FY2027_305J.pdf

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION RESEARCH

Assistance Listing Number (ALN): 84.305J

From Seedlings to Scale Grants Program Request for Applications

Letter of Intent October 29, 2026 https://iesreview.ed.gov/LOI/LOISubmit

Application Package Available

October 16, 2026 https://www.grants.gov

Application Deadline 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time on December 11, 2026 https://www.grants.gov

Possible Start Dates June 1, 2027

See the companion IES Application Submission Guide (https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide) for guidance on preparing and submitting applications through Grants.gov.

https://iesreview.ed.gov/LOI/LOISubmit https://www.grants.gov/ https://www.grants.gov/ https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide

Table of Contents

Part I: Overview A. Introduction B. C-STEP — Coordinating Systems to Translate Evidence into Policy and Practice – Phase One C. General Requirements

1. Award Limits

2. Education Setting

D. Getting Started

1. Technical Assistance for Applicants

2. Letter of Intent

3. Eligible Applicants

4. Project Team

5. RFA Organization and the IES Application Submission Guide

6. Ensuring Your Application is Forwarded for Scientific Peer Review

E. Changes in the FY 2027 Request for Applications Part II: Program Requirements and Recommendations

A. Phase One Scope of Work B. Project Narrative Requirements and Recommendations

1. Project Narrative Requirements

2. Recommendations for Strong Applications

Part III: Preparing Your Application A. Overview B. General Formatting

1. Page and Margin Specifications

2. Page Numbering

3. Spacing

4. Font and Type Size

5. Citations

C. Required and Optional Appendices

1. Appendix A: Engagement and Dissemination Plan (Not Applicable/Do Not Submit)

2. Appendix B: Response to Reviewers (Not Applicable/Do Not Submit)

3. Appendix C: Supplemental Materials (Optional)

4. Appendix D: Letters of Agreement (Optional)

5. Appendix E: Data Sharing and Management Plan (Not Applicable/Do Not Submit)

6. Appendix F: Alignment with SEER 27 (Required)

D. Other Narrative Content

1. Project Summary

2. Bibliography and References Cited

3. Human Subjects Narrative

4. Biographical Sketches for Key Personnel

Part IV: Competition Regulations and Review Criteria A. Funding Mechanisms and Restrictions

1. Mechanism of Support

2. Funding Available

3. Special Considerations for Budget Expenses

4. Program Authority

5. Applicable Regulations

6. General Terms and Conditions

7. Continuation Awards

B. Additional Requirements

1. Pre-Award

2. Post-Award

C. Overview of Application and Scientific Peer Review Process

1. Submitting Your Letter of Intent

2. Resubmissions and Multiple Submissions

3. Application Processing

4. Scientific Peer Review Process

5. Review Criteria for Scientific Merit

6. Award Decisions

Part V: Compliance and Responsiveness Checklist Part VI: Program Code

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 1

Part I: Overview

A. Introduction The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) provides scientific evidence to improve education practice and policy and shares that evidence in ways that can be used by educators, parents, policymakers, researchers, and the public. IES was established by the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (ESRA – P.L. 107-279), in part to improve academic achievement and attainment, and access to educational opportunities for all learners (ESRA, § 111.b.1.B), with a particular focus on low-performing learners (ESRA, § 115.a.1) and those lacking access to high-quality educational opportunities (ESRA, § 115.a.2.A and 115.a.2.B).

In carrying out its mission, IES must ensure that our work and the work we fund is objective, secular, neutral, and nonideological; free of partisan political influence; and free of racial, cultural, gender, or regional bias (ESRA, § 111.b.2).

Within IES, the National Center for Education Research (NCER) supports a program of field-initiated research to build knowledge and understanding of education practice and policy.

In this Request for Applications (RFA), NCER invites applications for the From Seedlings to Scale Grants program (ALN 84.305J) as part of the Accelerate, Transform, and Scale (ATS) Initiative. IES models programs in the ATS Initiative on the federal government’s Advanced Research Projects Agencies (ARPAs) and the National Institutes of Health Common Fund, to generate exceptionally innovative solutions to high-priority issues in education.

Through the From Seedlings to Scale (S2S) Grants program, IES will invest in innovative ideas within an identified focus area through three phases of increasing funding and duration to support ideas as they grow from seedlings to scalable solutions. Projects will incorporate high-quality research, robust solution development, and attention to sustainability and scaling throughout all phases.

