Empowering Young Minds: STEM Grants for Elementary Schools

August 6, 2026 | Chandra Dhopatkar | EDUCATION & TRAINING, Funding/Grants, Middle/Elementary

Elementary students collaborate on robotics, coding, engineering design, and hands-on STEM activities in a modern classroom, illustrating how STEM grants can expand inquiry, creativity, and problem-solving opportunities for young learners.

Funding information and application statuses were reviewed on August 6, 2026. Grantmakers may revise deadlines, eligibility rules, award amounts, and priorities. Educators should confirm all details on the linked official program page before applying.

Elementary STEM funding is often discussed as a smaller version of secondary-school funding: fewer machines, simpler robots, and lower-cost laboratory materials. That framing misses the real opportunity.

In the elementary grades, STEM grants can shape how children understand knowledge itself. A well-designed project teaches students that science is something they can investigate, mathematics is something they can use, engineering is something they can improve, and technology is something they can create with—not merely consume.

The challenge is that elementary science and engineering are frequently under-resourced and receive less instructional attention than literacy and mathematics. The National Academies’ consensus report, Science and Engineering in Preschool Through Elementary Grades, concluded that young children are capable of sophisticated scientific and engineering thinking, while also finding that elementary science receives comparatively little time, funding, and institutional priority.

STEM grants can help correct that imbalance. They can fund project materials, outdoor laboratories, robotics and coding centers, measurement tools, teacher learning, family engagement, and after-school programs. Yet the strongest grants do more than deliver supplies. They create a repeatable system in which students ask questions, gather evidence, build models, test solutions, revise ideas, and explain what they learned.

For elementary schools, the most important funding question is therefore not, “What can we buy?” It is, “What kind of thinking will this investment make possible?”

Key Takeaways

Elementary STEM grants should build investigation, design, reasoning, and communication—not simply provide entertaining activities.
Several credible teacher-facing opportunities have fall 2026 dates, including Toshiba America Foundation, AFCEA, and Fund for Teachers.
Most large federal funding streams reach elementary schools through districts, states, universities, nonprofits, or after-school partnerships rather than direct teacher applications.
Integrated projects can strengthen science, mathematics, literacy, engineering, and student discourse at the same time.
Small grants are especially valuable as pilots that generate evidence for larger school, district, foundation, or federal requests.
The strongest proposals budget for teacher learning, accessibility, consumables, storage, maintenance, and assessment alongside student materials.

Why This Matters

Early STEM education is not premature career training. It is the development of curiosity, evidence-based reasoning, design habits, collaboration, and confidence before students begin deciding which subjects are “for people like me.”

Why Elementary STEM Funding Deserves Its Own Strategy

Elementary schools operate under different instructional, developmental, and financial conditions than middle schools and high schools.

A secondary engineering grant may support a dedicated course, specialized instructor, competition team, or technical credential. Elementary STEM usually crosses subjects and classrooms. A single project may involve science standards, measurement, reading informational text, writing explanations, drawing models, collaborative discussion, and engineering design.

That integration is a strength, but it complicates funding.

A grant reviewer needs to understand whether the proposal is:

A classroom science investigation
A grade-level engineering unit
A schoolwide STEM laboratory
A robotics or coding center
An environmental-learning project
An after-school enrichment program
A family STEM initiative
A teacher professional-learning project
A pilot intended for district expansion

The funding source should match the project type. A teacher-facing microgrant may be ideal for a fourth-grade water-quality investigation. A schoolwide makerspace may require district capital funds, Title IV-A, foundation support, or several grants. An after-school STEM club may fit a 21st Century Community Learning Centers partnership better than a classroom grant.

The National Academies found that preschool and elementary science and engineering are constrained by limited time, uneven curriculum, insufficient professional learning, and lack of resources. Those barriers are connected. New materials will not solve a scheduling problem. A professional-development workshop will not solve the absence of consumables. A robotics kit will not create coherent instruction without curriculum, teacher preparation, and time for students to revise their designs.

The strongest funding plan addresses the system rather than only the object.

Current and Recurring STEM Funding Opportunities for Elementary Schools

The following opportunities represent different funding models. Some accept teacher-led applications, while others require school, district, nonprofit, or partner participation.

