Sponsors
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Amends the Health Profession Opportunity Grants program to require the Secretary to give funding preference to grant applicants that have business and community partners in three specified categories: (1) state and local government agencies and social service providers (including entities administering Title IV-A programs), (2) institutions of higher education, apprenticeship programs, and local workforce development boards, and (3) health care employers, health sector partnerships, and labor or labor-management partnerships. The amendment takes effect on October 1, 2025.
The bill improves job placement and support for participants by prioritizing employer, education, and agency partnerships, but that priority risks concentrating funds with established partners and better‑resourced states while disadvantaging small, innovative, or rural providers and the communities they serve.
Low-income individuals and students are more likely to complete training and obtain placements, while local healthcare employers and other employers gain a stronger pipeline of better-trained candidates because grant awards favor programs that partner with employers, colleges, and workforce boards.
Participants in funded programs are more likely to receive wraparound supports and coordinated services because inclusion of Title IV-A administrators, workforce boards, and connections with state/local social service agencies improves linkages to cash assistance and other supports, boosting completion and employment outcomes.
Smaller, newer, or innovative training providers (and their prospective students) may be less likely to receive grants because the preference for formal employer/college/state partnerships advantages providers with existing institutional connections.
Programs and funding may concentrate in established healthcare systems, unions, and apprenticeship pathways, reducing geographic and programmatic diversity and leaving rural communities and nontraditional models with fewer options.
Emphasizing partnerships with state agencies and administrative capacity may advantage programs in well‑resourced states and disadvantage applicants and participants in states with limited administrative capacity, exacerbating state-level inequities for low-income people.
Introduced September 16, 2025 by Dwight Evans · Last progress September 16, 2025