Solving big problems requires taking big leaps. In its S2S program, IES is looking for breakthrough solutions to big problems that persist at all levels of the education system. Those solutions may be one or a combination of education products, processes, and state or local policies. Solutions developed under S2S should be both comprehensive, meaning they seek to address the entirety—rather than just one aspect—of a problem, and seamless, meaning they minimize technological, human, and systemic frictions and can be successfully implemented within education settings.

When brainstorming possible solutions, applicants to the S2S program will need to consider questions such as:

• What is getting in the way of implementing evidence-based practices? How can we reimagine the status quo and innovate to achieve dramatically better outcomes for all students?

• What insights from other fields have the potential to improve the alignment of structures, policies and resources within education systems to allow for transformational systems-level change?

• What makes your solution innovative enough that it might finally solve the identified seemingly intractable challenge facing education, and ultimately lead to improved outcomes for students?

The S2S program invites bold thinkers to apply for funding to grow their transformative ideas from seedlings to scalable solutions. The program is designed to ground that growth in high-quality research and development (R&D). Its phased structure scaffolds sustained attention to both users’ needs and the solution’s effectiveness at improving students’ education outcomes.

Throughout three phases, teams will conduct R&D to refine their understanding of the problem being addressed, to evolve their solution’s theory of change, and to gather evidence of whether—and if so, how and how much—the solution improves education systems and students’ education outcomes. A living document, a solution’s theory of change describes how the solution will work. This includes a description

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 2 of the core components of the solution, how users will interact with the solution, and how those interactions will result in the intended outcomes. All components and connections in the theory of change should be supported by existing evidence or should be considered hypotheses to be tested. As the project progresses, teams will test those hypotheses and update their theory of change to incorporate new data and evidence. IES will provide R&D-focused training and resources to project teams throughout the project period via the ATS Hub (https://ats-hub.org/).

Phase One – Seedling Stage. This phase represents the seedling, a new theory of change and/or educational approach that is just beginning to take root. The work in this stage is in its infancy. During Phase One, teams will have one year to clarify their understanding of the specific problem their project seeks to address, refine their theory of change and the resulting solution they propose to develop through engagement with relevant stakeholders, and build out a detailed plan for further development and testing.

Phase One grantees are not expected to develop a fully functioning solution but should develop an early-stage prototype. At the end of this stage, it should be clear that the proposed solution could meet the needs of stakeholders but still requires further development and refinement before testing and scaling.

At the end of Phase One, teams will have an opportunity to apply for Phase Two funding. Strong Phase One activities should result in compelling evidence that the solution is worth further investment in Phase Two. IES expects that many teams will not progress past Phase One. Once vetted, some seemingly promising ideas may not be feasible while others may lack strong alignment to users’ needs.

Phase Two – Early Growth. Here, the prototype develops into a usable solution that improves student outcomes in a limited setting. Phase Two projects will be selected based on the strength of Phase One activities and Phase Two plans, as evaluated by peer review. Phase Two teams will have two years of funding to develop their concept into a fully functioning solution and refine it as they identify needed improvements, including those that will support scaling. Teams will also test the impact of the solution on students’ education outcomes.

Phase Three – Scaling Up. IES may, at its discretion, support additional work in Phase Three. During Phase Three, teams will bring the innovation to maturation, focus on refining the solution based on learning from Phase Two, deploying and evaluating the impact of the solution across multiple settings and contexts, and solidifying the foundation to scale the solution to users. At the end of this phase, the innovation is usable and improves student outcomes at scale, demonstrating evidence-based impact across diverse education settings.

For the FY 2027 S2S competition, IES invites applications for Phase One projects under the C-STEP — Coordinating Systems to Translate Evidence into Policy and Practice focus area. More details about the expectations for Phase One projects are described in Part II.

For fiscal year (FY) 2027, IES intends to fund up to 12 C-STEP Phase One projects. IES may consider making additional awards to high-quality applications that remain unfunded after 12 awards are made should resources permit.

IES expects all IES-funded research to implement the Standards for Excellence in Education Research, or SEER (https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/standards-excellence-education-research-seer). The 2027 Standards (SEER 27) are organized into 4 domains.

• Domain 1. Objectivity and Scientific Integrity

• Domain 2. Relevance

• Domain 3. Open Science

• Domain 4. Intervention Research

Each application for IES funding is required to describe how their project is aligned with applicable standards in SEER 27 (see Appendix F).

https://ats-hub.org/ https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/standards-excellence-education-research-seer

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 3

B. C-STEP — Coordinating Systems to Translate Evidence into Policy and Practice – Phase One What if education and policy leaders had the tools to rapidly and coherently incorporate evidence about the policies, practices, and programs with the greatest potential to address intractable problems in their education system so that the education outcomes of their students are dramatically improved?

