s Direct Hire Authority.

The proposed Corps addresses emergent, short-term capacity needs, but internal policy clarity is needed to solve medium-term hiring challenges for hard-to-recruit positions. As far back as 2007, NRC hiring managers and human resources reported that DHA was highly desired for hiring flexibility. The NRC OIG closed Recommendation 2.1 from Audit of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Vacancy Announcement Process in June 2024 because NRC updated Standard Operating Procedure for Direct Hire Authority with more details. However, management directives are the primary policy and procedure documents that govern the NRC’s internal functions. The EDO should update management directives to formally capture or reference this procedure so that NRC staff are better equipped to use DHA. Specifically, the EDO should:

• amend Management Directive 10.13 Special Employment Programs to add Section IX. Direct Hire Authority, that formalizes the procedure in the Standard Operating Procedure for Direct Hire Authority
• update Management Directive 10.1, Section I.A. to reference the amended Management Directive 10.13 as the general policy for non-competitive hiring

Conclusion

The potential of new nuclear power plants to meet energy demand, increase energy security, and revitalize local economies depends on new regulatory and operational approaches at the NRC. Rulemaking on new licensing frameworks is in progress, but the NRC should also use AEA flexible hiring authorities to address emergent, short-term workforce needs that may be temporary based on shifting industry developments. The proposed Corps structure allows the EDO to quickly hire new staff outside of the agency’s competitive merit system for short-term needs while preserving flexibility to renew appointments if the capacity needs continue. For permanent hard-to-recruit positions, the EDO should clarify guidance for hiring managers on direct hire authority. The NRC is well equipped with existing authorities to meet emergent regulatory demand and renewed expectations of nuclear power growth.

This action-ready policy memo is part of Day One 2025 — our effort to bring forward bold policy ideas, grounded in science and evidence, that can tackle the country’s biggest challenges and bring us closer to the prosperous, equitable and safe future that we all hope for whoever takes office in 2025 and beyond.

PLEASE NOTE (February 2025): Since publication several government websites have been taken offline. We apologize for any broken links to once accessible public data.

The next presidential administration should establish a comprehensive Cyber Workforce Action Plan to address the critical shortage of cybersecurity professionals and bolster national security. This plan encompasses innovative educational approaches, including micro-credentials, stackable certifications, digital badges, and more, to create flexible and accessible pathways for individuals at all career stages to acquire and demonstrate cybersecurity competencies.

The initiative will be led by the White House Office of the National Cyber Director (ONCD) in collaboration with key agencies such as the Department of Education (DoE), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and National Security Agency (NSA). It will prioritize enhancing and expanding existing initiatives—such as the CyberCorps: Scholarship for Service program that recruits and places talent in federal agencies—while also spearheading new engagements with the private sector and its critical infrastructure vulnerabilities. To ensure alignment with industry needs, the Action Plan will foster strong partnerships between government, educational institutions, and the private sector, particularly focusing on real-world learning opportunities.

This Action Plan also emphasizes the importance of diversity and inclusion by actively recruiting individuals from underrepresented groups, including women, people of color, veterans, and neurodivergent individuals, into the cybersecurity workforce. In addition, the plan will promote international cooperation, with programs to facilitate cybersecurity workforce development globally. Together, these efforts aim to close the cybersecurity skills gap, enhance national defense against evolving cyber threats, and position the United States as a global leader in cybersecurity education and workforce development.

Challenge and Opportunity

The United States and its allies face a critical shortage of cybersecurity professionals, in both the public and private sectors. This shortage poses significant risks to our national security and economic competitiveness in an increasingly digital world.

In the federal government, the cybersecurity workforce is aging rapidly, with only about 3% of information technology (IT) specialists under 30 years old. Meanwhile, nearly 15% of the federal cyber workforce is eligible for retirement. This demographic imbalance threatens the government’s ability to defend against sophisticated and evolving cyber threats.

The private sector faces similar challenges. According to recent estimates, there are nearly half a million unfilled cybersecurity positions in the United States. This gap is expected to grow as cyber threats become more complex and pervasive across all industries. Small and medium-sized businesses are particularly vulnerable, often lacking the resources to compete for scarce cyber talent.

The cybersecurity talent shortage extends beyond our borders, affecting our allies as well. As cyber threats from adversarial nation states become increasingly global in nature, our international partners’ ability to defend against these threats directly impacts U.S. national security. Many of our allies, particularly in Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia, lack robust cybersecurity education and training programs, further exacerbating the global skills gap.

A key factor contributing to this shortage is the lack of accessible, flexible pathways into cybersecurity careers. Traditional education and training programs often fail to keep pace with rapidly evolving technology and threat landscapes. Moreover, they frequently overlook the potential of career changers and nontraditional students who could bring valuable diverse perspectives to the field.

However, this challenge presents a unique opportunity to revolutionize cybersecurity education and workforce development. By leveraging innovative approaches such as apprenticeships, micro-credentials, stackable certifications, peer-to-peer learning platforms, digital badges, and competition-based assessments, we can create more agile and responsive training programs. These methods can provide learners with immediately applicable skills while allowing for continuous upskilling as the field evolves.

Furthermore, there’s an opportunity to enhance cybersecurity awareness and basic skills among all American workers, not just those in dedicated cyber roles. As digital technologies permeate every aspect of modern work, a baseline level of cyber hygiene and security consciousness is becoming essential across all sectors.

By addressing these challenges through a comprehensive Cyber Workforce Action Plan, we can not only strengthen our national cybersecurity posture but also create new pathways to well-paying, high-demand jobs for Americans from all backgrounds. This initiative has the potential to position the United States as a global leader in cyber workforce development, enhancing both our national security and our economic competitiveness in the digital age.

Evidence of Existing Initiatives

While numerous excellent cybersecurity workforce development initiatives exist, they often operate in isolation, lacking cohesion and coordination. ONCD is positioned to leverage its whole-of-government approach and the groundwork laid by its National Cyber Workforce and Education Strategy (NCWES) to unite these disparate efforts. By bringing together the strengths of various initiatives and their stakeholders, ONCD can transform high-level strategies into concrete, actionable steps. This coordinated approach will maximize the impact of existing resources, reduce duplication of efforts, and create a more robust and adaptable cybersecurity workforce development ecosystem. This proposed Action Plan is the vehicle to turn these collective workforce-minded strategies into tangible, measurable outcomes.

At the foundation of this plan lies the NICE Cybersecurity Workforce Framework, developed by NIST. This common lexicon for cybersecurity work roles and competencies provides the essential structure upon which we can build. The Cyber Workforce Action Plan seeks to expand on this foundation by creating standardized assessments and implementation guidelines that can be adopted across both public and private sectors.

Micro-credentials, stackable certifications, digital badges, and other innovations in accessible education—as demonstrated by programs like SANS Institute’s GIAC certifications and CompTIA’s offerings—form a core component of the proposed plan. These modular, skills-based learning approaches allow for rapid validation of specific competencies—a crucial feature in the fast-evolving cybersecurity landscape. The Action Plan aims to standardize and coordinate these and similar efforts, ensuring widespread recognition and adoption of accessible credentials across industries.

The array of gamification and competition-based learning approaches—including but not limited to National Cyber League, SANS NetWars, and CyberPatriot—are also exemplary starting points that would benefit from greater federal engagement and coordination. By formalizing these methods within education and workforce development programs, the government can harness their power to simulate real-world scenarios and drive engagement at a national scale.

Incorporating lessons learned from the federal government’s previous DoE CTE CyberNet program, the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Scholarship for Service Program (SFS), and the National Security Agency’s (NSA) GenCyber camps—the Action Plan emphasizes the importance of early engagement (the middle grades and early high school years) and practical, hands-on learning experiences. By extending these principles across all levels of education and professional development, we can create a continuous pathway from high school through to advanced career stages.

A Cyber Workforce Action Plan would provide a unifying praxis to standardize competency assessments, create clear pathways for career progression, and adapt to the evolving needs of both the public and private sectors. By building on the successes of existing initiatives and introducing innovative solutions to fill critical gaps in the cybersecurity talent pipeline, we can create a more robust, diverse, and skilled cybersecurity workforce capable of meeting the complex challenges of our digital future.

Plan of Action 

Recommendation 1. Create a Cyber Workforce Action Plan.

ONCD will develop and oversee the plan, in close collaboration with DoE, NIST, NSA, and other relevant agencies. The plan has three distinct components:

1. Develop standardized assessments aligned with the NICE framework. ONCD will work with NIST to create a suite of standardized assessments to evaluate cybersecurity competencies that:

• Cover the full range of knowledge, skills, and abilities defined in the NICE framework.
• Include both theoretical knowledge tests and practical, scenario-based evaluations.
• Be regularly updated to reflect evolving cybersecurity threats and technologies.
• Be designed with input from both government and industry cybersecurity professionals to ensure relevance and applicability.

2. Establish a system of stackable and portable micro-credentials. To provide flexible and accessible pathways into cybersecurity careers, ONCD will work with DoE, NIST, and the private sector to help develop and support systems of micro-credentials that are:

• Aligned with specific competencies in the NICE framework: NIST, as the national standards-setting body, will issue these credentials to ensure alignment with the NICE framework. This will provide legitimacy and broad recognition across industries.
• Stackable, allowing learners to build towards larger certifications or degrees: These credentials will be designed to allow individuals to accumulate certifications over time, ultimately leading to more comprehensive qualifications or degrees.
• Portable across different sectors and organizations: The micro-credentials will be recognized by both government agencies and private-sector employers, ensuring they have value regardless of where an individual seeks employment.
• Recognized and valued by both government agencies and private-sector employers: By working closely with the private sector—where credentialing systems like those from CompTIA and Google are already advanced—the ONCD will help ensure government-issued credentials are not duplicative but complementary to existing industry standards. NIST’s involvement, combined with input from private-sector leaders, will provide confidence that these credentials are relevant and accepted in both public and private sectors.
• Designed to facilitate rapid upskilling and reskilling in response to evolving cybersecurity needs: Given the rapidly changing landscape of cybersecurity threats, these micro-credentials will be regularly updated to reflect the most current technologies and skills, enabling professionals to remain agile and competitive.

3. Integrate more closely with more federal initiatives. The Action Plan will be integrated with existing federal cybersecurity programs and initiatives, including:

• DHS’s Cybersecurity Talent Management System
• DoD’s Cyber Excepted Service
• NIST’s NICE framework
• NSF’s CyberCorps SFS program
• NSA’s GenCyber camps

This proposal emphasizes stronger integration with existing federal initiatives and greater collaboration with the private sector. Instead of creating entirely new credentialing standards, ONCD will explore opportunities to leverage widely adopted commercial certifications, such as those from Google, CompTIA, and other private-sector leaders. By selecting and promoting recognized commercial standards where applicable, ONCD can streamline efforts, avoiding duplication and ensuring the cybersecurity workforce development approach is aligned with what is already successful in industry. Where necessary, ONCD will work with NIST and industry professionals to ensure these commercial certifications meet federal needs, creating a more cohesive and efficient approach across both government and industry. This integrated public-private strategy will allow ONCD to offer a clear leadership structure and accountability mechanism while respecting and utilizing commercial technology and standards to address the scale and complexity of the cybersecurity workforce challenge.

The Cyber Workforce Action Plan will emphasize strong collaborations with the private sector, including the establishment of a Federal Cybersecurity Curriculum Advisory Board composed of experts from relevant federal agencies and leading private-sector companies. This board will work directly with universities to develop model curricula that incorporate the latest cybersecurity tools, techniques, and threat landscapes, ensuring that graduates are well-prepared for the specific challenges faced by both federal and private-sector cybersecurity professionals.

To provide hands-on learning opportunities, the Action Plan will include a new National Cyber Internship Program. Managed by the Department of Labor in partnership with DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and leading technology companies, the program will match students with government agencies and private-sector companies. An online platform will be developed, modeled after successful programs like Hacking for Defense, where industry partners can propose real-world cybersecurity projects for student teams.

To incentivize industry participation, the General Services Administration (GSA) and DoD will update federal procurement guidelines to require companies bidding on cybersecurity-related contracts to certify that they offer internship or early-career opportunities for cybersecurity professionals. Additionally, CISA will launch a “Cybersecurity Employer of Excellence” certification program, which will be a prerequisite for companies bidding on certain cybersecurity-related federal contracts.

