U.S. Leadership in Education, Advanced Manufacturing, and Digital Skills (U.S. LEADS) Program

Overview:

The United States Leadership in Education, Advanced Manufacturing, and Digital Skills (U.S. LEADS) Program celebrates America's 250th anniversary by showcasing U.S. leadership from the Industrial Revolution to the Digital Revolution, focusing on revitalizing manufacturing, advancing AI, and strengthening supply chains. This Freedom 250 initiative will spark collaboration between U.S. community colleges, international vocational leaders, and U.S. industry partners to address emerging labor market demands that advance U.S. interests and drive economic development. The program will launch with a summit in Washington, D.C. to highlight America’s industrial heritage, current leadership in manufacturing and AI, and the role of U.S. community colleges in preparing the workforce of tomorrow. 

The program will also include a U.S. exchange for approximately 100 higher education officials, commerce leaders, and policymakers from countries strategically important to U.S. industry. The group should be divided into four cohorts comprised of approximately 25 representatives from approximately 3-4 countries, determined based on U.S. foreign policy priorities in consultation with ECA, U.S. embassies, and regional bureau input. These two-week regional programs will take place in approximately four U.S. cities with strong higher education-industry partnerships. Through site visits, hands-on learning, and industry engagement, international participants will gain knowledge of U.S. best practices in manufacturing and technology training, enabling them to adopt similar approaches and establish partnerships that advantage U.S. companies. The summit should occur between December 2026 and March 2027 and be followed immediately by the in-person regional exchanges. The successful applicant will provide responsive and flexible programming with activities tailored to U.S. priorities for vocational-technical education and commercial diplomacy that will lead to measurable positive policy change.

Solicitation limitations:

Only one proposal will be considered by ECA from each applicant organization. 

Limitation: ASU may submit only one (1) application to the sponsoring organization.
Notice: ASU Limited Submissions will run this opportunity with a rapid review system to better accommodate the sponsor's immediate timeline.

Other information:

Announcement Type: New Cooperative Agreement
Length of Performance Period: 18-36 months
Number of Awards Anticipated: One award
Cost Sharing: There is no minimum or maximum percentage of cost sharing required for this program.

TechAccess: AI-Ready America

Overview:

TechAccess: AI-Ready America is a national-scale initiative to accelerate Artificial Intelligence (AI) readiness and adoption across the U.S. by strengthening coordination, leveraging partnerships and resources, filling gaps, and scaling what works — so local and state priorities can lead in shaping an AI-driven economy that benefits all Americans.

Unlike initiatives centered around K – 16 education, AI-Ready America additionally reaches businesses, public-serving organizations, and individuals, among others, expanding access to AI knowledge, tools, and resources. The program also emphasizes practical implementation through hands-on assistance and workforce up-skilling, including experiential learning such as internships, project-based work, and apprenticeships, to ensure stakeholders can effectively apply and innovate with AI.

The program supports:

1. State/Territory Coordination Hubs (Coordination Hubs) – one in every state, the District of Columbia (DC), or territory in the United States – connecting partners, strengthening planning and deployment, and rapidly scaling approaches;
2. A National Coordination Lead (National Lead) – facilitating collaboration and knowledge sharing among Coordination Hubs, coordinating priority economic sectors, and informing national AI strategies; and
3. AI-Ready Catalyst Award Competitions – a series of topic-driven competitions issued over the course of the program to pilot and scale innovative approaches that address critical national AI readiness needs.

Solicitation limitations:

NOTICE: This award is limited to one per state. Due to the potential for coordinated, multi-institution engagement at the state level, this opportunity may not follow a standard limited submission review process. Institutional considerations and external partnerships may play a significant role in final decisions. ASU’s course(s) of action will depend upon a careful evaluation of the reasonable and allowable options by university leadership, which will be shared with the limited submissions applicants as soon as is possible.
Notice: ASU Limited Submissions will run this opportunity with a rapid review system to better accommodate the sponsor's immediate timeline.
Limitation: ASU may submit only one (1) application to the sponsoring organization.

Other information:

Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is required. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

2026 Research Grants on Reducing Inequality

Overview:

Research grants on reducing inequality fund research studies that examine programs, policies, or practices to reduce inequality in the academic, social, behavioral, or economic outcomes of young people ages 5–25 in the United States, along dimensions of race, ethnicity, economic standing, sexual or gender minority status (e.g., LGBTQ+ youth), language minority status, or immigrant origins.

