This paper makes two key recommendations.<\/p>\n
Invest in workforce sector partnerships in targeted infrastructure fields, starting with zero-emission transportation as well as water quality and availability. Sector partnerships focus on recruitment, training, and job placement for employers who produce similar goods and services or that otherwise have similar skill and occupational needs. These partnerships are standard practice in workforce development\u2014nationally, statewide, and in the Los Angeles area\u2014although existing sector programs have varying levels of maturity and capacity. Zero-emission transportation and water are good bets for sector partnerships: they are supported not only by federal investments but by state and local investments and policy goals, which will likely continue to generate activities and projects that require skilled workers. Carrying out these recommendations will require mapping out existing efforts to build on; identifying gaps; and holding important and difficult discussions about which organizations should be involved, what roles they should play, who should be in leadership positions, and (not least of all) funding. The workforce, education, and infrastructure sectors in the Los Angeles region all have considerable resources and strengths, but they need to\u202fwork together\u202fmore effectively\u202fto develop\u202fbetter\u202ftalent pipelines\u202ffor in-demand infrastructure- and climate-related jobs.\u202fThis includes attention to recruitment, occupational skills training,\u202fapprenticeships, career navigation, job placement, and job retention.<\/p>\n There is not a unitary template for success, but collaboration is essential. Coalition governance and structure vary by place, and so do the idiosyncrasies of organizational capacity and relationships. But success will depend on leveraging and strengthening the \u201cinvisible\u201d civic infrastructure<\/a> that enables multiple organizations to work together toward shared goals.<\/p>\n \t\t\tIntroduction<\/p>\n Federal infrastructure and climate-related spending dramatically increased in recent years thanks to two signature pieces of legislature signed by President Joe Biden: 2021\u2019s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and 2022\u2019s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The laws invested in tens of thousands of projects across the country designed to improve transportation, energy, water, and broadband systems, support wildfire and land management, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and more. All these projects require skilled workers, but it has been challenging to connect the investments to robust workforce development strategies and to bring more people into infrastructure-related careers. The laws\u202fmostly allow<\/a>\u2014but do\u202fnot require<\/a>\u2014workforce development activities such as outreach and recruitment for training programs and employment, occupational skills training, apprenticeships, and job placement. They provide few automatic mechanisms to link education and workforce leaders with those planning or carrying out infrastructure projects. Nor do the\u202flaws\u202ffund apprenticeships, community colleges, the public workforce development system, or the nonprofit organizations that\u202fdo so much to recruit and prepare workers.<\/p>\n Moreover, federal funds flow from so many departments, cover such a wide range of activities and projects, and\u202fgo to such a wide range of recipients\u202fthat it is difficult to assess the full spectrum of infrastructure spending.<\/p>\n Another issue is that the infrastructure sector itself is fragmented and decentralized.\u202fIt is\u202fbetter understood as a \u201csupersector\u201d\u202fthat spans multiple industries that all relate in some way\u202fto physical assets in the built and natural environments.\u202fThis supersector includes energy, water, and transportation systems; broadband networks, public works, and land management\u2014all of which encompass different\u202factors,\u202factivities,\u202fand purposes. The infrastructure\u202fsupersector\u202fis fragmented in terms of governance\u202fas well. It includes\u202fa variety of state and municipal agencies,\u202fenergy utilities that may be publicly or privately owned, water utilities and districts that may be governed\u202fand funded\u202fseparately from\u202fa municipal or county government, transit agencies, port authorities, and more.\u202fIt can be a confusing landscape for education and workforce actors to navigate, just as\u202fthe\u202feducation and workforce development\u202flandscape\u202fcan be confusing for infrastructure entities to navigate.<\/p>\n This paper seeks to help actors in the workforce and educator sectors in the Los Angeles area\u2014or anyone interested in helping to recruit, train, and place people into infrastructure jobs\u2014better understand the infrastructure sector. Toward that end, the paper assesses flows of federal infrastructure spending into regional and local organizations in the Los Angeles area between roughly 2022 and 2024, lays out the kinds of projects that were funded and the types of organizations receiving funding, and assesses the extent to which workforce development activities were incorporated into these infrastructure awards.<\/p>\n Of course, the political environment changed dramatically when President Donald Trump took office in January 2025. He moved quickly to counter many of the IIJA\u2019s and the IRA\u2019s goals. His administration paused or cancelled funds that did not align with his administration\u2019s priorities, and he championed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which modified or cancelled IRA tax credits supporting clean energy and rescinded the unobligated funds of many IIJA and IRA programs.<\/p>\n Another factor in any analysis of infrastructure spending is that federal funds, while notable and often catalytic, are not the only sources of support. In fact, state and local dollars account<\/a> for the majority of infrastructure spending. For example, the Los Angeles region is in the middle of multiple massive infrastructure projects and capital plans, which are funded partially but by no means entirely with federal funds. To name a few examples, Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) is carrying out a $30 billion capital improvement program<\/a>, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is in the middle of a $7 billion plan to upgrade its water system<\/a>, and LA Metro is carrying out its Twenty-Eight by \u201928 Initiative<\/a> to prepare for the 2028 Olympics.<\/p>\n Nonetheless, a review of federal infrastructure awards provides critical insights for workforce development actors, since the awards also signal the priorities of the state and local entities that access federal dollars and that manage transportation, water, energy, and clean air projects.<\/p>\n The findings are based on an analysis of the Investing in America spreadsheet downloaded from the invest.gov website on January 14, 2025, before it was dismantled by the Trump administration. The spreadsheet includes awards from 2021\u20132025, but it primarily includes awards in the 2022\u20132024 time period. Our goal was to identify IIJA and IRA awards that were granted or allocated to local or regional entities in the Los Angeles region, focusing on projects in the City and County of Los Angeles, but also including projects and organizations whose geographic scope spans surrounding counties. We included grants awarded to organizations in the public, private, and nonprofit sectors. We did not search for projects managed or controlled by state entities. For more information on the spreadsheet and our analysis, please see the Methodology.