The Investing in Tomorrow’s Workforce Act of 2026 directs the Department of Labor to award competitive grants to industry‑or sector‑based partnerships for demonstration and pilot projects that retrain workers displaced or at risk of displacement from automation. Grants may fund training, equipment, incumbent‑worker programs, stipends, and supports such as child care or transportation; awards last up to four years and prioritize areas with high shares of vulnerable populations or industries likely to be automated.
The bill also amends the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act to explicitly add training for workers affected by automation to the list of allowable training activities and authorizes an additional $40 million per year (2027–2031) for National Dislocated Worker Grants. The statute defines “automation” broadly to include robotics, autonomous systems, digital manufacturing, and analytics, and it tightens partnership requirements to include workforce and economic development boards.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates a competitive grant program (up to 4 years) for eligible partnerships to run demonstration/pilot retraining projects for workers dislocated or likely to be dislocated by automation. It expands allowable WIOA training activities and adds a $40M annual authorization for national dislocated worker grants through 2031.
Who It Affects
Local and State workforce development boards, industry/sector partnerships that include community colleges and employers, training providers, employers with incumbent workers, and workers in occupations vulnerable to automation (disproportionately low‑wage workers, women, and people of color).
Why It Matters
The bill channels new federal resources into regionally designed, employer‑linked retraining tailored to automation risk, while imposing reporting and nondiscrimination obligations—potentially shifting how workforce funding targets rapidly changing labor markets.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The core of the bill is a new competitive grant program run by the Secretary of Labor, funded from fiscal year 2027 onward, to test and scale training approaches for workers affected by automation. Eligible applicants are industry or sector partnerships that must expressly include specified stakeholders — employers, institutions of higher education, workforce boards, and economic development organizations.
Applications must describe partner roles, the training curriculum, goals for upskilling and job placement, and how the proposal serves covered populations (those facing employment barriers under WIOA). Successful applicants receive awards for up to four years to build and run demonstration projects.
Grant funds are flexible: partnerships can use them for direct training (including digital literacy and IT‑related skills), equipment purchases, creating a staff position to manage training, stipends, integrated education and training, and transitional supports like job search assistance. The Secretary must prioritize proposals located in areas with high percentages of covered populations and—if funds remain—proposals that target high‑automation industries, provide incumbent‑worker training coupled with employer backfill plans, offer worker supports (transportation, child care, paid leave), or develop shared curricula for regional employer networks.Performance and accountability are built into the statute.
Partnerships must submit a post‑project report to the Department with aggregate and disaggregated outcomes: number trained, transitions to new positions, placement in in‑demand sectors, earnings data, and second‑ and fourth‑quarter employment or training status. Grant recipients must follow WIOA labor standards and nondiscrimination rules.
Separately, the bill amends WIOA to add training for workers impacted by automation explicitly to allowable adult and dislocated worker services and authorizes $40 million annually for National Dislocated Worker Grants for FY2027–2031 to respond to automation‑related dislocation.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Department of Labor will award competitive grants to eligible partnerships for demonstration or pilot projects helping workers displaced or likely to be displaced by automation; grant terms may be up to 4 years.
Grant applications must include partner roles, a training plan (including digital literacy and tech skills if applicable), measurable goals for upskilling and placement, and an engagement plan for covered populations identified under WIOA.
The Secretary must prioritize applications in areas with high shares of covered populations and then, subject to remaining funds, prioritize proposals that target high‑automation industries, incumbent‑worker training with employer backfill plans, worker supports, or shared regional curricula.
Recipients must report post‑project outcomes (training counts, transitions, placement in in‑demand sectors, earnings, and Q2/Q4 post‑exit status) in both aggregate and disaggregated form by training type, age, gender, and race.
The bill amends WIOA to add automation‑related training to allowable adult/dislocated worker services and authorizes an additional $40 million per year for National Dislocated Worker Grants for FY2027–2031.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Designates the statute as the Investing in Tomorrow’s Workforce Act of 2026. This is administrative but signals the bill’s focus on forward‑looking workforce investments tied to technological change.
Key statutory definitions
Provides working definitions for terms that determine the program’s scope: a broad definition of “automation” (analytics, digital manufacturing, robotics, autonomous vehicles/machinery), WIOA‑aligned definitions for covered populations and dislocated workers, and an explicit inclusion of digital literacy and training services. Those definitions govern eligibility, allowable activities, and the populations the grants are intended to serve; the breadth of “automation” means many sectors could be considered at risk.