The Action Plan will also address the global nature of cybersecurity challenges by incorporating international cooperation elements. This includes adapting the plan for international use in strategically important regions, facilitating joint training programs and professional exchanges with allied nations, and promoting global standardization of cybersecurity education through collaboration with international standards organizations.

Ultimately, this effort intends to implement a national standard for cybersecurity competencies—providing clear, accessible pathways for career progression and enabling more agile and responsive workforce development in this critical field. 

Recommendation 2. Implement an enhanced CyberCorps fellowship program.

ONCD should expand the NSF’s CyberCorps Scholarship for Service program as an immediate, high-impact initiative. Key features of the expanded CyberCorps fellowship program include:

1. Comprehensive talent pipeline: While maintaining the current SFS focus on students, the enhanced CyberCorps will also target recent graduates and early-career professionals with 1–5 years of work experience. This expansion addresses immediate workforce needs while continuing to invest in future talent. The program will offer competitive salaries, benefits, and loan forgiveness options to attract top talent from both academic and private-sector backgrounds.

2. Multiagency exposure and optional rotations: While cross-sector exposure remains valuable for building a holistic understanding of cybersecurity challenges, the rotational model will be optional or limited based on specific agency needs. Fellows may be offered the opportunity to rotate between agencies or sectors only if their skill set and the hosting agency’s environment are conducive to short-term placements. For fellows placed in agencies or sectors where longer ramp-up times are expected, a deeper, longer-term placement may be more effective. Drawing on lessons from the Presidential Innovation Fellows and the U.S. Digital Corps, the program will emphasize flexibility to ensure that fellows can make meaningful contributions within the time frame and that knowledge transfer between sectors remains a core objective.

3. Advanced mentorship and leadership development: Building on the SFS model, the expanded program will foster a strong community of cyber professionals through cohort activities and mentorship pairings with senior leaders across government and industry. A new emphasis on leadership training will prepare fellows for senior roles in government cybersecurity.

4. Focus on emerging technologies: Complementing the SFS program’s core cybersecurity curriculum, the expanded CyberCorps will emphasize cutting-edge areas such as artificial intelligence in cybersecurity, quantum computing, and advanced threat detection. This focus will prepare fellows to address future cybersecurity challenges.

5. Extended impact through education and mentorship: The program will encourage fellows to become cybersecurity educators and mentors in their communities after their service, extending the program’s impact beyond government service and strengthening America’s overall cyber workforce.

By implementing these enhancements to the CyberCorps program as a first step and quick win, the Action Plan will initiate a more comprehensive approach to federal cybersecurity workforce development. The enhanced CyberCorps fellowship program will also emphasize diversity and inclusion to address the critical shortage of cybersecurity professionals and bring fresh perspectives to cyber challenges. The program will actively recruit individuals from underrepresented groups, including women, people of color, veterans, and neurodivergent individuals.

To achieve this, the program will partner with organizations like Girls Who Code and the Hispanic IT Executive Council to promote cybersecurity careers and expand the applicant pool. The Department of Labor, in conjunction with the NSF, will establish a Cyber Opportunity Fund to provide additional scholarships and grants for individuals from underrepresented groups pursuing cybersecurity education through the CyberCorps program.

In addition, the program will develop standardized apprenticeship components that provide on-the-job training and clear pathways to full-time employment, with a focus on recruiting from diverse industries and backgrounds. Furthermore, partnerships with Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, and Tribal Colleges and Universities will be strengthened to enhance their cybersecurity programs and create a pipeline of diverse talent for the CyberCorps program.

The CyberCorps program will expand its scope to include an international component, allowing for exchanges with allied nations’ cybersecurity agencies and bringing international students to U.S. universities for advanced studies. This will help position the United States as a global leader in cybersecurity education and training while fostering a worldwide community of professionals capable of responding effectively to evolving cyber threats.

By incorporating these elements, the enhanced CyberCorps fellowship program will not only address immediate federal cybersecurity needs but also contribute to building a diverse, skilled, and globally aware cybersecurity workforce for the future.

Implementation Considerations

To successfully establish and execute the comprehensive Action Plan and its associated initiatives, careful planning and coordination across multiple agencies and stakeholders will be essential. Below are some of the key timeline and funding considerations the ONCD should factor into its implementation.

Key milestones and actions for the first two years

Months 1–6:

• Create the Cyber Workforce Action Plan as a roadmap to implementing ONCD’s NCWES.
• Form interagency working group and private-sector advisory board.
• NIST’s Information Technology Laboratory, in collaboration with industry partners, will begin the development of the standardized assessment system and micro-credentials framework.
• Initiate the Federal Cybersecurity Curriculum Advisory Board.
• Launch the expanded CyberCorps fellowship program recruitment.

Months 7–12:

• Implement pilot programs for standardized assessments and micro-credentials.
• Begin first cohort of expanded CyberCorps fellows.
• Launch diversity and inclusion initiatives, including the “Cyber for All” awareness campaign.
• Initiate the National Cybersecurity Internship Program.
• Begin development of the Cybersecurity Employer of Excellence recognition program.

Months 13–18:

• Pilot standardized assessments and micro-credentials system in select agencies and educational institutions, with full rollout anticipated after evaluation and adjustments based on feedback.
• Expand CyberCorps program and university partnerships.
• Implement private-sector internship and project-based learning programs.
• Launch the International Cybersecurity Workforce Alliance.

Months 19–24:

• Implement tax incentives for industry participation in workforce development.
• Establish the Cybersecurity Development Fund for international capacity building.
• Conduct first annual review of diversity and inclusion metrics in federal cyber workforce.

Program evaluation and quality assurance

Beyond these key milestones, the Action Plan must establish clear evaluation frameworks to ensure program quality and effectiveness, particularly for integrating non-federal education programs into federal hiring pathways. For example, to address OPM’s need for evaluating non-federal technical and career education programs under the Recent Graduates Program, the Action Plan will implement the following evaluation framework:

• Alignment with NICE framework competencies (minimum 80% coverage of core competencies)
• Completion of NIST-approved standardized technical assessments
• Documentation of supervised practical experience (minimum 400 hours)
• Evidence of quality assurance processes comparable to registered apprenticeship programs
• Regular curriculum updates (minimum annually) to reflect current security threats
• Industry partnership validation through the Cybersecurity Employer of Excellence program

The implementation of these criteria will be overseen by the same advisory board established in Months 1-6, expanding their scope to include program evaluation and certification. This approach leverages existing governance structures while providing OPM with quantifiable metrics to evaluate non-federal program graduates. 

Budgetary, resource, and personnel needs

The estimated annual budget for the proposed initiative ranges from $125 million to $200 million. This range considers cost-effective resource allocation strategies, including the integration of existing platforms and focused partnerships. Key components of the program include:

• Staffing: A core team of 15–20 full-time employees will oversee the centralized program office, focusing on high-level coordination and oversight. Specialized tasks such as curriculum development and assessment design will be contracted to external partners, reducing the need for a larger in-house team.
• IT infrastructure: Rather than building new systems from scratch, the initiative will use existing platforms and credentialing technologies from private-sector providers (e.g., CompTIA, Coursera). This significantly reduces upfront development costs while ensuring a robust system for managing assessments and credentials.
• Marketing and outreach: A smaller but targeted budget will be allocated for domestic and international outreach to raise awareness of the program. Partnerships with industry and educational institutions will help amplify these efforts, reducing the need for a large marketing budget.
• Grants and partnerships: The program will provide modest grants to universities to support curriculum development, with a focus on fostering partnerships rather than large-scale financial commitments. This allows for more cost-effective collaboration with educational institutions.
• Fellowship programs and international exchanges: The expanded CyberCorps fellowship will begin with a smaller cohort, scaling up based on available funding and demonstrated success. International exchanges will be limited to strategic, high-impact partnerships to ensure cost efficiency while still addressing global cybersecurity needs.

Potential funding sources

Funding for this initiative can be sourced through a variety of channels. First, congressional appropriations via the annual budget process are expected to provide a significant portion of the financial support. Additionally, reallocating existing funds from cybersecurity and workforce development programs could account for approximately 25–35% of the overall budget. This reallocation could include funding from current programs like NICE, SFS, and other workforce development grants, which can be repurposed to support this broader initiative without requiring entirely new appropriations.

Public-private partnerships will also be explored, with potential contributions from industry players who recognize the value of a robust cybersecurity workforce. Grants from federal entities such as DHS, DoD, and NSF are viable options to supplement the program’s financial needs. To offset costs, fees collected from credentialing and training programs could serve as an additional revenue stream.

Finally, the Action Plan and its initiatives will seek contributions from international development funds aimed at capacity-building, as well as financial support from allied nations to aid in the establishment of joint international programs.

Conclusion

Establishing a comprehensive Cyber Workforce Action Plan represents a pivotal move toward securing America’s digital future. By creating flexible, accessible career pathways into cybersecurity, fostering innovative education and training models, and promoting both domestic diversity and international cooperation, this initiative addresses the urgent need for a skilled and resilient cybersecurity workforce.

The impact of this proposal is wide-ranging. It will not only reinforce national security by strengthening the nation’s cyber defenses but also contribute to economic growth by creating high-paying jobs and advancing U.S. leadership in cybersecurity on the global stage. By expanding access to cybersecurity careers and engaging previously underutilized talent pools, this initiative will ensure the workforce reflects the diversity of the nation and is prepared to meet future cybersecurity challenges.

The next administration must make the implementation of this plan a national priority. As cyber threats grow more complex and sophisticated, the nation’s ability to defend itself depends on developing a robust, adaptable, and highly skilled cybersecurity workforce. Acting swiftly to establish this strategy will build a stronger, more resilient digital infrastructure, ensuring both national security and economic prosperity in the 21st century. We urge the administration to allocate the necessary resources and lead the transformation of cybersecurity workforce development. Our digital future—and our national security—demand immediate action.

The economic vitality and competitiveness of America’s economy is in jeopardy. The Silver Tsunami of retiring business owners puts half of small businesses at risk: 2.9 million companies are owned by someone at or near retirement age, of which 375,000 are manufacturing, trade, and distribution businesses critical to our supply chains. Add to this that 40 percent of U.S. corporate stock is owned by foreign investors, which funnels these companies’ profits out of our country, weakening our ability to reinvest in our own competitiveness. If the steps to expand the availability of employee ownership were to address even just 10% of the Silver Tsunami companies over 10 employees, this would preserve an estimated 57K small businesses and 2.6M jobs, affecting communities across the U.S. Six hundred billion dollars in economic activity by American-owned firms would be preserved, ensuring that these firms’ profits continue to flow into American pockets.

Broad-based employee ownership (EO) is a powerful solution that preserves local American business ownership, protects our supply chains and the resiliency of American manufacturing, creates quality jobs, and grows the household balance sheets of American workers and their families. Expanding access to financing for EO is crucial at this juncture, given the looming economic threats of the Silver Tsunami and foreign business ownership.

Two important opportunities expand capital access to finance sales of businesses into EO, building on over 50 years of federal support for EO and over 65 years of supporting the flow of small business private capital to where it is not in adequate supply: first, the Employee Equity Investment Act (EEIA), and second, addressing barriers in the SBA 7(a) loan guarantee program.

Three trends create tremendous urgency to leverage employee ownership small business acquisition: (1) the Silver Tsunami, representing $6.5T in GDP and one in five private sector workers nationwide, (2) fewer than 30 percent of businesses are being taken over by family members, and (3) only one in five businesses put up for sale is able to find a buyer. 

Without preserving Silver Tsunami businesses, the current 40 percent share of foreign ownership will only grow. Supporting U.S. private investors in the mergers and acquisitions (M&A) space to proactively pitch EO to business owners, and come with readily available financing, enables EO to compete with other acquisition offers, including foreign firms.  

In communities all across the U.S., from urban to suburban to rural (where arguably the need to find buyers and the impact of job losses can be most acute), EO is needed to preserve these businesses and their jobs in our communities, maintain U.S. stock ownership, preserve manufacturing production capacity and competitive know how, and create the potential for the next generation of business owners to create economic opportunity for themselves and their families.