<\/p>\n \t\t\tFindings The awards we identified were made between 2022 and 2024. For simplicity\u2019s sake, we combined funding from different years into one figure, rather than reporting on awards made in a specific year.<\/p>\n Public transportation awards received the most funding ($2.7 billion)\u2014nearly half of the region\u2019s total (see Figure 1). The second-largest category of funding went to \u201cenvironmental remediation\u201d ($1.1 billion), a broad category covering air quality, the built environment, brownfields, and more. Awards also went to projects focused on airports, roads, water systems, road and railroad safety, ports, electric vehicles (EVs), clean energy, and more.<\/p>\n \n Figure 1\n <\/p>\n \tFederal infrastructure awards to local and regional entities in the Los Angeles region by infrastructure category<\/p>\n \t\t\tAwards went to a wide variety of organizations, but most funds went to special purpose districts or municipal proprietary agencies that directly manage transportation, energy, water, and air quality projects<\/p>\n Public sector entities were the most common awardees, and many received more than one award. Grant recipients also included nonprofit organizations, businesses, school districts, community colleges, and universities (see Figure 2).\u202f<\/p>\n \n\t\t\tFigure 2\n\t\t<\/p>\n Awards were heavily concentrated in two types of public sector entities: special purpose governments and municipal proprietary agencies. Together, entities in these two categories received nearly 90% of all funds, which makes sense given that these entities directly manage and govern transportation, energy, water, and air quality systems.<\/p>\n Special purpose governments<\/a>, also called special districts, are independent government units created for a limited, specific purpose. In the words<\/a> of the National Special Districts Association, they \u201cdeliver specialized services essential to [the community\u2019s] health, safety, economy and well-being.\u201d Such services include public transit, water treatment and delivery, energy generation and transmission, fire protection, and more. \n Figure 3\n <\/p>\n \tTypes of entities that received federal infrastructure funds in the Los Angeles region<\/p>\n In the Los Angeles region, special purpose districts received 64% of the funds. The districts that got the largest amounts of funding are listed below.<\/p>\n LA Metro operates public transportation and related infrastructure in Los Angeles County. It received the largest amount among all the special districts\u2014indeed, among all awardees in the region\u2014at $2.8 billion through nearly 40 awards. Its funds came from formula and competitive grants, representing more than 10 programs with a variety of goals and purposes. The largest share of its funding\u2014nearly two-thirds\u2014came from two long-standing formula programs from the U.S. Department of Transportation: the Urbanized Area Formula Grants Program ($1.2 billion) and the State of Good Repair Formula Grants Program ($511 million), both primarily focused on capital purchases and investments. LA Metro also won competitive grants, including funding for the Purple Line Extension, for the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor, and for purchases of zero-emission buses and charging equipment. Other special purpose districts that received funds included metropolitan planning organizations<\/a>, other water and sanitation districts, and airport authorities.<\/p>\n As a group, Los Angeles and Long Beach municipal proprietary agencies received 24% of all funds in the region. The awardees are listed below.<\/p>\n Los Angeles World Airports received 12 awards from the Department of Transportation\u2019s Federal Aviation Administration totaling $449 million, almost all of which went to LAX for capital improvements. \n \t\t\tAn introduction to the infrastructure field and to infrastructure- and climate-related jobs<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Infrastructure as a supersector<\/p>\n \t <\/a><\/p>\n The infrastructure field is broad enough that it can be considered a \u201csupersector\u201d that spans multiple industries. As classified by Brookings colleagues<\/a>, these industries include transportation (both within and between metropolitan areas), trade and logistics, energy, water, telecommunications, and public works.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Infrastructure occupations<\/p>\n \t <\/a><\/p>\n Infrastructure and climate jobs involve building, operating, and maintaining a variety of physical assets in the built and natural\u202fenvironments. But how does that translate into specific occupations?<\/p>\n Previous Brookings research<\/a> found that the most common infrastructure positions are in the skilled trades and construction-related occupations. Yet jobs in the field cover a wide range of varied roles, such as civil engineers, bus mechanics, cargo handlers, meter readers, hydrologists, foresters, and workers in management, finance, and customer service. Think of\u202fall\u202fthe\u202fworkers responsible for maintaining roads, streetscapes, and parks; managing water and energy systems; moving goods and people;\u202fupgrading buildings to be more energy efficient;\u202fand more. Only about 15% of infrastructure workers have bachelor\u2019s degrees, meaning that the jobs are broadly accessible, although many of them incorporate apprenticeships or other on-the-job training. Moreover, infrastructure jobs offer above-average median wages and a higher floor for workers at the lower end of the wage distribution.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Climate-related occupations<\/p>\n \t <\/a><\/p>\n Jobs that are climate-related or \u201cgreen\u201d are not so clearly defined. There is no clear consensus about how to categorize and count jobs geared toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions, adapting to climate impacts,\u202for\u202fpreserving or restoring\u202fnatural resources. There is agreement, however, that such jobs do not primarily represent new and distinct occupations<\/a>. Rather, meeting climate-related goals generally involves incorporating new tasks and skills into existing occupations.<\/p>\n For example, an analysis of the jobs<\/a> generated by nearly 30 programs funded by the California Climate Investments initiative\u202ffound that\u202fmore than half\u202fwere in the construction sector. An analysis of occupations most relevant to\u202fgreen infrastructure and\u202furban forestry projects<\/a> found that\u202fonly two of the ten largest occupations related directly to plants and soil. The other eight\u202fincluded the workers that build and maintain the elements that surround and\u202fcontain\u202fgreen infrastructure and urban forestry facilities (construction laborers, carpenters, and plumbers) and those that transport or move related materials (freight and material movers\u202fand\u202ftruck or tractor operators).<\/p>\n \t\t\tWe identified 19 awards that incorporated workforce development activities, accounting for 7% of all awards<\/p>\n Based on publicly available project descriptions, we identified 19 awards that incorporated workforce development activities such as outreach and recruitment for training programs and job openings, occupational skills training, apprenticeships, and job placement. All of them were competitive grants. While this list may be incomplete\u2014given that publicly available project descriptions may not reflect all project components\u2014it is a useful benchmark.