Advances in technology, coupled with a growing evidence base in education, have created a significant opportunity for breakthrough, systems-level solutions. State and local education leaders often know the outcomes they seek to achieve, such as improved reading achievement, but may struggle to identify the underlying factors that impede progress. While leaders may recognize a proximal cause, such as low-quality instructional materials, other factors (e.g., chronic absenteeism) may also contribute to poor student outcomes but not be immediately apparent.

Increasingly, data from across education systems can be integrated to examine multiple factors that influence outcomes. When paired with evidence about what works, for whom, and under what conditions, such data can enable leaders to model potential interventions and anticipate their likely effects before implementing changes. However, the complexity and fragmentation of data and evidence across education systems make evidence-informed decision-making challenging.

Key questions remain:

• How can education leaders identify the factors that are most critical to address at a given point in time and most likely to improve student outcomes?

• How can they determine which evidence-based programs, policies, and practices are both responsive to those factors and feasible within their local context?

• How can they identify the conditions necessary for successful implementation, estimate the full costs of implementation, and determine which resources can be leveraged to support it?

More broadly, how can education leaders use complex and interconnected data to improve system performance and student outcomes, both now and in the future? What interoperable technologies can address these needs and be integrated into a comprehensive solution suite for education leaders?

Artificial intelligence and related technologies have the potential to address these challenges. Applications of AI and technology could include knowledge networks that connect evidence on programs, practices, policies, and implementation costs; dashboards that illuminate key system inputs and outcomes; tools that identify both intended and unintended consequences of implementation; and modeling platforms that allow users to explore how alternative implementation strategies may affect outcomes. Together, these technologies could provide school-, district-, and state-level leaders with actionable roadmaps for improving implementation and student success.

Lessons from other sectors may yield valuable insights. Education is not unique in facing complex challenges shaped by multiple interacting factors. Systems thinking and modern technological infrastructure have transformed sectors such as healthcare and business, yet these approaches remain underutilized in education. Because innovation often emerges at the intersection of disciplines and sectors, IES seeks ideas inspired by successful technological solutions from other fields that have the potential to transform education research and practice.

C-STEP seeks to develop and rigorously test innovative AI- and technology-enabled solutions that help education systems intentionally integrate evidence-based products, processes, and policies to improve outcomes for prekindergarten through grade 12 students. Proposed solutions should reflect a deep understanding of the systems in which they operate and enable education leaders to align resources, anticipate impacts, and overcome implementation barriers, thereby strengthening the connection between research, policy, and practice.

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 4

Strong proposals will address the root causes of implementation failure rather than focus on a single proximal cause impeding progress. IES expects solutions to be grounded in rigorous research on complex systems and organizational change and encourages applicants to draw on expertise from diverse scientific disciplines and industry sectors. Collectively, the projects funded through this program should make meaningful progress toward equipping education systems with the tools needed to implement and scale evidence-based policies, programs, and practices that produce dramatically improved outcomes for learners.

C. General Requirements Applications must meet the general requirements below to receive scientific peer review.

1. Award Limits

The maximum award amount and duration for a S2S C-STEP Phase One project is $500,000. The maximum grant duration is 1 year. Applicants to this program must not exceed the limits on award duration and cost per year and should request the actual duration and amount of funding necessary to conduct the proposed scope of work, rather than the maximums allowable by IES.

In your application, provide a detailed budget justification that explains how the requested costs are allowable, allocable, and reasonable (see 2 CFR 200, Subpart E; https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title- 2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-E) and reflect the proposed scope of work. See the IES Application Submission Guide (https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide) for information about completing the SF 424 Research and Related Budget form that is included in the application package available through Grants.gov and for information about what should be included in the budget justification.

2. Education Setting

Your proposed solution must be relevant to education in the United States and must address factors under the control of U.S. education systems.

D. Getting Started

1. Technical Assistance for Applicants

IES offer virtual office hours (https://ies.ed.gov/funding/help) for general guidance on grant writing and submitting your application and choosing the appropriate competition. The ATS-Hub also provides resources for applicants to this competition (https://ats-hub.org/resources/?tx_category=applicant-support).

The program officer for this grant competition is Dr. Akilah Nelson (Akilah.Nelson@ed.gov).

2. Letter of Intent IES strongly encourages applicants to submit a letter of intent on the IES Peer Review website (https://iesreview.ed.gov/LOI/LOISubmit). The letter of intent is non-binding and optional but strongly recommended. IES staff use the information in letters of intent to identify the expertise needed for the scientific peer review panels and to secure enough reviewers to handle the anticipated number of applications. See Part IV.C.1 for more information on what to include in your letter of intent.

