PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. McBath, Lucy [D-GA-6] · D–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Oct 15, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1132 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1132 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1132 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1132 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-07 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This proposal would create competitive grants for community colleges, vocational schools, and groups of those institutions to expand job training with employers. Programs would serve workers and people entering the workforce, offer career support, and help participants earn education or training credentials. The bill would authorize $65 million annually for fiscal years 2026–2031; actual funding would require appropriations. Funded institutions would face performance reviews and public reporting requirements.
From the amounts appropriated to carry out this section under paragraph (3) and not reserved under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall, on a competitive basis, make grants to eligible institutions to carry out the activities described in subsection (e).
The term eligible institution means— (A) a community college; (B) a postsecondary vocational institution (as defined in section 102(c) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002(c))); or (C) a consortium of such colleges or institutions.
serves adult and dislocated workers, incumbent workers, and new entrants to the workforce;
provide career services to individuals participating in the programs funded with the grant to facilitate retention and program completion
to expand opportunities for individuals to obtain recognized postsecondary credentials that are nationally or regionally portable and stackable for high-skill, high-wage, or in-demand industry sectors or occupations.
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $65,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2026 through 2031.
On an annual basis during each year of the grant period, the Secretary shall evaluate the performance during such year of each eligible institution receiving a grant under this section
The Secretary shall make available on a publicly accessible website of the Department of Labor, in transparent, linked, open, and interoperable data formats, the following information:
The bill would add a community college workforce grant program to the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. Its stated goals are to improve training and expand access to credentials that can be used nationally or regionally and built upon toward further qualifications. These are goals, not demonstrated results.
Subtitle D of title I of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (29 U.S.C. 3221 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following: 173. Strengthening community colleges workforce development grants program
The purposes of this section are— (1) to establish, improve, or expand high-quality workforce development programs at community colleges; and (2) to expand opportunities for individuals to obtain recognized postsecondary credentials that are nationally or regionally portable and stackable for high-skill, high-wage, or in-demand industry sectors or occupations.
Eligible applicants would include community colleges, qualifying postsecondary vocational institutions, and groups of those institutions. The community college definition includes public colleges and public university branch campuses where an associate degree is the highest or most frequently awarded degree, two-year Tribal Colleges or Universities, and other degree-granting Tribal Colleges or Universities meeting the associate-degree test.
The term community college means— (A) a public institution of higher education (as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)), at which— (i) the highest degree awarded is an associate degree; or (ii) an associate degree is the most frequently awarded degree; (B) a branch campus of a 4-year public institution of higher education (as defined in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001)), if, at such branch campus— (i) the highest degree awarded is an associate degree; or (ii) an associate degree is the most frequently awarded degree; (C) a 2-year Tribal College or University (as defined in section 316(b)(3) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059c(b)(3))); or (D) a degree-granting Tribal College or University (as defined in section 316(b)(3) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059c(b)(3))) at which— (i) the highest degree awarded is an associate degree; or (ii) an associate degree is the most frequently awarded degree.
The term eligible institution means— (A) a community college; (B) a postsecondary vocational institution (as defined in section 102(c) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002(c))); or (C) a consortium of such colleges or institutions.
The proposal would authorize $65 million for each fiscal year from 2026 through 2031. This would permit future appropriations rather than itself provide the money. The Secretary would award available grant funds competitively.
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $65,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2026 through 2031.
From the amounts appropriated to carry out this section under paragraph (3) and not reserved under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall, on a competitive basis, make grants to eligible institutions to carry out the activities described in subsection (e).
The Secretary could reserve up to 2% of appropriated funds for grant administration, including evaluation and reporting. This could also fund application assistance and outreach to rural-serving institutions and institutions serving many low-income people or people facing barriers to employment.
the Secretary may reserve not more than two percent for the administration of grants awarded under this section, including— (A) providing technical assistance and targeted outreach to support eligible institutions serving a high number or high percentage of low-income individuals or individuals with barriers to employment, and rural-serving eligible institutions, to provide guidance and assistance in the process of applying for grants under this section; and (B) evaluating and reporting on the performance and impact of programs funded under this section in accordance with subsections (f) through (h).