Opportunity	Best Fit and Support	Current Route and Status
Toshiba America Foundation K–5 Grants	Project-based classroom STEM; up to $1,000	K–5 teacher application; deadline October 1, 2026
AFCEA Gravely and Paige Grants	Elementary STEM, robotics and cyber learning; up to $2,000	Teacher application with principal recommendation; opens October 1, 2026
AIAA Foundation Classroom Grants	Aerospace-focused K–12 projects; up to $500	Funds paid to the school; previous cycle closed December 2, 2025
AdoptAClassroom.org STEM Fund	Periodic STEM classroom awards; spring 2026 awards were $500	Registered educators monitor future application cycles
DonorsChoose	Public-school materials and experiences funded by donors and partners	Eligible educators post vetted requests; ongoing
Fund for Teachers	Self-designed professional learning; up to $5,000 individually or $10,000 for a team	Eligible preK–12 educators; 2027 application opens October 1, 2026
Voya Unsung Heroes	Innovative K–12 classroom projects; fifty $2,000 awards plus larger top awards	Recurring educator competition; monitor the official page
Title IV, Part A	Well-rounded STEM, computer science and effective technology use	Federal formula funding accessed through state and district planning
21st Century Community Learning Centers	Before-school, after-school and summer enrichment	State-administered competitions and subgrants
EPA Environmental Education Grants	Large environmental education and community partnerships	2026 competition closed March 3; eligible organizations apply, not individual teachers
NOAA B-WET	Watershed, coastal and field-science projects	Regional eligibility and competition schedules vary

Teacher-Led Opportunities: Where Elementary Educators Can Start

Toshiba America Foundation: A focused K–5 project grant

The Toshiba America Foundation K–5 grant is one of the clearest national opportunities designed specifically for elementary STEM educators. Teachers may request up to $1,000 for project-based learning with tangible outcomes. The annual deadline is October 1.

The small award size can be a strength. It encourages a focused project that can be implemented and evaluated without requiring a districtwide initiative.

A competitive concept might include:

Students testing which materials make the most effective insulation
A schoolyard biodiversity investigation using field tools
An engineering challenge to reduce playground runoff
Simple machines used to solve a classroom or community problem
Weather instruments connected to data visualization
Plant-growth investigations with controlled variables
Accessible coding and robotics stations linked to a defined unit

The proposal should explain what students will do, what they will learn, which materials are essential, and how the teacher will evaluate the result.

“Buying science supplies” is not a project. “Students will design and test low-cost erosion-control systems, compare sediment measurements, revise their models, and present evidence-based recommendations” is.

AFCEA: Elementary STEM, robotics, and cyber learning

The AFCEA Gravely and Paige Grants provide up to $2,000 for elementary and middle-school STEM programs. AFCEA identifies robotics clubs, cyber clubs, academic programs, and other STEM-related activities as examples.

Applications open October 1, 2026, and require a principal recommendation.

The opportunity is particularly relevant for schools building:

Introductory robotics experiences
Coding and computational-thinking centers
Digital citizenship and age-appropriate cybersecurity learning
Engineering clubs
STEM family nights
Cross-grade technical mentoring
Reusable classroom maker materials

Because AFCEA’s mission is connected to science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and technical education, proposals should make the STEM substance visible. A generic technology request is weaker than a project that explains the algorithms, systems thinking, design process, or problem-solving students will practice.

AIAA: Small aerospace grants with a clear disciplinary focus

The AIAA Foundation Classroom Grant provides up to $500 for K–12 classroom projects with a STEM connection and an aerospace emphasis. The previous application cycle closed December 2, 2025, so educators should monitor the official page for the next cycle.

Possible elementary applications include:

Designing and testing paper aircraft
Investigating lift, drag, thrust, and gravity
Building parachutes under material constraints
Studying crater formation
Comparing rocket-fin designs
Creating weather-balloon or satellite models
Measuring wind and connecting data to flight

The award amount is modest, but a carefully scoped $500 project can create reusable materials, student portfolios, photographs, performance data, and a foundation for future funding.

AdoptAClassroom.org and DonorsChoose: Funding platforms rather than traditional grants

AdoptAClassroom.org and DonorsChoose operate differently from competitive foundations.

AdoptAClassroom.org allows registered educators to create classroom pages and participate in periodic funds, giveaways, and campaigns. Its spring 2026 STEM Fund offered at least 50 grants of $500, although that cycle is closed.