3. Eligible Applicants Institutions that have the ability and capacity to conduct scientifically valid research are eligible to apply.

Eligible applicants include, but are not limited to, institutions of higher education and non-profit, for-profit, public, or private organizations and entities.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-E https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-E https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide https://ies.ed.gov/funding/help https://ats-hub.org/resources/?tx_category=applicant-support https://ats-hub.org/resources/?tx_category=applicant-support mailto:Akilah.Nelson@ed.gov https://iesreview.ed.gov/LOI/LOISubmit

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 5

4. Project Team

IES R&D projects demand project teams with a wide variety of expertise to help ensure the R&D is of high quality. The range of expertise needed for projects funded through this competition is described under Team Capacity in Part II.C.2.c.

Applications should include as key personnel all team members who will make substantial contributions to the work. Describe key personnel in the personnel section of the project narrative and include their biographical sketches as file attachments in the application. Key personnel will be listed on the grant award notification (GAN) when IES makes a new award.

The Principal Investigator (PI) is the primary point of contact with IES. The PI has the authority and responsibility for the proper conduct of the R&D, including the appropriate use of federal funds and the submission of required scientific progress reports. The PI is designated by the institution submitting the application. Other personnel having authority and responsibility for the research and use of grant funds should be designated as co-Principal Investigators (co-PIs). Only one PI may be identified as the PI for the purposes of making a grant award, regardless of whether more than one person will share the authority and responsibility for leading and directing the proposed R&D. The PI and any co-PIs will be listed on the grant award notification (GAN) when a new award is made. You may identify anyone to serve as a co-PI on a grant, including members of the project team who are at different institutions or those who may be serving as a consultant. Co-Investigators (co-Is) may also be listed on the GAN at the awardee’s discretion.

While not required at the time of application, all key personnel must have a persistent identifier (PID), such as an ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID; https://orcid.org/) at the time of award. For all key personnel who have a PID at the time of application, include the PID in the biographical sketch and in the “Credential, e.g., agency login” field on the Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) form in the application package. See the IES Application Submission Guide (https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide) for more information about this form in the application package. All key personnel must have a PID as a condition of award.

5. RFA Organization and the IES Application Submission Guide

To submit a compliant, responsive, and timely application, you will need to review two documents:

1. This RFA provides information on how to prepare an application that is compliant with and responsive to the requirements. Part I provides an overview of this grant program. Part II provides details on application requirements and provides recommendations for what is expected in a strong application. Part III provides information about general formatting and the other narrative content for the application. Part IV provides general information on competition regulations and the review process. Part V provides a checklist that you can use to ensure you have included all required application elements to advance to scientific peer review. Part VI provides the program code to enter in Item 4b of the SF 424 Application for Federal Assistance form.

2. The IES Application Submission Guide (https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide) provides important information about how to find, complete, and submit an application package in Grants.gov and IES-specific guidance and recommendations to help you ensure your application is complete and received without errors on time through Grants.gov.

We strongly recommend that both the PI and the authorized organization representative (AOR) read both documents.

https://orcid.org/

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 6

6. Ensuring Your Application is Forwarded for Scientific Peer Review

Only compliant and responsive applications received before the date and time deadline are peer reviewed for scientific merit and practical significance. The PI and the AOR should work together to ensure that the application meets these criteria.

a) On-time submission

• Received and validated by Grants.gov no later than 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time on December 11, 2026

b) Compliance

• Includes the required project narrative (see Part II.B)

• Adheres to all formatting requirements (see Part III.B)

• Adheres to all page limit maximums for the project narrative and appendices. IES will remove any pages above the maximum before forwarding an application for scientific peer review.

• Includes the required appendix (see Part III.C) o Appendix F: Alignment with SEER 27

c) Responsiveness

• Meets the general requirement (see Part I.C)

• Meets all project narrative requirements (see Part II.B.1)

E. Changes in the FY 2027 Request for Applications Everyone involved in preparing and submitting an application, whether new or revised, should carefully read all relevant parts of this RFA. Major changes to the From Seedlings to Scale grants program for FY 2027 are listed below and described fully in relevant sections of the RFA.

• IES updated the focus of the Phase One competition.

• IES added a new required appendix, Alignment with SEER 27. Appendix F must include information about how the project aligns with the current Standards for Excellence in Education Research (SEER; https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/standards-excellence-education-research-seer).

• IES added guidance on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in preparing grant applications to Part III.A. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the development of grant applications is allowable.

Applicants submitting a grant application must certify on the standard application form to the “true, complete, and accurate” nature of all of the contents of their grant application, regardless of whether it is generated by AI (https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2025-16571).

