Funding Strategies for Training Programs

Latin America is increasingly investing in employment programs, ranging from training courses and job-matching services to CV workshops and beyond. The number of programs increased by 20% in the last decade. But the results remain mixed. Some programs are successful, while others have little to no impact. The problem? Governments only pay for courses and services offered, not for people who get jobs. What if governments paid based on results, on people getting and keeping jobs? RESULTS-BASED FINANCING Under this model, providers of employment services receive partial payments for delivering training and support, but only get the full payment when participants:  1.     Get formal employment 2.     Stay employed for months Global evidence from a substantial body of impact evaluations suggests that these financing arrangements enhance effectiveness, leading to greater impacts. One example is Empléate, an employment program for vulnerable population during the pandemic.  The results (experimental evaluation) show:  A 9% higher probability of having formal jobs Rising to 22%  in sectors less affected by the pandemic  A 14% salary increase   Another major benefit is that results-based financing improves accountability and transparency; governments pay for what works. These models require thoughtful design and implementation: How to distribute financial risk? How to plan for payment flows and execution? The good news, Latin America already has valuable lessons to build on. Time to use them. Authors: Laura Casas, María Fernanda Gómez Gerena Carolina Gonzalez-Velosa Laura María Quiroz López Gerardo David Rosas Shady Full report: https://lnkd.in/eDQ434UJ Experimental evaluation of Empléate:  https://lnkd.in/ew_mzw47

Free Business Analysis Training? Recently, I discussed the high cost of becoming a BA and emphasized the need for equity in access to training. This has subtle undertones as a call for free training, but that’s not my intention. I believe people should pay for what they value. As someone put it, what we don't pay for, we won’t value. Everything that works has people behind it who are working, and if something is offered for free, someone is bearing the cost. For a structured end-to-end BA training program that costs between£450 to £10,000 in the entirety of its journey but offers the potential to land a lifetime job with an annual salary of £40,000 or more, this seems like a fair investment compared to programs that can cost between £15,000 and £30,000, often without guaranteeing even an interview upon graduation. What I’m proposing is to explore ways to make these programs more accessible, rather than free. For example, when Apple noticed that many of their customers couldn't afford their products, they introduced trade-in options, flexible financing plans, and regional pricing tailored to the purchasing power of different markets. A similar approach could be adopted in BA training. Providers could partner with credit firms to offer flexible payment options, allowing participants to pay back over 12 to 24 months, which would make the cost less daunting. They could also introduce pricing strategies that differentiate based on regional purchasing power or employment status ensuring that people from lower-income areas can still afford it. Also, we could offer partial scholarships to a select number of financially constrained participants. This could be paired with a “Robin Hood” model, where those who can afford to pay full price subsidize the costs for those who cannot. Another idea is to redesign: instead of offering only 12-week programs, organizations could create shorter courses at lower prices. These might include pre-recorded modules or access to recordings of past cohorts at discounted rates. Seeking external funding could also be an option. Training providers could look for grants from companies, foundations, or high-net-worth individuals to help offer discounts to students. In addition to this, training providers could seek corporate sponsorships, where companies fund the training in exchange for early access to participants who may fill job vacancies. Ultimately, the key is to build a sustainable model that balances equity and accessibility with profitability. While the training itself may not be free, making it more affordable through creative financing, pricing differentiation, product redesign, and external partnerships. Rather than advocating for free services, I’m proposing thoughtful solutions that expand access. This will be a win-win for the learners and the trainers.

Expanding the U.S. workforce in emerging technology is a pressing challenge. How can we build new talent pipelines for critical industries like biotechnology and AI? CSET’s recent report, "Biotech Manufacturing Apprenticeships: A Case Study in Workforce Innovation," by Luke Koslosky, Steph Batalis, and Veronica Jade Kinoshita, explores a promising solution. By examining the North Carolina Life Sciences Apprenticeship Consortium (NCLSAC), the report offers a practical guide for organizations looking to develop their own programs. A few policy takeaways from the report that caught my eye included: 1️⃣ Provide sustainable funding for the infrastructure that apprenticeship programs rely on, such as regional workforce hubs, technical education programs, and pre-apprenticeship training. 2️⃣ Support regular, regional labor market studies and ensure timely access to data on skills gaps and hiring needs to help target training efforts effectively. 3️⃣ Increase federal and state funding for the startup and long-term costs of apprenticeship programs, including support services for apprentices like stipends and child care — flexible funding is helpful! 4️⃣ Support recruitment initiatives that build awareness and reduce barriers to entry, especially for engaging new and historically underserved communities in the industry. 5️⃣ Create or strengthen regional groups that bring together employers, education providers, and government partners to align their efforts and goals. For organizations in any emerging tech field considering this model, our new report provides guiding questions to start the process: ❓What are your current workforce gaps in terms of roles and numbers, and what specific skills are most in demand? ❓What type of apprenticeship model—employer-sponsored, an intermediary partnership, or a consortium—best suits your organization's needs and resources? Learn more and see how this model could apply to your industry: ➡️ Read the full report: https://lnkd.in/ekcTD7GY ➡️ For industry & workforce developers, see our guiding questions: https://lnkd.in/e3rAhtQV ➡️ For policymakers, check out the "Policy Takeaways": https://lnkd.in/eiNx2qfD