DonorsChoose allows eligible public-school educators to request specific resources. The organization vets requests, purchases the items when a project is funded, and ships resources to the verified school. Corporate and foundation partners may provide matching funds or selective support.

These platforms can work well for:

A defined set of classroom materials
A visible, student-centered project
A manageable funding target
A project that community donors can understand quickly
Schools without a dedicated grant writer

They also require planning. Educators should review district crowdfunding policy, avoid exposing student information, clarify ownership of materials, and ensure that the request fits curriculum and purchasing expectations.

Institution-Led Funding: The Opportunities Teachers May Not See

Some of the largest STEM resources are not advertised as “grants for elementary teachers.” They reach classrooms through district plans, state competitions, nonprofits, universities, and partnerships.

Title IV-A: Well-rounded education and effective technology use

The federal Student Support and Academic Enrichment Program, Title IV, Part A, supports three broad purposes:

Access to a well-rounded education
Improved school conditions for learning
Effective use of technology to improve achievement and digital literacy

The Department of Education lists estimated national funding of $1.38 billion. Schools do not apply independently to the federal government. Funding moves through states and districts.

Elementary educators should ask district leaders:

How are Title IV-A priorities established?
Does the district’s needs assessment identify STEM, computer science, digital literacy, or professional learning?
Can a teacher pilot be included in the next district plan?
What evidence would support expanding the program?
Which expenses are allowable under the district’s strategy?

Potential uses may include integrated STEM, computer science access, instructional technology, professional development, and other well-rounded learning activities when permitted by the plan and federal requirements.

21st Century Community Learning Centers: STEM beyond the school day

The Nita M. Lowey 21st Century Community Learning Centers program supports academic enrichment during non-school hours, particularly for children attending high-poverty and low-performing schools.

The program can create room for elementary STEM experiences that are difficult to fit into the regular day:

Extended engineering challenges
Coding clubs
Family STEM evenings
Garden and environmental projects
Maker programs
Science-literacy integration
Mathematics games and investigations
Partnerships with museums, colleges, libraries, or employers

Funding is administered through states, which make subgrants under their own competitions and rules. A teacher may participate in program design even when the district or nonprofit serves as applicant.

EPA Environmental Education Grants: Large partnerships, not individual-teacher awards

The EPA Environmental Education Grants Program supports projects that develop environmental awareness, knowledge, skills, and stewardship.

The 2026 national competition closed March 3 and anticipated up to 16 awards ranging from $200,000 to $250,000. Eligible applicants included local education agencies, nonprofits, colleges and universities, state or local agencies, and certain Tribal organizations. Individual teachers were not eligible to apply alone.

For an elementary school, the realistic path is partnership.

A district, nonprofit, university, park system, watershed organization, or environmental agency might lead a project involving:

Teacher professional learning
Schoolyard habitat investigation
Water-quality monitoring
Community science
Waste reduction
Environmental health
Student-designed stewardship
Family and community engagement

These grants require substantial planning, cost sharing, subawards, and organizational capacity. They are not a substitute for a $1,000 classroom grant, but they can expand a proven local model across multiple schools.

NOAA B-WET: The local environment as a STEM laboratory

The NOAA Bay Watershed Education and Training program supports Meaningful Watershed Educational Experiences and teacher professional development through regional competitions.

Regional eligibility matters. The Mid-Atlantic program, for example, serves specified portions of the Chesapeake and Delaware Bay watersheds, while Great Lakes and Hawaiʻi programs have their own geographic priorities.

Elementary B-WET projects can involve:

Asking questions about a local environmental issue
Conducting field investigations
Gathering and analyzing evidence
Evaluating possible solutions
Taking informed action
Reflecting on results

This framework demonstrates a broader principle for elementary STEM grants: young students do not need artificial “real-world” scenarios when the school’s own environment already contains meaningful problems to investigate.

What a Fundable Elementary STEM Project Looks Like

Strong proposals make the learning visible before describing the materials.

Science investigation

Weak concept: Buy science kits.

Fundable concept: Third-grade students will investigate how soil composition affects water infiltration. Teams will collect samples, measure infiltration rates, graph results, compare model predictions, and design a school-garden soil mixture.

Engineering design

Weak concept: Create a makerspace.

Fundable concept: Fourth-grade students will design devices that move classroom materials for a student with limited mobility. They will interview users, define criteria and constraints, build prototypes, test performance, and revise their designs.