We fund:

• Descriptive studies that describe, explore, or explain how programs, practices, or policies reduce inequality.
• Intervention studies that provide causal evidence on the effectiveness of programs or policies for reducing inequality.

Our focus on reducing inequality grew out of our view that research can do more than help us understand the problem of inequality—it can generate effective responses. We believe that it is time to build stronger bodies of knowledge on how to reduce inequality in the United States and to move beyond the mounting research evidence about the scope, causes, and consequences of inequality. Thus, we fund research that focuses on responses to inequality.
 
Research Interests 
Our research interests center on studies that examine ways to reduce inequality in youth outcomes. We welcome descriptive studies that clarify mechanisms for reducing inequality or elucidate how or why a specific program, policy, or practice operates to reduce inequality. We also welcome intervention studies that examine attempts to reduce inequality.

We invite studies from a range of disciplines, fields, and methods, and we encourage investigations into various youth-serving systems, including justice, housing, child welfare, mental health, and education.

Recognizing that findings about programs and practices that reduce inequality will have limited societal impact until the structures that create inequality in the first place have been transformed, the Foundation is particularly interested in research to uproot systemic racism and the structural foundations of inequality that limit the life chances of young people.

Applications for research grants on reducing inequality must:

1. Identify a specific inequality in youth outcomes.
2. Make a convincing case for the dimension(s) of inequality the study will address.
3. Articulate how findings from your research will help build, test, or increase understanding of a program, policy, or practice to reduce the specific inequality that you have identified.

Solicitation Limitations
New for 2026: Please note that you may only submit one application per cycle as the Principal Investigator. For example, you may submit only one major grant or one Officers’ research award letter of inquiry.

Other Information
Eligible Studies

• Only studies that 1) align with the stated research interests of this program and 2) relate to the outcomes of young people between the ages of 5 and 25 in the United States are eligible for consideration.
• We do not support non-research activities such as program implementation and operational costs, or make contributions to building funds, fundraising drives, endowment funds, general operating budgets, or scholarships. Letters of inquiry for ineligible projects are screened out without further review.

Fit with Research Interests

• The proposed study aims to examine a program, policy, or practice to reduce inequality in the academic, social, behavioral, or economic outcomes of young people ages 5–25 in the United States.
• The study focuses on reducing inequality along the dimension(s) of race, ethnicity, economic standing, sexual or gender minority status, language minority status, or immigrant origins.
• Studies that focus primarily on documenting the causes and consequences of inequality are not a fit with our interests.

LOI: For major research grants applications, based on internal review of the letter of inquiry, the Foundation either invites a full proposal for further consideration, or declines the application. We do not accept unsolicited full proposals. Officers’ research grants are awarded on the merit of the letter of inquiry alone.

Award Information
Major Research Grants

• $100,000 to $600,000 over 2-3 years, including up to 15% indirect costs.
• Projects involving secondary data analysis are typically at the lower end of the budget range, whereas projects involving new data collection and sample recruitment can be at the higher end. Proposals to launch experiments in which settings (e.g., classrooms, schools, youth programs) are randomly assigned to conditions are usually on the higher end. We encourage applicants pursuing cluster randomized designs to apply for additional sources of funding to ensure support for a sufficient sample.

Officers’ Research Grants

• $25,000–$50,000 over 1-2 years, including up to 15% indirect costs. 

Studies may be stand-alone projects or may build off larger projects. The budget should be appropriate for the activities proposed.

Solicitation limitations:

New for 2026: Please note that you may only submit one application per cycle as the Principal Investigator. For example, you may submit only one major grant or one Officers’ research award letter of inquiry.

Other information:

Eligible Studies

• Only studies that 1) align with the stated research interests of this program and 2) relate to the outcomes of young people between the ages of 5 and 25 in the United States are eligible for consideration.
• We do not support non-research activities such as program implementation and operational costs, or make contributions to building funds, fundraising drives, endowment funds, general operating budgets, or scholarships. Letters of inquiry for ineligible projects are screened out without further review.

Fit with Research Interests

• The proposed study aims to examine a program, policy, or practice to reduce inequality in the academic, social, behavioral, or economic outcomes of young people ages 5–25 in the United States.
• The study focuses on reducing inequality along the dimension(s) of race, ethnicity, economic standing, sexual or gender minority status, language minority status, or immigrant origins.
• Studies that focus primarily on documenting the causes and consequences of inequality are not a fit with our interests.

