Author: sHq_LoGiNz

Media Contacts:

Action Against Hunger 

Kara Green, email: kgreen@actionagainsthunger.org 

IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC) 

Paula Machio, email: paula.machio@igad.int 

Kennedy Wekesa, email: kennedy.wekesa@igad.int 

 

The IMPAACT project is expected to reach 243,801 people in Ethiopia, Somalia, and Djibouti through interoperable, government-led multi-hazard preparedness systems anchored at the IGAD regional level.

NAIROBI, Kenya, July 10, 2026 /3BL/ – Action Against Hunger (ACF) and the IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC), today launched “Institutionalizing Interoperable Multi-Hazard Anticipatory Action” (IMPAACT), a two-year initiative funded by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO). The project aims to protect 243,801 people in Ethiopia, Somalia, and Djibouti from the compounding effects of climate-induced and conflict-driven humanitarian crises through coordinated, science-based anticipatory action.

The Greater Horn of Africa remains one of the world’s most disaster-prone regions, where recurrent drought, floods, conflict, and displacement intersect to generate predictable humanitarian crises. Despite the advances in early warning systems, the gap between available risk data and coordinated, timely action continues to cost lives and livelihoods. IMPAACT directly addresses this gap by scaling nationally led anticipatory action systems — from the IGAD regional level down to sub-national, cross-border, and urban community levels —across the three countries.

Implemented through a joint consortium model under Action Against Hunger leadership, with ICPAC as regional institutional partner, the project will deliver four integrated results: strengthen the regional anticipatory action framework; build preparedness capacities in conflict-affected cross-border areas of Ethiopia and Somalia; enhance urban preparedness in Djibouti; and operationalize a rapid-onset crisis modifier mechanism capable of delivering first assistance within 48 hours of trigger confirmation.

“This project represents a fundamental shift in how we confront humanitarian crises in the region—moving from reactive response to proactive protection. By bridging the gap between early warning data and swift, coordinated action, this initiative will allow us to reach the region’s most vulnerable people before disaster strikes,” said Rotimy Djossaya, Action Against Hunger Chief Impact Officer. Rotimy further states that; “True resilience isn’t just about surviving the next crisis; it’s about building the institutional systems that prevent it from becoming a catastrophe in the first place.”

At the regional level, ICPAC will anchor the project’s anticipatory action framework, validating cross-border trigger matrices, ensuring policy coherence across Ethiopia, Somalia, and Djibouti, and linking the initiative to established coordination platforms including the IGAD Regional Technical Working Group on Anticipatory

Action (RTWGAA) and SCALAA. The project builds on and complements these existing systems rather than creating parallel mechanisms, reinforcing the institutional architecture that underpins long-term food security and resilience across the Greater Horn.

“As climate extremes and humanitarian crises become more frequent and severe, investing in disaster preparedness through anticipatory action is no longer optional—it is essential. This ECHO-funded IMPAACT partnership comes at a critical moment to accelerate anticipatory action across the region, placing governments in the driver’s seat to lead, own, and sustain solutions that protect lives, livelihoods, and development gains,” said Dr Abdi Fidar, ICPAC’s Director.

The project is funded by the European Commission under ECHO’s Humanitarian Implementation Plan (HIP) for the Greater Horn of Africa. The European Union’s support reflects its continued commitment to building the evidence base and institutionalize AA systems needed to shift humanitarian response toward prevention and preparedness in one of the world’s most complex crisis environments.

The IMPAACT project targets pastoralists, displaced persons, and vulnerable urban communities, directly reaching 86,261 people in Ethiopia, 105,332 in Somalia, and 52,208 in Djibouti over its two-year duration. Protection, inclusion, conflict sensitivity, and environmental sustainability are integrated throughout all project activities. The project will conclude in May 2028.

***

About Action Against Hunger 

Action Against Hunger leads the global movement to end hunger. We innovate solutions, advocate for change, and reach 26.5 million people every year with proven hunger prevention and treatment programs. As a nonprofit that works across over 55 countries, our 8,500+ dedicated staff members partner with communities to address the root causes of hunger, including climate change, conflict, inequity, and emergencies. We strive to create a world free from hunger, for everyone, for good.