Computer science

Weak concept: Purchase coding robots.

Fundable concept: Second-grade students will develop and debug sequences that guide a floor robot through a community map, then explain how changing an algorithm affects the route.

Environmental STEM

Weak concept: Start a recycling program.

Fundable concept: Fifth-grade students will audit cafeteria waste, classify and quantify materials, analyze patterns, design interventions, and measure whether the changes reduce waste over six weeks.

Integrated literacy and STEM

Weak concept: Read books about inventors.

Fundable concept: Students will analyze an informational text describing a community problem, compare proposed solutions, design and test a prototype, and write an evidence-based explanation defending their final design.

Designing for Children Without Making the STEM Superficial

Age-appropriate does not mean intellectually empty.

Elementary students can engage in authentic STEM practices when the task is structured carefully. They can:

Ask investigable questions
Identify patterns
Use simple measurement tools
Create and revise models
Define a problem
Compare materials
Test a design
Record observations
Interpret graphs
Explain cause and effect
Use evidence to support a claim
Communicate findings

The complexity should come from the reasoning, not from unnecessary equipment.

A fourth-grade class may learn more from repeatedly testing a simple cardboard structure than from watching a teacher demonstrate an expensive machine. A first-grade class can practice computational thinking with physical sequence cards before using a robot. A school garden can support richer systems thinking than a collection of disconnected experiments.

Grant reviewers often recognize this distinction. A proposal is stronger when the technology is necessary for the learning rather than the attraction around which the learning is later assembled.

Classroom Impact

The goal is not to make STEM look exciting for one afternoon. The goal is to make investigation and design part of how students learn throughout the year.

Budgeting Beyond the Box

Elementary STEM budgets often underestimate the unglamorous expenses that determine whether a project succeeds.

Budget Area	Examples	Planning Question
Core materials	Sensors, robotics components, measuring tools, construction materials	What specific student task requires each item?
Consumables	Batteries, tape, cardboard, soil, seeds, craft materials, replacement components	Can the school afford another year?
Storage	Labeled bins, charging station, secure cabinet, mobile cart	Where will materials live between lessons?
Accessibility	Adaptive scissors, switch interfaces, visual instructions, alternative grips	Can every student participate meaningfully?
Teacher learning	Workshop, planning time, coaching, curriculum resources	Does the teacher have the knowledge to use the materials well?
Safety	Goggles, gloves, sanitation materials, tool controls, first-aid supplies	Has the activity been reviewed for age and environment?
Documentation	Rubrics, student portfolios, printing, data tools	How will the school demonstrate learning?
Maintenance	Replacement parts, calibration, software renewals	Who is responsible when something stops working?

Schools should also confirm whether grant-funded materials remain in the classroom, belong to the school, or must be tracked as district property.

Equity Should Be Designed Into the Project

Elementary STEM grants can broaden opportunity, but they can also unintentionally concentrate it.

A school should ask:

Is the project part of the regular school day or limited to students who can remain after school?
Does participation require family transportation?
Are students selected based on prior achievement or teacher nomination?
Can students with disabilities use the tools?
Are instructions accessible to multilingual learners?
Do examples connect with students’ communities and experiences?
Are all students given meaningful technical roles?
Will one grade or classroom receive resources unavailable to peers?

Possible design responses include:

Implementing the project during core instruction
Rotating reusable kits among classrooms
Funding transportation and family communication
Providing adaptive interfaces and materials
Using multilingual visual instructions
Structuring team roles so every student measures, builds, records, or explains
Collecting participation and outcome data by student group
Building teacher collaboration into the project

Equity is more persuasive when it changes the schedule, budget, materials, or assessment—not when it appears only as a sentence about serving diverse learners.

Professional Learning Is Part of the Infrastructure

The National Academies emphasized that many elementary educators have limited preparation in science and engineering content and need sustained professional learning.

That does not imply that elementary teachers lack expertise. Their knowledge of child development, literacy, classroom culture, differentiation, and integrated instruction is essential. The funding challenge is to combine that expertise with deeper confidence in scientific practices, engineering design, computational thinking, and assessment.

Fund for Teachers supports self-designed professional learning. The 2027 application opens October 1, 2026. Eligible individuals may request up to $5,000, while teams may request up to $10,000.