Challenge and Opportunity

Broad-based employee ownership (EO) of American small businesses is one of the most promising opportunities to preserve American ownership and small business resiliency and vitality, and help address our country’s enormous wealth gap. EO creates the opportunity to have a stake in the game, and to understand what it means to be a part owner of a business for today’s small business workforces. 

However, the growth of EO, and its ability to preserve American ownership of small businesses in our local economies, is severely hampered by access to financing.   

Most EO transactions (which are market rate sales) require the business owner to first learn about EO, then to not only initiate the transaction (typically hiring a consultant to structure the deal for them), but also to finance as much as 50 percent or more of the sale. This contrasts to how the M&A market traditionally works: buyers who provide the financing are the ones who initiate the transaction with business owners. This difference is a core reason why EO hasn’t grown as quickly as it could, given all of the backing provided through federal tax breaks dating back to 1974.

More than one form of EO is needed to address the urgent Silver Tsunami and related challenges, including Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) which are only a fit for companies of about 40 employees and above, and worker-owned cooperatives and Employee Ownership Trusts (EOTs), which are a fit for companies of about 10 employees and above (below 10 is a challenge for any EO transition). Of small businesses with greater than 10 employees, those with 10-19 employees make up 51% of the total; those with 20-49 employees make up 33%. In other words, the vast majority of companies with over 10 employees (the minimum size threshold for EO transitions) are below the 40+ employee threshold required for an ESOP. This underscores the importance of ensuring financing access for worker coops and EOTs that can support transitions of companies in the 10-40 employee range.

Without action, we are at risk of losing the small businesses and jobs that are in need of buyers as a result of the Silver Tsunami.

via Project Equity

Across the entire small business economy, 2.9M businesses that provide 32.1M jobs are estimated to be at risk, representing $1.3T in payroll and $6.5T in business revenue. Honing in on only manufacturing, wholesale trade and transportation & warehousing businesses, there are an estimated 375,000 businesses at risk that provide 5.5M jobs combined, representing $279.2B of payroll and $2.3T of business revenue.

Plan of Action

Two important opportunities will expand capital access to finance sales of businesses into EO and solve the supply-demand imbalance created in the small business merger and acquisition marketplace with too many businesses needing buyers and being at risk of closing down due to the Silver Tsunami.

First, passing new legislation, the Employee Equity Investment Act (EEIA), would establish a zero-subsidy credit facility at the Small Business Administration, enabling Congress to preserve the legacy of local businesses and create quality jobs with retirement security by helping businesses transition to employee ownership. By supporting private investment funds, referred to as Employee Equity Investment Companies (EEICs), Congress can support the private market to finance the sale of privately-held small- and medium-sized businesses from business owners to their employees through credit enhancement capabilities at zero subsidy cost to the taxpayer.

EEICs are private investment companies licensed by the Small Business Administration that can be eligible for low-cost, government-backed capital to either create or grow employee-owned businesses. In the case of new EO transitions, the legislation intends to “crowd in” private institutional capital sources to reduce the need for sellers to self-finance a sale to employees. Fees paid into the program by the licensed funds enable it to operate at a zero-subsidy cost to the federal government. 

The Employee Equity Investment Act (EEIA) helps private investors that specialize in EO to compete in the mergers & acquisition (M&A) space.

Second, addressing barriers to EO lending in the SBA 7(a) loan guarantee program by passing legislation that removes the personal guarantee requirement for worker coops and EOTs would help level the playing field, enabling companies transitioning to EO to qualify for this loan guarantee without requiring a single employee-owner to personally guarantee the loan on behalf of the entire owner group of 10, 50 or 500 employees. 

Importantly, our manufacturing supply chain depends on a network of tier 1, 2 and 3 suppliers across the entire value chain, a mix of very large and very small companies (over 75% of manufacturing suppliers have 20 or fewer employees). The entire sector faces an increasingly fragile supply chain and growing workforce shortages, while also being faced with the Silver Tsunami risk. Ensuring that EO transitions can help us preserve the full range of suppliers, distributors and other key businesses will depend on having capital that can finance companies of all sizes. The SBA 7(a) program can guarantee loans of up to $5M, on the smaller end of the small business company size. 

Even though the SBA took steps in 2023 to make loans to ESOPs easier than under prior rules, the biggest addressable market for EO loans that fit within the SBA’s 7(a) loan size range are for worker coops and EOTs (because ESOPs are only a fit for companies with about 40 employees or fewer, given higher regulatory costs). Worker coops and EOTs are currently not able to utilize this SBA product. 

The legislative action needed is to require the SBA to remove the requirement for a personal guarantee under the SBA 7(a) loan guarantee program for acquisitions financing for worker cooperatives and Employee Ownership Trusts. The Capital for Cooperatives Act (introduced to both the House and the Senate most recently in May 2021) provides a strong starting point for the legislative changes needed. There is precedent for this change; the Paycheck Protection Program loans and SBA Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDL) were made during the pandemic to cooperatives without requiring personal guarantees as well as the aforementioned May 2023 rule change allowing majority ESOPs to borrow without personal guarantee.

There is not any expected additional cost to this program outside of some small updates to policies and public communication about the changes. 

Addressing barriers to EO lending in the SBA 7(a) loan guarantee program would open up bank financing to the full addressable market of EO transactions.

The Silver Tsunami of retiring business owners puts half of all employer-businesses urgently at risk if these business owners can’t find buyers, as the last of the baby boomers turns 65 in 2030. Maintaining American small business ownership, with 40% of stock of American companies already owned by foreign stockholders, is also critical. EO preserves domestic productive capacity as an alternative to acquisition by foreign firms, including China, and other strategic competitors, which bolsters supply chain resiliency and U.S. strategic competitiveness. Manufacturing is a strong fit for EO, as it is consistently in the top two sectors for newly formed employee-owned companies, making up 20-25% of all new ESOPs. 

Enabling private investors in the M&A space to proactively pitch EO to business owners, and come with readily available financing will help address these urgent needs, preserving small business assets in our communities, while simultaneously creating a new generation of American business owners.

This action-ready policy memo is part of Day One 2025 — our effort to bring forward bold policy ideas, grounded in science and evidence, that can tackle the country’s biggest challenges and bring us closer to the prosperous, equitable and safe future that we all hope for whoever takes office in 2025 and beyond.

PLEASE NOTE (February 2025): Since publication several government websites have been taken offline. We apologize for any broken links to once accessible public data.

The incoming presidential administration of 2025 should champion a policy position calling for strengthening of the connection between K-12 schools and community workplaces. Such connections result in a number of benefits including modernized curricula, more meaningful lessons, more motivated students, more college and career readiness, more qualified applicants for local jobs, more vibrant communities, and a stronger nation. The gains associated with education-workplace partnerships are certainly not exclusive to STEM disciplines of study but given the high-demand for talent in STEM business and industry, the imperative may be greatest in science and mathematics, and the applied domains of engineering and technology. 

The rationale for a policy priority around K-12 and workplace partnerships centers around waning public confidence in the ability of schools to prepare tomorrow’s workforce. A perceived disconnect between what gets taught and what learners need in order to thrive on the job threatens individual livelihoods, family and community stability, and national competitiveness in an ever-more rapidly evolving global economy. Bridges are needed that unite education and workplaces, putting students and their teachers to work beyond the classroom. A new administration should:

1. Expand externships for teachers in community workplaces. The best way to help every student to explore and to be inspired about career horizons is to prepare and inspire their teachers to represent to them the opportunities that await. Externships in community workplaces sharpen teachers’ content knowledge and skills and equip them to portray the exciting careers that await students. The existing Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) federal infrastructure can be adapted for supporting externships. 
2. Deploy Competency-Based Education (CBE) at scale. America’s prevailing school model inhibits the expansion of experiential, or Work-Based Learning (WBL) in workplaces. The school day is a regimented sequence of seat-time tallies toward a seven-period stack of classes yielding little if any time to immerse learners in relevant experiences at workplaces. Or as one advocacy organization phrased it, “Today’s high school transcript is a record of time and activity, but not a very good measure of knowledge, skills, and dispositions. It doesn’t capture experiences or work products that provide evidence of growth and accomplishment.” An internet search of Work-based Learning nets over 3 billion hits. It’s one of the hottest topics in education. But those hits reveal a weakness to the WBL “movement”: it is almost entirely focused on career and technical education, a branch of general education serving about one-fourth of all students. Going forward, core area teachers and classes must take part. To do so, mathematics, science and other required and college preparatory courses need flexibility from seat time and content delivery. When teachers, schools and districts adopt Competency-Based Education, this allows more time for the other 75% of learners to earn credits by acquiring the knowledge and skills of a subject area while doing, making and working. Models exist for doing so.  

Concerted federal policy promoting the connection between K-12 schools and community workplaces sends a strong, bipartisan message to both education and employer sectors of the nation that the myriad advantages to learners, employers, and communities of cross-sector collaboration will now be the norm, not the exception. Moreover, it requires no new or novel and untested programmatic priorities – they are already at play in forward-thinking communities. Teacher externships dot the American landscape and will fit neatly into a new RET mold (coupling Research Experiences for Teachers with Regional Externships for Teachers as menu options). Competency-Based Education, with guidelines for Work-Based Learning, is already on paper in most U.S. states. Now is prime time to expand these life-changing educational reforms for all young Americans. 

Such expansions would fit neatly into existing federal structures; federal agencies have long supported competency-based education (U.S. Department of Education), Work-based Learning (U.S. Department of Labor), and Teacher-Externships (U.S. Department of Energy, and National Science Foundation). The current national landscape of teacher-externships, while promising, is  fraught with inconsistency and low participation: presently there are thousands of local teacher-externship models of wide variation in duration and rigor operated by school districts, local business organizations, higher education institutions, and regional education groups. Federal research-based guidelines and example-setting is a desperately needed function for standardizing high-quality experiences. Federal guidance and promotion could also help expand those experiences from the present low-capacity  (estimating 10 teachers per year in 5,000 local programs equates to 50,000 teacher-externs annually while there are over 3 million K-12 educators nationwide, meaning 60 years to reach all practitioners) to greater volume through more workplace and educator involvement.

Similarly, the national portrait for competency-based education leading to work-based learning presents a golden opportunity to usher educational transformation. At present, many schools and districts implement CBE to limited degrees in specific courses (typically Career and Technology Education, or CTE) for certain students (non-college bound). The potential for far greater impact across courses and the entire student spectrum awaits federal guidance and support.   

Challenge and Opportunity  

Urgency for Action

Thousands of businesses in towns and cities across the United States use science, mathematics and technology to engineer global goods while struggling to find and employ local talent. Thousands of schools across the U.S. teach science, mathematics, engineering and technology yet struggle to inspire their students toward local career opportunities. These two seemingly parallel universes overlap like the acetate pages of an anatomy textbook—muscle over bone—while largely failing to unite for mutual benefit. Iowa for example, is home to 4,273 global manufacturers depending on 263,870 employees to move product out the door. Pella Window, John Deere, Vermeer, Diamond-Vogel, Collins Aerospace, Winnebago, Tyson and others scramble to fill roughly 15,000 STEM job openings (p. 61) at any given time. The good news is that 75% of the state’s high school graduates profess interest (p. 29) in STEM careers. The bad news is that just 37% of graduates (p. 30) intend to live and work in Iowa. That is unless they’ve enjoyed a work-based learning experience and/or had a teacher who had spent a summer in industry. The Iowa experience parallels that of many rural and urban regions across the country: students whose teacher externed find more relevance in STEM classes applied to local jobs, And students who enjoy work-based learning are more likely to pursue careers locally after graduation. In combination, these two programs serve up a culture of connectedness between the world of work and the world of education, generating a win-win outcome for educators, employers, families, communities, and most importantly, for students.       