 

About ICPAC

The IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC) is a specialised institution of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and a Regional Climate Centre mandated by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) to provide and support the delivery of climate services and early warning information to 11 countries (Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan, South Sudan, Kenya, Uganda, Somalia, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi) in the Greater Horn of Africa.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) has moved from a niche policy concept to a practical business issue in the United States. For companies that sell packaged goods, consumer products, or products already covered by stewardship laws, EPR is now a complex regulatory reality. Spanning issues of compliance, data, procurement, packaging design, and budgeting, packaging EPR laws increasingly touch legal, operations, finance, and marketing teams alike.

At its core, EPR shifts responsibility for managing products at end-of-life from municipalities and taxpayers to producers. In practice, that usually means certain companies must register with a producer responsibility organization (PRO), report what they place on the market, and help fund collection, recycling, or other end-of-life management systems. In the United States, EPR is not governed by a single federal framework. Instead, it’s developing through a patchwork of state laws, each with its own definitions, timelines, and compliance expectations.

This legislative patchwork can begin to look unmanageable very quickly. For example, a company could be regulated in one state, exempt in another, and subject to a different set of definitions and deadlines in a third — all while facing fairly significant fines for non-compliance. In this article, we offer an overview of the current EPR landscape in the U.S., focusing on the seven states that have enacted packaging EPR laws, including where each law stands now, which deadlines matter most, and where to find official legislative information.

What EPR Means for Business 

For companies new to EPR, one of the biggest sources of confusion is the word “producer.” In most state packaging laws, the producer is not necessarily the company that physically manufactures the packaging. The producer can be a brand owner, brand licensee, importer, or another party identified through a hierarchy written into state law, which means a company can be responsible for compliance even if a third party designed or supplied the package. This distinction is important because EPR obligations are tied to the legal definition of producer in each jurisdiction.

For an in-depth discussion about various producer definitions, roles, and responsibilities (among other topics related to packaging EPR), be sure to read our recent interview: Unpacking Extended Producer Responsibility.

The Seven U.S. States with Packaging EPR Laws

As of May 2026, seven states have enacted packaging EPR laws: Maine, Oregon, Colorado, California, Minnesota, Maryland, and Washington. These laws are in different stages of implementation, and the pace of rulemaking remains uneven. For businesses, the key takeaway is simple: Enactment does not mean all EPR programs work the same way, and deadlines are already active or approaching in several states.

Maine: Stewardship Program for Packaging

Maine was the first U.S. state to enact a packaging EPR law. Passed in 2021, Maine’s LD 1541 established a Stewardship Program for Packaging intended to reimburse municipalities for recycling and waste management costs and improve the state’s recycling system over time. Maine’s law has been especially influential because it helped set the policy direction later adapted by other states.

Unlike some newer programs, Maine’s implementation has been phased and shaped through additional rulemaking and legislative refinements. The program is expected to be fully operational in 2027 and managed by a stewardship organization (SO) selected by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection. As the law moves into operational compliance, producers will be expected to register and report with a stewardship organization immediately after Maine has designated one — likely early summer 2026.

Important deadlines and milestones include a 2026 registration and reporting cycle tied to producer obligations, with reporting for covered producers expected by June 2026. Start-up fee obligations are expected in September 2026 once the stewardship organization process advances.

Businesses selling into Maine should not assume this program’s earlier enactment date equates to less significant operational requirements. In fact, Maine is one of the clearest examples of how EPR laws mature over multiple years before becoming fully actionable for producers. Now is the time to understand the law and prepare operations for compliance.

Official legislation: Maine LD 1541, An Act to Support and Improve Municipal Recycling Programs and Save Taxpayer Money

Maine’s LD 1541 is the only one of the seven EPR laws not currently operating under the banner of the Circular Action Alliance (CAA), which is the leading PRO for EPR in the United States. CAA intends to be the stewardship organization for Maine, but as of this writing (May 2026), no stewardship organization has been selected.

PRO (SO): Not determined.

Oregon: Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act

Oregon’s SB 582 is widely viewed as the first packaging EPR program in the United States to become fully operational at scale. Reflecting Oregon’s commitment to prioritizing practices that prevent and reduce the negative environmental, social, economic, and health impacts of production, consumption, and end-of-life management of products and packaging across their life cycle, SB 582 establishes that producers have responsibility for managing covered products, packaging, and the waste associated with them.

The law covers packaging, paper, and food serviceware, making it broader than some packaging-only frameworks. It has become an important real-world test case for how producer registration, data reporting, fee collection, and oversight work in practice.

