Last week, the Department of Education’s AHEAD Committee hosted negotiated rulemaking for Workforce Pell. As promised, the process went rapidly, covering an incredible amount of detail and reaching consensus after just five days of rulemaking. The rules, as negotiated, set up a complex partnership between the federal government—including the departments of Labor and Education—and states, and requiring intentional and thoughtful collaboration between higher education and workforce systems and attention to how those systems collect and share data.
This partnership will ultimately determine whether Workforce Pell delivers on its promise of expanding opportunities for working people and helping employers hire with confidence – or remains out of reach for students who need it most.
While everyone awaits the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which will share the final proposed language and invite public comment, here are a few takeaways and considerations for state policymakers, education and training stakeholders, and advocates to keep in mind in the new year.
Takeaways from Negotiated Rulemaking
- Past attention to quality non-degree credentials will give states a leg up. States with existing quality definitions, financial aid programs, data systems for non-degree programs and credentials, especially those that are linked to in-demand job lists that are regularly updated, will be ahead of the curve. These states will have existing processes in place for vetting programs and credentials according to quality metrics similar to those required by Workforce Pell and for establishing demand thresholds that can inform eligibility assessments.
- Regulators missed an opportunity to build meaningful pathways. According to statute, eligible programs must stack to credit-bearing pathways and be portable to other institutions—but the negotiated rules will make it so that continued education upon completion of a Workforce Pell program will count negatively towards the 70 percent job placement rate metric. While negotiators pushed against this, the inclusion of students who continue their education is a missed opportunity – effectively treating continued education as a negative outcome rather than rewarding programs that support people to stack their credentials and advance along a career pathway.
- States have a lot to do, but there are questions about the payoff. States—specifically governors and state workforce boards—are given significant authority in the rules as currently composed. States will be responsible for, among other things:
- Defining high-demand, high-wage, or high skill occupations, as well as stackability and portability
- Processing program approval and conducting regular reviews, including removal of programs which fail the 70/70 and value-added earnings metrics
- Ensuring data systems can report effectively on performance requirements, including establishing data sharing agreements, improving and filling gaps in data for eligible noncredit programs, and taking steps to enhance wage records or find other ways to collect data on occupation
- Establishing bilateral agreements for online education programs
- Engaging employers in validating the skills, competencies, and credentials needed to meet hiring requirements
The complexity and amount of work required for implementation will likely be balanced with the expected payoff, especially given estimates that very few programs will qualify, at least in the beginning.
- The rulemaking process underscored a persistent tension between workforce and higher education systems that is likely to carry through implementation. Although Workforce Pell is administered by the Department of Education, its success hinges on close coordination with the Department of Labor; particularly around outcomes data, credential alignment, and integration with registered apprenticeship and other work-based learning models. Throughout federal negotiations, stakeholders repeatedly returned to questions of Congressional intent, debating whether Workforce Pell should function primarily as a workforce outcomes–driven investment or as an extension of traditional postsecondary aid structures. How this tension is ultimately resolved at the federal level will shape program design, accountability measures, and interagency coordination, and is likely to be replicated at the state level as agencies determine roles, data-sharing practices, and implementation authority.
Considerations Moving Forward
As July 1, 2026, approaches, a few things should be top of mind for states, institutions, and workforce and education advocates:
- Implications of Workforce Pell for existing state higher education ecosystems. States will need to determine how state financial aid will interact with Workforce Pell and how best to leverage the $8.1 billion in state investment in short-term workforce education and training to ensure students and workers have access to high-quality opportunities to gain skills and credentials in demand by employers.
- The importance of student outreach. Getting the word out about Workforce Pell—both the opportunity it represents and to protect students against potential risks—should be top of mind for states, institutions, advocates, and community partners. Knowing that predatory institutions will likely seek to take advantage of new federal aid dollars, that not all short-term programs lead to good outcomes, and that Workforce Pell counts against a student’s lifetime eligibility for Pell Grants overall, students will need good information and strong guidance about which programs and institutions will be worth their investment.
- The other policies and practices necessary for delivering on the promise of Workforce Pell. While Workforce Pell is a huge step for ensuring students have the financial resources to pursue high-quality, career-oriented training that was previously ineligible for federal aid, aid alone is not enough to ensure students see a strong return on their—and taxpayers’—investments. A plethora of evidence shows, including NSC research with workers and learners, that affordability—while essential—on its own is not enough to help people achieve their end goals of career and economic mobility. Holistic and basic needs supports, college and career navigation, strong employer partnerships, paid work-based learning opportunities, among other policies and practices are essential to helping students achieve their dreams.
- Continuing federal advocacy to make necessary data collection under Workforce Pell easier on states, institutions, and students. National Skills Coalition (NSC) has long championed passing Workforce Pell together with the College Transparency Act (CTA), to strengthen federal oversight of students’ privacy and improve data collection. Introduced on a bipartisan, bicameral basis, CTA helps ensure that students and businesses can trust that public investments are going toward high-quality, career-aligned programs. With institutional and state capacity for data collection already strained, advocating for CTA is crucial, and will be a key ask to federal policymakers at NSC’s Skills Summit in February.
What Comes Next—and Where There’s Still Time to Shape Workforce Pell
In the new year, the Department of Education will release a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) with the final proposed regulations for Workforce Pell, kicking off a 30-day public comment period (for a breakdown of how NPRM works, see this recap from Wesley Whistle). This next phase will be critical in determining whether Workforce Pell delivers on its promise. Meanwhile, states and institutions will be working to understand and build frameworks for implementing the rules as drafted. Look out for more information, guidance, and opportunities to take action with NSC, including:
- Ongoing analysis of regulatory, subregulatory, and state actions regarding implementation
- Opportunities to engage with the Administration and states
- A breakdown of the complementary policies that will be essential to delivering on the promise of Workforce Pell