Opportunity for Impact

Immersing students and their teachers in workplace experiences is not a new idea. Career and technology education (CTE) has been a driving force for WBL for over 100 years. More recently, federal policy during the Obama administration re-shaped the blueprint for Perkins reauthorization by encouraging models that “better focus on real world experiences” (p. 3). And under the Trump administration the federal STEM education strategic plan called for a new and renewed emphasis on “…education-employer partnerships leading to work-based learning…” (p. 4). The key word here is “new”, and it’s not being emphasized enough: the status quo remains centered on CTE when it comes to teachers and students connecting with the work world, leaving out nearly three-quarters of all students. High school internships, for example, are completed by only about two percent of U.S. students, and CTE programs are completed by approximately 22 percent of white students but 18 percent of Black and 16 percent of Hispanic students. The national standards upon which states and districts base their mathematics and science curricula, including the Common Core and the Next Generation Science Standards, are not much help. They urge applied classroom problem-solving but fail to promote WBL for students or teachers. Today, the vast majority of K-12 student WBL opportunities—internships, apprenticeships, job shadows, collaborative projects, etc., take place through the CTE wing of schools. Likewise, most teacher-externship programs engage CTE educators almost exclusively. 

The potent WBL tools of career-technical education transposed over to core subject area students and teachers can invigorate mathematics, science and computing class, too. 

Impact Opportunity for Externships

As one former extern put it, “If you send one kid on an internship, it affects that one kid. If you send a teacher, the impact reaches their 200 students!” Especially for today’s rapidly growing and economically vital career sectors including Health Science, Information Technology, Biotech, Manufacturing, Agriculture, Data Analytics, Food, and Nature Resources, teacher externships can fuel the talent pipeline. Iowa has been conducting just such an experiment for a decade, making this type of professional development available to core discipline teachers. “Surveyed teacher-externs agreed or strongly agreed that it affected the way they taught, their understanding of 21^st century [transportable] skills through math and science, and they agreed or strongly agreed that more students expressed an interest in STEM careers as a result of their having participated in the externship (p. 12). Nearly all participating teachers (93%) described the externship as “more valuable than any other PD in which they had ever taken part” (p. 13).

Specific impacts on teachers included the following: 

• Greater awareness of the importance of 21st century skills—critical thinking, technology, and collaboration—and greater integration of these skills into teaching practice.
• Improved knowledge of and skills in using technology. 
• Greater understanding of the workplace expectations students will encounter.
• Increased professional confidence.
• Improved capacity to use real-world examples in the classroom.
• Better advising for students about STEM jobs.

Specific impacts on their students include the following: 

• Increase in science and STEM career interest.
• Highest gain for female interest in science, math, and a STEM career compared to before-externship (p. 29).

Beyond the direct effects upon students and their teachers, externships in local workplaces leave lasting relationships that manifest year after year in tours, projects, mentorships, equipment support, summer jobs, etc. Teacher testimonials speak to the lasting effects. 

Impact Opportunity for CBE and WBL

Although rarely implemented, every U.S. state now allows Competency-Based Education. Broadly defined, CBE is an education model where students demonstrate mastery of concepts and skills of a subject to advance and graduate, rather than log a set number of hours seat-time and pass tests. Students move at individualized pace, concepts are accrued at variable rates and sequences, teachers operate as facilitators, and the work is more often projects-based—much of it occurring outside classroom walls. CBE solves the top inhibitor to Work-Based Learning for non-CTE, core content areas of study including science, mathematics, and computing: it frees up time. 

Utah, Washington, and Wyoming are considered leaders in the CBE arena for crafting policy guidelines sufficient for a few schools to pilot the model. In Washington, 28 school districts are collaborating to establish at least one CBE school in each, the Mastery-Based Learning Collaborative (MBLC). 

Another trailblazer in CBE, North Dakota, was recently recognized by the Education Commission of the States for legislating a series of changes to school rules to disinhibit CBE and WBL: (a) A competency-based student graduation pathway and allowance for outside work to count for course credit; (b) Level state support per student whether credits are earned inside or outside the classroom; and  (c) Scholarships that honor demonstrated competency equally to the standard credits and grades criterion.  

Finally, a school that typifies the power of CBE across subject areas, supported by the influential XQ Institute, is a metropolitan magnet model called Iowa BIG in Cedar Rapids. Enrollees choose local projects in partnership with an industry partner. Projects, like real life, are necessarily transdisciplinary. And project outcomes (i.e., mastery) determine grades. Outcomes include:

• Average ACT scores of 22 (21 is state average, just under 20 is national average).
• 97 percent of graduates report feeling at least somewhat prepared for the future.
• 92 percent cite “collaboration [and] working in groups” as strengths most developed.

Yet, for all its impact and promise, Iowa BIG, like many CBE pilots, struggles to broaden offerings (currently limited to English, social studies, and business credits), and enrollment (roughly 100 students out of a grade 11-12 regional population over ten-times that amount). As discussed in the next section, CBE programs can be significantly constrained by local, state, and federal policies (or lack thereof).

Challenges Limiting Impact

The limited exposure of American K-12 students to teachers who enjoy an Externship, or to Competency-Based Education leading to Work-Based Learning testifies to the multiple layers of challenge to be navigated. At the local district level, school schedules and the lack of communication across school   – business boundaries are chief inhibitors to WBL, while educator professional development and crediting/graduation rules suppress CBE. At the state level, the inhibitors reveal themselves to be systemic: funding of and priority needs for educator professional development, a lack of a coherent and unifying profile of a graduate, standardized assessments, and graduation requirements retard forward movement on experiential partnerships. Logically, federal challenges have enormous influence on state and local conditions: the paucity of research and development on innovative instructional and assessment practices, inadequate communication of existent resources to drive WBL and other national education imperatives, insufficient support for the establishment of state and regional intermediary structures to drive local innovation, and non-complimentary funding programs that if coordinated could significantly advance K-12 –workplace alignment.  

The pace of progress at the local school level is ultimately most strongly influenced by federal policy priority. The policy is well-established by the federal STEM education strategic plan Charting a Course for Success: America’s Strategy for STEM Education, a report by the Committee on STEM Education of the National Science and Technology Council, Pathway 1: Develop and Enrich Strategic Partnerships (p. 9). The plan was developed through and embraced for its bipartisan approach. Refocusing on its fulfillment will make the United States a stronger and more prosperous nation.

Plan of Action

The federal government’s leadership is paramount in driving policy toward education-workplace alignment. Specific roles range from investment to asset allocation to communication, specific to both teacher externships and CBE leading to WBL.

(1) Congress should legislate that all federal agencies involved in STEM education outreach (those represented on the Committee on STEM Education [Co-STEM] and on the Subcommittee on Federal Coordination in STEM Education [FC-STEM]) establish teacher-externship programs at their facilities as capacity and security permit. The FC-STEM should designate an Inter-agency Working Group on Teacher-Externships [IWG-TE]  to be charged with developing a standard protocol consistent with evidence-based practice (e.g., minimum four-week, maximum eight-week summer immersion, authentic work experience applying knowledge and skills of their teaching discipline, close mentorship and supervision, the production of a translational teaching product such as a lesson, unit, or career exploratory component, compensation commensurate with qualifications, awareness and promotion activities, etc.). The IWG-TE will provide an annual report of externships activity across agencies to the FC-STEM and Co-STEM. 

(2) Within two years of enactment, all agencies participating in teacher externships shall develop and implement an expansion of the externships model to localities nationwide through a grant program by which eligible LEAs, AEAs, and SEAs may compete for funding to administer local teacher-externship programs in partnership with local employers (industry, nonprofit, public sector, etc.) pertinent to the mission and scope of the respective agency. For example, EPA may fund externs in state natural resource offices, and NASA may fund externs in aerospace industry facilities. The IWG-TE will include progress and participation in the grant program as part of their annual report.

(3) The IWG-TE shall design and administer an assessment instrument for components (1) and (2) that details participation rates by agency, demographics of participants, impact on participants’ teaching, and evidence of impact on the students of participants related to interest in and capability for high-demand career pursuit. An external expert in teacher-externships administration may be contracted for guidance in the establishment of the externships program and its assessment. 

As to funding, the agencies charged with implementation are those already conducting outreach, so it could be that initially no new dollars accompany the mandate. However, for the second component (grants), new funding would definitely be needed. A budget line request in 2027 seeking $10 million to be distributed proportionally to agencies based on numbers of externs – determined by the Office of Science and Technology Policy in close consult with FC-STEM – such that a goal of 1500 total externs be supported nationwide at an estimated cost of $6,000 each, plus administrative costs. In summary:

Teacher Externships

• The next administration should work with Congress to authorize the use of the RET infrastructure (NOAA, NASA, Dept. of Energy, NSF, and other variants) across agencies to administer Teacher-Externships at federal facilities.
• Congress should authorize a new grant program where agencies participating in teacher externships develop and administer grant programs by which eligible LEAs, AEAs, and SEAs may compete for funding to administer local teacher-externship programs in partnership with local employers.

Competency-based Education leading to Work-Based Learning

• Congress should ensure that a reauthorized WIOA could support the establishment and operation of state or regional intermediaries like The Center in Iowa and the MBCL in Washington state to conduct professional development and facilitate information exchange. 
• Increase R&D on knowledge transfer and mobilization around CBE via funding for  Education Innovation and Research and the Advancing Research in Education Act.
• ED and DOL should issue joint guidance to allow for flexible use in combination with WIOA, Perkins V, ESSA and other federal resources to expand CBE and WBL.

Recommendations supporting both innovations

• For all awarded R&D proposals across all member agencies of CoSTEM, encourage Externships and WBL as Broader Impact functions.
• Establish a single, searchable resource specific for finding federal activities and resources for Externships, CBE, and WBL.
• Sustain the call for strategic partnerships of education and workplace as a national imperative in the updated 2025 federal STEM strategic plan. 

Conclusion 

Teachers prepared to connect what happens between 8:00 am and 3:00 pm to real life beyond school walls reflect the future of education. Learners whose classrooms expand to workplaces hold our best hopes as tomorrow’s innovators. Studying forces and vectors at the amusement park make Physics come alive. Embryo care at the local hatchery enlivens biology lessons. Pricing insurance against actuarial tables adds up in Algebra. Crime lab forensics gives chemistry a courtroom. Designing video games that use AI to up the action puts a byte in computer study. And all such experiences fuel passions and ignite dreams for STEM study and careers. Let America put learners and their teachers to work beyond classrooms to bridge the chasm between classrooms and careers. This federal policy priority will be a win-win for learners, their families and communities, employers, and the nation.

This action-ready policy memo is part of Day One 2025 — our effort to bring forward bold policy ideas, grounded in science and evidence, that can tackle the country’s biggest challenges and bring us closer to the prosperous, equitable and safe future that we all hope for whoever takes office in 2025 and beyond.

PLEASE NOTE (February 2025): Since publication several government websites have been taken offline. We apologize for any broken links to once accessible public data.

The Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system contains critical statistical information about occupations, employment levels, trends, pay and benefits, demographic characteristics, and more. The system allows users – including leaders at Federal agencies – to collect, analyze, and disseminate data on employment trends, wages, and workforce demographics, and it enables a consistent analysis of the labor market. However, the rapid evolution of the job market, particularly in the tech sector, is outpacing updates to the SOC system. This misalignment poses challenges for economic measurement and development. The Office of Performance and Personnel Management (OPM) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) at the White House should lead a comprehensive effort to update SOC codes through research, collaboration with industry experts, pilot programs, and regulatory adjustments. By acting now, the Administration can create clear career pathways for workers and better equip federal agencies with critical workforce insights to optimize national investments.

Challenge and Opportunity

Outdated SOC classifications hinder efficient workforce planning, as traditional classifications do not reflect emerging tech roles and the energy innovation sector. Accurate SOC codes are necessary to enhance job growth analysis and create an efficient hiring pipeline that meets the demands of a fast-evolving job market. OMB is currently updating the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system manual and aims to complete the update by 2028. This is an opportunity to modernize classifications and include new roles that drive economic growth and support workforce development. Newer and emerging roles such as Renewable Energy Technicians, Large Language Model Engineers, Blockchain Developers, and Sustainability Engineers are either absent or not sufficiently detailed within the current SOC system. These emerging positions involve specialized skills like developing AI algorithms, creating decentralized applications, or designing immersive virtual environments, which go beyond the scope of traditional software development or IT security. 

