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Outdated SOC classifications hinder efficient workforce planning, as traditional classifications do not reflect emerging tech roles and the energy innovation sector.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.

The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) and Alliance for Learning Innovation (ALI) Coalition, in collaboration with the Aspen Strategy Group and Walton Family Foundation, released a new paper “Fortifying America’s Future: Pathways for Competitiveness,” co-authored and edited by Brienne Bellavita, Dan Correa, Emily Lawrence, Alix Liss, Anja Manuel, and Sara Schapiro. The report delves into the intersection of education, workforce, and national security preparedness in the United States, summarizing key findings from roundtable discussions in early 2024. These roundtable discussions gathered field experts from a variety of organizations to enrich the discourse and provide comprehensive recommendations for addressing this challenge. Additionally, a panel of topical experts discussed the subject matter of this report at the Aspen Security Forum on July 18th, 2024.

The United States faces a critical human talent shortage in industries essential for maintaining technological leadership, including workforce sectors related to artificial intelligence, quantum computing, semiconductors, 5G/6G technologies, fintech, and biotechnology. Without a robust education system that prepares our youth for future careers in these sectors, our national security and competitiveness are at risk. Quoting the report, Dr. Katie Jenner, Secretary of Education for the State of Indiana, reiterated the idea that “we must start treating a strong educational system as a national security issue” during the panel discussion. Addressing these challenges requires a comprehensive approach that bridges the gaps between national security, industry, higher education, and K-12 education while leveraging local innovation. The paper outlines strategies for creating and promoting career pathways from K-12 into high-demand industries to maintain the U.S.’s competitive edge in an increasingly global landscape, including:

• Leveraging the national security community to foster a sense of urgency around improving our education ecosystem.
  

National security has historically driven educational investment (think Sputnik) and remains a bipartisan priority, providing a strong foundation for new legislation addressing emerging technologies like AI. For example, the CHIPS and Science Act, driven by competition with China, has spurred states to innovate, form public-private partnerships, and establish Tech Hubs. 

• Providing federal incentives and highlighting successful state approaches, building coalitions around key industries, supporting states in developing K-12 pathways, and scale impactful place-based strategies.

Mapping out workforce opportunities in other critical sectors such as aviation, AI, computer science, and biosecurity can ensure that the future workforce is gaining necessary skills to be successful in high-need careers in national security. For example, Ohio created a roadmap for advanced manufacturing with the Governor’s Office of Workforce Transformation and the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association outlining sector-specific competencies.

• Supporting intermediaries to scale connections between K-12 education and the workforce.

Innovative funding streams, employer incentives, and specialized intermediaries promoting career-connected learning can bridge gaps by encouraging stronger cross-sector ties in education and the workforce. For example, Texas allocated incentive funding to Pathways in Technology Early College High Schools (P-TECH) encouraging explicit career-connected learning opportunities that engage young people in relevant career paths. 

• Launching a Technical Assistance Center and developing a Career Counseling Corps to assist states in creating pathways to key industries through place-based ecosystem support.

A Technical Assistance (TA) Center would offer tailored support based on each state’s emerging industries, guided by broader economic and national security needs. The center could bring together stakeholders such as community colleges, education leaders, and industry contacts to build partnerships and cross-sector opportunities. 

• Highlighting success stories and place-based strategies through a 50 State Bright Spots campaign. 

Virginia streamlined all workforce initiatives under a central state department, enhancing coordination and collaboration. The state also convenes representatives and cabinet members with backgrounds in workforce issues regularly to ensure alignment of education from K-12 through postsecondary.

• Strengthening education R&D by creating and funding an ARPA-ED to advance career-connected learning with innovative solutions, improve data systems, and promote evidence-based practices in career-connected learning.

Education R&D lacks sufficient investment and the infrastructure to support innovative solutions addressing defining challenges in education in the U.S. The New Essential Education Discoveries (NEED) Act would establish an agency called the National Center for Advanced Development in Education (NCADE) that would function as an ARPA-ED, developing and disseminating evidence-based practices supporting workforce pathways and skills acquisition for critical industries.

• Encouraging technology careers by introducing K-12 students to technology-related topics early and communicating the opportunities available in key industries.

Giving young students opportunities to learn about different careers in these sectors will inspire interest and early experiences with diverse options in higher education, manufacturing, and jobs from critical industries ensuring American competitiveness.Implementing these recommendations will require action from a diverse group of stakeholders including the federal government and leadership at the state and local levels. Check out the report to see how these steps will empower our workforce and uphold the United States’ leadership in technology and national security.

Federal climate initiatives, like the ‘Climate Corps’ and the National Climate Resilience Framework, overlook the integration of technology-focused green jobs, missing opportunities for equity and innovation in technology, artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning (ML). Our objective is to advocate for the integration of technology-focused green jobs within these initiatives to foster equity. Leveraging funding opportunities from recent legislation, notably the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) environmental education fund, we aim to craft novel job descriptions, tailored training programs, and foster strategic public-private partnerships.

Methods and Approach

Our approach was based on comprehensive research and extensive stakeholder engagement, including discussions with key federal agencies and industry experts, identifying challenges and opportunities for integrating technology-focused green jobs. We engaged with officials and experts from various organizations, including the Department of Energy, EPA, USDA, FEMA, New America, the Benton Institute, National Urban League, Kajeet, the Blue Green Alliance, and the Alliance for Rural Innovation.We conducted data research and analysis, reviewed government frameworks and CRS reports, as well as surveyed programs and reports from diverse sources.

Challenge and Opportunity

The integration of technology-focused green jobs within existing federal climate initiatives presents both challenges and opportunities. One primary challenge lies in the predominant focus on traditional green jobs within current initiatives, which may inadvertently overlook the potential for equitable opportunities in technology, artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning (ML). This narrow emphasis risks excluding individuals with expertise in emerging technologies from participating in climate-related efforts, hindering innovation and limiting the scope of solutions. Moreover, the lack of adequate integration of technology within climate strategies creates a gap in inclusive and forward-looking approaches, potentially impeding the effectiveness of initiatives aimed at addressing climate change. Addressing these challenges requires a paradigm shift in how federal climate initiatives are structured and implemented, necessitating a deliberate effort to incorporate technology-driven solutions alongside traditional green job programs.

However, amidst these challenges lie significant opportunities to foster equity and innovation in the climate sector. By advocating for the integration of technology-focused green jobs within federal initiatives, there is an opportunity to broaden the talent pool and harness the potential of emerging technologies to tackle pressing environmental issues. Leveraging funding opportunities from recent legislation, such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) environmental education fund, presents a unique opportunity to invest in novel job descriptions, tailored training programs, and strategic public-private partnerships. Furthermore, initiatives aimed at reconciling concerns about equity in job creation and transitions, particularly in designing roles that require advanced degrees and ensuring consistent labor protections, provide avenues for fostering a more inclusive and equitable workforce in the green technology sector. By seizing these opportunities, federal climate initiatives can not only advance technological innovation but also promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in the emerging green economy.

Plan of Action

Moving the integration of these policy frameworks internally and with an aspiration to reflect market and community needs will require a multi-faceted approach. In response to the identified challenges and opportunities, the following policy recommendations are proposed:

Recommendation 1. Restructuring Federal Climate Initiatives to Embrace Technology-Focused Green Jobs

In light of the evolving landscape of climate challenges and technological advancements, there is a pressing need to review existing federal climate initiatives, such as the ‘Climate Corps’ and the National Climate Resilience Framework, to actively integrate technology-focused green jobs. Doing so creates an opportunity for integrated implementation guidance. This recommendation aims to ensure equitable opportunities in technology, artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning (ML) within the climate sector while addressing the intersection between climate and technology. By undertaking this restructuring, federal climate initiatives can better align with the demands of the modern workforce and foster innovation in climate solutions. For example, the two aforementioned initiatives and the Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence all infer or clearly mention the following: green or climate jobs, equity, job training programs and tech and climate literacy. There is room to create programs to research and generate solutions around the ecological impacts of AI development within the auspices of the Climate Resilience Framework, and consider creating roles to implement those solutions as part of the Climate Corps (see Appendix II). 