An initial grant could last no more than four years. An institution could receive additional grants, each lasting no more than four years, if it showed that it met its agreed performance levels during its most recently completed grant period. Renewal would be permitted, not guaranteed.
Each grant under this section shall be awarded for an initial period of not more than 4 years.
An eligible institution that receives an initial grant under this section may receive one or more additional grants under this section for additional periods of not more than 4 years each if the eligible institution demonstrates that, during the most recently completed grant period for a grant received under this section, such eligible institution achieved the levels of performance agreed to by the eligible institution with respect to the performance indicators specified in subsection (f).
Applicants would have to describe their employer relationships, employment-placement arrangements, partner responsibilities, and targeted industries, supported by current local labor-market data. Lack of previous partnership experience alone could not disqualify an institution.
The extent to which the eligible institution has demonstrated success building partnerships with employers in in-demand industry sectors or occupations to provide students with the skills needed for occupations in such industries and an explanation of the results of any such partnerships.
The methods and strategies the eligible institution will use to engage with employers in in-demand industry sectors or occupations, including any arrangements to place individuals who complete the workforce development programs supported by the grant into employment with such employers.
the roles and responsibilities of each employer, organization, agency, or institution of higher education that the eligible institution will partner with to carry out the activities under this section
One or more industries that such partnership will target and real-time labor market data demonstrating that those industries are aligned with employer demand in the geographic area to be served by the eligible institution.
The Secretary may not disqualify an eligible institution from receiving a grant under this section solely because such institution lacks previous experience in building partnerships, as described in paragraph (2)(A).
Applications would also need to explain additional resources and long-term sustainability, program quality, the population and area served, planned programs and credentials, and supporting evidence. Applicants would have to describe alignment with relevant workforce, career education, and economic development plans and set goals for institutional capacity and participant performance.
The extent to which the eligible institution can— (i) leverage additional resources to support the programs to be funded with the grant, which shall include written commitments of any leveraged or matching funds for the proposed programs; and (ii) demonstrate the future sustainability of each such program.
The steps the institution will take to ensure the high quality of each program to be funded with the grant, including the career pathways within such programs.
The population and geographic area to be served by the eligible institution, including the number of individuals the eligible institution intends to serve during the grant period. (H) The workforce development programs to be supported by the grant. (I) The recognized postsecondary credentials that are expected to be earned by participants in such workforce development programs and the related high-wage, high skill, or in-demand industry sectors or occupations for which such programs will prepare participants.
The evidence upon which the education and skills development strategies to be used in such workforce development programs are based and an explanation of how such evidence influenced the design of the programs to improve education and employment outcomes.
How activities of the eligible institution are expected to align with the workforce strategies identified in— (i) any State plan or local plan submitted under this Act by the State, outlying area, or locality in which the eligible institution is expected to operate; (ii) any State plan submitted under section 122 of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2342) by such State or outlying area; and (iii) any economic development plan of the chief executive of such State or outlying area.
The goals of the eligible institution with respect to— (i) capacity building (as described in subsection (f)(1)(B)); and (ii) the expected performance of individuals participating in the programs to be offered by the eligible institution, including with respect to any performance indicators applicable under section 116 or subsection (f) of this section.
Grant priority would require all three conditions: serving people with employment barriers or current workers needing foundational skills; awarding credit for prior learning based on demonstrated skills; and having, or seeking, state approval of the funded career programs as eligible training providers.
In awarding grants under this section, the Secretary shall give priority to eligible institutions that— (A) will use the grant to serve— (i) individuals with barriers to employment; or (ii) incumbent workers who need to gain or improve foundational skills to enhance their employability; (B) use competency-based assessments to award academic credit for prior learning for programs supported by the grant, such as any competency-based assessment developed and identified by the State in which the eligible institution is located, in coordination with industry organizations, employers (including small and mid-sized employers), industry or sector partnerships, training providers, local boards, and institutions of higher education; and (C) have, or will seek to have, the career education programs supported by the grant included on the list of eligible providers of training services under section 122 for the State in which the eligible institution is located.