The most significant operational milestone was July 1, 2025, when Oregon’s program became active, and producers were required to register with the approved PRO (Circular Action Alliance) and begin complying with reporting and fee obligations. The first reporting cycle for 2024 supply data was due in spring 2025. For 2026, the key business deadline is the annual reporting cycle May 31, 2026 (for 2025 supply data), alongside ongoing fee and participation obligations.

Oregon’s law also demonstrates how quickly EPR can move from policy to enforcement. SB 582 has already required thousands of companies to assess whether they are obligated producers, to register, and to build reporting processes. Businesses that have not yet evaluated their Oregon exposure may already be behind.

Official legislation: Oregon Senate Bill 582, the Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act

PRO: Circular Action Alliance (CAA) | Oregon

Colorado: Producer Responsibility Program for Statewide Recycling Act

Colorado’s HB 22-1355 created another major packaging EPR framework, with a strong emphasis on statewide recycling access and producer funding through an approved PRO. Colorado has moved steadily through implementation and is now one of the most important compliance states for businesses that sell packaging into the western United States.

Colorado’s producer registration deadline passed earlier in implementation, and the state has now entered its active reporting and program administration phase. For 2026, one of the most important deadlines is May 31, 2026, when annual supply reporting for 2025 data is due for covered producers. As with other states, producers must first determine if they fall within the state’s producer hierarchy and whether their packaging qualifies as covered material.

Colorado matters strategically because it reinforces a broader trend: Even where overall program design is similar from state to state, implementation details differ. Reporting methodologies, fee approaches, exemptions, and guidance all need to be reviewed on a state-by-state basis.

Official legislation: Colorado House Bill 22-1355, the Producer Responsibility Program for Statewide Recycling Act

PRO: Circular Action Alliance (CAA) | Colorado

California: Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act

California’s Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act (SB 54) is one of the highest-profile packaging EPR laws in the country, largely because of the size and influence of the California market and the broader policy ambitions embedded in the statute. The law goes beyond producer responsibility to include source reduction, recyclability, and plastic pollution prevention goals, making it especially consequential for businesses with large packaging footprints. California’s implementation has been closely watched because rulemaking has taken time, and the program includes more detailed reporting concepts than some other states.

For businesses, the most important near-term deadlines in 2026 include the baseline producer report due May 31, 2026, along with an annual supply report and a source reduction baseline report (2023 data). Individual source reduction plans are expected no later than August 1, 2026.

California’s program deserves special attention because many companies that already track packaging for Oregon or Colorado will still need additional data and planning for California. Source reduction plans and the extensive list of the different packaging classifications for California can raise the bar for internal data readiness.

Official legislation: California Senate Bill 54, the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act

PRO: Circular Action Alliance (CAA) | California

Minnesota: Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act

Minnesota’s 2024 packaging EPR law (HF 3911 / SF 2744) added another major state to the growing national patchwork. Known as the Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act, the law created a framework ensuring producer responsibility for packaging, paper products, and food packaging. The law also signaled continued momentum for Midwestern states to join the packaging EPR trend.

Because Minnesota enacted its law later than Oregon, Maine, Colorado, and California, the state is still in earlier implementation stages, but important obligations are already taking shape. Key 2026 milestones include the simplified supply reporting deadline of May 31; the July 1 deadline for the first annual PRO registration; and the December 31 deadline for full needs assessment reporting. Producers selling into Minnesota should use this period to validate applicability, improve packaging data, and monitor guidance as the program matures.

Official legislation: Minnesota HF 3911 / SF 2744, commonly referred to as the Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act

PRO: Circular Action Alliance (CAA) | Minnesota

Maryland: Packaging and Paper Products Producer Responsibility Plans Act

Maryland became one of the newest states to enact packaging EPR when it adopted SB 901. The law addresses packaging and paper products and adds another East Coast jurisdiction to the list of states businesses must track closely. For national brands, Maryland reinforces that packaging EPR is no longer confined to a handful of early-adopter states.

Implementation in Maryland is still in development, but 2026 is already a critical year. A simplified supply reporting deadline is expected on May 31, 2026, making this a live compliance year rather than a distant planning exercise. July 1, 2026, also brings a requirement from the PRO (Circular Action Alliance) to provide the Maryland Department of the Environment with a list of producers, brands, and material type information. Companies should also pay attention to how Maryland finalizes producer registration and PRO-related requirements.