Competitive grants for demonstration and pilot projects
Authorizes competitive awards to eligible partnerships for up to four years and enumerates acceptable uses of funds (training, equipment, stipends, integrated education, employer staffing support, transitional services). Eligible partnerships are industry/sector partnerships but must additionally include state/local workforce boards and economic development organizations. This structure pushes projects toward employer‑aligned training with regional coordination while giving partnerships latitude on supports and capital investments.
Application contents, priorities, and reporting requirements
Applications must detail partner roles, training content, goals, and covered‑population outreach. The Secretary must prioritize areas with high shares of covered populations, then focus remaining funds on high‑automation industries, incumbent‑worker models with employer backfilling, worker supports, or shared curricula. Post‑project reporting requires outcome metrics and disaggregation by demographic and training type, creating a dataset for identifying best practices but also imposing a measurable compliance obligation on recipients.
Labor standards, nondiscrimination, and appropriations
Requires grant activities to comply with WIOA labor protections and nondiscrimination clauses, tying recipient obligations to existing federal standards. The section leaves funding open‑ended with an authorization of appropriations 'as may be necessary' for FY2027–2031, which gives Congress leeway but no fixed dollar figure for the new grant program itself.
Amendments to WIOA (program scope and DWG funding)
Adds training for workers impacted by automation to the list of allowable adult and dislocated worker training activities under WIOA and inserts 'advances in automation technology' as an explicit cause for National Dislocated Worker Grants. It also authorizes $40 million per year for DWGs for FY2027–2031. These changes integrate automation risk into existing federal workforce funding pathways and provide a dedicated, though time‑limited, funding stream for rapid response to automation‑related dislocation.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Employment across all five countries.
Explore Employment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Workers in automation‑vulnerable roles, especially lower‑wage workers, women, and people of color — the bill funds retraining, stipends, and supports designed to increase access to in‑demand, higher‑skilled occupations.
- Community colleges, apprenticeship sponsors, and training providers — grant funding can cover equipment, curriculum development, and integrated education partnerships, expanding capacity to deliver tech‑focused programs.
- Employers in regions with high automation risk — incumbent‑worker training options let employers retain institutional knowledge while upskilling staff to new roles, and the bill encourages employer partnership and backfill plans.
- Local workforce and economic development boards — the statute explicitly incorporates these entities into eligible partnerships, increasing their centrality in designing regionally aligned retraining strategies.
- Regions with high concentrations of covered populations — the Secretary must prioritize grants for areas with larger shares of WIOA‑specified barriers to employment, directing resources toward equity‑focused projects.
Who Bears the Cost
- Department of Labor — will need to design the competitive solicitation, evaluate complex applications, monitor outcomes, and manage reporting and compliance without a fixed appropriation specified in the grant authorization.
- Eligible partnerships (employers, training providers, workforce boards) — must assemble multi‑partner applications, run multi‑year demonstration projects, comply with WIOA labor and nondiscrimination rules, and produce disaggregated reporting.
- Employers asked to hire or backfill positions — incumbent‑worker training priorities assume employers will hire replacements or create higher‑skilled roles, imposing recruitment and HR costs on participating firms.
- Smaller training providers and community organizations — may face upfront costs to meet equipment, curriculum, or staffing expectations to be competitive for grants, potentially favoring larger institutions.
- Congressional appropriators and federal budget — the proposal creates an open authorization for the new grant program plus a specified $40M annual DWG authorization, requiring lawmakers to allocate new budget authority.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether to concentrate limited federal resources on competitive, employer‑linked pilots aimed at rapid adaptation to automation (which may yield scalable models but produce uneven immediate coverage and favor established partners) versus distributing resources more broadly through formula funding to reach more workers quickly but with less capacity for testing new training models and employer integration.
The bill balances experimentation with accountability but leaves several implementation tradeoffs unresolved. It relies on competitive demonstrations rather than a formula approach, which can foster innovation but risks uneven geographic coverage and favors applicants with grantwriting capacity.
The broad definition of “automation” allows many industries to qualify as at‑risk, which helps target support where technology is changing work but also creates room for discretionary interpretation by the Department of Labor when determining priorities and awarding funds. Reporting requirements are rigorous—disaggregated Q2/Q4 outcomes and earnings data—but the statute does not prescribe standardized metrics or a central data platform, which could hamper cross‑project comparability and evaluation.
Funding design also creates tension. The grant program’s appropriation language is open‑ended (“such sums as may be necessary”), leaving the program dependent on future Congressional appropriations, while the DWG stream is fixed ($40M/year through 2031).
That split could produce bottlenecks: projects designed for multi‑year scale may face stop‑start funding or uneven national coverage. Finally, the bill encourages incumbent‑worker models that require employers to hire/backfill positions; this can make projects more sustainable but assumes employer willingness and local labor supply, which may not hold in all regions and could limit the kinds of partners who can participate effectively.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.