Clear job classifications will allow for the efficient tracking of new, in-demand roles in emerging tech sectors, aligning with recent large federal investments, such as the CHIPS Act and IIJA, which aim to strengthen American industries. Updates to the SOC system will boost local economies by helping communities develop effective workforce training programs tailored to new job trends. They will provide clarity on required skills and competencies, making it easier for employers to develop accurate job descriptions and hire efficiently. Updates will provide workers with access to clear job descriptions and career pathways, allowing them to pursue opportunities and training in emerging fields like renewable energy and AI. SOC updates ensure national workforce strategies are data-driven and align with economic and industrial goals. The updates will ensure policymakers and researchers have accurate measurements of economic impacts and employment trends. 

Plan of Action

To modernize the SOC system and better reflect emerging tech roles, a dual-track plan involving comprehensive research, collaboration with key stakeholders, pilot programs, interagency awareness efforts, and regulatory updates is needed. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), specifically the SOC policy committee, should lead this work in partnership with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Key partners will include the Department of Energy (DOE), and Department of Labor (DOL), industry experts, academic institutions, and nonprofit organizations focused on workforce development.

Recommendation 1. Update the SOC System. 

The BLS, along with OPM and OMB,  should begin a comprehensive update process, with a focus on defining new roles in the market. Collaborate with industry experts, pilot programs with federal and state agencies, and research with academic institutions to ensure classifications accurately reflect the responsibilities and qualifications of modern roles. 

Recommendation 2. Reinstate Green Job Programs/Develop Frameworks.

OPM and OMB should work to immediately establish classifications for tech occupations. They should establish guidelines that facilitate the inclusion of emerging job categories in federal and state employment databases. Concurrently, advocate for the reinstatement and sustainable funding of job programs impacted by sequestration. These actions align with broader federal priorities on technological innovation and will require ongoing collaboration with Congress for budget approval. For example, before the work was stopped, BLS had $8 million per year for its “measuring green collar” jobs initiative. 

Recommendation 3. Pilot Programs and Interagency Awareness Efforts.

To validate the proposed changes, the BLS can implement pilot programs in collaboration with the broader DOL and selected state workforce agencies. These pilots will test the practical application of updated SOC codes and gather data on their effectiveness and increase awareness of the SOC role. The total estimated budget for implementing these actions is similar to those involved in a rulemaking process, which can vary from $500,000 to upwards of $10 million over two years.  The costs of the updates could be offset by reallocating unspent funds from a previous year’s budget allocation for workforce training and readiness programs or as part of an appropriation from Congress that restores program measurement funding. 

Conclusion

Modernizing the SOC system to reflect new and emerging occupations is essential for efficient workforce planning, economic growth, and national policy implementation. This update will provide local communities, employers, workers, and federal agencies with accurate data, ensuring efficient use of federal resources and alignment with the Administration’s economic priorities. By prioritizing these updates, the Administration can enhance job tracking, workforce strategies, and data accuracy, supporting investments that drive economic competitiveness.

This action-ready policy memo is part of Day One 2025 — our effort to bring forward bold policy ideas, grounded in science and evidence, that can tackle the country’s biggest challenges and bring us closer to the prosperous, equitable and safe future that we all hope for whoever takes office in 2025 and beyond.

PLEASE NOTE (February 2025): Since publication several government websites have been taken offline. We apologize for any broken links to once accessible public data.

In order to help all American workers and strengthen the national economy, the next administration should establish a Sector-Focused Employment Training Initiative (SETI) to coordinate and expand evidence-based sectoral employment training programs across the U.S. workforce. SETI would help address persistent wage inequality and limited career advancement for low-income workers, equipping millions of Americans to contribute to and prosper alongside critical U.S. industries.

Sectoral employment training programs offer a proven, evidence-based way to generate substantial and long-term employment and earnings gains for participants. These programs provide low-income and non-traditional workers (i.e., workers without a high school or college degree) with access to higher-wage jobs in better paying sectors with opportunities for advancement. There has been encouraging movement towards integrating sectoral approaches into federal job training programs, but without coordination and firm grounding in evidence, these programs risk being fragmented and ineffective. SETI would work closely with federal programs, local workforce development systems, and key industries to coordinate and expand sectoral employment programs in direct response to local workforce needs. Sectoral employment programs target in-demand, high-wage occupations and focus on breaking down barriers to employment through training, mentorship, and comprehensive supports. 

SETI would ultimately create pathways for millions of Americans to enter in-demand careers with long-term growth trajectories, strengthening both the competitiveness and prosperity of U.S. industries. 

Challenge and Opportunity

The state of wage inequality and economic mobility in the United States

Workers in the U.S. have experienced decades of skyrocketing wage inequality, with the highest earners increasingly pulling away from middle- and low-wage workers. From 1979 to 2018, the top 0.1 percent of earners saw their earnings grow fifteen times faster than the bottom ninety percent. In 2022, the median weekly earnings of Black full-time workers was approximately 83 percent that of all full-time workers. These disparities often stem from structural barriers to opportunities faced by people of color in the American job market. Despite the historically fast wage growth that low-wage workers experienced from 2019 to 2023, large racial, educational, and gender wage gaps persist. These gaps are especially pernicious as American workers are encountering major affordability challenges, including meeting basic needs such as housing and healthcare. 

It is increasingly difficult for non-college-educated workers to gain employment in high-paying occupations with career advancement opportunities. Opportunities for upward mobility in many industries with a high concentration of low-wage workers are limited, and though some pathways exist, access to them is unequal. Black, Hispanic, and female workers disproportionately experience low wage mobility. The downsizing of once prosperous industries has also left many Americans, especially those without college degrees with fewer opportunities for jobs with meaningful career advancement. For example, from 1979 to 2019 America lost 6.7 million manufacturing jobs (a 35 percent decrease), which previously gave adults with a high school education a path into the middle class. Many of these jobs were replaced by lower-wage service jobs, but a resurgence of manufacturing jobs are now at risk of being unfilled due to skills gaps. 

As rapid advancements in automation and artificial intelligence are projected to shift the types of jobs Americans hold, policymakers must act now to ensure that workers can obtain the skills needed to thrive in a changing labor market and to meaningfully shrink wage inequities. Historically, technological change in labor markets has unequally benefitted college-educated workers to the detriment of non-college-educated workers, but it does not have to in the future. AI has the potential to restore middle wage jobs, but only if it is implemented thoughtfully. Policymakers must urgently invest in evidence-based sector-focused employment training programs to ensure workers benefit from, rather than are displaced by, emerging technologies. These targeted training programs will provide workers with in-demand skills for careers with long-term potential for upward mobility. 

Creating competitive career pathways through sector-focused employment programs

Sectoral employment programs train job seekers, typically low-income adults and those with non-traditional backgrounds (i.e. those whose educational and/or training background is different from traditional expectations for their role) for high-quality, in-demand employment with opportunities for longer-term career advancement. In contrast to traditional job training programs, sectoral employment programs target in-demand occupations and focus on breaking down barriers to employment through training, mentorship, and additional supports.  Programs work with local employers to identify in-demand jobs with high starting wages and opportunities for advancement, and equip participants with the technical and general career readiness skills and credentials to succeed in both the targeted jobs and in the labor market more broadly. Sectors typically include healthcare, IT, and manufacturing.

Among many workforce development models, sectoral employment training programs stand out for their proven ability to produce and sustain significant wage gains. A review of four randomized evaluations of several sectoral employment programs highlights their effectiveness in consistently boosting employment and earnings. These programs lead to substantial and lasting earnings gains  (a 12–34 percent increase) primarily by helping workers access better-paying, higher-quality industries and occupations. Additionally, these programs provide training in certifiable and transferable skills which can enable job mobility. 

Sectoral employment programs can also be cost-effective by increasing employee income, which in turn generates additional tax revenue for the government to help offset some of the program costs. Preliminary, ongoing research by Nathan Hendren and co-authors, suggests the returns from this increased tax revenue can be substantial. For example, initial analyses of three key sectoral employment programs (Project QUEST, Year Up, and WorkAdvance) suggest that just using estimated incomes over the observed follow-up time frames, the benefits they provide to participants exceeds the net cost to the government—meaning that the marginal value of public funds (MVPF) is greater than one. What is more, if the increase in earnings observed over the study period persisted for 20 years or more, the increase in tax revenue would offset the program costs entirely. 

Meeting a moment for American workers

SETI would build on recent federal investments and a strong bipartisan movement to support the American worker. There is significant bipartisan support for strengthening national infrastructure and technological advancement by investing in workforce development, as evidenced by the passage of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors Act (CHIPS). Nine regional Workforce Hubs help implement federal investments to ensure Americans get connected to the quality jobs created through these significant federal investments. Importantly, additional key infrastructure for advancing workforce development programs already exists through the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), which has a goal of bringing about increased federal coordination for workforce development programs. WIOA workforce development programs are provided and coordinated through approximately 3,000 One-Stop centers (also known as American Job Centers) nationwide, governed through local Workforce Development Boards and coordinated through the Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration (ETA). 

Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) has made a suite of recent investments in workforce development. Through a $500 million allocation from the American Rescue Plan, the DOC’s Economic Development Administration (EDA)’s Good Jobs Challenge awarded 32 industry-led, workforce training partnerships funds to develop workforce training systems in 2022. As of December 2023, 11,000 workers have been trained and 3,000 participants have secured jobs through the Good Jobs Challenge. In FY24, EDA will be providing an additional 5-8 awards to regional workforce training systems that establish sectoral partnerships, though this is still not sufficient to meet the clear demand of Good Jobs Challenge funding, which initially received $6.4 billion in funding requests from over 500 applicants. 

In 2023, the DOL’s Chief Evaluation Office and the ETA funded the Sectoral Strategies and Employer Engagement Portfolio (SSEEP), which includes three grant programs totalling approximately $188 million in funding to workforce development strategies that build relationships with employers in specific sectors to provide tailored training and good jobs to participants. Targeted sectors include renewable energy, transportation, broadband infrastructure, healthcare, climate resiliency, and hospitality. Importantly, evidence and evaluation are embedded within SSEEP. The portfolio includes a formative study, implementation studies, and assessments to identify sites for impact evaluation. The DOL continues to push for increased investment in sectoral employment strategies, putting forth a Sectoral Employment through Career Training for Occupational Readiness (SECTOR) program to seed and scale industry-led and worker-centered sectoral training partnerships in its FY25 budget proposal. SECTOR was included in the FY25 Presidential Budget, but did not make it into either the House or Senate FY25 Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bills.

These significant investments and proposals for expansion of sectoral workforce development approaches are encouraging, but they risk being uncoordinated in a federal employment and training program ecosystem that spans 43 programs across 9 agencies. Since the Government Accountability Office (GAO) recommended reducing overlap and fragmentation between these programs in 2019, DOL has taken several steps to increase coordination. The DOL should build upon this progress and establish a SETI to coordinate and broaden sectoral employment strategies across programs. 

Plan of Action

The next administration should establish a Sector-Focused Employment Training Initiative (SETI), an inter-agency initiative based jointly within the Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration and the Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration. SETI would work closely with various federal intermediaries, including local Workforce Development Boards and regional Workforce Hubs, to coordinate and expand sector-focused training programs within American Job Centers, Workforce Hubs, DOL’s Sectoral Strategies and Employer Engagement Portfolio (SSEEP) and other federal initiatives, trade associations, community colleges, and local and national nonprofits. SETI would support the expansion of existing evidence-based programs like Per Scholas and Year Up as well as the establishment of new evidence-based sector-focused job training programs. Additionally, SETI would provide technical assistance to local workforce development systems on how to implement these programs and match job seekers with evidence-based training providers. It would also promote continuous improvement by supporting rigorous evaluations of promising new models. To establish SETI, the next administration should take the following specific steps:

Recommendation 1. The President should call upon Congress to direct federal funding to SETI through the annual Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill.

This could be achieved by securing new funding through the federal budget and/or proposing tax incentives for employers that participate in the initiative. Broadly, the goal of SETI is to fund, coordinate, and expand sector-focused training programs across American Job Centers, federal workforce development initiatives, trade associations, community colleges, and local and national nonprofits. SETI would coordinate existing sector-focused training approaches across agencies to maximize current investments and expand sector-focused approaches through programs including SECTOR (which would be funded as part of SETI). SETI will ensure that the sectoral employment programming is evidence-based, effective, and coordinated. It will also include mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation for continuous program improvement. To help fund this initiative in the future, the federal government could commission an assessment (through GAO) of the array of workforce development programs across the country to identify opportunities to redistribute funding away from less effective models. 