The rationale behind this recommendation lies in the recognition of the imperative to adapt federal climate initiatives to embrace emerging technologies and promote diversity and inclusion in green job opportunities. As the climate crisis intensifies and technological advancements accelerate, there is a growing need for skilled professionals who can leverage technology to address environmental challenges effectively. However, existing initiatives predominantly prioritize traditional green jobs, potentially overlooking the untapped potential of technology-driven solutions. Therefore, restructuring federal climate initiatives to actively integrate technology-focused green jobs is essential to harnessing the full spectrum of talent and expertise needed to confront the complexities of climate change.

1. Developing a Green Tech Job Initiative. This initiative should focus on creating and promoting jobs in the tech, AI, and ML sectors that contribute to climate solutions. This could include roles in developing clean energy technologies, climate modeling, and data analysis for climate research and policy development. Burgeoning industries such as regenerative finance offer opportunities to combine AI and climate resilience goals. 
2. Ensuring Equitable Opportunities. Policies should be put in place to ensure these job opportunities are accessible to all, regardless of background or location. One example would be to leverage the Justice40 initiative, and use those allocations to underserved communities to create targeted training and education programs in tech-driven environmental solutions for underrepresented groups. Additionally, public-private partnerships could be strategically designed to support community-based projects that utilize technology to address local environmental issues.
3. Addressing the Intersection of Climate and Technology. The intersection of climate and technology should be a key focus of federal climate policy. This could involve promoting the use of technology in climate mitigation and adaptation strategies, as well as considering the environmental impact of the tech industry itself. (Strengthening community colleges, accredited online programs and other low-cost alternatives to traditional education and job training)

Recommendation 2. Leveraging Funding for Technology-Driven Solutions in Federal Climate Initiatives

In order to harness the funding avenues provided by recent legislation such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) environmental education fund, strategic policy measures must be implemented to facilitate the development of comprehensive job descriptions, tailored training plans, and robust public-private partnerships aimed at advancing technology-driven solutions within federal climate initiatives. This recommendation underscores the importance of utilizing available resources to cultivate a skilled workforce, foster innovation, and enhance collaboration between government, industry, and academia in addressing climate challenges through technology.

The rationale behind this recommendation is rooted in the recognition of the transformative potential of technology-driven solutions in mitigating climate change and building resilience. With significant funding streams allocated to climate-related initiatives, there is a unique opportunity to invest in the development of job descriptions that reflect the evolving demands of the green technology sector, as well as training programs that equip individuals with the necessary skills to excel in these roles. Moreover, fostering robust public-private partnerships can facilitate knowledge sharing, resource pooling, and joint innovation efforts, thereby maximizing the impact of federal climate initiatives. By strategically leveraging available funding, federal agencies can catalyze the adoption of technology-driven solutions and drive progress towards a more sustainable and resilient future.

1. Comprehensive Job Descriptions. Develop comprehensive job descriptions for technology-focused green jobs within federal climate initiatives. These descriptions should clearly outline the roles and responsibilities, required skills and qualifications, and potential career paths. This could be overseen by the Department of Labor (DOL) in collaboration with the Department of Energy (DOE) and the EPA.
2. Tailored Training Plans. Establish tailored training plans to equip individuals with the necessary skills for these jobs. This could involve partnerships with educational institutions and industry bodies to develop curriculum and training programs. The National Science Foundation (NSF) could play a key role in this, given its mandate to promote science and engineering education.
3. Public-Private Partnerships. Foster robust public-private partnerships to advance technology-driven solutions within federal climate initiatives. This could involve collaborations between government agencies, tech companies, research institutions, and non-profit organizations. The Department of Commerce, through its National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), could facilitate these partnerships, given its role in fostering innovation and industrial competitiveness.

Recommendation 3. Updating Bureau of Labor Statistics Job Categories for Green and Tech Jobs

To address the outdated Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) job categories, particularly in relation to the green and innovation economies, federal agencies and stakeholders must collaborate to support an update of these categories and classifications. This recommendation emphasizes the importance of modernizing job classifications to accurately reflect the evolving nature of the workforce, especially in sectors related to green technology and innovation.

The rationale behind this recommendation is rooted in the recognition of the significant impact that outdated job categories can have on program and policy design, particularly in areas related to green and technology-driven jobs. Currently the green jobs categorization work has been interrupted by sequestration.¹ The tech job updates are on differing schedules. By updating BLS job categories to align with current market trends and emerging technologies, federal agencies can ensure that workforce development efforts are targeted and effective. Moreover, fostering collaboration between public and private sector stakeholders, alongside inter-agency work, can provide the necessary support for BLS to undertake this update process. Through coordinated efforts, agencies can contribute valuable insights and expertise to inform the revision of job categories, ultimately facilitating more informed decision-making and resource allocation in the domains of green and tech jobs.

1. Inter-Agency Collaboration. Establish an inter-agency task force, including representatives from the BLS, Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Department of Labor (DOL), to review and update the current job categories and classifications. This task force would be responsible for ensuring that the classifications accurately reflect the evolving nature of jobs in the green and innovation economies.
2. Public-Private Partnerships. Engage in public-private partnerships with industry leaders, academic institutions, and non-profit organizations. These partnerships can provide valuable insights into the changing job landscape and help inform the update of job categories and classifications.
3. Stakeholder Engagement. Conduct regular consultations with stakeholders, including employers, workers, and unions in the green and innovation economies. Their input can ensure that the updated classifications accurately represent the realities of the job market.
4. Regular Updates. Implement a policy for regular reviews and updates of job categories and classifications, particularly in renewing and syncing the green and tech jobs.The Office of Budget and Management can offer guidance about regular reviews and feedback based on government-wide standards. Initiating such a policy may require additional personnel in the short-term, but long-term this will increase agency efficiency. It will also ensure that the classifications remain relevant as the green and innovation economies continue to evolve (see FAQ section and Appendix I).

Conclusion

The integration of technology-focused green jobs within federal climate initiatives is imperative for fostering equity and innovation in addressing climate challenges. By restructuring existing programs and leveraging funding opportunities, the federal government can create inclusive pathways for individuals to contribute to climate solutions while advancing in technology-driven fields. Collaboration between government agencies, private sector partners, educational institutions, and community stakeholders is essential for developing comprehensive job descriptions, tailored training programs, and strategic public-private partnerships. Moreover, updating outdated job categories and classifications through inter-agency collaboration and stakeholder engagement will ensure that policy design accurately reflects the evolving green and innovation economies. Through these concerted efforts, the federal government can drive sustainable economic growth, promote workforce development, and address climate change in an equitable and inclusive manner.

Appendix

The recommendations outlined in this memo represent the culmination of extensive research and collaborative efforts with stakeholders. As of March 2024, while the final project and products are still undergoing refinement through stakeholder collaboration, the values, solutions, and potential implementation strategies detailed here are the outcomes of a thorough research process.

Our research methodology was comprehensive, employing diverse approaches such as stakeholder interviews, data analysis, examination of government frameworks, review of Congressional Research Service (CRS) reports, and surveying of existing programs and reports.

Stakeholder interviews were instrumental in gathering insights and perspectives from officials and experts across various sectors, including the Department of Energy, FEMA, New America, the Benton Institute, National Urban League, Kajeet, and the Alliance for Rural Innovation. Ongoing efforts are also in place to engage with additional key stakeholders such as the EPA, USDA, select Congressional offices, labor representatives, and community-based organizations and alliances.