LOI: For major research grants applications, based on internal review of the letter of inquiry, the Foundation either invites a full proposal for further consideration, or declines the application. We do not accept unsolicited full proposals. Officers’ research grants are awarded on the merit of the letter of inquiry alone.

Award Information
Major Research Grants

• $100,000 to $600,000 over 2-3 years, including up to 15% indirect costs.
• Projects involving secondary data analysis are typically at the lower end of the budget range, whereas projects involving new data collection and sample recruitment can be at the higher end. Proposals to launch experiments in which settings (e.g., classrooms, schools, youth programs) are randomly assigned to conditions are usually on the higher end. We encourage applicants pursuing cluster randomized designs to apply for additional sources of funding to ensure support for a sufficient sample.

Officers’ Research Grants

• $25,000–$50,000 over 1-2 years, including up to 15% indirect costs. 

Studies may be stand-alone projects or may build off larger projects. The budget should be appropriate for the activities proposed.

Call for Research Grant Proposals

Overview:

With support from the National Science Foundation (NSF), the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Grants Program seeks proposals for Research Grants. The AERA Grants Program provides Research Grants to faculty at institutions of higher education, postdoctoral researchers, and other doctoral level scholars. The aim of the program is to advance fundamental knowledge of relevance to STEM education policy, foster significant science using education data, and build research capacity in education and learning. The program supports highly competitive studies using rigorous quantitative methods to examine large-scale, education-related data. Since 1991, this AERA Program has been vital to both research and training at early career stages.   

The Grants Program encourages the use of major datasets from multiple and wide-ranging sources. It emphasizes the advanced statistical analysis of data sets from the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and other federal agencies. The program also supports studies using large-scale international data systems (e.g., PISA, PIRLS, or TIMMS) that benefit from U.S. federal government support. In addition, statewide longitudinal administrative data systems (SLDS), other data systems (e.g., school district level), or national studies (e.g., ABCD Study) supported by or enhanced through federal grants are also eligible for consideration. Federal or state administrative information that further expands the analytic capacity of the research is appropriate for inclusion. The thrust of the analysis needs to have strong intellectual merit and show potential for broad impact, inclusive of being generalizable to a national, state, or population or subgroups within the sample that the dataset represents.

The Grants Program is open to field-initiated research and welcomes proposals that:

1. Support fundamental research using extant data and quantitative methods on STEM learning and learning environments;
2. Cultivate rigorous scientific research using big data and data linkages, with an emphasis on large administrative federal datasets, state longitudinal data systems (SLDS), and local record systems;
3. Promote the use and study of machine learning and artificial intelligence in STEM research; or
4. Undertake replication research of major findings or major studies using large-scale, federally supported or enhanced data.

The Grants Program encourages proposals across the life span and contexts of education and learning of relevance to STEM policy and practice. The research may focus on a wide range of topics, including but not limited to such issues as student achievement in STEM, analysis of STEM education policies, contextual factors in education, educational participation and persistence (pre-kindergarten through graduate school), early childhood education and development, postsecondary education, and the STEM workforce and transitions.

Solicitation limitations:

An applicant may submit only one proposal to the AERA Grants Program for review at any one time.

Research Grants are available for faculty at institutions of higher education, postdoctoral researchers, and other doctoral level scholars. Proposals are encouraged from the full range of education research fields and other fields and disciplines engaged in education-related research, including economics, political science, psychology, sociology, demography, statistics, public policy, psychometrics, and discipline-based education research (DBER). Applicants for this one-year or two-year, non-renewable award must have received their doctoral degree at the start of the award. Applicants may be U.S. citizens or U.S. permanent residents. Non-U.S. citizens affiliated with a U.S. university or institution are also eligible to apply.

Researchers who have previously received Research Grants through the AERA Grants Program (as a PI or CoPI) may not apply for a Research Grant. However, applicants who have received an AERA Dissertation Grant are eligible to apply for a Research Grant. Dissertation Grant recipients must complete the Dissertation Grant before applying for a Research Grant.

Other information:

Awards for Research Grants are up to $25,000 for 1-year projects, or up to $35,000 for 2-year projects. In accordance with AERA's agreement with the funding agencies, institutions may not charge indirect costs or overhead on these awards.

Research Grantees may not accept concurrent grant or fellowship awards from another agency, foundation, institution or the like for the same project that is funded by the AERA Grants Program. 