Less Federal Funding = More Competitive Grant Writing = Stronger Justification & Outcomes With federal and state funding becoming increasingly competitive, securing grants isn’t just about identifying a need—it’s about proving impact, justifying every dollar, and demonstrating long-term value. Funders are looking for investments that yield measurable results and financial accountability. To compete, organizations must go beyond writing strong proposals and focus on building data-driven, outcome-oriented programs that stand out in a crowded funding landscape. How to Strengthen Your Grant Strategy in 2025 1️⃣ Set SMART Goals That Prove Impact Funders want to know exactly how their investment will drive change. Set clear, outcome-based goals that align with their priorities. ✅ Specific – Clearly define what you’ll achieve (e.g., “Provide job training to 150 small business owners in 12 months”). 📊 Measurable – Quantify the expected impact (e.g., “Increase employment by 20%” or “Launch 50 new businesses”). 🎯 Achievable – Base targets on past performance and industry benchmarks. 🔗 Relevant – Align goals with funder priorities (e.g., workforce development, environmental resilience). ⏳ Time-Bound – Set a clear implementation and reporting timeline. 2️⃣ Use Data-Driven Storytelling Winning proposals blend compelling narratives with hard data. Funders need both the numbers and the human story to make informed decisions. 📌 Leverage national and local data to quantify the problem. 📌 Showcase past program success to demonstrate credibility and effectiveness. 📌 Incorporate real beneficiary stories to connect funders to the impact on a personal level. 3️⃣ Justify Every Dollar in Your Budget Funders scrutinize budgets for transparency and ROI. Tie every line item directly to measurable outcomes. Example: Instead of requesting a lump sum of “$500K for program expansion,” break it down: 💰 $200K for staff = 300 additional participants served. 💻 $150K for technology = 40% faster service delivery. 📢 $150K for outreach = 25% increase in community engagement. Funders will ask: Why this amount? Why this allocation? What’s the return on investment? 4️⃣ Demonstrate Sustainability & Scalability With fewer dollars available, funders prioritize projects that create long-term impact. Strengthen your case by showing: 🔄 Diverse funding sources (public-private partnerships, earned revenue). 📈 Scalability (how the project can expand or replicate). 💡 Federal and state dollars are shrinking, but outcome-driven, evidence-backed proposals will rise to the top. Winning grants in 2025 requires more than strong writing—it demands a strategic approach. The organizations that secure funding will be those that justify their requests, prove measurable impact, and design programs built for lasting change. #GrantWriting #FundingStrategy #SMARTGoals #Nonprofits #ImpactMeasurement #CompetitiveGrants

Most EdTech founders start by pitching VCs. That is usually the slowest way to get funded. Venture capital comes with equity, investor timelines, and growth pressure that does not always fit how education businesses actually scale. And for most early-stage EdTech companies, it is not the right first move. There are at least five funding paths most EdTech founders overlook: 1. Non-dilutive grants — SBIR, NSF I-Corps, and Google for Startups programs give you capital without taking equity. You keep full ownership. 2. EdTech-specific accelerators — LearnLaunch, StartEd, Village Capital EdTech, and EduSpaze were built for education companies. Most come with funding, mentorship, and network access alongside the capital. 3. Fellowships — Programs like Schmidt Futures, Echoing Green, and LearnLaunch Innovation Fellowship fund founders directly, not just companies. 4. Dedicated funds for underrepresented founders — Backstage Capital, Black Girl Ventures, and Collab Capital are actively writing checks to founders traditional VC has overlooked. These are not consolation prizes. They are real capital. 5. Startup competitions — GSV Cup, MIT Solve, and TechCrunch Battlefield all have education tracks with real prize money and visibility attached. The problem is not that these opportunities do not exist. The problem is that most founders do not know about them until after they have already spent months chasing the wrong doors. If you are building in the education space and want to talk through your funding and visibility strategy, my details are in my profile. What funding path are you currently exploring? #EdTech #EdTechStartups #StartupFunding #EducationInnovation