<\/p>\n For five of these awards (about one-quarter of them), the stated purpose of the grant was to provide education, training, and work-based learning opportunities. Awardees included nonprofits, community colleges, and universities. Proposed activities included providing training in fields such as hybrid vehicle and EV maintenance, water treatment, and solar installation; offering internships, professional development, and research opportunities for undergraduate and master\u2019s students; and providing on-the-job training.<\/p>\n The remainder of the awards had other stated purposes\u2014such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions or promoting urban and community forestry\u2014but they also incorporated apprenticeships and training programs to help them carry out those stated purposes.<\/p>\n Awards with workforce development elements went to a variety of organizations, including typical workforce development organizations such as nonprofits and colleges (see Table 1). But the largest number of awards went to entities directly responsible for managing transportation systems, charging infrastructure, ports, and air quality projects, including LA Metro, the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.<\/p>\n \n Table 1\n <\/p>\n \t\t\t Nearly half of the awards (nine of the 19) focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions by moving to zero-emission vehicles. Such awards also had the highest dollar amount, although that refers to total project budgets, not to the amounts allocated to workforce development (which is unknown). Nonetheless, this trend points to zero-emission vehicles as a promising focus for future workforce development efforts. Several of these awards focused on the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles; others focused on transit buses, school buses, and charging infrastructure.<\/p>\n We identified 12 awards that were reportedly cancelled by the Trump administration.<\/p>\n The federal funding and policy landscape has been chaotic and confusing since President Trump took office. There has been a flurry of executive orders, departmental memos, and contract and grant cancellations from the Department of Government Efficiency and other federal departments. There is no consolidated source on which grants or funding programs have been cancelled.<\/p>\n Nonetheless, it is possible to piece information together from various sources to provisionally identify awards in the Los Angeles region that have been cancelled. We identified 12 awards that appear to have been cancelled, including one from the Department of Transportation, three from the Department of Energy, and eight from the Environmental Protection Agency (see Table 2). Together, they totaled $151 million, a small share of the region\u2019s total funding, but these cancellations were likely very disruptive to the budgets and plans of the individual awardees that were affected.<\/p>\n Among the cancelled awards, four included workforce development components. These included awards to the Coalition for Responsible Community Development ($20 million), the U.S. Green Building Council California ($3.8 million), the University of Southern California ($3 million), and Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs ($3 million).<\/p>\n \n Table 2\n <\/p>\n \t\t\t \t\t\tDon\u2019t forget about state and local policy<\/p>\n As noted previously,\u202fstate\u202fand local entities provide\u202fmost infrastructure funding<\/a>,\u202fwhether through ratepayer revenue, general funds, or debt instruments like bonds, and they also own and\u202foperate\u202fmost infrastructure assets.\u202fAs discussed in the recommendation section\u202fbelow,\u202fstate and local governments are actively supporting transportation electrification\u202fand\u202fwater quality\u202fand\u202favailability. More generally, California is making sizeable infrastructure and climate investments\u202flikely to\u202fcontinue to generate labor market demand, such as the three programs listed below:<\/p>\n California voters passed the Climate Bond (or Proposition 4)<\/a> in 2024, directing $10 billion to climate-resilience purposes, including water, wildfire, energy, biodiversity, access to nature, and more. The California Natural Resources Agency administers the bond overall<\/a>, and a variety of state departments, boards, conservancies, and commissions administer specific programs<\/a>. Both the Climate Bond and Cap-and-Invest allow and in some cases prioritize workforce development activities, although much will depend on implementation.<\/p>\n \t\t\tRecommendations<\/p>\n Going forward, federal, state, and local infrastructure- and climate-related investments will continue to support projects that need skilled workers. Aging and vulnerable water infrastructure, inefficient and outmoded energy facilities, and outdated residential and commercial buildings all need upgrades and maintenance. The state needs to continue to build out its charging infrastructure given its emphasis on zero-emission transportation. Floods, droughts, fires, and other acute and chronic impacts add to the urgency of these challenges, with the recent Eaton and Palisades fires providing vivid examples.<\/p>\n The influx of federal funds supported additional workforce development activities in the region that would not have taken place otherwise: a total of 11 out of the 19 awards that incorporated workforce development stemmed from new IIJA and IRA programs. Many of the awards included partnerships between organizations, thus leveraging the strengths of different groups throughout the region. Among grants with a workforce component, the highest-dollar awards were led by infrastructure entities such as LA Metro, the Port of Long Beach, the Port of Los Angeles, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.<\/p>\n But the fact that fewer than 10% of awards included activities related to workforce development activities such as recruitment and outreach, training, and job placement signaled a missed opportunity. And the partnerships did not appear to draw on pre-existing sector initiatives<\/a>\u2014a best practice in workforce development\u2014or other organized cross-sector consortia. Rather, they mostly appeared to be bespoke partnerships for particular grants or seemed to reflect one-on-one or more limited partnerships.<\/p>\n Workforce, education, and business leaders in the Los Angeles region need to knit their considerable resources together more effectively to develop talent pipelines for in-demand infrastructure- and climate-related occupations. Below are some recommendations about how to do so.<\/p>\n 1. Invest in workforce sector partnerships in targeted infrastructure fields, starting with zero-emission transportation and water quality and availability<\/p>\n At this point, sector strategies<\/a> are a core workforce development approach both nationally and in California. Sometimes called sector partnerships, industry partnerships, or industry sector partnerships,\u202fsector strategies<\/a>\u202ffocus on job training and placement in particular industries or occupations, rather than trying to meet employer needs across the whole span of the labor market.\u202fThe California Workforce Development Board\u2019s\u202fHigh Road Training Partnership<\/a>\u202fis based on a sector model, and both LA City<\/a> and LA County<\/a> incorporate sector approaches.