Recommendation 2. Establish the structure of SETI, which will include a guiding task force, an Executive Director, and personnel:

• The SETI task force will oversee the design and implementation of SETI. The task force should be chaired by the Executive Director and should include representatives from: the National Association of Workforce Development Boards; representatives from high-growth industries, including green energy and semiconductor industries; state and local governments, including staff from state labor offices; DOL and DOC  staff overseeing the Good Jobs Challenge, Workforce Hubs, and other federal initiatives; union representatives; representatives from trade organizations, community colleges, and established sectoral job training nonprofits such as Year Up and Per Scholas. The task force should conduct consultations with industry leaders, educational institutions, labor organizations, and community groups to gather input and build support for SETI. This will help tailor the initiative to the specific needs of various regions and sectors.
• The Executive Director will chair the task force, manage the day-to-day operations of SETI, oversee hiring of personnel, and will be responsible for ensuring that the directives of the task force are carried out, reporting back regularly to the task force.
• SETI personnel will carry out the directives of the task force as delegated by the Executive Director, which will include disbursement of funds to local sectoral employment training programs and providing technical assistance. 

Recommendation 3. Beginning with implementation pilots, SETI should provide technical assistance and funding to local Workforce Development Boards, national Workforce Hubs, and other intermediaries implementing federal workforce development initiatives to launch and scale sectoral employment programming.

• Implementation pilot of SETI: SETI personnel, under the direction of the Executive Director and the guidance of the task force, will work with intermediaries in select localities (e.g., local Workforce Development Boards, Workforce Hubs, etc.) to identify promising opportunities to launch or scale up sectoral employment programs. Together, local intermediaries and SETI personnel will identify industries with strong labor demand and potential for career growth, such as healthcare, IT, manufacturing, and green energy. SETI will support local intermediaries  to develop and strengthen industry partnerships and generate industry buy-in for sectoral employment programs. SETI will provide technical assistance and funding to local intermediaries to leverage existing infrastructure to set up and deliver programming in partnership with industry. For example, a local intermediary such as a Workforce Development Board would receive SETI funding and technical assistance to launch and scale sectoral employment programs through  local American Job Centers, trade associations, community colleges, and/or local and national nonprofits, in alignment with community needs and resources. These implementation pilots can serve as a proof of concept for SETI, providing valuable insights into the best practices for training, employer collaboration, and participant support.
• Standards of quality and best practices: Following insights gained from the implementation pilots, the existing rigorous evidence base on sectoral employment programs, and learnings from SSEEP and other federal initiatives, the SETI task force will publish standards of quality for sectoral employment programs and best practices for how local intermediaries  can integrate them into existing workforce development infrastructure. Additionally, the task force will make recommendations to local intermediaries  on which less effective workforce programs to scale back and how.
• Technical assistance: SETI personnel will provide technical assistance to local intermediaries to develop, grow, and strengthen sectoral employment programs that meet high quality standards and best practices. Technical assistance may include guidance on program design (ensuring key components are included), employer engagement, and participant recruitment, as well as support for building the capacity of local training providers.
• Funding: SETI will provide funding to local intermediaries to disburse to sectoral employment programs that follow standards of quality and best practices.
• Community of practice: SETI will establish and lead a community of practice of local intermediaries launching and scaling sectoral employment programs to sustain coordination and collective learning. This will build upon and implement best practices learned from the  Good Jobs Challenge Community of Practice. 

Recommendation 4. SETI should encourage and fund rigorous evaluations, including randomized evaluations, in partnership with research labs and consulting firms  to continuously assess and improve SETI’s sectoral employment programs.

Evidence from these evaluations can help policymakers and practitioners identify effective models that should be scaled up. During the technical assistance phase, SETI personnel should embed monitoring and evaluation practices into the setup of sectoral employment programs. SETI should share successful strategies and practices identified through evaluations with states, localities, and training providers to ensure continuous improvement and widespread adoption of effective models. 

Conclusion 

The next administration should establish a Sector-Focused Employment Training Initiative (SETI) to expand access to quality, evidence-based sectoral employment training programs to help millions of American workers prosper. A SETI would coordinate various government job training investments and efforts by setting best practices, providing technical assistance, and delivering further funding to expand sectoral employment programs. An effective, coordinated approach to sectoral employment training programs is critical to reduce wage inequality and ensure the long-term prosperity of workers and in-demand industries during a time of rapid technological advancement.

This action-ready policy memo is part of Day One 2025 — our effort to bring forward bold policy ideas, grounded in science and evidence, that can tackle the country’s biggest challenges and bring us closer to the prosperous, equitable and safe future that we all hope for whoever takes office in 2025 and beyond.

PLEASE NOTE (February 2025): Since publication several government websites have been taken offline. We apologize for any broken links to once accessible public data.

The energy transition underway in the United States continues to present a unique set of opportunities to put Americans back to work through the deployment of new technologies, infrastructure, energy efficiency, and expansion of the electricity system to meet our carbon goals. Unlike many previous industrial transitions, the U.S. can directly influence the pace of change, promote greater social equity, and create new jobs to replace those that are phasing out. 

Since 2021, significant policies have been enacted to support this transition, including the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act. The most recent Congressional Budget Office estimates of the energy-related spending of these three pieces of legislation was at least $956 billion over a 10-year period.

Despite these historic investments, additional work remains to be done. To supplement the accomplishments of the last four years, the next administration should:

1. Establish the Energy Workforce and Economic Development Extension Program inside the Department of Energy (DOE). 
2. Restore the interagency Energy and Advanced Manufacturing Workforce Initiative.
3. Initiate the Energy Transition Community Benefits Training Program. 
4. Establish a national public-private commission on steel decarbonization.
5. Restore the DOE Labor Working Group under the direction of a senior advisor to the Secretary of Energy.

Challenge and Opportunity 

In 2023, the energy sector added over 250,000 jobs, with clean energy accounting for 56% of jobs. Energy efficiency jobs, such as the manufacture and installation of heat pumps, added 74,700 jobs, the most of any technology area. While energy jobs are found in every state in America, fossil fuel production jobs and the infrastructure associated with them are highly concentrated. In 2020, 73% of the roughly one million oil, coal, and natural gas production jobs were in just 10 states. By 2023, 70,000 of those jobs were lost in the same 10 states, leaving the communities that host them at risk of economic decline. The Interagency Working Group on Coal and Power Plant Communities was established by Executive Order in 2021 to address this issue and provide new incentives for clean energy production such as the Sparkz and Form Energy battery plants in West Virginia. To date, over $538 billion of competitive and formula funding has been provided to “revitalize America’s energy communities.”

Plan of Action

On day one, the next administration should announce the expansion of the DOE Office of Energy Jobs to lead the following efforts. 

Recommendation 1. Establish the Energy Workforce and Economic Development Extension Program (EWEDEP) inside the DOE. 

Modeled after the Agricultural Extension Program, and in partnership with the National Laboratories, the EWEDEP should provide technical advice to the state decarbonization plans funded by the Environmental Protection Agency, as well as to municipalities, regional entities, tribal governments, and private-sector businesses. Led by the Office of Energy Jobs, this program should also assist regional, state, local, and tribal governments in developing and implementing technical decarbonization strategies that simultaneously create good local jobs. State and regional support staff for the Office of Energy Jobs should be located in each of the national laboratories.

Recommendation 2. Restore the interagency Energy and Advanced Manufacturing Workforce Initiative (EAMWI). 

During the Obama Administration, EAMWI, run by the Department of Energy, coordinated activities between the Departments of Energy, Labor, Education, Commerce, and Defense and the National Science Foundation to harmonize planning, training, and curriculum development for the new energy workforce. In addition to resuming those coordinative activities, the next administration should mandate that the EAMWI produce quarterly assessments of the needs and opportunities in workforce training in response to the requirements of the energy transition. Based on updated USEER data from 2024 and ongoing job occupational needs’ assessments, EAMWI should provide annual reports on state energy workforce needs to the appropriate federal and state agencies in charge of energy, education, and economic development strategies. 

Recommendation 3. Initiate the Energy Transition Community Benefits Training Program. 

Community Benefit Plans (CBPs) and Community Benefit Agreements (CBAs) have emerged as the primary tools for monitoring job quality metrics in the energy transition, particularly those that are supported by federal government grants and loans. This program should provide expert training in the design and performance of CBPs and CBAs for company executives, community organizations and advocates, labor unions, and local government employees. This program should be informed by an advisory board of experts from business schools, trade associations, labor unions, and community stakeholders.

Recommendation 4. Establish a national public-private commission on steel decarbonization. 

Decarbonizing the steel industry will be one of the most difficult and expensive challenges posed on the energy transition. Appointing a national commission of industry stakeholders, including business, labor, communities, and federal agencies, will be critical for developing a model for managing hard-to-decarbonize, industrial sectors of the economy in ways that create quality jobs, protect communities, and build broad consensus among the American people. DOE should also establish an Office of Steel Decarbonization to implement the commission’s recommendations.

Recommendation 5. Restore the DOE Labor Working Group under the direction of a senior advisor to the Secretary of Energy. 

The DOE Labor Working Group provided monthly guidance on how to implement high wage strategies in the energy sector while preserving jobs and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Member organizations included energy sector unions involved in the mining, extraction, manufacturing, construction, utility, and transportation industry sectors. 

After initiating these actions on day one, the next administration should prioritize legislation establishing an Energy Transition Adjustment Assistance Program (ETAAP). In some cases, the loss of fossil fuel jobs in concentrated parts of the country will require retraining of current employees to prepare them for new careers with new employers. The U.S. will need a program to provide income support greater than extended unemployment to recipients undergoing retraining. Such a program should learn from the shortcomings of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program by providing more supportive services. Based on two-year training costs and average participation rates of TAA-certified beneficiaries, a minimum of $20 billion for worker retraining should be allocated as part of this effort.

In addition, the Interagency Working Group on Coal and Power Plant Communities should be consulted to design standards for broad eligibility to participate in the ETAAP, including energy-intensive manufacturing businesses impacted by the energy transition. Finally, as existing energy companies transition to producing cleaner forms of energy, the program should consider subsidizing the retraining of existing energy-sector employees to provide new skills for the transition.

Conclusion

Unlike many previous industrial transitions, which were driven by new technologies and market forces, decarbonization is driven largely by social policy interventions. Thus, well-planned responses, based on timely clean-energy economic development investments, can provide good jobs and economic opportunity for displaced workers and affected communities. The clean energy tax credits included in the IRA should be maintained and extended. Labor standards and domestic content rules should be attached to both grants and formula spending. Finally, the lending authorities for the DOE Loan Program Office should be expanded to include energy infrastructure, energy-intensive manufacturing, and energy efficiency projects. With such an approach, the U.S. and its workers can benefit from the global push to decarbonize.

This idea was originally published on February 1, 2021. We’ve republished this updated version on November 27, 2024.

This action-ready policy memo is part of Day One 2025 — our effort to bring forward bold policy ideas, grounded in science and evidence, that can tackle the country’s biggest challenges and bring us closer to the prosperous, equitable and safe future that we all hope for whoever takes office in 2025 and beyond.

PLEASE NOTE (February 2025): Since publication several government websites have been taken offline. We apologize for any broken links to once accessible public data.

Competent and innovative technologists are crucial to the future of U.S. national security. The National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI) warns that a digital talent deficit at the Department of Defense (DOD) represents the greatest impediment to the U.S. military’s effective embrace of emerging technologies (such as artificial intelligence). 

A new Digital Military Talent Initiative could help address the military’s digital-talent gap by providing an expedited path to U.S. citizenship through military service for noncitizen technologists aligned to NSCAI archetypes. Modernization of an already-existing DOD program and military enlistment policy updates could infuse digital talent by providing vetted noncitizens a pathway to accelerated naturalization through military service.

