The release of the 2025-2026 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Argus Commission Forecast comes at an important time for pharmacy. Colleges and schools of pharmacy are navigating financial pressures, changing applicant trends, rapid advances in artificial intelligence, evolving educational models, and an expanding vision for pharmacists’ role in patient care. Rather than attempting to predict the future, the Argus Commission has done something more valuable. It has challenged the profession to think strategically about where pharmacy education is headed and how today’s decisions may shape tomorrow’s workforce.
Reading the report, I found myself agreeing with much of its analysis. It is balanced, thoughtful, and intentionally designed to stimulate discussion rather than provide definitive answers. The Commission deserves credit for asking difficult questions while encouraging pharmacy educators and leaders to prepare for a future that remains uncertain.
As I worked through each section, one question continued to surface. It was not a question about enrollment, accreditation, artificial intelligence (AI), or institutional finances. It was a question shaped by nearly 4 decades of pharmacy practice and more than 2 decades serving veterans: How will these strategic decisions ultimately be experienced by the patients who depend on us? That question deserves a place alongside every discussion about workforce planning.
The Forecast devotes considerable attention to the financial pressures facing pharmacy education. Survey respondents expressed differing opinions about whether significant numbers of pharmacy programs could close or merge over the next 5 years, illustrating the uncertainty facing higher education and the financial realities confronting many institutions.¹ Whether those scenarios ultimately occur is almost secondary to the broader conversation they encourage.
Every decision made in pharmacy education eventually reaches a patient. Sometimes that connection is obvious. More often, it develops gradually over many years. Decisions about enrollment, faculty investment, curriculum design, experiential education, and institutional sustainability influence where pharmacists are trained, the careers they pursue, and ultimately the communities they serve.
National workforce projections remain an essential part of that discussion. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics projects approximately 14,200 pharmacist openings annually, driven primarily by retirements and workforce turnover rather than rapid employment growth.² Encouragingly, pharmacy school applications have begun to rebound after several challenging admission cycles.³ These data answer an important question: Are we educating enough pharmacists?
Patients experience something much more tangible. They experience whether a pharmacist is available in their community when they need one. They experience whether an ambulatory care clinic can recruit a clinical pharmacist, whether comprehensive medication management remains available after a retirement, or whether specialized pharmacist services continue close to home. Supply and distribution are related, but they are not synonymous.
Across many rural communities, recruiting pharmacists into specialized clinical positions remains difficult. When vacancies occur, replacing those services may take months. During that time, patients can temporarily lose convenient access to anticoagulation management, chronic disease education, medication optimization, and other pharmacist-provided services that have become integral to modern health care.
None of this suggests that pharmacy education should resist change. On the contrary, one of the Forecast’s greatest strengths is its emphasis on innovation. AI, competency-based education, technician advancement, research modernization, and evolving practice models will all influence the profession in positive ways. These developments deserve thoughtful implementation rather than hesitation.
AI, in particular, is likely to become one of the most important tools available to pharmacists. Used responsibly, AI can strengthen literature review, improve efficiency, support clinical decision-making, and allow pharmacists to devote more time to direct patient care.
Even so, technology cannot replace presence. Clinical software can recommend an anticoagulant. It cannot recognize uncertainty in a patient’s expression or earn the trust that develops through years of caring for a community. Decision-support systems can summarize evidence remarkably well. They cannot replace clinical judgment, compassion, or the relationships that remain central to excellent pharmacy practice. Technology should extend the reach of pharmacists, not replace their presence.
The Argus Commission encourages pharmacy leaders to think strategically about the future. That invitation also creates an opportunity to consider whether workforce planning should eventually measure additional outcomes alongside traditional educational metrics.
Today we routinely evaluate enrollment, graduation rates, licensure performance, employment projections, faculty development, and institutional sustainability. These remain essential measures of a healthy profession.
About the Author
Edward L. Carter, BSPharm, RPh, CPP, is a clinical pharmacist practitioner at Prestonsburg Community Based Outpatient Clinic, part of the Veterans Health Administration, in Prestonsburg, Kentucky.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States Government. The author gratefully acknowledges the members of the 2025-2026 AACP Argus Commission for producing a thoughtful report that encourages meaningful discussion about the future of pharmacy education.
Future workforce discussions might also ask where graduates establish practice, how many remain in rural or underserved communities, how many enter federal health systems, community practice, or ambulatory care, and whether patients continue to have meaningful access to pharmacist-provided care regardless of geography. Those questions do not replace traditional workforce planning. They broaden our understanding of what success ultimately looks like.
The greatest strength of the 2025-2026 AACP Argus Commission Forecast is not that it predicts the future. It is that it invites thoughtful, evidence-informed conversation about the future of pharmacy education. My hope is that one additional perspective becomes part of that conversation.
Ultimately, workforce statistics describe supply. Patients experience access. If future workforce planning continues to measure both, the profession will be better positioned to strengthen pharmacy education while ensuring that patients, regardless of where they live, continue to benefit from pharmacist-provided care.
REFERENCES
Accreditation Standards and Key Elements for the Professional Program in Pharmacy Leading to the Doctor of Pharmacy Degree. Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education. July 1, 2024. Accessed August 5, 2026. https://www.acpe-accredit.org/wp-content/uploads/ACPEStandards2025.pdf
McCauley L, Phillips Jr RL, Meisnere M, Robinson SK, eds. Implementing High-Quality Primary Care: Rebuilding the Foundation of Health Care. National Academies Press; Washington, DC. 2021.