Applicants are encouraged to view the informational recorded webinar to learn more about the AERA Grants Program and discuss the application process.

Fostering Interdisciplinary Networks to Develop Emergent and Responsive Solutions Foundry

Overview:

The NSF FINDERS FOUNDRY program supports collaboration among K-12 educators, technologists, parents or guardians, and researchers, to develop innovative solutions to persistent challenges in learning and workforce development. These challenges are identified by K-12 students, families, and educators. The program aims to create and scale evidence-based practices, tools, and technologies that improve learning outcomes and prepare students for a digital, Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven future.

A key focus is early exposure to AI to build curiosity, understanding, and readiness for future careers. The program encourages partnerships to co-design responsive, technology-based solutions between key sectors – schools, universities, industry, government, and nonprofits – and our nation’s families.

NSF FINDERS FOUNDRY program includes two phases: Planning and Development. Planning proposals help teams explore one of several focus areas. Only teams awarded Planning grants may submit Development proposals, which support the growth and implementation of promising ideas. [Read full NOFO here.]

Solicitation limitations:

Limitation: ASU may submit only one (1) application to the sponsoring organization. An organization may submit only one Planning proposal and, if awarded a Planning award, one Development proposal.
ASU Limited Submissions will run this opportunity with a rapid review system to better accommodate the sponsor's immediate timeline. 

An organization may submit only one Planning proposal and, if awarded a Planning award, one Development proposal.

Each NSF FINDERS FOUNDRY leadership team must have at least one member from each of four stakeholder groups: (1) K-12 educators, (2) technologists, (3) researchers, and (4) parents or guardians. One of these individuals must act as the Principal Investigator (PI) through an eligible organization described above. Co-PIs and additional Senior Personnel, (sub)contractors, consultants, etc., are also allowed.

Unaffiliated individuals are not eligible to submit proposals in response to this solicitation.

There are no PI degree requirements (i.e., the PI is not required to hold a Ph.D. nor any other degree).

Other information:

Estimated Number of Awards: 70

• An estimated 50 Planning awards of up to $50,000 each for up to 2 months.
• An estimated 20 Development awards of up to $300,000 each for 1 year.

Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Research Grants on Improving the Use of Research Evidence (IURE)

Overview:

Research evidence can be a powerful resource for policymakers, agency leaders, organizational managers, and others who make high-stakes decisions that shape youth-serving systems. In addition to informing policy formation and service delivery, evidence from systematic research can deepen decision-makers’ understanding of issues, generate reliable assessment tools, support strategic planning, and guide program improvement. But only if it is used. 

This program supports studies of strategies that aim to improve the use of research evidence in ways that benefit young people ages 5-25 in the United States. We want to know what it takes to get research used by decision-makers and what happens when research is used. And we are particularly interested in studies of strategies that are robust enough to facilitate research use in decision-making regarding divisive youth issues or in highly polarized environments. We welcome letters of inquiry for studies that pursue these broad aims.

We fund: 

• Studies that build or test strategies to improve the use of existing research in policy or practice.
• Studies that test whether and how strategies that improve the use of research evidence in turn improve decision-making and youth outcomes. 

We do not fund: 

• Studies that aim solely to understand how individuals and organizations access research, make sense of research findings, and apply evidence. Studies must examine a strategy to improve research use and the implications of that research use for youth outcomes.
• Studies that focus solely on improving data-driven decision-making. Studies in which data, data use, and research use intersect are welcome, however. For example, some teams have leveraged routines around data use as a strategy to embed use of research evidence. Others have engaged youth to pair data, personal narratives, and research evidence to increase school leaders’ use of research evidence.
• Studies about improving research use among frontline practitioners, at the point of service. For example, studies of strategies to improve research use among teachers, clinicians, and others in similar roles are not considered a fit. See page 6 for a note on why we prioritize mid-level managers and other organizational decision-makers.

2026 Priorities: This year we will prioritize funding applications that: 

• investigate and test strategies to improve the use of research evidence to benefit young people concerning politically charged and contested issues, particularly in highly polarized contexts. Prior studies of decision-makers’ use of research evidence during school board deliberations (Asen & Gurke, 2014), in legislative sessions (Bogenschneider, Day, & Parrott, 2019; Yanovitzky & Weber, 2020), and by advocacy coalitions (Scott et al., 2017) provide a strong evidence base for designing and studying strategies.
• propose experimental tests of strategies to improve research use in policy and practice to improve youth outcomes.

