A new class of financial tools is being developed to promote human capital investments that benefit society. Social innovation financing (SIF) entails raising private capital to support promising social interventions, with the expectation that those providing the funding will eventually be repaid. Funds are allocated based on service providers' achievement of measurable improvements in social conditions, under what is termed a pay for success (PFS) contracting model. Social impact bonds (SIBs) provide the upfront working capital for PFS contracts. This working capital is needed because a delay in payments is inherent in the PFS approach as it can take years to determine if it has achieved successful outcomes. Leveraging private-sector resources to finance government investments can dramatically expand the funding available for service delivery. Moreover, because the upfront costs and risks of implementing social programs are borne by outside agents, taxpayers are not required to make payments for the programs unless they produce an agreed-upon set of outcomes. SIF has the added advantage of providing funders with some assurance that their money will be invested responsibly. This is because well-designed SIF projects that incorporate PFS-SIB approaches target programs that: (1) are research-backed; (2) are implemented by trained professionals vetted by investment officers; (3) produce measurable outcomes for participants; (4) include an evaluation component to measure impact; and (5) offer the potential of some return on investment. PFS-SIB investments to date primarily have been directed at addressing the needs of high-risk populations (e.g., prison inmates, juvenile delinquents) for which social investments may reap substantial returns. The potential applications of SIF in educational and workforce training programs for other populations are as yet unknown. This paper introduces the PFS and SIB concepts, describes their applications nationwide, and explores their potential for generating resources that can be used to finance the delivery of high-quality career and technical education (CTE) programming. State and local policymakers can use the principles presented in this paper to develop new applications for this innovative, yet still emerging method of social service procurement.