<\/p>\n But existing state and local sector initiatives are at varying levels of maturity and have some structural weaknesses. Rather than operating as standing statewide or local sector structures, they are bound to specific time-limited funding streams. Without sturdy scaffolding, programs will not scale and may not last. And\u202fcrucially,\u202fa critical mass of\u202femployers<\/a>\u202fwithin a given sector need to\u202fwork together\u202fto identify and communicate their current and future skill needs.\u202fAbsent such intelligence\u202f(which cannot be gleaned from publicly available data\u202for sporadic convenings),\u202feducation and workforce entities will not have the information they need to target business needs.\u202fThis kind of employer involvement is a perennial challenge for sector initiatives.<\/p>\n Based on a review of investments at the federal, state, and local levels, along with information on local actions and priorities, we recommend initiatives focused on zero-emission vehicles and water infrastructure. In addition to local workforce initiatives related to zero-emission vehicles described below, these two subsectors are aligned with other regional workforce plans and priorities, such as the Los Angeles Regional Consortium<\/a> representing 19 community colleges, the City of Los Angeles Workforce Development Board<\/a>, Los Angeles County<\/a>, and a consortium of workforce boards<\/a> in the Los Angeles Basin.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n A note about sector initiatives<\/p>\n \t <\/a><\/p>\n Sector partnerships typically link employers, business associations, community colleges, universities, workforce agencies, labor\u202funions, community-based organizations, and others.<\/p>\n By collectively addressing the common skill needs of employers who provide similar goods and services or\u202fotherwise have similar occupational needs, sector partnerships are more efficient and have greater scale than\u202fmore limited partnerships between individual employers and training programs.\u202fSector partnerships also create forums\u202ffor small- and medium-sized firms to join forces with larger employers for economies of scale in training investments.<\/p>\n As Brookings colleagues wrote<\/a>, \u201cOrchestrating this type of cross-sector interaction is more important and more difficult than is generally understood. The work is often referred to as\u202f\u2018convening,\u2019\u202fand these organizations are called\u202f\u2018intermediaries.\u2019\u202fThese terms suggest that what\u2019s needed is neutral dot-connecting, when in fact what\u2019s needed is purposeful creation and management of civic networks in service of a shared economic strategy.\u201d Such initiatives require leadership; skilled facilitators; and organizational\u202fcapacity to re-engineer relationships, incentives, and practices to advance common goals.<\/p>\n Zero-emission vehicles and related infrastructure for light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles and in the goods-moving sector : The transition to zero-emission vehicles in the Los Angeles region is supported not only by the federal investments listed above, but even more so by state and local policies designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. Together, these investments point to a continued focus on vehicle electrification that will reliably generate demand for workers in zero emission\u2013related occupations in the Los Angeles area.<\/p>\n The region received more than 30 awards from multiple federal programs totaling $1.4 billion focused on reducing emissions from vehicles of various types. Entities such as school districts, bus companies, independent cities, LA Metro, and the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach all received grants to install charging infrastructure and\/or to purchase zero- or low-emission transit buses, school buses, trucks, and port vehicles and equipment.<\/p>\n At the state level, legislation signed in 2022<\/a> requires California to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045. Governor Gavin Newsom issued an executive order<\/a> in 2020 mandating that all new passenger trucks and vehicles sold in the state must be zero emission by 2035, with a target of 2045 for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. Governor Newsom followed that up with a 2025 executive order<\/a> reaffirming the state\u2019s commitment to zero-emission vehicles after President Trump signed legislation revoking waivers<\/a> from the Environmental Protection Agency that allowed the state to set state emissions standards that were more stringent than federal standards. Multiple state agencies, including the California Air Resources Board<\/a>, the California Energy Commission<\/a>, and the California Governor\u2019s Office of Business and Economic Development<\/a> are all moving aggressively to support the deployment and use of zero-emission vehicles, and they are including workforce development in their efforts.<\/p>\n At the regional level, the LA Cleantech Incubator has organized two cross-sector collaborations: the Transportation Electrification Partnership<\/a> (TEP) and the Green Jobs Regional Partnership<\/a> (GJRP). In its Zero Emissions Roadmap 3.0<\/a>, the TEP set out specific goals to increase the use of different categories of zero-emission vehicles and to increase the number of chargers.<\/p>\n The GJRP\u2019s Green Jobs Roadmap for Transportation Electrification<\/a> focused on occupations related to transportation electrification, specifically aligning with the TEP\u2019s goals to increase the usage of electric light-duty private vehicles and school buses in the region. It outlined three high-priority EV-related occupations that will need more workers to meet the TEP\u2019s goals by 2028: electricians, technicians to maintain and repair charging stations and other supply equipment, and technicians to maintain and repair light-duty EV private vehicles and school buses. It also identified two occupations that may warrant attention after 2028: electric vehicle fleet managers and production line workers for manufacturing EVs and EV supply equipment. In the accompanying workforce needs assessment<\/a>, the GJRP identified relevant skills for the three high-priority occupations, relevant training programs and apprenticeships in the region, and training gaps and challenges. The document concluded, \u201cLA County will need a significant training and re-training push to ensure the workforce has the specialized knowledge and certifications to meet the EV and EVSE [EV supply equipment] maintenance and installation need.\u201d<\/p>\n The GJRP developed a collaborative structure and a solid analysis to inform future workforce development efforts. The next steps are to bring in additional partners and to develop and implement strategies to meet the partnership\u2019s goals and to address the identified challenges.<\/p>\n For example, creating a workforce that is more diverse by race and gender will involve multiple approaches, such as creating more awareness about EV careers, deliberately recruiting from new communities, and addressing workplace cultures that may be unwelcoming to women and people of color. To prepare some candidates, it may be necessary to build their digital literacy, help them get drivers\u2019 licenses, or offer supportive services. The analysis also identified a need to develop more EVSE programs, develop shared baseline skill standards among employers and education programs, train existing vehicle mechanics in EV technology, and offer more hands-on training for EV technicians.