We welcome studies that pursue one of two aims:

1. Building or testing ways to improve the use of existing research evidence in policy or practice.
2. Testing whether and how strategies that improve the use of research evidence in turn improve decision-making and youth outcomes.

Solicitation limitations:

New for 2026: Please note that you may only submit one application per cycle as the Principal Investigator. For example, you may submit only one major grant or one Officers’ research award letter of inquiry.

Other information:

Review the previously funded grants.

Funding Amounts 

• Major research grants: $100,000–$1,000,000 over 2-4 years, including up to 15% indirect costs. Funding amounts vary based on study design, see page 9 for more information. 

Officers’ research grants: $25,000–$50,000 over 1-2 years, including up to 15% indirect costs.

Racial Equity Research Grants

Overview:

The Racial Equity Research Grants program supports education research projects that will contribute to understanding and disrupting racial inequality in education and work to reimagine generative possibilities to advance educational equity, with budgets up to $75,000 for projects ranging from one to five years. We accept Intent to Apply forms once a year.

We believe that educational research can play an important role in developing new forms of education that are humane, equitable, and just. As such, there is a pressing need for robust approaches to scholarship that can contribute consequentially to achieving equity in education. We encourage a wide range of methodological approaches to creatively and ambitiously engage in advancing racial equity.  

This program is “field-initiated” in that proposal submissions are not required to focus on a particular research topic, discipline, design, or method. We hope that scholars will identify the most compelling and needed areas of research. We are interested in proposals at all levels and in all settings of learning, including early childhood, higher education, and in schools, families, and communities across the world. 

Our goal for this program is to support rigorous, intellectually ambitious, and technically sound research that is relevant to the most pressing questions and compelling opportunities in relation to racial equity in education. In this cycle of funding, we will continue to fund scholarship focused on a range of communities and issues with respect to equity. We encourage proposals from across the methodological spectrum, including qualitative methods, mixed-methods, and quantitative methods. 

We want to especially encourage Racial Equity proposals that focus on the following areas: 
(1) youth and educator mental health that explores possibilities that promote resilience, center healing, and foster well-being; 
(2) innovative and community-based approaches to workforce development; and 
(3) innovative approaches at the intersections of quantitative methods and racial equity

Solicitation limitations:

PIs and Co-PIs may only hold one active research grant from the Spencer Foundation at a time. This restriction does not apply to the administering organization; organizations may submit as many proposals as they like as long as they are for different projects and have different research teams. 

PIs and Co-PIs may not submit more than one research proposal to the Spencer Foundation at a time. This restriction applies to the Small Grants Program, Large Grants Program, Racial Equity Research Grants Program, and Research-Practice Partnership Program. If the PI or any of the Co-PIs currently have a research proposal under consideration in any of these programs, they are required to wait until a final decision has been made on the pending proposal before they can submit a new proposal. 

An exception to these restrictions is the Spencer Vision Grants program. PIs and Co-PIs may apply for a Vision Grant if they have another active research grant from the Spencer Foundation or if they have another Spencer grant proposal in review. However, the projects proposed in a Vision Grant proposal and in another Spencer grant program proposal must be distinct. 

Other information:

The application process begins with an Intent to Apply form. Once submitted, you will automatically have access to the Full Proposal application in our online portal. 

We accept Intent to Apply forms once a year. We will be accepting applications for projects ranging from one to five years with budgets up to $75,000.

Proposals to the Racial Equity Research Grants program must be for academic research projects that will contribute to understanding and ameliorating racial inequality in education, broadly conceived. 

Talent Search Program (TRIO Talent Search)

Overview:

This opportunity is being managed in partnership with the Provost office, all applications will need to be strategically selected by the Provost office. This is not a traditional limitation. However, internal coordination is encouraged due to the target areas. ASU may submit multiple applications if each separate application describes a project that will serve a different target area or different target schools. The term “target area” is defined as a geographic area served by a project, and the term “target school” is a school designated by the applicant as a focus of project services (34 CFR 643.7).  

In a rapidly evolving economy where opportunity belongs to those equipped with the right knowledge and choices, the Talent Search program serves as an essential early-intervention bridge for underserved learners nationwide. Talent Search aims to deliver personalized academic, financial, and college and career guidance while dramatically broadening awareness of a variety of accessible postsecondary pathways beyond high school. 

