AID Youth Employment Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Kelly, Robin L. [D-IL-2]
- Committees
- Education and Workforce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Mar 31, 2025
Bottom line
The bill aims to significantly expand employment and skill-building opportunities for youth, especially vulnerable populations, through substantial federal grants for local summer and year-round job programs, coupled with comprehensive support services and mentorship.
What it actually does
This bill amends Title I of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) by establishing two new competitive grant programs: one for subsidized summer youth employment and another for subsidized year-round youth employment. These programs target individuals aged 14-24, with a particular focus on marginalized youth, and provide funding to states, local governments, tribal organizations, and community-based organizations to offer employment opportunities, skill development, and mentorship.
Proponents argue
Supporters would argue that this bill addresses critical youth unemployment and underemployment, particularly for marginalized populations, by providing structured work experience, essential skill development, and crucial mentorship. They contend that this investment in human capital will reduce crime, create clear pathways to further education and stable careers, and ultimately strengthen local economies and communities.
Opponents contend
Potential opponents might raise concerns about the substantial cost of these new programs, arguing that such large-scale federal intervention in local employment markets could be inefficient or create dependency. They might also question the overall effectiveness of subsidized employment compared to private sector job creation or express concerns about potential administrative burdens on states and local entities.
The bill is relatively short and clearly structured, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core provisions and implications within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 176(1), (5)
Definition of Eligible Youth and Marginalized Individuals
This provision defines 'eligible youth' as individuals aged 14-24 who are either in-school, out-of-school, or unemployed, making them eligible for the new employment programs. It also specifically defines 'marginalized' individuals to include youth who are homeless, in foster care, involved in the justice system, or at risk of dropping out, especially those living in underserved communities facing significant trauma, discrimination, poverty, violence, or high rates of drug overdose mortality.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that these definitions ensure the program effectively targets those most in need of employment opportunities and comprehensive support, focusing resources on vulnerable youth who face significant systemic barriers to entering the workforce.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against definitional provisions that clarify program scope, though some might argue for broader or narrower eligibility criteria in general policy discussions.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the goal of providing broad youth employment opportunities with the critical need to specifically target and prioritize highly vulnerable populations to maximize the program's social impact.
Section 176A
Allocation of Funds for Summer and Year-Round Programs
This section authorizes the Secretary of Labor to allocate up to $1.8 billion for subsidized summer employment opportunities and up to $2.4 billion for subsidized year-round employment opportunities from the total appropriated funds. Additionally, it allows the Secretary to reserve up to 10% of the appropriated funds for technical assistance and oversight to help eligible entities apply for and administer these grants.
Section 176B
Summer Employment Competitive Grant Program Establishment
This section establishes a competitive grant program for entities to plan and implement subsidized summer employment opportunities for eligible youth. Grants can be awarded for a 1-year planning period (up to $250,000) or a 3-year implementation period (up to $6,000,000). It sets out detailed eligibility requirements for states, local governments, Indian tribes, tribal organizations, and community-based organizations, emphasizing the necessity of partnerships with various entities including educational, workforce, justice, and child welfare agencies, as well as employers.
Section 176B(d)
Detailed Application Requirements and Program Design for Summer Grants
This provision specifies extensive application content, requiring descriptions of eligible youth, partner responsibilities, demonstrated community need (e.g., high youth unemployment, poverty, crime), and strategic objectives (e.g., financial literacy, technical skills, soft skills). For planning grants, applicants must analyze best practices for recruitment, engagement, and placement in appropriate subsidized employment (at least 6 weeks, up to 20 hours/week, minimum wage, and Davis-Bacon wages for construction). For implementation grants, detailed plans are required for recruitment, placement, mentorship, employer services (coaching for supervisors), pathways back into employment after termination, and engagement beyond the summer period, such as referrals to year-round programs or job development services.
Section 176B(e)
Targeting Summer Grants to In-School/Out-of-School Youth and Diverse Geographic Areas
This provision mandates that the Secretary of Labor reserve 50% of summer grant funds for in-school youth and the remaining 50% for out-of-school youth. It also requires the Secretary to consider the regional diversity of areas to be served (urban, suburban, rural, and tribal) when awarding grants. Specifically, not less than 20% of the funds must be made available for activities in rural areas, and not less than 5% for activities in tribal areas.
Section 176C
Year-Round Employment Competitive Grant Program Establishment
This section establishes a parallel competitive grant program for planning and implementing subsidized year-round employment opportunities, largely mirroring the summer program's structure but with specific adjustments. For in-school youth, year-round employment is limited to not more than 15 hours per week, while for out-of-school youth, it ranges from 20 to 40 hours per week. The program also specifically requires plans for providing mental health services and addressing common barriers to participation, such as transportation and child care. Mentors in year-round programs must maintain contact with youth at least twice a week.
Section 176D
Performance Measures and Continuous Quality Improvement
This section directs the Secretary of Labor to establish performance measures for annual reviews and to develop and implement a system of continuous quality improvement for the grant programs. Key performance indicators include the percentage of participants in education/training or employment after program exit (at 2 and 4 quarters), the percentage obtaining recognized postsecondary credentials or secondary diplomas (linked to employment or further training), and the percentage achieving measurable skill gains. The Secretary will provide feedback, create improvement plans, offer targeted support, and disseminate information on program quality.
Section 176E
Authorization of Appropriations
This section authorizes specific funding levels for the new grant programs: $375,000,000 for the summer employment program and $500,000,000 for the year-round employment program for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030. This totals $875,000,000 annually, amounting to $4,375,000,000 over the five-year period.
Requires that any summer employment opportunities involving construction pay wages not less than those determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act (subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States Code).
Section 176B(d)(1)(B)(iv)(II)(dd)
Why it matters:While referencing existing law for wage standards is common legislative practice, its specific inclusion for youth employment programs, particularly within a detailed list of application requirements, might be overlooked by a casual reader focused on the broader program goals. It's a technical detail with significant implications.
Case for: Proponents of this inclusion would argue it ensures fair and prevailing wages for youth engaged in construction work, preventing exploitation and upholding established labor standards on projects supported by federal funds, consistent with broader federal contracting policies.
Case against: Opponents might argue that applying Davis-Bacon standards to youth employment programs could increase program costs and administrative burden for employers, potentially limiting the number of available construction-related jobs for youth or making such opportunities less attractive to participating businesses.
Estimated impact: This provision ensures a specific wage floor for any construction-related jobs created under the summer employment program, impacting the compensation of youth in such roles and the cost structure for employers offering these positions. The scale of impact depends on the number of construction jobs created.
Allows Indian tribes and tribal organizations to provide their non-program share (matching funds) for implementation grants from Federal sources, unlike other eligible entities which must use State, local, tribal, or private sources.
Section 176B(h)(2)(C)(ii)
Why it matters:This is a specific carve-out reflecting the unique federal-tribal relationship and the often-limited local tax bases of tribal governments. It's a technical detail that might not be immediately apparent to a general reader focused on the main cost-sharing rules for all grantees.
Case for: Proponents argue this provision acknowledges the unique sovereign status and often limited financial resources of tribal governments, ensuring they can access and participate in these critical youth employment programs without undue financial burden. It promotes equitable access for tribal communities.
Case against: Some might argue that allowing federal funds to be used as a match for other federal funds dilutes the principle of local investment and cost-sharing, potentially reducing the overall leverage of federal dollars or creating an uneven playing field for other types of grantees.
Estimated impact: This provision significantly eases the financial burden for Indian tribes and tribal organizations seeking to participate in the grant programs, likely leading to greater participation from these entities and ensuring more youth in tribal areas are served.