<\/p>\n Given that the green jobs analysis focused on transportation electrification regarding light-duty private vehicles and school buses, a future step may involve assessing the workforce needs related to medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, especially those involved with the ports and the goods-moving industries. There is clear momentum. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach developed the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan<\/a> to move toward zero emissions and provide regular updates and progress reports<\/a>. The South Coast Air Quality Management District and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach recently entered into a cooperative agreement<\/a> that requires the ports to develop and implement charging and fueling infrastructure plans. And many of the federal awards to the region to reduce emissions at the ports and by medium- and heavy-duty vehicles incorporate workforce development components, signaling demand for related education and training.<\/p>\n Water systems including water treatment, distribution, and conservation and stormwater management: Water infrastructure includes a range of built and natural systems<\/a> that supply, treat, and conserve water and also manage stormwater runoff to prevent pollution, flooding, and erosion. It includes \u201cgray infrastructure\u201d such as pipes, pumps, tunnels, and treatment plants as well as \u201cgreen infrastructure\u201d<\/a> such as raingardens and bioswales that use plants, soils, and other media to capture and treat stormwater. Such systems are badly in need of investment: as Brookings colleague Joseph W. Kane wrote<\/a>, \u201cWhether it\u2019s fixing pipes<\/a>, modernizing treatment plans<\/a>, or conserving and protecting natural resources<\/a>, the list of water needs keeps growing, as does the price tag.\u201d<\/p>\n The water sector has identified workforce development as a priority: a 2023 review<\/a> of the industry summarized it thusly: \u201caging infrastructure remains the top concern in the sector, compounded by the pitfalls of an aging workforce and the pursuit of hiring qualified staff.\u201d The U.S. Water Alliance, an industry association of water utilities and other stakeholders, noted<\/a>, \u201cmany utilities face a current workforce quantity and quality crisis.\u201d The California Workforce Development Board has sponsored a High Road Training Partnership<\/a> program in the water sector<\/a>, and the Centers of Excellence for Labor Market Research within the community college system have identified eight mission-critical water sector occupations<\/a> requiring more than a high school diploma but less than a bachelor\u2019s degree that are difficult to fill, including positions for a variety of technicians, mechanics and maintenance workers, and operating engineers.<\/p>\n A series of federal, state, and local investments focus on improving water infrastructure statewide and in the Los Angeles region, suggesting that continued projects and activities will require water workers. The largest federal water investments went to the state (more than $2 billion), specifically to the State Water Resources Control Board to capitalize state revolving (loan) funds (SRFs), with one focused on clean water<\/a> and the other on drinking water<\/a>. Through SRFs, states play a crucial role<\/a> in planning, selecting, and investing in water projects that are often administered by local utilities and other local actors. Funded projects can include wastewater facilities, water treatment plants, pollution control, and pipe installation and repair. As noted above, the federal government also directly awarded more than $250 million in water-related grants to regional entities such as the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Long Beach Utilities.<\/p>\n Modernizing water infrastructure and management is clearly a state priority. The state\u2019s 2022 Water Supply Strategy<\/a> laid out priorities including developing new water through wastewater recycling and desalination and expanding water storage capacity to capture and save more stormwater. Such projects are capital intensive, expensive, and require ongoing operations and maintenance. California has directed billions of dollars to water<\/a> and climate projects in recent years, even after state budget cuts. The 2024 Climate Bond will direct nearly $4 billion to water-related purposes<\/a>, including safe drinking water, flood planning, stormwater management, and more\u2014on top of similar projects already supported by general fund dollars<\/a>.<\/p>\n There are several regional water initiatives as well:<\/p>\n The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts are partnering to carry out the Pure Water Southern California project<\/a>, a massive water recycling program to purify and reuse cleaned wastewater, thereby creating a new water source. It will include building<\/a> a water purification facility, modifying another plant, and carrying out other activities to convey and treat water. In its construction phase, the project\u2019s forecasted job creation impacts<\/a> are heavily concentrated in construction occupations, but it is also projected to create jobs in management, business, and architecture and engineering. Once Pure Water Southern California is operational, associated jobs will primarily be in the utilities sector. 2. Ensure that infrastructure workforce initiatives recruit from a broad, diverse group of people, particularly focusing on young adults<\/p>\n The\u202finfrastructure workforce skews older<\/a>, with above-average shares of workers over age 45 and below-average shares under age 24.\u202fOn average, an estimated 1.7 million infrastructure workers<\/a>\u202fwill need to be replaced each year over the next decade due to retirements and workers transitioning out of these jobs. Infrastructure projects like the ones mentioned above require a continuous flow of workers.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, the systems supporting the transition from school to a good job are foundering<\/a> for many young people, especially for those from low-income backgrounds<\/a> or whose parents do not have college degrees. In a concise distillation<\/a> of the problems with current youth, education, and employment policies, Georgetown University\u2019s Center on Education and the Workforce referenced \u201cthe triple deficits of inadequate access to postsecondary education, limited exposure to high-quality work experience and work-based learning, and insufficient counseling to support career navigation.\u201d Another article<\/a> memorably described the United States as having \u201carguably one of the least effective systems\u202ffor preparing non-college bound youth for the workforce in the Western World.\u201d These systemic barriers disproportionately affect young people of color and those from marginalized communities.<\/p>\n In Los Angeles County, an estimated 123,000 young people<\/a> between the ages of 16 and 24 are disconnected from school and work. The problem is particularly acute among young people past high-school age: 107,000 young people between 19 and 24 years are disconnected, accounting for one out of every six people (16%) of that age group in Los Angeles County. A total of 18% of this group lacks a high school diploma, and almost two-thirds (66%) have a high school diploma but no post-secondary degree. They have less work experience than their age group as a whole and higher poverty rates, and they are disproportionately Black, Native American, and Hispanic or Latino.<\/p>\n Young people in these circumstances\u2014with lower educational attainment, limited work experience, and likely weak professional networks\u2014do not generally have good labor market prospects, likely facing high unemployment and low-wage jobs.