Furthermore, our research included a thorough analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data to understand industry projections and job classification limitations. We employed text mining techniques to identify common themes and cross-topic programming or guidance within government frameworks. Additionally, we reviewed CRS reports to gain insights into public policy writings on related topics and examined existing programs and reports from various sources, including think tanks, international non-governmental organizations (INGOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and journalism.
The detailed findings of our research, including analyzed data, report summaries, and interview portfolio, are provided as appendices to this report, offering further depth and context to the recommendations outlined in the main text.

I. BLS Data Analysis: Employment Trends in Tech-Related Industries (2022-2032)

This section provides a detailed analysis of employment statistics extracted from CSV data across various industries, emphasizing green, AI, and tech jobs. The analysis outlines notable growth and potential advancement areas within technology-related sectors.

The robust growth in employment figures across key sectors such as computer and electronic product manufacturing, software publishing, and computer systems design underscores the promising outlook for tech-related job sectors. Similarly, the notable expansion within the information sector, while not explicitly AI-focused due to industry constraints, signals an escalating demand for skill sets closely aligned with technological advancements.

Moreover, the significant growth observed in support activities for agriculture and forestry hints at progressive strides in integrating green technologies within these domains. This holistic analysis not only sheds light on evolving employment trends but also provides valuable insights into market dynamics. Understanding these trends can aid in identifying potential opportunities for workforce development initiatives and strategic investments, ensuring alignment with emerging industry needs and fostering sustainable growth in the broader economic landscape.

Further Analysis

• Search Industry. Projections indicate a robust growth of 5.4% by 2032, signaling a promising trajectory for this sector.
• Self-Employed Workers. There’s a concerning projected decline in employment by 8.6%, indicating potential challenges for individuals in this category, necessitating exploration into the underlying causes.
• Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting. With an anticipated increase of 5.4% in employment, this sector demonstrates resilience and potential opportunities for growth, possibly driven by technological advancements or shifts in consumer demand.
• Utilities. A notable expected decline of 7.4% suggests a need for strategic interventions to address factors contributing to this trend, such as changing energy policies or shifts in market dynamics.
• Construction. While a moderate drop of 4.0% is projected, deeper analysis is warranted to understand whether this decline is indicative of cyclical fluctuations or more systemic challenges facing the industry.
• Manufacturing. Despite an overall slight decrease of 1.9%, it’s essential to dissect this trend further to discern which sub sectors are driving this decline and whether there are opportunities for innovation or retooling to reverse this trajectory.
• Wholesale Trade. A potential decline of 2.6% underscores the need for adaptation within this sector to address evolving market demands and competitive pressures.
• Retail Trade. With a significant expected drop of 10.0%, there’s a pressing need for retailers to explore strategies for reinvention, such as embracing e-commerce, enhancing customer experiences, or diversifying product offerings.

This nuanced analysis illuminates the varied trajectories across different industries, highlighting both areas of growth and challenges. It underscores the importance of proactive strategic planning and adaptation to navigate the evolving employment landscape effectively.

Regarding job classifications, while the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) provides valuable insights, it may not fully capture emerging roles in next-gen fields like AI, Web 3.0, Web 4.0, or climate tech. Exploring analogous roles or interdisciplinary skill sets within existing classifications can offer a starting point for understanding employment trends in these innovative domains. Additionally, leveraging alternative sources of data, such as industry reports or specialized surveys, can complement BLS data to provide a more comprehensive picture of evolving employment dynamics.

Based on the information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and the search results, here’s what I found:

Market Demand for Tech Jobs. The BLS projects that overall employment in computer and information technology occupations is expected to grow much faster than the average for all occupations from 2022 to 20321. This suggests that these jobs are being filled according to market demand but not quickly enough for market demand.

Green and Tech Jobs. The BLS produces data on jobs related to the production of green goods and services, jobs related to the use of green technologies and practices, and green careers23. Many of the jobs listed on the provided BLS links fall under tech jobs, especially those related to AI, Web 3.0, and Web 4.0. However, specific data on jobs related to regenerative finance or climate tech was not found in the search results.

Education Requirements. Most of the jobs listed on the provided BLS links typically require a Bachelor’s degree for entry14. Some occupations may require a Master’s degree or higher. However, the exact education requirement can vary depending on the specific role and employer expectations.

These industries demonstrate growth potential from 2022 to the projected 2032 data, underscoring the increasing demand for tech-related job sectors, especially in computer and electronic product manufacturing, software publishing, and computer systems design. The information sector also shows significant growth, potentially reflecting the rise in AI and technology advancements.

Appendix I.A. BLS Data and Standard Occupation Codes (Climate Corps Specific)

These job classifications encompass a range of roles pertinent to green initiatives, infrastructure technology, and AI/ML development, reflecting the evolving landscape of employment opportunities.

Intersection of Green Jobs

Here’s a summary based on the jobs that explicitly refer to green jobs and the Federal Job Codes requiring different levels of education:

Green Jobs:

• 47-2230 Solar Photovoltaic Installers
  • Description: Assemble, install, or maintain solar photovoltaic (PV) systems on roofs or other structures in compliance with site assessment and schematics. May include measuring, cutting, assembling, and bolting structural framing and solar modules. May perform minor electrical work such as current checks.
  • Illustrative examples: Photovoltaic (PV) Installation Technician, Solar PV Installer

Federal Job Codes/Roles Requiring Different Levels of Education:

Bachelor’s Degree

• 11-2020 Marketing Managers
• 15-1250 Web and Digital Interface Designers
• 15-1255 Software Developers, Applications
• 15-1256 Software Developers, Systems Software
• 15-1299 Computer Occupations, All Other
• 17-3020 Electrical and Electronics Engineering Technicians
• 17-3023 Electrical and Electronics Engineering Technologists
• 17-3031 Surveying and Mapping Technicians
• 17-4010 Architectural and Civil Drafters
• 17-4020 Surveyors
• 17-4030 Cartographers and Photogrammetrists
• 17-4040 Hazardous Materials Removal Workers

Associate’s Degree

• 17-3020 Electrical and Electronics Engineering Technicians
• 17-3023 Electrical and Electronics Engineering Technologists
• 17-3031 Surveying and Mapping Technicians
• 17-4010 Architectural and Civil Drafters

High School Diploma

• 17-4050 Highway Maintenance Workers
• 17-4060 Rail-Track Laying and Maintenance Equipment Operators

Please note that while this list includes occupations that explicitly require a bachelor’s degree, associate’s degree, or high school diploma and showed up in an NLP search, it may have missed jobs that require certifications only. Additionally, other green job titles such as environmental engineers, conservationists, social scientists, and environmental scientists may require advanced degrees.

II. Analysis of EOs, Frameworks, TAs and Initiatives

This appendix analyzes executive orders, frameworks, technical assistance guides, and initiatives related to green and climate jobs, equity, job training programs, and tech and climate literacy. It presents findings from documents such as the American Climate Corps initiative, National Climate Resilience Framework, and Executive Order on AI, focusing on their implications for job creation and skills development in the green and tech sectors.

*Note about technologies use, this was text mined (SAS NLP, later bespoke app from team member) and Read (explain creating of text mining browser add on in methods overview/disclosure) using key terms “green”, “climate”, “equity”, “training”, “technology” and “literacy.”

Analysis of Executive Orders, Frameworks, Technical Assistance Guides, and Initiatives

This appendix delves into executive orders, frameworks, technical assistance guides, and initiatives pertaining to green and climate jobs, equity, job training programs, and tech and climate literacy. It scrutinizes documents such as the American Climate Corps initiative, National Climate Resilience Framework, and Executive Order on AI, dissecting their implications for job creation and skills development in the green and tech sectors.