• IES added two new pre-award requirements.

o If your application is being considered for funding, IES program officers will review the completeness and acceptability of the information in Appendix F: Alignment with SEER 27 prior to making the new award.

o All recipients of IES research and research training funds are required to be in compliance with the research security requirements described in Part IV prior to receiving IES funding.

https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2025-16571

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 7

Part II: Program Requirements and Recommendations

A. Phase One Scope of Work The goal of Phase One is to formulate a deep understanding of the perceived need, identify a solution, articulate how the proposed solution would solve the problem, and create an early-stage prototype to demonstrate that the solution can fulfill the needs of the end users. This understanding will inform three deliverables, described in more detail below: a Proof-of-Concept Report, an Early-Stage Prototype, and an R&D Plan.

By the end of Phase One, teams should be able to answer the following questions using the ideas and data presented in their Phase One application as a starting point, and then adding the lessons learned from their Phase One work:

• What exactly are you aiming to change? How will the solution improve things?

• Do relevant stakeholders believe the specific problem the solution is addressing is a pressing problem?

• Do potential users think this solution addresses the specific problem you aim to solve? Do they believe it is worth trying?

• What are the core components that must be included in an initial, fully functioning version of the solution? How will you know if it works?

• What is your theory of change? What assumptions are embedded in the theory of change that need to be tested before building the solution?

• Do relevant stakeholders believe the solution could have a large impact on student education outcomes?

• What evidence do you have that the solution could be scaled to have broad and meaningful effects on the U.S. education system and student education outcomes?

Some examples of activities that teams could undertake to answer these questions include defining end users and their requirements, developing a needs hypothesis, developing key performance indicators or other indicators of success, defining the core components of their solution, iteratively testing a prototype to validate the problems they’re trying to solve and their proposed solution pathway, conducting a competitive analysis, or creating a customer value proposition. See the Invent stage of the Learn to Scale Toolkit for more information (https://ats-hub.org/learn-to-scale-toolkit/).

Project teams are expected to participate in capacity building activities hosted by the ATS Hub (https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/awards/accelerate-transform-scale-ats-hub; https://ats-hub.org/). Teams will receive training and resources to support team science and establishing shared language within an interdisciplinary team, upskilling in R&D approaches, entrepreneurial skills, scaling and sustainability, and other topics identified by the Hub and the needs of the teams. The Hub hosts two one-day convenings in Washington DC for all project teams. These include a workshop in late summer/early fall 2027 and a demo day in early 2028. The workshop will provide training to Phase One project teams on a to-be-identified topic identified by the ATS Hub in collaboration with the Phase One project teams and, at the demo day, teams will present an early-stage prototype of their solution to IES staff and other ATS Initiative stakeholders.

Teams will prepare to present their case that their solution should move on to Phase Two through three core Phase One deliverables. These deliverables are:

https://ats-hub.org/learn-to-scale-toolkit/ https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/awards/accelerate-transform-scale-ats-hub https://ats-hub.org/

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 8

• A Proof-of-Concept Report that documents the activities undertaken to answer the questions above and details user needs; market opportunities; solution-market fit; requirements to build and/or implement the product, process, or policy; and potential for improving students’ education outcomes. This report should also include a refined theory of change that incorporates data and information gathered in Phase One and clearly articulates the core components of the solution and how and by whom it will be implemented. The Proof-of-Concept Report should provide compelling evidence grounded in stakeholder input that the proposed solution could produce substantial improvements to student education outcomes if successfully implemented at scale. The information included in the Proof-of-Concept Report will be used to assess the likelihood that the breakthrough potential of your solution will be realized.

• An Early-Stage Prototype shared at demo day. Given the breadth of possible solution concepts across funded project teams, each team’s prototype will be unique, but all prototypes should facilitate testing aspects of design, usability, and functionality. The purpose of the Demo Day presentation is to obtain initial feedback, which will be used by grantees to refine the early-stage prototype.

• An R&D Plan, which details the work that would be undertaken in Phase Two if the project receives additional funding. This plan should include the following components:

o A timeline for Phase Two activities o A high-level description of activities that will be needed to develop a fully functioning version of the solution, including:

Testable hypotheses generated from the theory of change that will need to be validated before building a fully functioning solution. For any link in the theory of change, the team should ask, "How do we know this is true/this will happen?" If the answer for any link is unclear, it is a hypothesis that must be tested before investing resources in building the full solution.

A plan that articulates how data collection will be built into the solution to facilitate continuous improvement and research. The plan should include the meaningful constructs that are important to measure, how they are operationalized as measurable data points, and how you plan to collect and consolidate the resulting data.

A plan to refine the solution.

o A high-level description of how an impact test of the fully functioning solution on student education outcomes would be designed.

o A plan describing how key staff leading Phase Two tasks would be identified, given that the expertise and experience required for Phase One and Phase Two work will be different.

o Commitments from additional staff or partners needed to complete the Phase Two work.

o A plan for securing necessary research approvals and data access, which may include IRB approval, district or school research approvals, and data use agreements.

B. Project Narrative Requirements and Recommendations The project narrative must include three sections: Breakthrough Potential, Research and Development Strategy, and Team Capacity. The three sections of the project narrative must include the content below to be responsive to the requirements of this RFA. Applications lacking this specific content will not receive peer review.

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 9

The project narrative must adhere to the formatting guidelines (see Part III.B) and be no more than 8 pages. If the narrative exceeds this page limit, IES will remove any pages after the 8th page of the narrative.

An application that meets the project narrative requirements alone doesn’t necessarily constitute a strong application; see Recommendations for Strong Applications (Part II.C) for recommendations to improve the quality of the application.

1. Project Narrative Requirements

a) Breakthrough Potential

The purpose of this section is to explain the potential for your solution to result in a breakthrough in improving students’ education outcomes.

• You must o Identify which aspects of an evidence-informed education system your to-be-developed technological tool will address.

o Identify the student education outcome(s) your solution is intended to improve.

o Describe your proposed solution.

o Describe the PreK-12 education setting and sample that is the focus of your project.

b) Research and Development Strategy

The purpose of this section is to describe your approach to carrying out the Phase One scope of work.

• You must o Describe your team’s approach to carrying out the Phase One scope of work.

c) Team Capacity

The purpose of this section is to demonstrate that your team has the capacity to carry out the R&D activities in Phase One.

• You must o Describe your team.

2. Recommendations for Strong Applications

IES provides these recommendations to improve the quality of the application. The recommendations support (1) applicants in writing applications and (2) reviewers in evaluating applications that align with IES’s expectations of high-quality research that has transformative potential and scientific merit. IES asks reviewers to use these recommendations, in conjunction with their professional judgment and expertise, to determine application quality.

a) Breakthrough Potential

Describe your project, recognizing that this application will include initial ideas that need to be refined during Phase One. Your responses here should reflect your current thinking and should highlight areas that you intend to confirm or refine in Phase One. Responses should demonstrate understanding of the

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 10 education systems and the context(s) where the proposed solution will be implemented.

Your description should answer the following questions:

• What is the specific problem you’re trying to solve that will enable the translation of evidence into policy and practice? What data and other evidence demonstrate that this problem is a need for education leaders, educators, students, and/or communities?

• What is the proposed solution? Who is it for? How do AI and technology enable the development of the proposed solution?

• Why will it work? What practice or research evidence supports this solution?

• How will you know if it worked? What outcomes do you expect to change and on what timeline?

• Why do you think the solution will have a large impact on the education system and its students?

• Why does your idea have breakthrough potential?

o What barriers will the solution overcome?

o Why hasn’t this solution been developed yet?

o What is new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?

• What open questions need to be addressed in Phase One to increase confidence that this solution is likely to impact the education system and student education outcomes and could successfully scale?

• Who would need to be involved to adopt and implement the solution? Who are the relevant decision makers who could influence long term success?

• What is the strategy you expect to use to scale up the solution so that it has broad and meaningful impacts on the US education system?

Specify an initial theory of change that draws on insights from the education sciences and other relevant research. The theory of change should identify the mechanisms through which the proposed solution could intentionally integrate evidence and data into their system(s) so as to improve students’ education outcomes. This theory of change should describe how the solution will work, including core components, how users will interact with it, and how those interactions will result in the intended outcomes.

b) Research and Development Strategy

Describe your proposed approach to completing the Phase One scope of work outlined above.

Detail the proposed scope of work, including specific activities planned to refine your understanding of the problem, iterate on the solution concept, develop an assessment of solution-market fit, and develop an early-stage prototype.

Describe plans to address open questions about the proposed solution and how it will function to improve education outcomes at scale.

c) Team Capacity

IES encourages applicants to the S2S program to use the phased structure of the program to build out a multidisciplinary team that has experience in areas such as solution development, technological R&D, AI, human-centered design, organizational design, systems thinking, bringing solutions to market, education policy and practice, and rigorous education research. Applicants should consider including researchers

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 11 from disciplines not traditionally represented in the education sciences and individuals from technology development companies and small businesses to the extent that they would be relevant for R&D of the proposed solution.

Applicants should identify the core team that is necessary to accomplish the Phase One scope of work.

• For Phase One, only a subset of team capabilities are required, as the scope of work will focus on user and market research and solution design.

• Clearly articulate roles for each team member who will be involved in Phase One, what aspects of the scope of work they will contribute to, the amount of time they will devote to this project, and how their experience and training relate to their role.

Describe a plan for how to build out a multidisciplinary team in preparation for Phase Two, which includes an expanded scope of work that will involve a stronger emphasis on research and on developing and preparing a solution for scaling. The plan may involve training and professional development for the core Phase One project team and/or additional staff who will be added should the team be selected to progress to Phase Two.

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 12

Part III: Preparing Your Application

A. Overview The application contents—individual forms and their PDF attachments—represent the body of an application to IES. Read the IES Application Submission Guide (https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide) to learn how to prepare a complete application that is submitted on time through Grants.gov (https://www.grants.gov/).

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the development of grant applications is allowable. Applicants submitting a grant application must certify on the standard application form to the “true, complete, and accurate” nature of all of the contents of their grant application, regardless of whether it is generated by AI (https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2025-16571).

B. General Formatting To ensure that reviewers can read your applications and that all applicants have similar expectations for length and space, IES specifies the following formatting conventions. These requirements apply to the PDF file as submitted, unless otherwise specified. For an application to be compliant and sent forward for review, the applicant should ensure that each narrative section follows both the page limit maximums and the formatting guidelines below unless otherwise specified.

1. Page and Margin Specifications

For all IES grant applications, a “page” is 8.5 in. x 11 in. on one side only with 1-inch margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

2. Page Numbering

Add page numbers using the header or footer function and place them at the bottom or upper right corner for ease of reading.

3. Spacing

Text must be single spaced.

4. Font and Type Size

Use a font that is 12-point.

Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial. Font size for tables, figures, charts, and diagrams may be 10-point.

5. Citations

Use the parenthetical author-date style for citations (for example, the American Psychological Association, 2009) rather than numeric citations that correspond to the reference list.

C. Required and Optional Appendices The required project narrative (see Part II.B.) is followed by several appendices. Some of these appendices are required and some are optional. When you submit your application through Grants.gov, you will create a single PDF file that contains the project narrative and all appendices and include it as an attachment in the application package. Include appendices in alphabetical order and simply skip an appendix if it is not required for your application or if you choose not to include an optional https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2025-16571

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 13 appendix. See the IES Application Submission Guide (https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide) for more information about preparing and submitting your application using the required application package for this competition through Grants.gov (https://www.grants.gov/).

The research project narrative and appendices are critical parts of the IES application because they include the substantive content that will be reviewed for breakthrough potential and scientific merit.

1. Appendix A: Engagement and Dissemination Plan (Not Applicable/Do Not Submit) Appendix A is not applicable to this RFA. Any content will be removed prior to review of the application.

2. Appendix B: Response to Reviewers (Not Applicable/Do Not Submit)

Appendix B is not applicable to this RFA. Any content will be removed prior to review of the application.

3. Appendix C: Supplemental Materials (Optional) Appendix C must meet the general formatting guidelines and be no more than five pages. If Appendix C exceeds this page limit, IES will remove any pages after the fifth page of the appendix before it is forwarded for peer review.

In Appendix C, you may include figures, charts, or tables with supplementary information. For example, you may include a timeline for project activities, a diagram of the management structure of your project team, a visual representation of your initial theory of change, or examples of measures used to collect data and evidence from stakeholders such as surveys and observation and interview protocols.

These are the only materials that may be included in Appendix C; IES will remove all other material prior to review of the application.

4. Appendix D: Letters of Agreement (Optional)

Appendix D must meet the general formatting guidelines. There is no recommended page length for Appendix D. In Appendix D, you may provide letters of agreement from schools, colleges, districts, and/or other settings, organizations, or data sources that will participate in or provide data for the research activities and/or individuals who will serve as consultants. You may also use this appendix to provide copies of letters that provide clear evidence of the importance of the identified problem. Letters of agreement should make it clear that the author of the letter understands the nature of the problem and proposed solution, the time commitment and timing of participation, and the unique point of view they can bring to the R&D process.

Ensure that the letters reproduce well so that reviewers can easily read them. Do not reduce the size of the letters. See the IES Application Submission Guide (https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide) for guidance regarding the size of file attachments.

These are the only materials that may be included in Appendix D; IES will remove all other material prior to review of the application.

5. Appendix E: Data Sharing and Management Plan (Not Applicable/Do Not Submit) Appendix E is not applicable to this RFA. Any content will be removed prior to review of the application.

6. Appendix F: Alignment with SEER 27 (Required) In Appendix F, you must include a table describing the alignment of your application with the standards in SEER 27 (https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/standards-excellence-education-research-seer). Appendix F https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide https://www.grants.gov/

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 14 must meet the general formatting guidelines and be no more than three pages including the required table. If Appendix F exceeds this page limit, IES will remove any pages after the third page of the appendix before it is forwarded for scientific peer review.

Fill in the table below with a high-level summary of how your proposed project aligns with each domain/standard in SEER 27 and refer back to the location in the narrative where additional details about project alignment are included. If a particular domain/standard is not relevant for your project, mark not applicable.

SEER Domain/ Standard

High-level summary of how your proposed project meets these standards

Pages in Narrative and/or Appendix

Domain 1 Objectivity and Scientific Integrity

Theory and Hypotheses

Research Design

Communication of Uncertainty

Integrity

Conflicts of Interest

Domain 2 Relevance

Relevant and Student- Outcomes Focused

Engagement

Generalizability

Design for Scale Applicable only to development and impact evaluations.

Domain 3 Open Science

Pre-registration

Open Data

Open Methods

Open Access

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 15

Domain 4 Intervention Research

Only complete Domain 4 if you are conducting a development study or an impact evaluation.

Core Components

Implementation and Treatment Contrast Applicable only to impact evaluations.

High Quality Measures

Distal Outcomes

Cost and Cost- Effectiveness Analysis

Cost analysis is applicable to development and impact evaluations. Cost-effectiveness analysis is applicable only to impact evaluations.

This appendix will not be part of scientific peer review. IES program officers will be responsible for reviewing the information in this appendix.

This is the only material that may be included in Appendix F; IES will remove all other material prior to review of the application.

D. Other Narrative Content In addition to the project narrative and required and optional appendices (see above), you will also prepare a project summary, a bibliography and references cited, an exempt or non-exempt research on human subjects narrative, and biographical sketches for key personnel and consultants to include as file attachments in your application. See the IES Application Submission Guide https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide) for more information about preparing and submitting your application using the required application package for this competition on Grants.gov (https://www.grants.gov/).

1. Project Summary

You must submit the project summary as a separate PDF attachment in the application package. If your project is recommended for funding, IES will use this summary as the basis for the online abstract that is posted on the IES website. IES recommends that the project summary/abstract be two pages long and follow the format used for IES online abstracts. See the online search engine of funded research grants (https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/awards) for examples of the content to include in the project summary/abstract.

a) Title

• Title: Distinct, descriptive title for the project.

b) Project Summary

The purpose of the project summary is to provide a high-level overview that is accessible to a range of audiences, such as policymakers, practitioners, and the public. This section should use short, active sentences to briefly describe the breakthrough potential of the project, project activities, and the intended outcomes.

https://ies.ed.gov/application-submission-guide https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/awards

Posted October 16, 2026 Institute of Education Sciences | 16

• Purpose: Include a brief description of the proposed education solution, the problem to be solved, why the solution has breakthrough potential, and the expected outcomes.

• Project Activities: An overview of the Phase One project activities.

• Products: A brief description of the expected early-stage prototype the project team will develop.

2. Bibliography and References Cited

You must submit the bibliography and references cited as a separate PDF attachment in the application package. There is no recommended page length for the bibliography and references cited. You should include complete citations, including the names of all authors (in the same sequence in which they appear in the publication), titles of relevant elements such as the article/journal and chapter/book, page numbers, and year of publication for literature cited in the project narrative. As a reminder, use the author-date style for citations in the project narrative (see Part III.B.5) .

3. Human Subjects Narrative

If you are proposing to carry out any R&D with human subjects as part of your proposed Phase One activities, you must submit an exempt or non-exempt human subjects narrative as a separate PDF attachment in the application package. We do not recommend a page length for the human subjects narrative. See Information About the Protection of Human Subjects in Research Supported by the Department of Education (https://www.ed.gov/grants-and-programs/manage-your-grant/protection-of-human-subjects-research/protection-of-human-subjects-human-subjects-research-narrative) for a brief overview of principles, regulations, and policies which affect research involving human subjects in research activities supported by the Department of Education.

The U.S. Department of Education does not require certification of IRB approval at the time you submit an application. However, if an application that involves non-exempt human subjects research is recommended for funding, the designated U.S. Department of Education official will request that you obtain and send the certification within 30 days of the formal request.

4. Biographical Sketches for Key Personnel

You must…