<\/p>\n But more broadly, leaving so many people on the economic and social margins squanders human potential and productivity. A lack of educational credentials<\/a> does not equal a lack of talent and drive. In this phase of life, young people should be charting their futures, developing their talents, and plugging into the labor market, thereby allowing themselves to support themselves and their families, pay taxes<\/a>, and contribute to their communities. Instead, many young people face an obstacle course.<\/p>\n Notably, however, prioritizing young people does not mean only focusing on young people. Given that the infrastructure sector is struggling to find and retain workers<\/a>, outreach should be broad. There are good reasons to focus on other communities or specific geographic areas. For instance, current car and bus mechanics, regardless of age, are good candidates to receive additional training to become certified in EVs.<\/p>\n And many of the strategies to support young people\u2019s success in workforce development are beneficial to other groups as well, such as assistance with transportation or guidance about post-secondary options.<\/p>\n But reaching young people will require some specific approaches, such as partnerships with high schools (including career and technical education programs), high school re-engagement programs<\/a>, and youth-serving nonprofits. Youth-serving initiatives should also include program design elements based on lessons from other youth-serving workforce development and education programs, such as the importance of positive and supportive relationships<\/a>, cohort models<\/a>, and stipends or paid work-based learning opportunities<\/a>.<\/p>\n \t\t\tConclusion<\/p>\n The Los Angeles region is in the middle of an infrastructure spending boom from federal, state, and local investments. Local and regional leaders can play a pivotal role to ensure that there is a sufficiently prepared and skilled workforce to carry out the multitude of projects planned and underway. They cannot afford to treat recruiting, training, and hiring for infrastructure projects as an afterthought: that is a recipe for project delays, quality control problems, and cost over-runs. But with stronger partnerships between infrastructure employers and workforce development actors, local leaders can connect more Los Angeles residents to education and employment to the mutual benefit of both workers and employers.<\/p>\n There are important questions ahead about which organizations should be involved, what roles they should play, and who should be in leadership positions. These are not easily or superficially answered questions; cross-sector coalitions promoting greater economic opportunity \u201ccan be messy, time-consuming, and often marked by friction,\u201d as noted<\/a> by Brookings colleagues. There is not a unitary model or template for success: coalition governance and structures vary by place, and so do the idiosyncrasies of organizational capacity and relationships. But since no single organization has the knowledge, influence, and resources to carry out the work of a sector initiative, the goal of creating more and better employment opportunities for people and workers on the economic margins requires a coalition that leverages the strength of many.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Methodology for analyzing federal infrastructure grants to the Los Angeles region<\/p>\n \t <\/a><\/p>\n Introduction<\/p>\n The purpose of the project was to identify federal funds through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) awarded to organizations in the Los Angeles area to support local leaders in developing strategies to connect workers to jobs associated with those investments. We focused on awards to locally or regionally controlled entities and projects that took place in the city of Los Angeles and Los Angeles County (including independent cities located in the county). We also included projects managed by organizations whose geographic scope crossed jurisdictional lines in the region, such as transportation, environmental, and regional governance entities. We included grants awarded to organizations in the public, private, and nonprofit sectors. We did not search for projects managed or controlled by state entities.<\/p>\n The Investing in America dataset<\/p>\n We began our search by downloading a copy of the most recent version of the Investing in America dataset from Invest.gov on January 14, 2025. According to the spreadsheet\u2019s documentation tab, this version was last updated on January 10, 2025. The spreadsheet included federally funded programs and projects across the United States under the IIJA, IRA, and CHIPS and Science Act. We looked at the funding summary tab, which provided information about each project in some or all of the following columns (listed below). Fields that we particularly relied on in our analysis are bolded.<\/p>\n ID While the January 2025 Invest.gov spreadsheet had empty cells, every project was connected to a unique ID. Our awareness of the fully populated ID column informed Excel searching, sorting, and counting methods during our research. Below we outline the basics of our approach. For more complete details, please contact the authors.<\/p>\n Searching the Invest.gov spreadsheet<\/p>\n Step 1: Identifying projects in California<\/p>\n We filtered the state or territory column to only show projects with \u201cCA\u201d in that column and then copied and pasted these California projects into a new tab. (N = 4,472)<\/p>\n Step 2: Identifying projects in the Los Angeles region<\/p>\n Identifying awards taking place in the Los Angeles region or going to locally or regionally controlled entities in the Los Angeles region required a variety of search methods.<\/p>\n The fields that indicated the project\u2019s location by city and county were often blank or were filled in with information that did not correspond to the heading. For instance, many of the city fields were populated with variations of the metropolitan area\u2019s name (such as Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim). Other fields that provided distinguishing information such as \u201cproject name\u201d and \u201crecipient name\u201d were also frequently blank.<\/p>\n We relied upon nine searches, listed below.<\/p>\n \u201cLos Angeles\u201d as a search term in the \u201ccity\u201d column (including entries for the LA metropolitan area, such as Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim) (N = 82) Consolidating and reviewing our search results<\/p>\n We identified 450 awards by at least one of the search methods described in Step 2. Many awards were captured by more than one search term or method.<\/p>\n Step 3: Removing categories of awards that were not relevant to our analysis<\/p>\n We referred to these awards as \u201csystematic deletions.\u201d With the removal of these entries, the number of awards in our analysis totaled 318. We deleted 132 awards through this method, although some awards fell into more than one category.<\/p>\n Awards to the U.S. Army Corps of Civil Works (N = 8, totaling $79 million). The Army Corps is a federally controlled entity, and we were interested in locally controlled entities. Step 4: Conducting desk research<\/p>\n The Invest.gov spreadsheet did not provide complete information about most awards. Fields such as \u201crecipient organization,\u201d \u201cproject name,\u201d and \u201cproject description\u201d were often empty.