From a business perspective, Maryland highlights a recurring lesson: Newly enacted laws can produce obligations quickly, and companies that wait for “full implementation” before preparing may find themselves scrambling to gather historical packaging data.

Official legislation: Maryland Senate Bill 901, the Packaging and Paper Products Producer Responsibility Plans Act.

PRO: Circular Action Alliance (CAA) | Maryland

Washington: Recycling Reform Act

Washington joined the packaging EPR landscape with SB 5284, the Recycling Reform Act. As another newly enacted law, it expands the number of jurisdictions where producers must be prepared for reporting, registration, and fee obligations tied to covered packaging and paper products.

Washington’s program is still moving through early implementation steps, but 2026 again marks an important planning and compliance year. A simplified supply reporting deadline is expected on May 31, 2026, and July 1, 2026, is the date by which producers must be registered with a PRO in Washington.

For businesses already dealing with California, Oregon, and Colorado, Washington adds to the operational pressure to standardize packaging data and develop repeatable state-by-state compliance processes.

Official legislation: Washington Senate Bill 5284, the Recycling Reform Act.

PRO: Circular Action Alliance (CAA) | Washington

How Producers Can Help Reduce EPR Fees

Because EPR fees are generally tied to the amount and type of packaging placed on the market — and many programs are increasingly using eco-modulation to reward better environmental performance — producers can often reduce costs by focusing on a few practical strategies: lightweighting packaging where possible, simplifying formats to improve recyclability (for example, moving away from hard-to-recycle multi-material combinations when feasible), increasing post-consumer recycled content where program rules recognize it, and eliminating unnecessary packaging components.

Producers should also strengthen packaging data management and work closely with suppliers early, since accurate material data is essential for correct reporting and for identifying lower-fee design options. In short, the companies most likely to control EPR costs are those that treat packaging design, data quality, and compliance planning as part of one coordinated strategy.

For a deeper discussion of ways to reduce EPR fees, including the eco-modulation approach, be sure to read our interview with the SCS Consulting EPR team.

The Bottom Line

EPR in the United States has entered a new phase. What began as a policy discussion has become an operational reality for producers in multiple states, especially in packaging. For businesses, the challenge is not only to understand the theory of producer responsibility, but to manage a fast-changing patchwork of state rules, deadlines, and reporting expectations in a way that is practical and repeatable.

The companies that will be best positioned are those that move early: validating producer status, improving packaging data, planning for fees, and integrating EPR into packaging and compliance strategy. That said, some companies may be just finding out about these regulations now and that they need to register and report by May 31^st — just days away.

For these companies, it’s most important to determine quickly if you’re an obligated “Producer” and to register with CAA as the PRO for all six states with upcoming reporting deadlines. Even if you can’t get your report filed by the deadline, you should get it in as soon as possible to reduce the risk of paying late fees and fines.

Do you have EPR questions, concerns, or emerging issues? Our EPR team at SCS Consulting Services is here to help. Learn more and feel free to get in touch today.

by Lee Green, Cascale

When people talk about labor issues in global supply chains, the conversation almost always comes back to regulation.

New laws. New reporting requirements. New due diligence obligations. The assumption often seems to be that more regulation naturally leads to better outcomes for workers.

I’m not convinced it’s that simple.

That’s not because regulation doesn’t matter. It absolutely does. Good regulation establishes clear expectations, creates accountability, and helps level the playing field. It can raise standards across industries and send a strong signal that exploitative practices have no place in global trade.

But legislation is only the beginning. Real progress depends on what happens after a law is passed.

Too often, we celebrate the announcement of new legislation as though the problem has been solved. In reality, implementation is where the hard work begins.

Take for example, the European Commission’s recent publication of the implementation guidance for the EU Forced Labour Regulation. It includes the new single portal – a national portal system set up by EU member states to provide single entry points for EU funds managed by national and regional authorities.

This shows how governments are now moving from adopting legislation to operationalizing it.

Governments need the resources to enforce new rules. Businesses need clarity about what is expected of them. Suppliers need time, investment, and support to adapt. Workers need access to effective remedies when standards aren’t met. Without those pieces, even well-intentioned regulation risks becoming another compliance exercise rather than a catalyst for change.

There’s another question I think we should be asking more often: what behaviors are we trying to encourage?