Challenge and Opportunity

A paucity of technical talent threatens the U.S. military’s current and future capability goals, as evidenced by the military’s ongoing inability to staff cyber units or achieve objectives set by the Pentagon’s Chief Data Officer. Global competition for technical talent requires the United States to get more creative with recruitment. The former Director of the DOD’s Defense Innovation Unit noted that the Pentagon’s efforts to add science and technology talent to its workforce are “insufficient” given competitors’ gains in these arenas. 

If current efforts are insufficient to meet technical talent needs, future efforts may be worse. Projections suggest the U.S. population is aging, such that fewer working-age persons will be available relative to the broader population in years to come. This trend may have an outsize negative impact on the military’s available talent pool, as the military fills its ranks predominantly with younger workers. Only 12% of the nation’s young adults are qualified and available to enlist, further exacerbating the larger recruiting shortage. Compounding the problem is the fact that military-eligible tech talent is often lost to the higher-paying private sector. Last, lack of lifestyle flexibility may make the military a hard sell, especially for innovative and free-thinking talent.

Even the newest models for bringing private-sector talent into the military, such as the U.S. Digital Corps and cyber direct-hire authorities, only harness talent from existing U.S. citizens. Proposals for training more government technologists (e.g., by creating a federal digital service academy) are limited by the number of citizens who may be willing and able to participate. 

There is a blueprint that may help overcome these challenges. During the Global War on Terror, the U.S. military enlisted over 10,000 noncitizen volunteers through the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (MAVNI) program. Under this program, a select group of pre-screened recruits was offered the chance to remain in the U.S. and obtain citizenship in exchange for military service. Notwithstanding an untimely termination that gave rise to a series of lawsuits, MAVNI was widely recognized as a success. It should be noted that over 14,000 individuals expressed interest in the first year that the U.S. Army sought to enlist recruits in the Global War on Terror pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 504(b)(2)). However, the program was limited in scope. Although many MAVNI participants held advanced degrees, the skillsets the program sought (due to DOD’s self-imposed restrictions) were limited to certain foreign languages and medical specialties. Modernizing and expanding MAVNI with statutory authority commensurate with the realities of modern conflict could help mitigate technology talent shortages in the military.

Modernizing and expanding MAVNI would also align with the NSCAI’s recommendation for a “comprehensive” legislative strategy to enable “highly skilled immigrants to encourage more AI talent to study, work, and remain in the United States.” Our nation’s inadequate strategies for recruiting foreign technical and STEM talent have caused leading companies like Google to appeal for Congressional assistance, even as peer nations like Canada have developed novel, effective policies to support digital immigration. During the Trump administration, Toronto became the fastest-growing location for tech-sector jobs in North America. The upshot is clear: the U.S. military—and the United States generally—faces a widening tech talent gap that requires out-of-the-box thinking to address.

Plan of Action

We propose a two-part plan of action for launching a national Digital Military Talent Initiative. Part One entails minor modifications to existing law governing U.S. military eligibility. Part Two involves modernizing the existing MAVNI program by expanding the definition of skills deemed “vital to the national interest” and evolving recruitment and technology practices to incorporate this new talent. More detail on each of these components is provided below.

Part 1. Amend existing law governing U.S. military eligibility. 

Two paragraphs of 10 U.S.C. § 504(b) should be modified to enable the Department of Defense to access noncitizen technologists. First, 10 U.S.C. § 504(b)(2)—which governs military enlistment of individuals who are neither U.S. citizens, permanent residents, nor citizens of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, or Palau— should be modified to read:

“Notwithstanding paragraph (1), and subject to paragraph (3), the Secretary concerned may authorize enlistment of a person not described in paragraph (1) if the Secretary determines that such person possesses a critical skill or expertise that is vital to the national interest.”

In other words, 10 U.S.C. § 504(b)(2) should be modified by removing provision (B), which currently requires that an enlistee use their referenced “critical skill or expertise” in their “primary daily duties.” This requirement unnecessarily inhibits military commanders at all levels, since critical skills and expertise often include skills and expertise deployed only in moments of the utmost exigency.

Second, 10 U.S.C. § 504(b)(3) should be modified to read: 

“A Secretary concerned may not authorize more than 10,000 enlistments under paragraph (2) per military department in a calendar year until after the Secretary of Defense submits to Congress written notice of the intent of that Secretary concerned to authorize more than 10,000 such enlistments in a calendar year.” 

This language increases the enlistment number at which the Secretary of Defense is statutorily obligated to notify Congress and does away with the 30-day waiting period that the Secretary must wait between notifying Congress and proceeding with the enlistment authorization.

These modifications are needed to accommodate anticipated recruitment under an expanded MAVNI and help the Secretary to move quickly on leveraging such a talent pool. Congressional changes can be slow and difficult to change; however, without these changes, the MAVNI program will continue to be constrained when bringing noncitizen tech talent into the military.

Part 2. Modernize the DOD’s existing MAVNI program by authorizing enlistment for certain vetted noncitizens with critical digital competencies.

The MAVNI program authorizes certain noncitizens to enlist if they possess critical skills limited to certain foreign languages and medical specialties. As the demands of modern conflict have adjusted at the speed of technological advancement, so too should the way the U.S. staffs its military. The DOD should expand the MAVNI program to include skills aligned to the NSCAI’s digital-talent archetypes, the 2021 Executive Order 14028 on improving the nation’s cybersecurity, FY2022 National Defense Authorization Act, and the 2023 Executive Order 14110 on the development and use of artificial intelligence. The DOD should also consider the following recommendations to modernize the existing MAVNI program. 

MAVNI Program Setup:

• Determine talent needs of military service-software factories, as well as tactical-level units and enterprise programs pursuing technology transformations.
• Source and prioritize needs related to specific problem statements and technology applications that can be developed with minimal risk and have potential for significant impact. 
• Educate internal stakeholders on leveraging noncitizen technologists capable of developing and shipping code in zero trust environments.
• Evolve and scale MAVNI program infrastructure in alignment with DOD zero trust principles and architecture requirements.
• Develop professional-development and career pathways that incentivize recruited technical talent to remain engaged in their military careers. 
• Gather and implement feedback from program alumni and participants on topics including recruitment, retention, training, incentives, and community-building.

Recruitment Process:

• Define enlistment pathways for recruited technical talent. For instance, a recruit might first enter into a non-classified military occupational specialty—whether a unique specialty for uncleared technical talent or a traditional specialty. After receiving a clearance naturalization, the recruit could a) shift to an existing enlisted role in information technology/networking, cyber, and electronic warfare, b) enter a potentially new technology-specialty role, or c) commission as a warrant or officer. 
• Understand military recruiter pain points and concerns specific to MAVNI and technical talent identification to ensure appropriate talent screening, talking points, and incentivization for both the recruiter and potential service member.
• MAVNI participants enlisting in the military are encouraged to join any of the Regular or Reserve components.
• Naturalization should occur prior to MAVNI participants reporting to initial active duty training to avoid creating any U.S. visa complications.

Conclusion

The DOD’s current technology talent deficiencies may evolve into an existential vulnerability without significant course correction, while our competitors increase investments in both R&D and STEM education. The DOD can begin addressing these deficiencies through an integrated Technical Military Talent Initiative. Such an initiative should comprise two parts: (1) amending existing law governing enlistment eligibility and (2) modernizing the existing MAVNI program to recruit talent for the military in alignment with STEM skills “vital to the national interest.”  Together, these actions will dramatically grow the U.S. military’s eligible technology talent pool, thus enabling it to better compete in future sub-threshold and armed conflict.

This idea was originally published on February 9, 2022; we’ve re-published this updated version on November 13, 2024. The views expressed are those of the authors. The analysis presented stems from the authors’ academic research of publicly available sources, not from protected operational information. All errors and omissions are those of the authors.

This action-ready policy memo is part of Day One 2025 — our effort to bring forward bold policy ideas, grounded in science and evidence, that can tackle the country’s biggest challenges and bring us closer to the prosperous, equitable and safe future that we all hope for whoever takes office in 2025 and beyond.

PLEASE NOTE (February 2025): Since publication several government websites have been taken offline. We apologize for any broken links to once accessible public data.

The next generation of nuclear energy deployment depends on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) willingness to use flexible hiring authorities to shape its workforce. Many analysts and policymakers propose increasing nuclear power production to ensure energy security and overall emissions reduction, and the U.S. recently joined 20 other countries in a pledge to triple global nuclear energy capacity by 2050. Additional nuclear deployment at this scale requires commercializing advanced reactor concepts or reducing capital costs for proven reactor technologies, and these outcomes rely on the capacity of the NRC to efficiently license and oversee a larger civilian nuclear industry. The ADVANCE Act, which became law in July, 2024, empowers the agency to accelerate licensing processes, mandates a new mission statement that reflects the benefits of nuclear energy, and provides additional direction to existing hiring flexibilities authorized by the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954. To meet expected demand for licensing and oversight, the NRC should not hesitate to implement new hiring practices under this direction.

The potential of the ADVANCE Act’s provisions should be understood in context of NRC’s existing authorities, practices, and history. NRC is exempt from the federal competitive hiring system for most positions. When Congress created the NRC in 1974 as a partial replacement of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), it maintained AEA provisions that allowed the AEC to hire without regard to civil service laws. Most NRC positions are in the Excepted Service, a category of positions across the federal workforce exempt from competitive hiring, which is particularly useful for highly-skilled positions that are impracticable to assess using traditional federal examining methods. The AEA allows NRC to hire staff to the Excepted Service provided salaries do not exceed grade 18 of the General Schedule (GS) (GS-16-18 were replaced with the Senior Executive Service in 1978) for scientific and technical positions and provided salaries for other positions follow the General Schedule when the occupation is comparable. Other agencies can hire to the Excepted Service in limited circumstances such as for candidates that are veterans or for specific occupations defined by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).

Non-Competitive Hiring In Practice

Based on a review of NRC policies, procedures, and reports, NRC underuses its non-competitive hiring authorities provided under the AEA. Management Directives (or MDs, NRC’s internal policy documents) repeatedly state that NRC is exempt from competitive hiring under the AEA while outlining procedures that mirror government-wide practices derived from other laws and regulations such as the Senior Executive Service, Administrative Judges, experts and consultants, advisory committee members, and veterans, which are common flexible hiring pathways available to other agencies. MD 10.1 outlines NRC’s independent competitive merit system that generally follows OPM’s general schedule qualification standards. MD 10.13 on NRC’s non-competitive hiring practices under AEA authority is limited to part-time roles and student programs. While the policy includes a disclaimer that it covers only the most common uses, it does not include guidance on applying non-competitive hiring to other use cases. 

The NRC has also been slow to reconcile its unique flexible hiring authorities with OPM Direct Hire Authority (DHA), a separate expedited process to hire to the Competitive Service. As far back as 2007, NRC hiring managers and human resources reported in Government Accountability Office interviews that DHA was highly desired and the agency was exploring how to obtain the authority. OPM denied NRC’s request for DHA the year before because it determined that it does not apply to NRC’s already-excepted positions under the AEA. NRC decided to replicate its own version of DHA that follows OPM’s restrictions for hiring of certain occupational categories. While this increased flexibility for hiring managers, a 2023 OIG audit found confusion among staff, managers, and directors about which laws and internal policies applied to DHA.

Making Sense of the ADVANCE Act

As NRC updates guidance on its version of DHA for hiring managers, the ADVANCE Act provides NRC with more direction for hiring to the Excepted Service. The law creates new categories of hires for positions that fill critical needs related to licensing, regulatory oversight, or matters related to NRC efficiency if the chair and the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) agree on the need. It specifies that the hires should be diverse in career level and have salaries commensurate with experience, with a maximum matching level III of the Executive Schedule. Additional limitations on the number of hires fall into two categories. The first category limits use of the authority to 210 hires at any time. The second category limits use of the authority to an additional 20 hires each fiscal year which are limited to a term of four years. The total number of staff serving at one time under the second category could reach 80 appointments if the authority is used to the maximum over four consecutive years. If NRC maximizes hiring in both categories each year for at least 4 years, the total number of staff serving at one time could reach 290, which is almost 7% of the current total NRC workforce. Several analyses and press releases mischaracterized or overlooked the specifics of these provisions, reporting the total number of 120 for the number of appointments in the first category, which could be a typo of 210 or a figure derived from a prior draft version of the bill. Appropriations are provided in NRC’s normal process of budget recovery through fees charged to license applicants.