An elementary educator might propose a fellowship to:

Study coastal ecology and create a local watershed unit
Learn from children’s engineering programs
Explore Indigenous environmental knowledge with appropriate community guidance
Investigate school-garden systems and food science
Attend a specialized elementary computer-science institute
Study museum-based inquiry and redesign classroom assessment
Learn inclusive maker practices for students with disabilities

The proposal should begin with a problem of practice. Travel or attendance is the method, not the outcome.

From a $500 Pilot to a Schoolwide Program

Small grants can produce disproportionate value when schools treat them as research-and-development funding.

Stage 1: Pilot

A teacher receives $500 for simple environmental sensors and tests a four-week investigation.

Stage 2: Document

The teacher collects student work, a performance rubric, implementation notes, participation data, photographs, and a list of recurring costs.

Stage 3: Improve

The unit is revised based on misconceptions, equipment problems, accessibility barriers, and student feedback.

A grade-level team or instructional coach reviews the evidence. Another classroom replicates the project.

Stage 5: Scale

The school or district uses local evidence to pursue foundation funding, Title IV-A support, a 21st CCLC partnership, or a larger environmental-education grant.

The pilot does not need to prove that the project will work everywhere. It needs to answer practical questions that make the next investment less risky.

A Practical Grant-Writing Framework

1. State the instructional problem

Avoid broad statements such as “students need more STEM.”

Use a defined limitation:

Students study weather patterns but do not collect local data, compare forecasts with measurements, or explain discrepancies using evidence.

2. Describe the student work

A reviewer should be able to picture the lesson.

Students will construct simple weather instruments, record daily observations, compare their data with a professional forecast, graph temperature and precipitation, and explain differences.

3. Define measurable outcomes

Possible outcomes include:

Students accurately use a measurement tool.
Students revise a model after testing.
Students distinguish an observation from an inference.
Students support a claim with evidence.
Students debug a sequence.
Students explain how a design meets criteria and constraints.
More students identify themselves as capable science or engineering learners.

4. Build the budget from the learning

Every item should have a job.

Item	Student Task	Evidence
Thermometers and rain gauges	Collect repeated weather measurements	Data table and graph
Building materials	Construct and revise instruments	Design journal
Storage bins	Organize tools for classroom rotation	Implementation log
Visual vocabulary cards	Support multilingual and developing readers	Student explanation
Replacement materials	Repeat testing across classrooms	Replication data

5. Explain feasibility

Address:

Schedule
Teacher preparation
Classroom management
Safety
Storage
Technology requirements
Purchasing
Accessibility
Family communication
Partner roles

6. Explain what happens after the award

Identify which materials are reusable, what must be replenished, how colleagues will learn the unit, and how the school will use the evidence.

Common Mistakes Elementary Schools Make

Treating engagement as the only outcome

Students enjoying a project is valuable, but it does not show what they learned.

Buying too many different tools

A small number of well-supported materials may be more effective than a cart containing disconnected devices.

Designing a one-day spectacle

STEM nights and special events can build visibility, but a grant should ideally influence sustained instruction.

Forgetting reading and writing demands

Young students may understand the science but struggle to document it. Include visual models, oral explanation, shared writing, vocabulary support, and age-appropriate recording tools.

Reserving STEM for “advanced” students

Curiosity, investigation, and design should not be rewards limited to students already performing above grade level.

Ignoring teacher learning

A new robot or sensor platform can remain unused when training is inadequate.

Failing to verify district policy

Crowdfunding, software, photographs, volunteers, field trips, and equipment may require prior approval.

Calling any hands-on activity STEM

Hands-on is not enough. Students need a question, problem, evidence, design decision, mathematical relationship, algorithm, or explanatory task.

Elementary STEM Grant Readiness Checklist

Before applying, confirm that:

The project serves a defined grade, class, or student group.
The instructional problem is documented.
Students will perform specific STEM practices.
The project aligns with curriculum and standards.
The equipment is necessary rather than decorative.
Teacher preparation is adequate.
The project includes accessibility supports.
Safety has been reviewed.
Storage and charging are planned.
Recurring consumables are identified.
Purchasing rules are understood.
The fiscal recipient is clear.
Outcomes extend beyond participation.
Assessment tools are ready.
The project can be sustained or replicated.
The application follows the funder’s exact rules.