This grant opportunity is fully aligned with America’s Talent Strategy, encouraging grantees to expand services to learners to explore a variety of postsecondary opportunities, including Registered Apprenticeship.2 These options include enhanced programing focused on pre-apprenticeships and other work-based learning experiences that combine paid, on-the-job training with academic credit and industry recognized credentials in high demand fields such as skilled trades, healthcare, manufacturing, information technology, artificial intelligence (AI), and shipbuilding and other occupations critical for the defense industrial base. 

Grantees should explore talent marketplaces, learning and employment records, and other mechanisms that present apprenticeships, career and technical education, and integration with the workforce system as equally viable and often faster routes to economic mobility as traditional college programs. Grantees are encouraged to develop applications that demonstrate connections with the workforce system, dual enrollment options, and resources dedicated to the data infrastructure necessary for Workforce Pell and other pathways that can minimize debt while accelerating entry into rewarding careers. 

Talent Search project proposals should seek to serve learners from socioeconomically disadvantaged communities, including students with disabilities, foster care youth, or otherwise disconnected youth. Grantees should, to the extent possible, develop applications that demonstrate how participants gain the early awareness, skills, confidence, and connections needed to either acquire a standard high school diploma or its equivalent and enroll in an in-demand postsecondary program. This grant is more than preparation; it is about empowerment. Through the Talent Search opportunity, we are seeking to not only increase postsecondary enrollment but aim to cultivate a generation of career-ready Americans.

Priorities 
This notice includes one absolute priority, one competitive preference priority, and one invitational priority.

Absolute Priority: Projects or proposals that will do one or more of the following:

(a) expand access to education services that accelerate learning such as high-impact tutoring, 
(b) expand access to one or more of the following at the high school or postsecondary level: distance education, pre-apprenticeships, or Registered Apprenticeships, including Registered Apprenticeships for in-school or out-of-school youth, or 
(c) expand access to programs or coursework that lead to in-demand, industry-recognized postsecondary credentials. 

 Competitive Preference Priority:Projects or proposals that will be carried out by one or more of the following:

(a) State educational agencies (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(49)), 

(b) State workforce development agencies or boards, 

(c) State higher education agencies (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 1003(22), or 
(d) An Indian Tribe (as defined in 25 U.S.C. 5304(e)), Tribal organization (as defined in 25 U.S.C. 5304(l)), or Tribal educational agency (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7452(b)(3))

Invitational Priority: Projects that are designed to strengthen their career and personal counseling activities (as authorized in 402B(c)) to improve student persistence, postsecondary access and opportunity, and create a scalable data infrastructure that connects education to workforce outcomes by doing the following:

(a) integrating learning and employment records (LER) with AI-enabled learner wallets to transform student support services into personalized, skills-based pathways to postsecondary success and employment, and 
(b) expanding access to talent marketplaces composed of credential registries (e.g. publishing education and training programs in structured, open, linked, and interoperable data formats), skills based job description generators, LERs that connect Talent Search participants, employers, and education providers through a common currency of skills.

Solicitation limitations:

An applicant may submit multiple applications if each separate application describes a project that will serve a different target area or different target schools. The term “target area” is defined as a geographic area served by a project, and the term “target school” is a school designated by the applicant as a focus of project services (34 CFR 643.7)

Other information:

Estimated Range of Awards: $250,000-$10,000,000 per year. 
For an applicant that has not been designated by their Governor as the state-level applicant, the annual maximum award is $1,000,000. For one state-level applicant that has been designated by their Governor as the state-level applicant, or for any Indian tribe receiving points under the competitive priority, the maximum annual award amount is $10,000,000. 
All projects must serve a minimum of 500 participants annually, and have an annual per-participant cost of no more than $500.
Estimated number of awards: 175  
Project Period: 60 months
Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Cost Sharing: This program does not require cost sharing or matching.
Sponsor: U.S. Department of Labor on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education (OPE)

National Environmental Education and Training Program

Overview:

The purpose of this program is to provide and build the national capacity of environmental education training for education professionals across the U.S., enabling them to effectively teach about environmental issues. Training may be provided for both formal (e.g., classroom teachers and faculty at colleges and universities) and non-formal educators (e.g., educators in museums, nature centers and other non-formal venues). It also may be provided in both pre-service (e.g., for students in teacher education programs and/or colleges of education and faculty) and in-service settings (e.g., for classroom teachers and other practicing educators). 