Much of today’s regulatory discussion understandably focuses on penalties. Non-compliance needs consequences. But if we only design systems around punishment, we miss an equally important opportunity to reward progress. Companies investing in stronger due diligence, better purchasing practices, improved working conditions, and long-term supplier relationships should see that effort recognized. Countries strengthening their labor frameworks should have confidence that meaningful progress counts for something. The most effective policy environments don’t simply identify failure. They create incentives for continuous improvement.

That principle becomes even more important when supply chains span dozens of countries, each operating under different legal systems and regulatory expectations.

One of the greatest challenges facing businesses today isn’t the volume of regulation. It’s fragmentation. Different definitions. Different reporting requirements. Different evidence standards. Different enforcement mechanisms. Every additional layer adds complexity, particularly for suppliers already serving multiple global brands. Time that could be spent improving labor conditions is instead diverted toward demonstrating compliance with a growing number of overlapping requirements.

Greater alignment doesn’t mean lowering standards. Harmonized approaches can make higher standards easier to implement consistently and at scale.

Labor issues aren’t solved by regulation alone because they were never created by regulation alone. Commercial relationships matter, and so do purchasing practices, transparency, and trust. Collaboration between governments, industry, civil society, and workers isn’t optional; it’s how standards actually take hold. None of this replaces regulation, but regulation can’t replace it either.

Now let’s look at the steps forward. Within Cascale’s policy and public affairs team, we monitor and analyze the policy demands on industry while also playing an active role in shaping guidance. Across several recent policy pieces – such as forced labor regulation or Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) – regulators increasingly appear to be asking companies not just for documentation, but for credible evidence that due diligence is working. This is an important shift. And it’s one that validates that the industry is moving beyond compliance check-box exercises and towards meaningful outcomes.

For the industry, turning these legal frameworks into operational reality requires moving away from theoretical compliance checklists and focusing on practical execution. What does real implementation look like on the ground?

One example is standardized data integration. When a facility uses a single, verified assessment framework (like the Higg Index or SLCP) to capture working conditions, and that data is mutually accepted by multiple global brands and regulatory bodies. It redirects resources directly into workplace improvements.

Another example is capacity building. When new climate adaptation laws demand that factories mitigate heat stress to protect worker health, passing the law doesn’t lower the temperature on the factory level. Better implementation means brands, manufacturers and impact capitals are motivated to co-invest technical energy and engineering audits, installing energy-efficient cooling systems and driving practical factory-level action.

The most successful approaches combine clear legal expectations with practical implementation, meaningful incentives, and shared responsibility across the value chain. The real question isn’t whether regulation is good or bad — that’s yesterday’s debate. It’s what kind of regulatory environment actually changes behavior: one that encourages improvement, supports implementation, reduces unnecessary complexity, and creates the conditions for collaboration alongside accountability.

Because regulation isn’t the destination. It’s one of the tools that helps us get there.

 Lee Green is vice president of communications & marketing at Cascale.

Keysight continues to drive innovation, uphold ethical and sustainable business practices, and contribute to societal prosperity through our corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts.

Keysight is a trusted partner to our customers in accelerating innovations that connect and secure the world. From clean tech, social impact and wellness, and safety and security perspectives, Keysight is a driving force in advancing a more sustainable future. In fiscal year 2025, we launched new solutions that accelerate time-to-market and enhance efficiencies while helping to ensure readiness for evolving industry standards across technologies that enable sustainable products and services.

Our CSR efforts touch on key societal support and developments. We surpassed our social impact goals by contributing more than $319 million in value to communities and engaging more than 3.5 million students, future engineers, and technology skill learners in STEM education programs. We also continued to foster a work environment of opportunity that enables employees to grow, collaborate effectively, and apply their skills to contribute meaningfully to customers, communities, and society in support of Keysight’s mission.

We continued to make progress towards our science-based targets around renewable electricity and energy conservation. In fiscal year 2025, Keysight’s energy efficiency projects resulted in an estimated 6,160 MWh of annual energy conservation.

Looking ahead, Keysight will continue to use its engineering expertise and operational excellence to support a sustainable future aligned with stakeholder expectations. We are preparing for regulatory disclosure requirements worldwide to maintain the transparency stakeholders expect. Acquisitions of Spirent, the Synopsys Optical Solutions Group, and Ansys PowerArtist enhance our capabilities and support our mission to accelerate innovation across the industries shaping our future. Through these developments, and continued progress on our CSR initiatives, Keysight will continue to support a better, more sustainable world.