The Regulatory Workforce for the Next Generation of Nuclear Power Plants

The capacity of the NRC to license new nuclear power plants and provide oversight to a larger number of operating reactors impacts the viability of nuclear power as part of the U.S.’s abundant and reliable energy system. For decades, the AEA has provided NRC staff with unique flexibility to shape a workforce to regulate the civilian nuclear energy and protect people and the environment. Under recent direction and specificity from Congress, the EDO should not hesitate to hire staff in new, specialized positions across the agency that are dedicated to implementing updates to licensing and oversight as mandated by the ADVANCE Act. In parallel, the EDO should work with the Office of Human Resources to promote NRC’s version of DHA to hiring managers more widely to solve long-standing hiring challenges for hard-to-recruit positions. Effective use of NRC’s broad hiring flexibilities are critical to realizing the next generation of nuclear energy deployment.

Over the last 20 years, the cost of college has skyrocketed, with tuition costs far outpacing wage growth. At the same time, many employers complain that they’re unable to find high-quality talent, in part due to an excessive focus on the signaling effect conferred by college degrees. Although the last three administrations have made significant strides towards expanding the number of pathways to high-earning jobs through apprenticeship programs, they remain under-utilized and have significant potential for growth. To maximize the potential of apprenticeship programs, the federal government should develop a cohesive approach to supporting “apprenticeships of the future,” such as those in cyber, healthcare, and advanced manufacturing. These apprenticeships provide high pay and upward mobility, support economic growth, and serve vital national interests. To maximize the benefits provided by an expansion of high-quality apprenticeships, the federal government should articulate degree pathways and credit equivalencies for individuals seeking further education, collaborate with industry associations to create standards for skills acquisition, and develop an innovation fund that supports cutting-edge labor market innovations, including those in apprenticeship programs.

Challenge & Opportunity

While recent student debt cancellation received significant attention, the key underlying driver is the spiraling cost of college: tuition at four-year universities has risen by more than 125% in the last twenty years, far outpacing inflation and leaving students with an average debt load of $28,000 by graduation. To alleviate the strain, policymakers have increasingly recognized the potential of non-degree training, particularly apprenticeships, which mix on-the-job training with targeted academic skills acquisition. Apprenticeships, which typically last between a few months and 2 years, enable an individual in a high school or tertiary education program to work with an employer, earning a wage while developing skills that may lead to a permanent position or enhance future employability. President Obama spent $260 million on apprenticeship training, while the Trump administration spent $1 billion. Thus far, the Biden administration has spent $730 million to expand registered apprenticeships. 

Nevertheless, apprenticeships in America remain vastly underutilized compared to some of our peer economies. In Germany, 1.2 million adults are enrolled in apprenticeship programs across 330 occupations. By contrast, the U.S. has roughly half as many apprentices despite enrolling 6.5 times as many college students as Germany. Moreover, apprentices are overwhelmingly concentrated in roles such as electricians, machinists, plumbers, and other industries historically classified as “skilled trades.” 

American employers have put a significant premium on college degrees. Research from the Harvard Business School highlights the pervasiveness of degree inflation in many middle-skill, well-paying jobs. The figure below shows the “degree gap percentage,” which is the difference between the percentage of job descriptions requiring a college degree and the percentage of job holders holding a college degree.

Historically, employers’ emphasis on degrees has made wide-scale adoption of apprenticeships outside of skilled trades more challenging. However, attitudes towards apprenticeships continue to change as more employers realize their versatility and applicability to a variety of industries. Over the past few years, companies have started to take action. For instance, JP Morgan Chase has provided $15 million since 2018 to create apprenticeship programs in operations, finance, and technology, while Accenture has led the way in developing apprenticeship networks across the U.S. Apprenticeships have clear momentum and strong applicability to critical, strategic jobs, and federal, state, and local officials should capitalize on the opportunity to create a coherent strategy.

Policy Framework For Strategic Jobs

To identify areas of policy synergy, policymakers should consider the following criteria for jobs that should attract government funding and policy support:

1. Essential to economic growth: roles that are frequently employed in high-growth industries, or else required to improve the future general productivity of businesses.
2. Necessary to protect American interests: jobs that have broader implications for American national interests, including economic competitiveness, national security, green energy, and public health.
3. Middle-skill roles that do not require college degrees: while higher educational attainment is generally desirable, it is not a suitable nor affordable option for all individuals, and many roles can or should support workers who have alternative credentials. Simply put, these jobs should provide pathways into the middle class without excessive education debt burdens.
4. High current job shortages: demand for roles far exceeds current labor supply.

Using this framework, there are three  areas in which the U.S. has clear, pressing needs:

1. Tech job shortages in the United States will cost the American economy over $160 billion in revenue, driven by a shortage of over 1.2 million workers.
   1. Cyber attacks alone cost the American economy 1% – 4% of GDP , which can be partially addressed by eliminating the existing talent shortage of 350,000 cyber professionals.
   2. In addition, 50% of the federal tech workforce is over the age of 50 and just 20% is under the age of 40, indicating a large “retirement cliff” in the medium-term horizon.
2. Although the U.S. has had a long-standing need for nurses and medical professionals, the COVID pandemic highlighted their importance and exposed systemic workforce shortages. By 2030, the country will be short over 500,000 nurses.
   1. The country also suffers from a lack of healthcare educators, with nearly 80,000 qualified nursing applicants turned away due to a lack of training capacity.
   2. While many critical healthcare roles (e.g., RNs and NPs) require at least a bachelor’s degree, apprenticeships are a great way to increase the pipeline of lower-level medical staff (e.g., medical assistants, CNAs, LVNs), who can then be upskilled into the RN role or higher.
3. Today, the U.S. has over 600,000 unfilled manufacturing jobs, which may hamper efforts to bring back clean energy and semiconductor manufacturing despite the hundreds of billions invested by the Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS Act, and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Cumulatively, this talent shortage could reduce American GDP by $1 trillion. The gap is most acute in a handful of roles, including assemblers, production supervisor, inspectors, and welders. However, these roles are essential to empowering the advanced manufacturing revolution, and need to be filled in order to maximize American industrial potential.

Policy Recommendations

In order to maximize the potential of apprenticeship programs in key strategic areas, the next administration should focus on coordinating resources, defining standards, and convening key stakeholders, which include employers and higher education providers, including private sector providers who demonstrate strong outcomes. To achieve this, the next administration should focus on the following policies: 

Recommendation 1. The Departments of Labor and Education should jointly lead the creation of a national strategy for increasing apprenticeships and blended work-learn programs in essential roles and industries. In conjunction with other government agencies, they will stand up a “Strategic Apprenticeships” Task Force. This task force will consist primarily of governmental agencies, including the Department of Defense, Department of Treasury, and the Fed, that have clear mandates for improving worker outcomes which are tied directly to national strategic priorities. This task force will cooperate with the Advisory Committee on Apprenticeships (a committee convened by the Department of Labor that consists of labor unions, community colleges, and other institutions) to set short, medium, and long-term priorities, propose funding levels, and develop a coherent apprenticeship and training strategy.

• The Strategic Apprenticeships Task Force should adopt a “whole of government” approach and when appropriate, include other stakeholders such as the Department of Commerce or the Department of Defense. The task force will then work closely with bodies with deep domain expertise on apprenticeships (e.g., the Advisory Committee on Apprenticeships) to ensure that the proposed standards and structures are appropriately designed and implemented. This will culminate in the development of a strategic plan for apprenticeships that is renewed every five years and outlines key roles, skills, technologies, and training pedagogies that merit greater attention.
• Where necessary, the task force should create standards for apprenticeship programs that qualify for federal funding. The Registered Apprenticeship Program provides a repository of federally or state validated apprenticeships. However, occupations in cybersecurity and software development remain highly under-represented compared to roles in “traditional” industries such as manufacturing. The task force should work with industry certifications and associations, such as the ISC(2) and ISSA, to develop skill acquisition standards that will form the backbone of new apprenticeship programs.
• To ensure that students have multiple pathways to acquire additional educational credentials, the federal government should create a set of competency-based standards that equate on-the-job activities with classroom learning, creating clear pathways for students in apprenticeships who want to later receive an associate’s or bachelor’s degree. While this applies to all apprenticeships (and is a defining feature of the very successful Swiss and German systems), creating federal learning standards will improve the appeal of apprenticeship programs in strategic sectors while giving individuals a path to higher credentials in the future. Great strides were made for the cyber workforce, but more can be done in other sectors as well.
• At the state and local levels, elected officials should work with local chambers of commerce, community colleges, universities, and alternative education providers such as coding bootcamps to translate learning standards into apprenticeship opportunities, course credit, and pathways to an associate’s or bachelor’s degree. Where possible, local officials should also engage with nonprofits and other service organizations to provide wrap-around support structures such as career coaching, financial planning, and mental health resources which have been shown to improve persistence and outcomes.

Recommendation 2. Congress should commit federal funds for apprenticeships in cyber, software engineering, healthcare, and advanced trades (“apprenticeships for the future”), which will be allocated by the Department of Labor as prioritized by the Strategic Apprenticeships Task Force. Given the strategic value and existing job shortages for these roles, the Department of Labor should direct at least 50% of funds to roles that (a) provide strong pathways into middle-class jobs and (b) address pressing economic and strategic shortages in our economy:

• Past presidents’ increased funding for apprenticeship programs demonstrates broad bipartisan appeal for apprenticeships. This can be paired with the increasing bipartisan consensus on China, thereby linking job creation in key industries with national security implications (e.g., cybersecurity). The Jumpstart Our Businesses by Supporting Students Act of 2019 and the Bipartisan Workforce Pell Act both call for Pell Grants to be used for certain short-term learning programs. New legislation can go one step further by adding funding for short-term programs in “strategic roles.” 
• Funding policies can take into account other economic and social justice priorities. For instance, the U.S. Department of Labor recently announced $87.5M of funding to expand diversity in registered apprenticeship programs. In addition to expanding the amount of funding targeted at women and individuals of color, the next administration could create funds for former apprentices of color to enter quality 4-year degree programs that continue expanding their earnings potentially (e.g., HBCUs).
• Department of Labor apprenticeship funding should transition away from proposal-style “contests” towards a more consistent and predictable schedule of funding. Currently, the Department of Labor will announce that a pot of money will be made available for competitive proposals and is typically distributed to State Departments of Labor and sometimes to large nonprofits. Going forward, apprenticeship funding, particularly those focused on jobs of the future, should be a consistent budget line item with clear paths towards funding renewal. In addition, the Department of Labor, in conjunction with the Strategic Apprenticeships Task Force, should publish guidelines for roles and skill development as outlined in their strategic plan.

Under the Biden administration, progress has been made on higher education accountability: for example, the Gainful Employment Rule was reinstated, requiring for-profit programs to demonstrate that typical graduates’ debts are less than 8% of their earnings, or 20% of their discretionary income, to maintain access to federal student aid. Moreover, the rule requires more than half of graduates to demonstrate higher earnings than a typical high school graduate.

Nonetheless, more can be done to buttress progress that has been made on higher education, particularly given stronger regulations around ROI. The policies suggested above can roll up into an “Apprenticeships of the Future” initiative jointly managed by the Departments of Labor and Education. By using a coordinated approach to apprenticeships, policymakers can ensure that more attention is paid towards strategically important industries and roles while creating clearer pathways for individuals seeking apprenticeships and for former apprentices looking to gain further skills and training in 4-year degrees and other “alt-ed” training programs. Moreover, the initiative could make diversity and economic advancement for underserved communities a core part of its mission.

This idea was originally published on November 29, 2021; we’ve re-published this updated version on October 21, 2024.

This action-ready policy memo is part of Day One 2025 — our effort to bring forward bold policy ideas, grounded in science and evidence, that can tackle the country’s biggest challenges and bring us closer to the prosperous, equitable and safe future that we all hope for whoever takes office in 2025 and beyond.

PLEASE NOTE (February 2025): Since publication several government websites have been taken offline. We apologize for any broken links to once accessible public data.