Climate Corps:

• Green or Climate Jobs. The American Climate Corps initiative aims to equip young individuals with high-demand skills for employment in the clean energy economy, emphasizing areas like conservation, community resilience, clean energy deployment, and environmental justice.
• Equity. With a focus on marginalized communities, including energy communities, the initiative underscores equity and environmental justice.
• Job Training Programs. In its inaugural year, the initiative provides skills-based training to over 20,000 individuals and offers comprehensive information about federal technical assistance programs supporting community endeavors.
• Tech and Climate Literacy. While not explicitly stated, the emphasis on training in clean energy and climate resilience could indirectly enhance tech and climate literacy within both the federal workforce and the broader U.S. populace.

National Climate Resilience Framework:

• Green or Climate Jobs. The framework hints at initiatives such as restoring natural infrastructure and improving forestry practices, suggesting potential job opportunities in green or climate-related sectors.
• Equity. Ensuring inclusivity, the framework demonstrates a commitment to preventing any community from being overlooked, thereby reflecting an equity-oriented approach in climate resilience strategies.
• Job Training Programs. Although not overtly addressed, the comprehensive government approach mobilized by the framework may entail job training programs.
• Tech and Climate Literacy. While not explicitly discussed, the community-driven solutions and investments in clean energy and climate action endorsed by the framework could contribute to increased tech and climate literacy.

Executive Order on AI:

• Green or Climate Jobs. While not expressly mentioned, the acknowledgment of AI’s potential to tackle urgent challenges implies its relevance to environmental and climate-related issues.
• Equity. Emphasizing inclusive AI development, the order stresses diverse stakeholder involvement, suggesting a commitment to equity considerations.
• Job Training Programs. Though not explicitly outlined, the necessity for robust evaluations of AI systems implies a potential demand for training programs to ensure workforce preparedness.
• Tech and Climate Literacy. While not directly addressed, the emphasis on ethical AI development implies a requisite level of literacy within the federal workforce. Additionally, efforts to establish effective labeling mechanisms for AI-generated content could contribute to tech literacy across the general population.

Please note that this analysis is based on provided excerpts, and the full documents may contain additional relevant insights.

Technical Assistance Guidance: Creating Green or Climate Jobs

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) are poised to create green or climate jobs, strengthen equity, and bolster job training programs, signaling a concerted effort towards enhancing tech and climate literacy across the workforce and the general U.S. population.

Creating Green or Climate Jobs

Both the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) are anticipated to generate green or climate jobs. The BIL aims to enhance the nation’s resilience to extreme weather and climate change, concurrently mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. Similarly, the IRA is forecasted to yield over 9 million quality jobs in the forthcoming decade.

Considering Equity

Both the BIL and the IRA prioritize equity in their provisions. The BIL endeavors to bridge historically disadvantaged and underserved communities to job opportunities and economic empowerment. Similarly, the IRA addresses energy equity through its climate provisions and investment tax credits in renewable energy.

Strengthening Job Training Programs

Both legislations incorporate provisions for enhancing job training programs. The BIL allocates over $800 million in dedicated investments towards workforce development, while the IRA mandates workforce development and apprenticeship requirements.

Increasing Tech and Climate Literacy within the Federal Workforce

Although explicit information on boosting tech and climate literacy within the federal workforce is lacking, both the BIL and the IRA include provisions for workforce development and training. These initiatives could potentially encompass tech and climate literacy training.

Increasing Tech and Climate Literacy in the General U.S. Population

The substantial investments in clean energy and climate mitigation under the BIL and the IRA may indirectly contribute to enhancing tech and climate literacy across the general U.S. populace. However, there is no specific information regarding programs aimed at directly augmenting tech and climate literacy in the general population.

III. Report Summaries

Insights from various reports shed light on the demand for tech and green jobs, digital skills, and challenges in the broadband workforce. Drawing from reputable sources such as Bank of America, BCG, the Federal Reserve of Atlanta, and others, these summaries emphasize the necessity for targeted educational and policy interventions.

• Bank of America NPower. Provides tech training programs for high school graduates lacking necessary skills and connections for tech careers. Offers a blend of classes and practical experience partnering with programs like Year Up, NPower, and Road to Hire.
• BCG Future of Jobs in AI. Highlights discrepancies between labor supply and demand in various sectors, particularly in tech-related occupations. Foresees significant worker deficits in computer-related fields due to automation’s pervasive impact.
• Federal Reserve of Atlanta Digital Skills Report. Reveals that 92% of jobs require digital skills, yet the supply of skilled workers is insufficient. Urges policymakers and educators to collaborate to bridge the digital skills gap through accessible training and education.
• National Skills Coalition Report. Discusses the digital skill divide and advocates for policies supporting skill development. Recommends investing in training programs and ensuring access to education tailored to the digital economy’s demands.
• Benton Broadband Workforce Report. Examines challenges in broadband rollout and underscores the need for training programs and education to meet digital economy demands.
• Forbes Demand Outpacing Supply For Green Jobs Skills. Highlights the mismatch between demand and supply for green skills, urging investment in training programs and education for success in the green economy.
• Global Green Skills Report (LinkedIn). Provides insights into the importance of green skills in transitioning to a low-carbon economy. Emphasizes the necessity of policies supporting green skills development.
• IMF. How the green transition will impact U.S. Jobs: Explores the impact of the green transition on U.S. jobs, predicting both job creation in renewable energy and losses in the fossil fuel sector. Recommends investment in training programs for success in the green economy.

These reports collectively underscore the growing demand for digital and green skills in the U.S. workforce, accompanied by a shortage of skilled workers. Collaboration between policymakers and educators is essential to provide adequate training and education for success in the digital and green economies.

IV. Digital Discrimination Reports

This section delves into findings from reports on digital discrimination, broadband access, and AI literacy, sourced from reputable institutions such as The Markup, Consumer Reports, Pew, and the World Economic Forum. These reports illuminate the inequities present in digital access and knowledge and emphasize the necessity for equitable policies to foster widespread participation in the digital economy.

• The Markup. Highlights how internet service providers often charge different prices for the same service based on geographic location, arguing for government regulation to ensure affordable internet access for all.
• Consumer Reports. Discusses the inadequate state of broadband access in the U.S., emphasizing the necessity of affordable, high-speed internet for full participation in the digital economy. Recommends policy interventions to invest in broadband infrastructure and ensure equitable access for all Americans.
• Pew Report on Americans’ Knowledge Level on AI. Examines Americans’ understanding of AI, cybersecurity, and big tech, revealing significant gaps in knowledge that could impact future work prospects. Recommends investment in education and training programs to equip workers with necessary digital skills for success in the digital economy.
• World Economic Forum Future of Jobs Report. Forecasts technology adoption as a key driver of business transformation, with over 85% of organizations anticipating increased adoption of new technologies and broader digital access. Emphasizes the need for Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) standards and discusses significant job creation and destruction effects driven by environmental, technological, and economic trends.

These reports collectively underscore the urgent need for policies supporting digital skill development and ensuring affordable, high-speed internet access across the U.S. Policymakers are urged to collaborate in providing necessary training and education opportunities to empower workers for success in the digital economy.

V. CRS Report Summaries

This section provides a synopsis of Congressional Research Service (CRS) reports addressing skills gaps, broadband considerations, job training programs, and economic assistance for transitioning communities. These reports offer insights into legislative and policy contexts for bridging digital divides and supporting transitions to green economies, with a focus on workforce development and economic assistance.