Satish Dhanasekaran
President and Chief Executive Officer

Read the full 2025 Corporate Social Responsibility Progress Report

Originally published in GoDaddy’s 2025 Global Stakeholder Impact Report

Community Engagement

Community is at the heart of our culture.

We take a human-centered approach to community engagement, empowering our employees and the entrepreneurs we serve, and supporting the communities where we operate. By fostering meaningful connections and thoughtfully investing our time and resources, we work to create a positive impact.

Employee Volunteerism & Giving

GoDaddy’s Corporate Sustainability and ESG Team supports employee volunteerism, corporate philanthropy, and our employee donation match program, helping employees make a difference in their communities and supporting causes they care about most.

All GoDaddy employees are eligible for 20 hours of paid time off each year to volunteer. We also offer up to an aggregate of $1,500 annually per employee for matching donations to eligible nonprofit organizations, and/ or hourly based donations of $35 for every hour an employee volunteers with a nonprofit. These programs reflect our belief that community engagement starts with empowering our people to give back in ways that matter to them.

• $800,000: Approximately $800,000 donated through employees, volunteer rewards, corporate funds, and matching donations.
• 725: Donated to more than 725 nonprofits.
• 4,400: Nearly 4,400 hours volunteered.

Learn more about GoDaddy’s 2025 Global Stakeholder Impact Report.

About this Report

The GoDaddy 2025 Global Stakeholder Impact Report details our progress toward our corporate sustainability goals, strategies, and initiatives in support of our overarching purpose and values. Unless otherwise noted, this report reflects our corporate sustainability performance across our global operations covering the fiscal year period from January 1 to December 31, 2025. To demonstrate our commitment to transparent communication regarding our sustainability progress, we routinely share updates through our website and our annual reporting. We welcome your questions, comments, and feedback on this report by contacting ESG@GoDaddy.com.

This report references the Global Reporting Initiative Standards, includes select Sustainability Accounting Standards Board metrics for the Internet Media and Services sector, and the Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosures. We also disclose our contributions and progress toward priority UN SDGs. For additional information on how we align with these frameworks and key indicators demonstrating our sustainability performance, please refer to the Frameworks & Metrics section.

About GoDaddy

GoDaddy, the world’s largest domain name registrar, helps millions of entrepreneurs globally start, grow, and scale their businesses. People come to GoDaddy to name their idea, build a website and logo, sell their products and services and accept payments. GoDaddy Airo®, the company’s AI-powered experience, makes growing a small business faster and easier by helping them to get their idea online in minutes, drive traffic and boost sales. GoDaddy’s expert guides are available 24/7 to provide assistance. To learn more about the company, visit www.GoDaddy.com.

AEG Presents, a division of AEG, a leading sports and live entertainment company, recently launched inaugural College Connections programs at both Buckeye Country Superfest in Columbus, Ohio, and Electric Forest in Rothbury, Michigan, expanding opportunities for students to explore careers in live entertainment through immersive, behind-the-scenes learning experiences. Designed to increase access to the industry and foster meaningful connections with professionals, the programs provided participants with firsthand exposure to the planning, operations and collaboration required to deliver large-scale live events.  

At Buckeye Country Superfest, students participated in an exclusive site tour and engaged directly with AEG Presents professionals representing finance, venue management, talent buying and event operations. Through career-focused discussions and mentorship opportunities, participants gained a deeper understanding of the diverse pathways available across the live entertainment industry and the expertise required to bring major events to life.  

Meanwhile, at Electric Forest, students took part in the festival’s first College Connections All Access Day, an immersive experience that introduced participants to the scale and complexity of festival production. Students joined department leaders on a guided site tour, learned about career pathways across multiple business functions and connected with employees through networking opportunities designed to support professional growth and industry awareness. The day concluded with remarks from Chad Cheek, Vice President of Business Strategy at AEG Presents, who shared perspectives on leadership, industry growth and the importance of creating access points for emerging talent.  

The impact of the program extended beyond career exploration. Following the Electric Forest experience, several participants were hired into the festival’s Student Staff Program, demonstrating how intentional workforce development initiatives can help create tangible pathways from education and exposure to employment opportunities.  

Through these programs, AEG Presents continues to invest in the next generation of live entertainment professionals by providing students with mentorship, access and real-world learning experiences. By connecting emerging talent with industry leaders and expanding awareness of the many careers that support live events, College Connections helps strengthen a more inclusive and sustainable talent pipeline for the future of the industry