Each recipient would have to maintain an employer partnership throughout its grant. The partnership would target high-skill, high-wage, or in-demand industries, collaborate with the workforce development system, serve existing and entering workers, use evidence-based program designs, and include work-based learning. Virtual services would be included where appropriate.
an eligible institution that receives a grant under this section shall establish a partnership (or continue an existing partnership) with one or more employers in an in-demand industry sector or occupation (in this section referred to as an eligible institution and industry partnership) and shall maintain such partnership for the duration of the grant period.
The eligible institution shall ensure that the partnership— (A) targets one or more specific high-skill, high-wage, or in-demand industries; (B) includes collaboration with the workforce development system; (C) serves adult and dislocated workers, incumbent workers, and new entrants to the workforce; (D) uses an evidence-based program design that is appropriate for the activities carried out by the partnership; (E) incorporates work-based learning opportunities, as defined in section 3 of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2302); and (F) incorporates, to the extent appropriate, virtual service delivery to facilitate technology-enabled learning.
In consultation with employer partners, recipients would have to establish, improve, or expand evidence-based job training, career pathways, or work-based learning, including possible apprenticeships or preparation for apprenticeships. They would also have to provide career services to support completion. Optional forms of support include coaching, mentoring, outreach, course materials, devices, and required equipment.
An eligible institution that receives a grant under this section shall, in consultation with the employers in the eligible institution and industry partnership described in paragraph (1)— (A) establish, improve, or expand high quality, evidence-based workforce development programs, career pathway programs, or work-based learning programs (including apprenticeship programs or preapprenticeships); (B) provide career services to individuals participating in the programs funded with the grant to facilitate retention and program completion, which may include— (i) career navigation, coaching, mentorship, and case management services, including providing information and outreach to individuals with barriers to employment to encourage such individuals to participate in programs funded with the grant; and (ii) providing access to course materials, technological devices, required equipment, and other supports necessary for participation in and successful completion of such programs;
Recipients would have to publish searchable, comparable information about funded curricula and credentials. This would include who issues and endorses credentials, the jobs and skills they cover, how skills are assessed, whether credentials transfer or build toward further qualifications, and additional skills participants gain.
make available, in a format that is open, searchable, and easily comparable, information on— (i) curricula and recognized postsecondary credentials offered through programs funded with the grant, including any curricula or credentials created or further developed using such grant, which for each recognized postsecondary credential, shall include— (I) the issuing entity of such credential; (II) any third-party endorsements of such credential; (III) the occupations for which the credential prepares individuals; (IV) the skills and competencies necessary to achieve to earn such credential; (V) the level of mastery of such skills and competencies (including how mastery is assessed); and (VI) any transfer value or stackability of the credential; (ii) any skills or competencies developed by individuals who participate in such programs beyond the skills and competencies identified as part of the recognized postsecondary credential awarded;
Recipients would also have to disclose employment and earnings outcomes using specified existing-law measures. For one measure, the bill would replace “fourth” with “second” and add a requirement concerning continued unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after leaving the program. The underlying measure is not reproduced in the bundle.
related employment and earnings outcomes on the primary indicators of performance described in subclauses (I) through (III) of section 116(b)(2)(A)(i), except that subclause (II) of such section shall be applied by— (I) substituting second for fourth; and (II) as if and remain in unsubsidized employment during the fourth quarter after exit from the program were inserted after the program.
Recipients would have to choose at least one additional activity in consultation with employer partners. Options include education and credit-transfer arrangements, remedial instruction taken alongside college courses, enrollment in two programs at once, education and assessment based on demonstrated skills, credit for prior learning, and steps to qualify for a state training-provider list. Equipment and student financial assistance would be other options.