• Skills Gaps. A Review of Underlying Concepts and Evidence: Explores the complex nature of skills gaps and their impact, attributing them to various factors such as technological advancements and demographic shifts. Recommends investment in training programs to equip workers for success in digital and green economies.
• Bridging the Digital Divide. Broadband Workforce Considerations for the 118th Congress: Discusses the inadequate access to affordable, high-speed internet in the U.S. and recommends policy interventions to invest in broadband infrastructure and ensure universal access.
• The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58). Summary of the Broadband Provisions in Division F: Summarizes broadband provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, emphasizing its role in narrowing the digital divide through infrastructure investment and expanded internet access.
• Federal Youth Employment and Job Training Programs. Highlights the importance of federal youth employment and job training programs in preparing young individuals for success in digital and green economies. Recommends increased investment in these programs to support skill development.
• Federal Economic Assistance For Coal Communities. Explores federal economic assistance for coal communities, emphasizing the need to transition workforce skills from coal-related jobs to other industries. Recommends investment in training programs and removal of barriers to labor mobility.
• Economic Development Administration Announces Phase 1 of New Tech Hubs Program. Discusses the Economic Development Administration’s Tech Hubs Program aimed at fostering regional technology ecosystems for economic growth. Recommends policymakers invest in such programs to bolster digital and green economies.

Overall, these reports underscore the necessity for policies supporting the development of digital and green skills, as well as ensuring equitable access to high-speed internet across the U.S. Policymakers are urged to collaborate in providing necessary training and education opportunities to empower workers for success in evolving economic landscapes.

Extreme heat is a growing threat to the health and productivity of U.S. workers and businesses. There is a high-impact opportunity to pioneer innovations in energy-efficient worker-centric cooling to protect workers from the growing heat while reducing the costs to businesses to install protections. With the impending Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standard, the federal government should ensure that businesses have the necessary support to establish and maintain the infrastructure needed for existing and upcoming worker heat protection requirements while realizing economic, disaster resilience, and climate co-benefits. To achieve this goal, an Executive Order should form a multiagency working group that coordinates federal government and nongovernment partners to define a new building design approach that integrates both worker health and energy-efficiency considerations. The working group should establish roles and a process for coordinating and identifying leaders and funding approaches to advance a policy roadmap to accelerate, scale up, and evaluate equitable deployment and maintenance of energy-efficient worker-centric cooling. This plan presents a unique and timely opportunity to build upon existing national clean energy, climate, and infrastructure commitments and goals to ensure a healthier, more productive, resilient, and sustainable workforce.

Challenge and Opportunity

U.S. workers and businesses face a growing threat of illness, death, and reduced work productivity from extreme heat exposure. There were 436 work-related heat deaths recorded in the U.S. from 2011 to 2021. Workplace heat exposure is linked to heat illnesses, traumatic injuries, and reduced work productivity among otherwise healthy workers, costing the nation an estimated $100 billion each year in lost economic activity. Workers exposed to high heat include those in outdoor occupations in agriculture and construction and those working in hot manufacturing, transportation and warehousing, and food services environments. Spikes in worker heat illness have occurred during recent extreme heat events, such as the “heat dome” event of 2021, which are more likely to occur with climate change. Disproportionately exposed workers and small businesses often do not have the resources or capacity to implement, improve, or maintain existing workplace cooling infrastructure, thus increasing heat exposure inequities.

An energy-efficient workplace cooling transformation is needed to ensure businesses have the support required to comply with existing state heat rules and upcoming federal workplace heat prevention requirements. Several states—California, Colorado, Oregon, Minnesota, and Washington—have already adopted occupational indoor and/or outdoor heat exposure rules to protect workers from heat stress. OSHA is in the process of developing a national workplace heat standard. In addition to requirements for worker rest breaks, training, and hydration, OSHA is considering requirements for employers to implement protections when the measured heat index is 80°F or higher, including engineering controls such as air-conditioned cool-down areas. 

Using energy-efficient active or passive cooling systems and building designs in workplaces has numerous benefits. Cooling the environment is one of the most effective methods for reducing the risk of heat illness. Energy-efficient cooling reduces electricity consumption and greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional systems. Energy-efficient buildings cost less to operate, allowing greater productivity at lower cost and reduced fossil fuel use and community air pollution. Energy-efficient cooling also decreases the amount of electricity on the grid at one time, reducing the chances of blackouts during extreme weather events. 

We must develop a new approach to building standards – energy-efficient, worker-centric cooling – that integrates both worker health and energy-efficiency considerations. Existing building-centric approaches that blanket-cool entire buildings to the same fixed temperature are energy inefficient and can lead to overcooling of unoccupied areas and increased costs. The urgent need for energy-efficient worker-centric cooling standards is highlighted, for example, by the 300–900 million ft² per quarter rate of U.S. warehouse space under construction, and a growing warehouse workforce, in recent years.

There is a gap in standards that address both civilian worker health and energy-efficient cooling simultaneously. The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has incorporated a worker-centric approach in its Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification program. This approach includes pilot credits for Prevention through Design (PtD), which aims to minimize risks to workers by integrating safety measures into building design and redesign. One such example is ensuring roof features, such as vegetated roofs and solar panel installations, are arranged to minimize hazards like falls for maintenance personnel. However, there are no specific PtD standards or LEED credits for energy-efficient cooling approaches that address worker heat hazards. For example, there are no specific standards that incorporate the proximity of indoor cool-down areas to hot work areas, targeted cooling of certain work areas, or mobile outdoor cooling stations that leverage solar and electrochemical technology.

Although there are several potential mechanisms of support for energy-efficient cooling infrastructure for commercial buildings and small businesses, there is no program to assist employers and small businesses in integrating these technologies into worker-centric cooling infrastructure designs. Under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA), tax deductions are available through Internal Revenue Code (IRC) 179D for building owners to install or retrofit equipment aimed at improving energy efficiency, including HVAC systems such as heat pumps and building envelope improvements to “heat-proof” or weatherize structures. However, tax credits may be difficult to access and may not provide a sufficient degree of immediate support for small business owners struggling with inflation costs. While the Biden-Harris Administration has also launched a $14 billion National Clean Investment Fund that will provide Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) grants to small businesses for deploying clean technology projects, there are no earmarked funds for workplace solutions focused on energy-efficient cooling or resilience to extreme heat events that integrate worker health considerations. Current U.S. Small Business Administration efforts focus primarily on supporting small businesses with disaster recovery rather than resilience.

Effective cross-agency coordination is needed to accomplish an energy-efficient cooling transformation in U.S. workplaces, support small businesses, and contribute to the Healthy People 2030 goal of reducing workplace deaths. Coordination among existing agencies and external partners to address gaps in energy-efficient cooling technology, worker-centric designs, and heat-specific PtD building approaches will support a healthier, more productive, and sustainable U.S. workforce.

Plan of Action

Transforming workplace infrastructure to support a healthy, productive, and sustainable U.S. workforce against extreme heat requires coordination across multiple federal agencies. This plan offers the first steps in developing a structure for coordination, defining the approach, developing a roadmap for future actions, and ultimately catalyzing and piloting innovations and implementing and evaluating solutions.

This plan is guided by the following principles:

• Workplace deaths, illnesses, and injuries from heat exposure are preventable.
• Work equity should be incorporated into decision-making, in alignment with the Justice40 Initiative, to ensure benefit for workers who are most likely to be exposed to dangerous workplace heat and who live and work in communities overburdened by pollution from energy inefficient infrastructure.
• Demand for solutions will be supported by co-benefits of energy-efficient workplace cooling (e.g., reduced workplace costs; increased productivity; reduced greenhouse gas emissions, in alignment with National Climate Task Force Goals and the Department of Energy (DOE) Better Buildings® Better Climate Challenge; and sustainable workplaces that are resilient to extreme events, in alignment with the Biden Administration’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law).
• High-level sponsorship and clarity of roles are critical to catalyzing the necessary coordination across federal agencies and with public and private partners.