💥 Under the U.S. “Big Beautiful Bill,” companies can now deduct 100% of their investment in technical training as part of R&D. If you're leading a company in the U.S., this is a huge opportunity to: ✅ Upskill your teams ✅ Modernize with AI & software training ✅ Reduce your tax bill —> this fiscal year 🟨 Before the Big Bill: • Training = general business expense • R&D deductions required strict technical ties • Internal enablement rarely qualified • Deductions were limited or delayed 🟩 Now (Post-Bill): ✔️ 100% deduction of qualifying training —> same fiscal year ✔️ Includes technical training, internal tool development, and upskilling ✔️ Smarter allocation = lower taxable income ✔️ Training becomes a strategic tax-saving initiative This means: • No more fighting for leftover HR budget • Scale enablement with better ROI • Every dollar invested in capability can return through tax 🔍 What qualifies? • AI, data & cloud training • Customized onboarding • Internal learning tied to innovation 🧠 Consult your tax advisor for details and specific guidance. 💼 Example: Company invests $100K in training. 📉 Deducts it under R&D and Lowers effective cost by up to 30% → More learning. Less tax this year. 📣 You’re not “just buying training”, you’re investing in innovation and deducting the cost. Tag your manager, a CFO, L&D or enablement lead 🔔 Follow me for insights on training strategy, AI & performance #BigBeautifulBill #CorporateTraining #TaxStrategy #RAndD #Enablement #AIinLearning #Upskilling #LearningAndDevelopment #TrainingROI

𝙏𝙝𝙚𝙨𝙚 7️⃣ 𝙖𝙡𝙩𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙛𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙨𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙞𝙚𝙨 𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙣'𝙩 𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙤𝙧y, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝙨𝙪𝙧𝙫𝙞𝙫𝙖𝙡 𝙜𝙪𝙞𝙙𝙖𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙛𝙤𝙧 2025. Shila N. and Samantha Musoke ACA break down why the "𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘰𝘱𝘦" funding model is quietly killing nonprofits. 💡 What jumped out at me: 1️⃣ Start with your assets, not your gaps - Before chasing new revenue streams, audit what you already own. That unused conference room? Idle vehicles? Training materials gathering digital dust? Revenue is often hiding in plain sight. 2️⃣ Corporate partnerships ≠ just asking for money - The payroll giving schemes and pro bono services models they outline create ongoing relationships, not one-off transactions. Much more sustainable than the annual sponsorship ask. 3️⃣ Reverse calls for proposals flip the power dynamic - Instead of contorting your mission to fit funder priorities, you define what your community needs and invite funders to support YOUR agenda. Brilliant. Tactical next steps if this resonates: ✓ Schedule that Financial Sustainability Strategy Session they mention (seriously, block 2 hours next week) ✓ Pick ONE model from their list that aligns with your current capacity—don't try to launch everything at once ✓ Start documenting your existing assets using their framework in section 7 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸: Your funding strategy needs to be as creative and intentional as your programs. The organizations still relying solely on traditional grants in 3 years will be the ones struggling to keep their doors open. 👉 Questions for fellow leaders: Which of these 7 models resonates most with your current context? 🔗 https://lnkd.in/gcrwWc6p Humentum

A learning budget is much like your retirement portfolio. It needs to be diversified and aligned to both the short-term and long-term goals. When your current allocation of dollars isn't producing the outcome, consider rebalancing your budget: ⭐ if retention is an issue ▶ increase your "training as a benefit" budget (self-paced platforms, SaaS libraries, etc.) ⭐ if career upward mobility and/or your internal talent pipeline are issues ▶ increase your career development budget (formalized upskilling programs and learning experiences) ⭐ if employee "tech debt" or your move into new markets isn't occurring fast enough ▶ increase the workforce transformation budget (reskilling programs and learning journeys) ⭐ if the fees (overhead) associated with running your learning program are just too high to deliver a material outcome ▶ reconsider your approach, the learning infrastructure, and the long-term contracts you have in place

4 grants currently open for workforce development and skills training programs  Our team tracks and analyzes hundreds of federal and private funding opportunities every month. These are April's picks for workforce organizations. RESTART Initiative $1M–$5.1M | Apr 15  | USA PATH Grant Up to $200,000 | Apr 27 | DC Pathways to STEM Grant Up to $150,000 | Apr 27 | DC Talent Search Program $250K–$10M | May 1 | USA Most workforce organizations and training providers find a grant that fits, and then lose it at the application stage. Not because they weren't eligible. Because they didn't know how to position their program, demonstrate outcomes, or meet compliance requirements in a way that wins. That's what GovCon Growth Academy teaches. Not just where to find funding, but how to actually win it. Full April Grant List → https://lnkd.in/eVh-umht GovCon Growth Academy → https://lnkd.in/ezMQBm8w Save this. Tag someone running a workforce or training program. #WorkforceDevelopment #SkillsTraining #Grants #GCG #GrantAlert #FederalFunding #JobTraining