In addition to the activities required under paragraph (2), an eligible institution that receives a grant under this section shall, in consultation with the employers in the eligible institution and industry partnership described in paragraph (1), carry out one or more of the following activities:
Establish, improve, or expand— (i) articulation agreements (as defined in section 486A(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1093a(a))); (ii) credit transfer agreements; (iii) corequisite remediation programs that enable a student to receive remedial education services while enrolled in a postsecondary course rather than requiring the student to receive remedial education before enrolling in a such a course; (iv) dual or concurrent enrollment programs; (v) competency-based education and assessment; or (vi) policies and processes to award academic credit for prior learning or for the programs described in paragraph (2)(A).
Establish or implement plans for providers of the programs described in paragraph (2)(A) to meet the criteria and carry out the procedures necessary to be included on the eligible training services provider list described in section 122(d).
Purchase, lease, or refurbish specialized equipment as necessary to carry out such programs
Reduce or eliminate unmet financial need relating to the cost of attendance (as defined under section 472 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ll)) of participants in such programs.
Specialized equipment purchases, leases, or refurbishment could use no more than 15% of an institution’s grant. Separately, administrative costs could use no more than 7%, including information collection, analysis, and coordination for performance oversight.
Purchase, lease, or refurbish specialized equipment as necessary to carry out such programs, provided that not more than 15 percent of the funds awarded to the eligible institution under this section may be used for activities described in this subparagraph.
An eligible institution may use not more than 7 percent of the funds awarded under this section for administrative costs, including costs related to collecting information, analysis, and coordination for purposes of subsection (f).
Performance standards would cover existing federal adult workforce measures for all participants, employer engagement and investment, new teaching methods or technology, coordination across programs, completion rates, and advancement among participants who were already employed when they enrolled.
The Secretary shall develop and implement guidance that establishes the levels of performance that are expected to be achieved by each eligible institution receiving a grant under this section.
Each of the primary indicators of performance for adults described in section 116(b), which shall be applied for all individuals who participated in a program that received funding from a grant under this section.
The extent to which the eligible institution built capacity by— (i) increasing the breadth and depth of employer engagement and investment in workforce development programs in the in-demand industry sectors and occupations targeted by the eligible institution and industry partnership established or maintained by the eligible institution under subsection (e)(1); (ii) designing or implementing new and accelerated instructional techniques or technologies, including the use of advanced online and technology-enabled learning (such as immersive technology); and (iii) increasing program and policy alignment across systems and decreasing duplicative services or service gaps.
With respect to individuals who participated in a workforce development program funded with the grant— (i) the percentage of participants who successfully completed the program; and (ii) of the participants who were incumbent workers at the time of enrollment in the program, the percentage who advanced into higher level positions during or after completing the program.
The Secretary would set performance levels separately for each institution, considering its goals and local economic conditions. Each institution would receive written notice and have to confirm that it agreed to evaluation under those levels.
the Secretary shall separately determine the performance levels that will apply to each eligible institution, taking into account— (i) the expected performance levels of each eligible institution with respect to the goals described by the eligible institution pursuant to subsection (d)(2)(L); and (ii) local economic conditions in the geographic area to be served by the eligible institution, including differences in unemployment rates and job losses or gains in particular industries.
The Secretary shall provide each eligible institution with a written notification that sets forth the performance levels that will apply to the eligible institution, as determined under subparagraph (B).
each eligible institution shall submit to the Secretary written confirmation that the eligible institution— (I) received the notification; and (II) agrees to be evaluated in accordance with the performance levels determined by the Secretary.
The Secretary would review each recipient’s performance every grant year. If a recipient missed its performance levels, the required response would be technical assistance and a performance improvement plan.
On an annual basis during each year of the grant period, the Secretary shall evaluate the performance during such year of each eligible institution receiving a grant under this section in a manner consistent with the performance levels determined for such institution pursuant to paragraph (2).
if the Secretary determines that an eligible institution did not achieve the performance levels applicable to the eligible institution under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall— (A) provide technical assistance to the eligible institution; and (B) develop a performance improvement plan for the eligible institution.