Following an executive order from the President, the Office of Management and Budget should convene a multiagency working group to develop a plan for coordination and to outline a roadmap toward an energy-efficient workplace cooling transformation for a healthy, productive, and sustainable workforce. The working group should:

Recommendation 1. Be chaired by an agency that has experience in convening multisectoral collaborations and advocating for equitable health outcomes, such as the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Climate Change and Health Equity. The inclusion of representatives from the following agencies and offices should be considered:

• DOE (e.g., Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Office of State and Community Energy Programs, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization)
• Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and its National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (e.g., Small Business Assistance Program, National Personal Protective Tech Lab, Division of Science Integration)
• EPA (e.g., Office of Research and Development, Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights)
• U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) (e.g., Small Business Innovation Research Program, Office of Disaster Recovery and Resilience)
• OSHA (e.g., Directorate of Standards and Guidance)
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (e.g., Climate Program Office)
• Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
• Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) (e.g., Office of Compensation and Working Conditions)
• White House Climate Policy Office

Recommendation 2. Define roles and develop a plan to enhance coordination with public and private partners in developing and evaluating evidence-based worker-centric cooling infrastructure technologies and building designs. Partners should include those that develop or promote voluntary standards and guidelines for:

• buildings (e.g., USGBC LEED Program PtD initiative; American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers [ASHRAE] energy efficiency standard 90.1, 2022 and thermal environment standard 55, 2023; and EnergyStar)
• worker health (e.g., American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienist (ACGIH) heat stress and American Industrial Hygiene Association thermal stress working groups) 
• and business and labor representatives identified by the working group.

Recommendation 3. Establish a consensus definition of energy-efficient worker-centric cooling using a combination of established metrics, including:

• metrics for energy efficiency and
• metrics for human effects of heat that account for work characteristics such as ambient heat exposure, workload, and clothing. 

Recommendation 4. Outline existing pathways to support an energy-efficient workplace cooling transformation, including: 

• IRA tax deductions for building owner energy-efficient installation or retrofitting (IRA 13303; IRC 179D)
• National Clean Investment Fund grants through EPA to small businesses deploying clean technology projects
• SBA Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience business loans, 
• and assess gaps, alternative incentive mechanisms for businesses, and the landscape of private and foundation funders to inform Step 5.

Recommendation 5. Articulate follow-on initiatives and identify leaders and potential funding approaches to advance the roadmap of policies to accelerate, scale up, and evaluate equitable deployment, maintenance, and evaluation of worker-centric energy-efficient cooling infrastructure. Policies considerations include:

• Grant funding mechanisms for research, development, and pilot implementation and evaluation of worker-centric building designs and cooling technologies, such as those through the EPA’s National Clean Investment Fund, SBA/SBIR, or NIOSH’s crowdsourcing mechanisms similar to the Respirator Fit Challenge mechanism. Matching of federal and private and foundation funding should be considered to support rapid development, prototyping, and evaluation of promising worker-centric cooling infrastructure technology and building designs.
• Funding for ASHRAE, LEED, and DOE initiatives focused on incorporating worker considerations into standard development and energy code validation processes that ultimately inform local building codes.
• Funding for the IRS to develop and implement alternative incentive mechanisms that reduce barriers and address gaps in support for businesses interested in implementing energy-efficient workplace cooling infrastructure.
• Funding for DOE to:
  • develop a centralized clearinghouse to disseminate information on federal programs, incentives, and mechanisms for financing energy-efficient cooling retrofits and upgrades for businesses, including small businesses (similar to H.R. 4092; 113th Congress for schools)
  • support coordination of state energy offices with health and labor departments to conduct coordinated outreach on implementation of energy-efficient worker-centric cooling approaches and initiatives, with a focus on small businesses and those with disproportionately exposed workers

Funding for agencies to work together to develop and implement approaches to track progress toward an energy-efficient workplace cooling transformation by combining data sources.

Conclusion

Given the growing threat to U.S. workers and businesses posed by illness, death, and reduced work productivity from increasing heat exposure, it is imperative to catalyze an energy-efficient workplace cooling transformation. There is currently a unique and timely opportunity to build upon national clean energy, climate, and infrastructure commitments and goals to address gaps in energy-efficient worker-centric cooling technology and PtD building standards. The proposed plan will incorporate high-level support, provide infrastructure for coordination among government agencies and nongovernmental partners, define the approach, and lay the groundwork for stimulating innovations in promising worker-centric cooling technologies and designs. This plan will produce a roadmap for an energy-efficient workplace cooling transformation that will support businesses in establishing the infrastructure needed for existing and upcoming workplace heat prevention requirements. The approach will build upon existing occupational health equity initiatives to reduce the risk of heat health effects for workers disproportionately affected by heat and small businesses. This initiative will ensure a healthier, more productive, and sustainable workforce with minimal cost and a substantial potential return on investment.

This idea of merit originated from our Extreme Heat Ideas Challenge. Scientific and technical experts across disciplines worked with FAS to develop potential solutions in various realms: infrastructure and the built environment, workforce safety and development, public health, food security and resilience, emergency planning and response, and data indices. Review ideas to combat extreme heat here.

Millions of workers are subjected to the dangers of extreme heat that increase their risk of heat-related illnesses and fatalities. Due to personal, social, and workplace vulnerabilities, workers are at even greater risk, particularly women, people who are Black or Brown, those who facing low-income challenges, and those employed by small businesses. With no mandated federal heat stress standard, there is no federal mechanism to ensure the adoption of appropriate heat stress prevention strategies and emergency procedures to protect vulnerable workers. 

Now is an opportune time to introduce a federal program to champion climate equity and justice in the workplace by assisting employers’ implementation of evidence-based heat stress management strategies and heat illness emergency procedures, particularly targeting underserved working populations who labor in the heat. This program should be supported by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), along with university and nonprofit partners, and funded through a private or public partnership. This effort will act on the principles of employer social responsibility, best practice recognition, increased resource allocation to vulnerable working groups, third-party auditing, and a non-retaliation reporting mechanism. This policy action, across multiple stakeholders, will proactively address the challenges posed by extreme heat and work toward creating safer, more equitable working environments for all.

Challenge and Opportunity

The average global surface temperature in 2023 was 2.12ºF above the 20^th century average, resulting in Earth’s warmest year on record. Extreme temperatures will continue to rise as the frequency, intensity, and duration of heat waves increase due to climate change. Climate change is a major public health priority that places workers who perform physical labor in the heat at higher risk, due to frequent prolonged, heavy physical exertion, layers of personal protective clothing, and exposure to environmental heat stress. This combination of factors exacerbates the level of heat stress placed on the body, leading to heat-related injuries, illnesses, and fatalities. While the Biden Administration has initiated federal action to establish a mandated heat standard, the bureaucratic process is slow, averaging around eight years. Congress is also working on addressing this issue through the consideration of a bill for the adoption of an emergency temporary standard. Although it offers a quicker solution, it has a limited life span of approximately six months. Moreover, in anticipation of mandating a federal heat stress standard, there is limited infrastructure to support the adoption of evidence-based heat stress management strategies to protect workers in high-temperature environments. The current enforcement solution, OSHA’s National Emphasis Program on outdoor and indoor heat hazards, has several limitations, include such as a vague definition of noncompliant following heat hazard inspection, and uses assessment tools such as Heat Index, which is not considered “best practice.” 

To address these limitations, key stakeholders from academic settings, large research institutes, and nonprofit organizations have developed evidence-based best practices to protect vulnerable workers from extreme heat. Unfortunately, there is no system in place to determine how well companies are prepared for extreme heat. The urgency of adopting evidence-based heat stress management strategies across industries cannot be overstated, as heat-related injuries and fatalities are entirely preventable with the implementation of appropriate prevention strategies and emergency procedures.

There is a critical opportunity to champion climate equity and justice to safeguard laborers from the dangers of extreme heat. Laborers from vulnerable demographics who engage in physical work in the heat are disproportionately affected and are often not protected under evidence-based heat stress management practices by their employers. Workers with personal (e.g., age, race/ethnicity, disease status) and social (e.g., employment type, income status) vulnerabilities are exploited by working in hot environments with limited heat stress prevention strategies available to them. This form of labor exploitation during periods of high heat exposure leaves millions of U.S. workers more vulnerable to preventable heat-related injuries and fatalities. 