Questions to Ask Your Program

How much instructional time do elementary students currently receive in science and engineering?
Which STEM practices are already embedded in the curriculum, and which are missing?
What can students not currently investigate, measure, build, program, or explain?
Does the proposed funding solve an instructional problem or merely add equipment?
Can the project strengthen literacy and mathematics without weakening the science or engineering?
Which students may be excluded by scheduling, transportation, selection, language, disability, or cost?
What professional learning will teachers need?
How will student thinking be documented?
What costs recur after the grant ends?
Can the project begin as a pilot and later scale?
Which district, nonprofit, university, museum, library, or community partner could strengthen the proposal?
Which funding lane—teacher microgrant, crowdfunding, district formula funds, after-school funding, or institutional grant—best fits the project?

What to Watch Next

Computational thinking before formal coding

Elementary computer-science funding will increasingly support sequencing, decomposition, pattern recognition, debugging, data representation, and systems thinking—not just screen-based coding.

Responsible introduction to artificial intelligence

Schools will need age-appropriate approaches that explain patterns, data, human judgment, errors, privacy, and verification without turning elementary AI instruction into product training.

Place-based environmental learning

Environmental grants are well suited to elementary education because local schoolyards, parks, gardens, waterways, weather, and waste systems provide observable phenomena and authentic problems.

Integrated curriculum with protected science substance

Integration will remain important, but schools must avoid using science merely as a theme for reading instruction. Students need time to investigate phenomena and engage in scientific and engineering practices.

More demand for evidence of equitable access

Grantmakers will increasingly expect schools to show who participates, which barriers have been removed, and whether the opportunity reaches students historically excluded from advanced STEM experiences.

Greater district oversight of crowdfunding and classroom technology

As teachers seek funding through platforms and corporate programs, districts will need clearer policies governing privacy, procurement, materials ownership, cybersecurity, and reporting.

Frequently Asked Questions About Elementary STEM Grants

Can an individual elementary teacher apply for a STEM grant?

Yes. Toshiba America Foundation, AFCEA, AIAA, Fund for Teachers, and some classroom-funding platforms accept teacher-led applications. The money or materials may still be administered by the school or another fiscal recipient.

What is the best STEM grant for an elementary classroom?

The best grant is the one whose grade range, purpose, award size, timing, and allowable expenses closely match the project. Toshiba is a strong fit for a focused K–5 project, while AFCEA may fit robotics or cyber-related learning. Larger schoolwide projects usually require institutional funding.

Can grants pay for elementary robotics?

Yes, when robotics is an allowable expense and is connected to a defined learning plan. The proposal should explain what students will program, test, debug, measure, or explain.

Can a grant fund a school makerspace?

Possibly, but a complete makerspace often exceeds a single classroom grant. Schools may need a combination of foundation support, district funds, Title IV-A, local donations, and staged implementation.

Can Title IV-A support elementary STEM?

Title IV-A can support access to a well-rounded education and effective use of technology when the activity fits the district’s plan and federal requirements. Schools access the funding through district and state processes rather than a direct teacher application.

Are after-school STEM programs eligible for federal funding?

The 21st Century Community Learning Centers program supports academic enrichment during non-school hours, especially for students in high-poverty and low-performing schools. States administer competitions and subgrants.

Can private schools apply for elementary STEM grants?

Eligibility varies. Toshiba supports public and nonprofit private schools, while DonorsChoose primarily serves eligible public-school educators. Each program’s current rules should be reviewed carefully.

Where should schools look for local grants?

Search community foundations, education foundations, utilities, manufacturers, hospitals, credit unions, service clubs, environmental groups, museums, libraries, colleges, workforce boards, and parent organizations. Local funding is often tied to community priorities rather than labeled specifically as “STEM.”

TechEd Magazine Perspective

Elementary STEM grants matter because early schooling is where students begin forming durable beliefs about intelligence, ability, and belonging.

A grant-funded project can show a child that a failed prototype is not failure but evidence. It can show that mathematics helps answer real questions, that reading supports investigation, and that technical ideas improve through collaboration and revision.

But the value does not reside in the robot, sensor, garden, or kit.

The value resides in the instructional system built around it: a teacher prepared to guide inquiry, time to test and revise, access for every learner, meaningful assessment, and a plan for the project to outlive the initial award.

The best elementary STEM grants do not simply make school more entertaining. They give children greater authority as observers, designers, investigators, and explainers of the world.