Within four years after the first grant, the Secretary would have to design and conduct an overall effectiveness evaluation. It would examine employer engagement, career pathways, coordination with the workforce system, employment assistance, credential attainment, and equal access across demographic groups.
Not later than 4 years after the date on which the first grant is made under this section, the Secretary shall design and conduct an evaluation to determine the overall effectiveness of the eligible institutions receiving a grant under this section.
developed new, or expanded existing, successful industry sector strategies, including the extent to which such eligible institutions deepened employer engagement and developed workforce development programs that met industry skill needs;
created, expanded, or enhanced career pathways
created alignment between eligible institutions and the workforce development system; (D) assisted individuals with finding, retaining, or advancing in employment; (E) assisted individuals with earning recognized postsecondary credentials; and (F) provided equal access to various demographic groups, including people of different geographic locations, ages, races, national origins, and sexes.
The evaluation would be designed through the Chief Evaluation Officer with participating institutions. It would include participant feedback and measures of results and implementation, using the most rigorous methods reasonably feasible; control groups are an example, not an absolute requirement.
The evaluation under this subsection shall— (A) be designed by the Secretary (acting through the Chief Evaluation Officer) in conjunction with the eligible institutions being evaluated; (B) include analysis of program participant feedback and outcome and process measures; and (C) use designs that employ the most rigorous analytical and statistical methods that are reasonably feasible, such as the use of control groups.
Evaluation data would have to be published on a public Department of Labor website in grouped form that does not identify individuals and complies with applicable federal privacy law.
The Secretary shall make available on a publicly accessible website of the Department of Labor any data collected as part of the evaluation under this subsection. Such data shall be made available in an aggregated format that does not reveal personally identifiable information and that ensures compliance with relevant Federal laws, including section 444 of the General Education Provisions Act (commonly known as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974) (20 U.S.C. 1232g).
An interim evaluation report would follow a schedule set by the Chief Evaluation Officer. After the evaluation was completed, a report would be due to the specified House and Senate committees within 60 days, and public results would be due within 90 days.
The Secretary (acting through the Chief Evaluation Officer) shall— (A) in accordance with the timeline determined to be appropriate by the Chief Evaluation Officer, publish an interim report on the preliminary results of the evaluation conducted under this subsection; (B) not later than 60 days after the date on which the evaluation is completed under this subsection, submit to the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate a report on such evaluation; and (C) not later than 90 days after such completion date, publish and make the results of such evaluation available on a publicly accessible website of the Department of Labor.
Annual public reporting would cover institutional capacity-building performance, participant completion and advancement measures, and enrollment totals. The information would have to be published in open, linked formats that can work across data systems.
(h) Annual reports The Secretary shall make available on a publicly accessible website of the Department of Labor, in transparent, linked, open, and interoperable data formats, the following information: (1) The performance of eligible institutions on the capacity-building performance indicator set forth under subsection (f)(1)(B). (2) The performance of eligible institutions on the workforce development participant outcome performance indicators set forth under subsection (f)(1)(C). (3) The number of individuals enrolled in workforce development programs funded with a grant under this section.
the percentage of participants who successfully completed the program; and (ii) of the participants who were incumbent workers at the time of enrollment in the program, the percentage who advanced into higher level positions during or after completing the program.
Grant funds would have to add to other federal, state, and local public funding for these activities, rather than replace that funding.
Funds made available under this section shall be used to supplement, and not supplant, other Federal, State, and local public funds made available for carrying out the activities described in this section.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated October 15, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Education and Workforce on February 7, 2025. This snapshot does not establish the bill’s subsequent legislative status.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-15T18:18:56Z. 2025-02-07: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. 2025-02-07: Introduced in House 2025-02-07: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-07. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular recipient or place was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. This text-only conclusion does not establish formal earmark status or absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow special benefit beyond ordinary program eligibility, priorities, and administration was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 15, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI