Bill Overview
Title: Strengthening STEM Ecosystems Act
Description: This bill authorizes the award of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) ecosystem grants. STEM ecosystem means a network, consortium, or multi-sector partnership that is united by a collective vision of supporting participation in STEM through the creation of accessible, inclusive STEM learning experiences and opportunities with a broad range of nonfederal partners, including pre-K through grade 12 schools. The bill authorizes the National Science Foundation (NSF) to award competitive grants to eligible entities to be used for activities that draw on the expertise of those entities to improve STEM learning, the STEM network or community of practice, and workforce development, including to share best practices. The bill states that the purpose of a grant is to leverage the expertise, depth of cross-sector partnerships, and equity focus of STEM ecosystems to enhance the value of STEM-intensive organizations in improving STEM learning to address immediate and long-term STEM workforce and economic needs in states and communities. No fewer than 25% of grants awarded under this bill and 25% of the total amount awarded shall be made to eligible entities that serve jurisdictions that participate in the Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR).
Sponsors: Sen. Kelly, Mark [D-AZ]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved in or benefiting from STEM ecosystems worldwide
Estimated Size: 120000000
- The bill aims to impact STEM ecosystems, which suggests it will affect educational institutions, students, teachers, and STEM-related organizations.
- Pre-K through grade 12 schools are explicitly mentioned, indicating that students in this range will be impacted.
- By involving the National Science Foundation and focusing on STEM workforce development, the bill is likely to affect current STEM professionals and job seekers looking to enter the STEM fields.
- The engagement with nonfederal partners suggests a widespread impact on various sectors and organizations involved in STEM education and the STEM workforce.
- The Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) component indicates targeting of areas historically underfunded in STEM research, likely affecting populations in those geographies.
Reasoning
- The policy impacts a wide range of demographics within the STEM ecosystem, including students, educators, and various organizational stakeholders.
- Given the budgetary constraints and the reach of the policy, not every region or community will experience direct effects immediately, but those involved in EPSCoR jurisdictions may see more significant short-term impacts.
- Wellbeing impacts will vary based on the degree of direct policy interaction; teachers and students in enhanced STEM programs might see more notable improvements.
Simulated Interviews
student (Vermont)
Age: 16 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am excited about the possibility of having more STEM opportunities at my school.
- I hope this program includes hands-on learning as that helps me understand better.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
STEM educator (California)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Professional development opportunities in STEM ecosystems are crucial for teachers.
- This policy can help update our curriculum and teaching methods.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
University professor (Alabama)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- EPSCoR-targeted funding can give our students exposure to resources they never had before.
- It's about time our state got more attention in STEM development.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
STEM professional (New York)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Connecting my skills with young students through the STEM ecosystem is promising.
- I look forward to more volunteer opportunities to inspire the next generation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
student (Texas)
Age: 11 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I really hope we get more robotics kits at school because it's my favorite subject.
- Learning with technology makes school more fun.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Parent (Oregon)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I want my children to have more exposure to STEM fields at school.
- This policy sounds promising if it means more resources for schools.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
STEM organization manager (Kansas)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Funding like this could expand our outreach programs significantly.
- Having more resources means more children can engage with STEM early on.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
College student (Illinois)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Enhancing STEM ecosystems will help students like me connect with industry leaders.
- It could mean more scholarships or internships.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
STEM curriculum developer (Massachusetts)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Integrating STEM ecosystems into our material can set a new standard for educational content.
- We need to be at the forefront of this movement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired engineer (Nebraska)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I can see this policy fostering future STEM leaders.
- I want to see our state take full advantage of this opportunity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)
Year 2: $160000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $190000000)
Year 3: $170000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $200000000)
Year 5: $180000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $210000000)
Year 10: $200000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $230000000)
Year 100: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- The effectiveness of the grant distribution and administration by the NSF.
- The readiness and engagement of nonfederal partners and their capability to contribute effectively to STEM ecosystems.
- Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to measure the impact on STEM learning and workforce development.
- Potential leveraging of additional nonfederal funds or resources to maximize the impact of federal grants.