Environmental education training refers to professional learning activities such as classes, online courses, workshops, communities of practice, seminars, and conferences which are designed to prepare education professionals to effectively teach about environmental issues. Building national capacity of environmental education training includes, but is not limited to, developing and disseminating environmental education guidelines, developing and implementing state educator certification programs, and providing access to information about high-quality programs and resources. 

Environmental education is a process that allows individuals to explore environmental issues, engage in problem solving, and take action to improve the environment. As a result, individuals develop a deeper understanding of environmental issues and have the skills to make informed and responsible decisions. Environmental education enables communities and individuals to engage in environmental problemsolving, identify cause and effect relationships, build an understanding of the implications of their actions and promote economic well-being, now and long into the future, through environmental stewardship (see environmental education continuum below). Key characteristics include the importance of the relationships among ecosystem health, community well-being, and long-term resource efficiency, which can include reflection on risks to health, safety, and the environment.

In alignment with EO 14313: Establishing the President’s Make America Beautiful Again Commission, environmental education supports the following policies: 

• Promote responsible stewardship of natural resources while driving economic growth.
• Encourage responsible, voluntary conservation efforts that expand outdoor recreation, hunting, and fishing opportunities for future generations.
• Recover America's fish and wildlife populations through proactive, voluntary, on-the-ground collaborative conservation efforts. 

Environmental education supports EO 14313 as it sparks awareness and supports knowledge building around environmental topics. Environmental education also teaches individuals how to assess and analyze environmental topics through critical thinking and enhances problem-solving and decision-making skills, enabling individuals to participate in informed action and stewardship experiences.  

Solicitation limitations:

Notice: ASU Limited Submissions will run this opportunity with a rapid review system to better accommodate the sponsor's immediate timeline.
Limitation: ASU may submit one (1) application to the sponsor. 

• Eligible applicants may be a member of a consortium in more than one application.
• However, such applicants may not apply as the sole applicant or as the applicant for a consortium in more than one application.

Other information:

Read full NOFO.

Cost Sharing: There is a cost share (non-federal match) requirement that all applicants must meet, for a minimum of 25% of the total project amount (total project amount = EPA Funding Request + Non-Federal Match). Applicants must demonstrate in their proposal how it will meet the cost share requirement to be considered eligible. 

Funding: Recipients may propose different funding levels for each project year so long as the annual federal funding request is no greater than $2,370,000 and the overall funding request does not exceed $4,740,000.

Number of Awards: One

Implications of the 2023 Supreme Court Decision to Ban Conscious Admissions at Colleges and Universities for Educational Attainment and Economic Mobility (SCD23)

Overview:

The Russell Sage Foundation, in collaboration with the Hewlett, Spencer, and William T. Grant foundations, seeks to support innovative research on the effects of the Supreme Court decision on a diversity of outcomes—from who attends college and where and the extent to which alternatives to race-conscious policies contribute to educational attainment and economic mobility among different groups in the population. Our interests extend beyond the effects on applications, admissions, enrollment, and degree completion and include the downstream effects, including whether and how the decision alters the college-to-career pipeline that many employers rely on to diversify their workforce, and the factors associated with public opposition to and support for race-conscious policies. We are particularly interested in analyses that make use of newly available data or demonstrate novel uses of existing data. We also support original data collection and encourage methodological variety and inter-disciplinary collaboration. 

Background
In a June 2023 decision, the Supreme Court held that admission practices at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina-Chapel-Hill were unconstitutionally race-conscious and violated the 14^th Amendment. Proponents of race-conscious admissions policies have argued that such policies acknowledge and help compensate for systemically unequal opportunities in education and contribute to a more diverse workforce. Critics have argued that race-conscious admissions policies limit opportunities for Asian and white applicants. The Court’s decision may also have effects on employment and promotion decisions in the workplace and other settings.

Prior to this decision, ten states had banned the use of race-conscious admissions for their public colleges and universities: Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington. Research on alternative methods for achieving diversity suggests that they do not work as well as race-conscious policies in diversifying college and graduate and professional school enrollment. As a result, the Supreme Court’s decision is likely to generate experimentation with a range of methods to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education and the educational attainment and economic mobility of underrepresented and lower-income groups.

We are especially interested in proposals that will advance social science research on the social, political, and economic effects of the Supreme Court decision and the future of race-conscious policies more generally. Examples of the kinds of topics and questions that are of interest include, but are not limited to, the following:

• What are the short- and long-run effects of the June 2023 Supreme Court ruling that restricts race-conscious policies in university and college admissions on who attends college and where?
• What has experience with the direct admissions or percentage plans of California, Texas, and other states revealed about what happens to racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity in enrollment and degree completion when race-conscious admission policies are no longer permissible for undergraduates or graduate students?
• Which alternatives to race-conscious policies, whether independently or in tandem, generate socioeconomic and racial and ethnic diversity in applications, admissions, enrollment, debt-free degree completion, and social mobility?
• To what extent are the beneficiaries of race-conscious admissions policies, who enroll in selective colleges and universities, more or less likely to graduate relative to those attending less-selective institutions?
• To what extent do race-neutral or alternative admissions policies contribute to the promotion of educational attainment and economic mobility among racially, ethnically, and economically diverse groups following the Supreme Court decision?
• What are the racial and socioeconomic composition effects of eliminating other admission practices such as early admissions, the use of standardized test scores, or the preferential treatment of the children of donors, alumni, faculty, and recruited athletes?
• To what extent will the race-conscious admissions ban impact the effort that high school students put into their studies, their educational aspirations, and their subsequent enrollment in higher education?
• What are the educational, social, and civic engagement benefits that derive from students’ interactions with classmates whose backgrounds, race and ethnicity, experiences, and political views differ from their own?
• What can we learn from historically Black colleges and universities (HBCU’s) and Minority Serving Institutions (MSI’s) on how to support retention, recruitment, anddegreecompletion for students from marginalized groups?
• What program or policy changesmight provide the basis for addressing historical racial harm in the context of higher education access andeconomic mobility?
• To what extent might improvements in college affordability lead to the promotion of educational attainment and economic mobility among racially, ethnically, and economically diverse groups?
• To what extent will the Supreme Court decision alter the college-to-career pipeline that many employers rely on to diversify their workforce?
• To what extent is the Supreme Court decision affecting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (D.E.I) initiatives in the recruitment, hiring, retention, promotion, and advancement of workers of color and or/other groups in higher education and in the private and public sectors?
• How are attitudes towards the use of race, ethnicity, or gender criteria in admissions, hiring, or contracting preferences formed? What factors are associated with opposition to and support for race-conscious policies? How might the framing of diversity, bias, opportunity, and/or mobility affect opposition or support for race-conscious policies?

Additional Considerations
RSF rarely considers projects for which the investigators have not already fully-developed the research design, the sample framework, access to data, etc. Investigators are encouraged to submit an LOI after they have developed and pre-tested survey instruments, completed preliminary data analyses if the data are publicly available or conducted some preliminary interviews for qualitative studies.

RSF encourages methodological variety and inter-disciplinary collaboration, but all LOIs and proposals must have well-developed conceptual frameworks and research designs. Analytical models must be well-specified and research questions and hypotheses (where applicable) must be clearly stated.

Grants are available for research assistance, data acquisition, data analysis, and investigator time for conducting research and writing up results.

We are particularly interested in analyses that make use of newly available data or demonstrate novel uses of existing data, to answer emerging or long-standing questions of interest in the foundation’s program areas and special initiatives. We also support original data collection. Proposals to conduct field experiments, in-depth qualitative interviews, and ethnographies are also encouraged.

RSF receives so many applications for its limited funding that it no longer considers submissions that solely make routine use of publicly available data, such as the Current Population Survey, American Community Survey, Panel Study of Income Dynamics, National Longitudinal survey of Youth, etc. Only novel uses of these data sets, particularly ones that link publicly available data to new data sets or ones that use the restricted versions of these data will be considered.

Solicitation limitations:

All applicants (both PIs and Co-PIs) must have a doctorate. In rare circumstances, RSF may consider applications from scholars who do not hold a doctorate but can demonstrate a strong career background that establishes their ability to conduct high-level, peer-reviewed scholarly research. Students may not be applicants.

Other information:

Funding
There are two levels of funding for core grants, Trustee-approved grants and Presidential-Authority grants.  The maximum grant amount for a Trustee grant is $200,000, including 15% indirect costs.  Grants up to $75,000 are considered Presidential-Authority grants.  RSF has 3 funding cycles per year and only considers proposals that are invited following review of an initial letter of inquiry. After peer review, about 15% of those who submit an LOI will receive an invitation to submit a full proposal.  The final funding rate for core research grants is approximately 6-10% of submitted LOIs.