Small businesses and other companies with limited resources are also less equipped to protect their workforce or have the means to ensure their employees are working in safe environments in the heat. To fortify workplace resilience against extreme heat and climate change, it is imperative to equitably distribute resources for enforcing evidence-based heat policies in workplaces. Organizations with employees exposed to high temperatures must be held accountable for the effective implementation of these policies. Additionally, vulnerable workers frequently refrain from reporting unsafe conditions due to the fear of employer retaliation. Advocacy efforts become even more challenging as language barriers, food insecurity, and poverty exacerbate already dire working conditions.

The present moment presents an opportune time to introduce a program supported by occupational health and safety federal agencies. As evidence-based best practices have been developed to protect workers from extreme heat, there is no system in place to protect vulnerable working populations, allocate resources, and keep companies accountable by assessing their current heat stress management practices. OSHA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) are key stakeholder organizations to initiate a federal response to address the lack of adoption of heat stress management policies. However, these entities often prioritize multiple projects simultaneously, are understaffed, and benefit from partnerships with universities and nonprofits. Therefore, a cooperative approach with governing like OSHA and universities/nonprofit organizations is the appropriate strategy to create a program that promotes the enforcement of evidence-based heat protection strategies (i.e., education, hydration, heat acclimatization, environmental monitoring, physiological monitoring) at the organizational level. This approach also provides under-resourced businesses with access to basic heat protection equipment and establishes a mechanism for employees to report unsafe working conditions without fear of retaliation. This program draws inspiration from the success of the Fair Food Program, a Corporate Social Responsibility model that promotes accountability among growers, buyers, and retailers. 

This comprehensive program will support all organizations that employ workers who perform physical work in the heat, such as construction, utilities, agriculture, oil, and gas. This program will facilitate employer accountability, social responsibility, increased resource allocation, third-party auditing, and a non-retaliation reporting system. 

Plan of Action

The development and implementation of this federal program, the Occupational Heat Resiliency Program (OHRP), will require a public-private partnership between OSHA, universities, and nonprofit partners. This partnership model draws inspiration from the successful collaborative partnerships between OSHA and other partners to protect the workforce against other occupational hazards. The OHRP will promote the adoption of evidence-based heat stress management practices by targeting employers with workplaces that experience high heat exposure and/or have a large population of laborers working in the heat who are classified as vulnerable workers. The establishment of OHRP will require funding through cooperative agreements, such as the OSHA Strategic Partnership Program (OSPP). To achieve the program’s objectives, both OSHA and its partners will commit their knowledge and resources to support the program.

The program will rely on the following principles to achieve this objective:

1. Employer accountability and best practice recognition:

• Employers engaging with the proposed federal program will formalize their commitment to safeguarding workers from extreme heat through evidence-based practices derived from original research from research institutes and academic organizations. These original research sources have informed governing body recommendations from institutes such as NIOSH. 
• These commitments can be publicized, creating transparency and ensuring that products are manufactured by adequately protected workers.
• The program aims to promote the adoption of evidence-based heat practices that enhance safety, health, and productivity for the U.S. workforce.
• Recognition of best practices will facilitate widespread adoption, empowering employers, safety professionals, and workers to implement strategies and emergency procedures that effectively mitigate the risk of heat-related illnesses and injuries.

2. Climate equity through increased resource allocation:

• Recognizing the disproportionate impact of climate change on vulnerable populations, the program will allocate resources to workplaces with high percentages (>50%) of at-risk workers. This includes small businesses and workplaces with a high percentage of women, people of Color, and low-income workers. Workplace needs will be performed through existing efforts related to other occupational hazards or community projects and by targeting industries associated with increased employment of vulnerable workers. 
• Support may include assistance in creating heat stress management educational materials and emergency action plans/procedures, implementing written heat stress management plans, and providing essential resources such as hydration, shade, and cooling products.

3. Safer work environments through third-party auditing and a non-retaliation reporting system:

• Third-party audits, led by university or non-profit partners, will determine feasible evidence-based practices and resource allocations.
• Audits will employ a tier system (I, II, II) to show the level of protection that the workplace has implemented based on the presented recommendations. To ensure compliance, a non-retaliation reporting system will allow workers to report incidences where their work environment was unsafe due to extreme heat. 
• A non-retaliation reporting system will be implemented to empower workers to report unsafe conditions due to extreme heat, ensuring employer compliance and accountability. This information within the report will not be shared with employers directly, but rather through the third-party auditing entity. 

The program will be led by teams composed of OSHA representatives and university/nonprofit partners that will meet virtually regularly to ensure the goals of each principle are being met and to address any partnership issues that may arise.

Conclusion

The escalating challenges to the U.S. workforce posed by extreme heat demand proactive measures, necessitating collaboration among key government entities like OSHA alongside universities and nonprofit organizations. Currently, there is a glaring absence of mechanisms to safeguard workers who engage in physical work in the heat, particularly those from vulnerable demographics. 

To tackle this issue head-on, the establishment of OHRP funded through a private or public partnership is imperative. This initiative would champion climate equity in the workplace by expediting the adoption of evidence-based heat stress management strategies and emergency procedures. The program’s framework includes commitments from employers, recognition of best practices, increased resource allocation to vulnerable working groups, third-party auditing, and a non-retaliation mechanism. OHRP will have an immediate impact at both the federal and state level. Without the implementation of such a program, a significant portion of the U.S. workforce remains at risk of entirely preventable heat-related injuries, illnesses, and fatalities.

This idea of merit originated from our Extreme Heat Ideas Challenge. Scientific and technical experts across disciplines worked with FAS to develop potential solutions in various realms: infrastructure and the built environment, workforce safety and development, public health, food security and resilience, emergency planning and response, and data indices. Review ideas to combat extreme heat here.

Emerging technologies and creative innovation are pivotal economic pillars for the future of the United States. These sectors not only promise economic growth but also offer avenues for social inclusion and environmental sustainability. However, the federal government lacks reliable and comprehensive data on these sectors, which hampers its ability to design and implement effective policies and programs. A key reason for this data gap is the outdated and inadequate job categories and classifications used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

The BLS is the main source of official statistics on employment, wages, and occupations in the U.S. Part of the agency’s role is to categorize different industries, which helps states, researchers and other outside parties measure and understand the size of certain industries or segments of the economy. Another BLS purpose is to use the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system to categorize and define jobs based on their duties, skills, and education requirements. This is how all federal workers and contracted federal workers are classified. For an agency to create and fill a role, it needs a classification or SOC. State and private employers also use the classifications and data to allocate funding and determine benefits related to different kinds of positions. 

Where no classification (SOC) or job exists, it is unclear whether hiring and contracting happen according to programmatic intent and in a timely manner. This is particularly concerning to some employers and federal agencies that need  to align numerous jobs with the provisions of Justice 40, the Inflation Reduction Act and the newly created American Climate Corps. Many of the roles imagined by the American Climate Corps do not have classifications. This poses a significant barrier for effective program and policy design related to green and tech jobs.

The SOC system is updated roughly once every 10 years. There is not a set comprehensive review schedule for that or the industry categories. Updates are topical, with the last broad revision taking place in 2018. Unemployment reports and data related to wages are updated annually, and other topics less predictably. Updates and work on the SOC systems and categories for what are broadly defined as “green jobs” stopped in 2013 due to sequestration. This means that the BLS data may not capture the current and future trends and dynamics of the green and innovation economies, which are constantly evolving and growing.Because the BLS does not have a separate category for green jobs, it identifies them based on a variety of  industry and occupation codes. The range spans restaurant industry SOCs to construction. Classifying positions this way cannot reflect the cross-cutting and interdisciplinary nature of green jobs. Moreover, the process may not account for the variations and nuances of green jobs, such as their environmental impact, social value, and skill level. For example, if you want to work with solar panels, there is a construction classification, but nothing for community design, specialized finance, nor any complementary typographies needed for projects at scale.

Similarly, the BLS does not have a separate category for tech jobs. It identifies them based on the “Information and Communication Technologies” occupational groups of the SOC system. Again, this approach may not adequately reflect the diversity and complexity of tech jobs, which may involve new and emerging skills and technologies that are not yet recognized by the BLS. There are no classifications for roles associated with machine learning or artificial intelligence. Where the private sector has a much-discussed large language model trainer role, the federal system has no such classification. Appropriate skills matching, resource allocation, and the ability to measure the numbers and impacts of these jobs on the economy will be difficult if not impossible to fully understand. Classifying tech jobs in this manner may not account for the interplay and integration of tech jobs with other sectors, such as health care, education, and manufacturing.

These data limitations have serious implications for policy design and evaluation. Without accurate and timely data on green and tech jobs, the federal government may not be able to assess the demand and supply of these jobs, identify skill gaps and training needs, allocate resources, and measure the outcomes and impacts of its policies and programs. This will  result in missed opportunities, wasted resources, and suboptimal outcomes.

There is a need to update the BLS job categories and classifications to better reflect the realities and potentials of the green and innovation economies. This can be achieved by implementing the following strategic policy measures:

• Inter-Agency Collaboration: Establish an inter-agency task force, including representatives from the BLS, Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Education (ED), and the Department of Commerce (DOC), to review and update the current job categories and classifications. This task force would be responsible for ensuring that the classifications accurately reflect the evolving nature of jobs in the green and innovation economies.
• Public-Private Partnerships: Engage in public-private partnerships with industry leaders, academic institutions, and non-profit organizations. These partnerships can provide valuable insights into the changing job landscape and help inform the update of job categories and classifications. They can also facilitate the dissemination and adoption of the updated classifications among employers and workers, as well as the development and delivery of training and education programs related to green and tech jobs.
• Stakeholder Engagement: Conduct regular consultations with stakeholders, including educational institutions, employers, workers, and unions in the green and innovation economies. Their input can ensure that the updated classifications accurately represent the realities and challenges of the job market. They can also provide feedback and suggestions on how to improve the quality and accessibility of the BLS data.
• Regular Updates: Implement a policy for regular reviews and updates of job categories and classifications. The policy should also specify the frequency and criteria for the updates, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the involved agencies and partners.

By updating the BLS job categories and classifications, the federal government can ensure that its data and statistics accurately reflect the current and future job market, thereby supporting effective policy design and evaluation related to green and tech jobs. Accurate and current data that mirrors the ever-evolving job market will also lay the foundation for effective policy design and evaluation in the realms of green and tech jobs. This commitment can contribute to the development of a workforce that not only meets economic needs but also aligns with the nation’s environmental aspirations.

The CHIPS and Science Act ushered in unprecedented opportunities for American manufacturing, science, and innovation – and yet, current underfunding leaves the outcomes at risk.

The legislation directs the federal government to invest $280 billion to bolster U.S. semiconductor capacity, catalyze R&D, create regional high-tech hubs, and develop a larger, more inclusive STEM workforce. The federal investment of $50 billion in semiconductor manufacturing is estimated to add $24.6 billion annually to the American economy and create 185,000 jobs from 2021 to 2026. However, at the current rate of STEM degree completion, the U.S. may not be able to produce enough qualified workers to fill these jobs. Left unaddressed, this labor market gap will have cascading effects on the U.S. economy and compromise the nation’s global competitiveness.

Supporting STEM Workforce Development by Expanding Fellowship and Mentorship Programs

Despite the progress that has been made in recent years to grow the STEM pipeline, STEM graduates continue to lack the opportunity to contribute to the research enterprise and are not equipped to translate their scientific knowledge into actionable policy solutions. The CHIPS and Science Act attempts to address the shortfall in the U.S. STEM workforce and create more career pathways for graduates by authorizing federal agencies to expand their fellowship programs. 

For example, the legislation directs the National Science Foundation (NSF) to expand the number of new graduate research fellows supported annually over the next 5 years to no fewer than 3,000 fellows. This provision echoes the recommendations from a 2021 Federation of American Scientists (FAS) policy memo calling for the expansion of the Graduate Research Fellowship Program in order to catalyze and train a new workforce that would maintain America’s leading edge in the industries of the future. Another important provision has led to the launch of NSF’s Entrepreneurial Fellowships in September 2022, with the goal of supporting STEM entrepreneurs from diverse backgrounds in turning breakthroughs from the laboratory into products and services that benefit society. 

In addition to fellowships, the legislation also includes federal funding for graduate student and postdoctoral research mentorship and professional development, which are critical elements to developing our nation’s research enterprise. Supportive mentors and advisors can guide career planning for future scientists and help them develop the necessary critical thinking and problem solving skills. This is also the case for students from underrepresented minority backgrounds (URMs), where positive research and mentorship experiences contribute to persistence in intention to pursue a STEM career following graduation.

While these provisions are promising, more can be done to ensure better oversight and support of mentorship programs within federal funded research programs. The GRAD Coalition, which was established to support the Congressional Graduate Research and Development Caucus, has called on Congress to expand mentorship oversight and support, specifically to: 

• Provide systematic oversight of graduate student mentorship. For example, survey mentorship experiences at the national level or mandate institutional data collection and reporting on graduate student advising;
• Develop incentive structures that support effective mentorship practices. For example, mentorship training programs that grant meaningful certification;
• Expand the mentorship plan mandate for funding proposals to include all federal agencies that fund graduate student research. The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 provisions concerning graduate student advising only apply to grants administered under the National Science Foundation (NSF). However, graduate students and their advisors rely on funding from many federal agencies outside the NIH and NSF, which do not currently mandate mentorship plans.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has long recognized the need for mentorship at the post-doctoral level. In 2023,the NIH Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD) Working Group on Re-envisioning NIH-Supported Postdoctoral Training held listening sessions resulting in a report detailing many aspects of the postdoctoral experience in biomedical fields: lack of adequate compensation, concerns about postdoctoral quality of life and challenges with diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility. Many of these postdoctoral issues have been known for some time but continue to be insufficiently addressed. The report calls for increasing oversight and accountability of faculty for mentoring, specifically for NIH to: 

• Provide more detailed mentorship requirements in requests for applications, expand the Individual Development Plan (IDP), and require that the IDP be regularly updated as part of the project progress report;
• Weigh principal investigator (PI) performance in postdoc mentoring and career development equally with research progress as criteria for continued funding, and require/encourage mentoring contracts and support acquiring and transferring mentoring tools from PI to postdoc;
• Increase transparency of PIs’ postdoc mentorship track records. Institutions should be required to record and report clearly on department websites the names of each postdoc and their next position;
• Require mentoring committees to ensure that postdocs receive all types of mentoring needed.

While boosts for science and education provisions in the legislation have been authorized, funding for the “and science” portion of the act has fallen short in several areas. FAS analysis shows that the FY 2024 appropriations for NSF are approximately $6 billion-short or 39% below the CHIPS and Science authorization levels, which has the potential to set the U.S. back in several areas of science and technology.

Maintaining the U.S. scientific and research enterprise requires a whole-of-government approach. Expanding fellowship programs and better incorporating mentorship in federal-funded programs can have far-reaching consequences for the STEM pipeline and maintaining our nation’s edge in scientific research and innovation. The CHIPS and Science Act provides specific opportunities for federal agencies, Congress, and the executive branch to grow the U.S. STEM workforce pipeline by expanding fellowships and mentorship support for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers. Our nation’s global leadership in science and technology is dependent upon the research and innovation driven by graduate students and postdoctoral researchers, and fully funding the authorized programs and new initiatives in the CHIPS and Science Act will help ensure that this trend continues.