<\/p>\n To fill in missing information and verify information that the Invest.gov spreadsheet provided, we searched the websites of federal, state, and local governments for program descriptions and award announcements. We also reviewed press accounts and the organizational websites of potential grant recipients. We created additional columns in the spreadsheet for the grant recipients, federal program descriptions, project descriptions, and links that described the awards.<\/p>\n To simplify reporting, we created categories of award recipients:<\/p>\n Special purpose districts (independent government units created for a limited, specific purpose) A note on grants from the Department of Transportation\u2019s Federal Transit Administration\u00a0<\/p>\n Federal Transit Administration (FTA) award announcements\u202ffrequently\u202fconnected funding to \u201curbanized areas\u201d without specifying direct recipients. However, the FTA grant\u202fprogram pages<\/a>\u202fclarify that the agency provides funding for governors and local transit agencies to apportion within urbanized areas with populations of 200,000 people or more. With these grants, it was more difficult than with others to\u202fidentify\u202fthe recipients, and the possibility of errors was higher. The associated FTA grants are the Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Program (Section 5310), Urbanized Area Formula Grants (Section 5307), the State of Good Repair Formula Grants (Section 5337), and Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Grants (Section 5339).<\/p>\n Step 5: Removing individual awards for incomplete information, for not being located in the Los Angeles region, or for other reasons<\/p>\n During our line-by-line review of the awards, we marked certain projects for exclusion for the reasons listed below. We referred to these as \u201cmerit deletions.\u201d We removed 44 awards, bringing the total number of awards in our analysis to 274.<\/p>\n The project was mistakenly identified as taking place in the Los Angeles region and actually was\u202flocated\u202felsewhere in California. Step 6: Identifying awards with a workforce development component<\/p>\n To identify awards that incorporated workforce development activities such as outreach and recruitment, occupational skills training, apprenticeships, and job placement, we conducted a keyword search of all columns for the 274 remaining entries in the document, using \u201cworkforce\u201d and \u201ctraining\u201d as search terms.<\/p>\n Our search process identified 26 entries. Upon review, we excluded eight of them. We excluded programs if: 1) the keywords appeared in the generic description of the federal program, meaning that workforce development was an allowable activity but the keywords did not appear in any information specific to the project itself; or 2) the keyword \u201ctraining\u201d appeared but not in the context of occupational skills or preparing people for employment.<\/p>\n We subsequently received additional information about an award that incorporated workforce development through personal communication, which we verified, bringing the total number of awards with workforce elements to 19.<\/p>\n Step 7: Identifying cancelled awards<\/p>\n When President Donald Trump took office in January 2025, he directed his administration to review federal funding and cancel awards and programs if they were not in alignment with his priorities, with a particular focus on awards for clean energy, greenhouse gas emissions, and environmental justice. While there have been press coverage and announcements from the federal government, we were unable to find an authoritative or consolidated list of cancellations in the Los Angeles region.<\/p>\n We relied on a mix of sources, including leaked documents about cancellations made by the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Agency, announcements by federal and state agencies, press coverage, and information from other stakeholders. All the relevant sources are listed in the report.<\/p>\n The Brookings Institution is committed to quality, independence, and impact.
\nRecruit and train a diverse range of workers, including young adults. Local leaders and programs can and should emphasize different geographic areas or groups of job seekers and incumbent workers, but they should also prioritize reaching young adults. Nationally and in Los Angeles, the systems supporting the transition from school to a good job are foundering for many young people. Nearly 125,000 young people<\/a> ages 16 to 24 in Los Angeles County were disconnected from school and work as of 2023\u201411% of that age group\u2014and they face increased chances of unemployment and low-wage work.<\/p>\n
\nThrough the IIJA and the IRA, the federal government made 274 awards totaling $5.9 billion to local and regional organizations in the Los Angeles area<\/p>\n
\n \t![\"Figure](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/figure-2-examples-la-organizations-received-federal-infrastructure-awards-v3.png\")
\n <\/a><\/p>\n
\nMunicipal proprietary agencies are part of local governments, but they are governed by their own commissioners and are generally self-funded by their own fees and revenues. The types of services that they provide overlap a great deal with those offered by special purpose governments.<\/p>\n
\nThe South Coast Air Quality Management District monitors air quality and funds air quality improvement efforts in Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties. It received $560 million, almost all of it from an Environmental Protection Agency grant to decarbonize transportation and goods movement in Los Angeles and Long Beach by supporting the use of zero-emission technology in vehicles and equipment. \u202f\u202f
\nThe Metropolitan Water District of Southern California provides water directly or through member public agencies to Los Angeles County and five surrounding counties. It received $132 million from the Department of the Interior primarily to purify and reuse cleaned wastewater as part of the Pure Water Southern California project<\/a>.<\/p>\n
\nThe Port of Los Angeles received three awards totaling $437 million, with most of it ($412 million) from an Environmental Protection Agency grant to purchase zero- emission tractors, forklifts, and other equipment.
\nThe Port of Long Beach received 3 awards totaling $336 million, all from the Department of Transportation. The largest award, for $283 million, was to reconfigure and expand the railyard to move more cargo by train rather than trucks, thus improving efficiency and reducing pollution.
\nThe Los Angeles Department of Power and Water received five awards totaling $116 million, including $60 million from the Department of the Interior to purify water and $48 million from the Department of Energy to enhance the electrical grid.\u202f\u202f(The $48 million award was subsequently cancelled, as listed below, bringing the department\u2019s total funding to $68 million.)<\/p>\n![\"IIJA](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/1765992489_846_full.png\")
<\/p>\n![\"IIJA](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/1765992489_99_full.png\")
<\/p>\n
\nProceeds from the state\u2019s Cap-and-Invest Program<\/a> (until recently known as Cap-and-Trade) fund the California Climate Investments<\/a> (CCI), which address climate change while providing environmental, economic, and public health benefits. The California Air Resources Board<\/a> oversees CCI as a whole, which consists of more than 100 programs<\/a> administered by multiple state agencies. Funding categories include agriculture, energy, nature-based solutions, transportation, transit-oriented development, water, and more.
\nSB 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act<\/a>, was enacted in 2017 and directs an estimated $5 billion annually to state highways, local streets and roads, public transit, and pedestrian and cycle routes.<\/p>\n
\nThe Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and the Los Angeles Department of Sanitation and the Environment are moving forward on a Pure Water Los Angeles<\/a> project, which is also focused on recycling water. They recently finalized<\/a> a planning framework to design, build, and operate a water purification system.
\nThe Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is carrying out a multi-year $7 billion water-system capital plan<\/a> to maintain and replace existing pipes, valves, tanks, treatment facilities, and other system components.
\nMeasure W, a tax initiative passed by Los Angeles County voters in 2018, created the Safe Clean Water Program<\/a>, which supports projects to capture stormwater runoff, improve water quality, and provide green spaces and parks.<\/p>\n
\nFunding source
\nProgram ID
\nProgram name
\nIIJA\/IRA\/CHIPS program
\nAnnouncement date
\nProject name
\nRecipient name
\nProject description
\nProject location type
\nLatitude
\nLongitude
\nZIP code (5-digit)
\nCity
\nCounty
\nTribe
\nState or territory
\n118th congressional district
\nFunding amount excluding loans
\nLoan amount
\nAnnouncement link
\nNotes
\nAgency name
\nBureau name
\nCategory
\nSubcategory
\nProgram type [discretionary or formula]
\nProvision\/section #
\nSubmission period
\nHistoric ID
\nJointly funded<\/p>\n
\n\u201cLos Angeles\u201d as a search term in the \u201ccounty\u201d column (N = 27)
\n\u201cLos Angeles\u201d as a search term in the \u201cproject name,\u201d \u201cproject description,\u201d and \u201crecipient name\u201d columns (N =112)
\nThe names of the other 87 independent cities located in Los Angeles County as search terms in the \u201ccity\u201d column (N = 199)
\nThe names of the other 87 independent cities located in Los Angeles County as search terms in the \u201cproject name,\u201d \u201cproject description,\u201d and \u201crecipient name\u201d columns (N = 138)
\n\u201cSouthern California\u201d as a search term in the \u201cproject name,\u201d \u201cproject description,\u201d and \u201crecipient name\u201d columns (N = 35)
\nThe names of Tribes listed in a 2023 land acknowledgement report prepared for Los Angeles County as search terms in the \u201ctribe\u201d column (N = 7). Note: Some Tribal names have variations and\/or have changed over time; we attempted to capture all of the variations in our searches.
\nAny of the more than 300 ZIP codes in Los Angeles County as search terms in the \u201cZIP code\u201d column: (N = 9)
\nCoordinate points from the \u201clatitude\u201d and \u201clongitude\u201d columns located in a shapefile of Los Angeles County using QGIS software for viewing and analyzing geospatial data (N =289)<\/p>\n
\nAwards under the Biofuel Infrastructure and Agriculture Product Market Expansion (Higher Blend Infrastructure Investment Program) (N = 44, totaling $30 million). This program supports greater availability of renewable fuels such as ethanol and biofuels, primarily to companies that manage transportation fueling facilities such as gas stations. Grants typically involved installing fuel dispensers and storage tanks, and in many cases it was difficult to determine the location of the projects and whether they would be in Los Angeles County.
\nAwards less than $151,000 (N = 72, totaling $6.6 million). Small awards are less likely to support workforce development activities, and in many cases, it was difficult to identify grant recipients, project names, and project descriptions. We considered setting a higher threshold for project exclusion (specifically, $250,000), but we judged that the higher threshold removed more projects (92) and an higher amount of total funding ($10.9 million) than we were comfortable with.
\nAwards under the Affordable Connectivity Program\u202f(N=7 projects, totaling $3 million).\u00a0 The Affordable Connectivity Program is a discontinued program of the Federal Communications Commission that provided discounts on internet bills for low-income households and discounts on laptops, desktop computers, and tablets. Funds appear to have gone directly to households and internet service providers, and thus did not\u202fprovide\u202fan opportunity to support workforce development activities.
\nAwards stemming from the CHIPS and Science Act (N = 1, totaling $280,000). This analysis was based on awards from the IIJA and the IRA, not the CHIPS and Science Act.<\/p>\n
\nMunicipal proprietary agencies (agencies that are part of general-purpose local government but that are governed by their own commissioners and are generally self-funded by their own fees and revenues)
\nAgencies of the city of Los Angeles
\nAgencies of Los Angeles County
\nAgencies of independent cities within Los Angeles County other than the city of Los Angeles
\nHigher education institutions (including community colleges, four-year colleges, and universities)
\nK-12 school districts and schools
\nNonprofit organizations
\nPrivate sector firms<\/p>\n
\nSignificant aspects of the project took place outside of the region\/state.
\nThe project was a duplicate of another entry.
\nWe were unable to verify the grant recipient, award amount, and\/or the nature of the project.
\nThe grant\u202fappeared to be\u202fmanaged directly by state or federal entities rather\u202fthan\u202fgoing to a local or regional entity.
\nThe award was designed to be\u202fsub-granted\u202fto other organizations not geographically limited to the Los Angeles region.<\/p>\n
We are supported by a diverse array of funders<\/a>. In line with our values and policies<\/a>, each Brookings publication represents the sole views of its author(s).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Executive summary The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), enacted in 2021 and…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":98495,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[847,33310,53759,33308,8076,48,52,51,53760,47,50,49,6080,1967,7041,45147],"class_list":["post-98494","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-los-angeles","tag-article","tag-brookings-metro","tag-business-workforce","tag-cities-communities","tag-infrastructure","tag-la","tag-la-headlines","tag-la-news","tag-labor-unemployment","tag-los-angeles","tag-los-angeles-headlines","tag-los-angeles-news","tag-research","tag-transportation","tag-u-s-economy","tag-workforce-development"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/98494","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=98494"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/98494\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/98495"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=98494"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=98494"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=98494"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}