SCIENCE, 

TECHNOLOGY, 

ENGINEERING, AND 

MATHEMATICS 

EDUCATION

Actions Needed to 

Better Assess the 

Federal Investment

Report to Congressional Requesters

March 2018

GAO-18-290

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-18-290, a report to 

congressional requesters

March 2018

SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND 

MATHEMATICS EDUCATION

Actions Needed to Better Assess the Federal 

Investment

What GAO Found

The federal investment in science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics (STEM) education programs remained relatively stable from 

fiscal years 2010 to 2016, although the number of programs declined 

from 209 to 163 (see figure). While agencies reported that many of the 

same STEM education programs existed during this time period, the 

portfolio underwent various changes, including program consolidations, 

creations, and terminations. Nearly all STEM education programs in fiscal 

year 2016 overlapped to some degree with at least one other program in 

that they offered similar services to similar groups in similar STEM fields 

to achieve similar objectives. The Committee on STEM Education, an 

interagency body responsible for implementing the federal STEM 

education strategic plan, reported it managed this overlap through 

coordination with agencies administering these programs.

Number of Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education 

Programs Reported in Fiscal Years 2010 and 2016

The Committee on STEM Education has not fully met its responsibilities 

to assess the federal STEM education portfolio. Specifically, the 

Committee has not reviewed programs’ performance assessments, as 

required by its authorizing charter, nor has it documented those 

assessments in its inventory, as required by law. Such efforts could 

encourage the use of evidenced-based practices across the portfolio—a 

key national goal of the STEM education strategic plan. These efforts 

could also enhance public awareness of the administering agencies’ 

efforts to assess programs’ performance. In addition, the Committee has 

not reported the participation rates of underrepresented groups in federal 

STEM education programs, as required by law. By reporting this 

information, the Committee could better assess whether programs are 

broadening access to groups historically underrepresented in STEM 

fields—another key goal of the strategic plan. View GAO-18-290. For more information, 

contact Melissa Emrey-Arras at (617) 788-

0534 or EmreyArrasM@gao.gov.

Why GAO Did This Study

Education programs in STEM fields are 

intended to enhance the nation's global 

competitiveness. GAO reported in 

2012 that there were more than 200 

federal STEM education programs in

fiscal year 2010. Since then, this 

portfolio of programs has changed. 

GAO was asked to review the 

landscape of federal STEM education

programs. 

This report examines (1) how the 

federal investment in STEM education 

programs changed from 2010 to 2016, 

and (2) the extent to which the STEM 

education portfolio has been assessed.

To answer these questions, GAO 

administered a web-based 

questionnaire to all federal STEM 

education programs funded in fiscal 

year 2016 and analyzed the results. 

GAO also reviewed relevant federal 

laws and agency documents, 

examined the implementation of 

relevant assessment requirements, 

and interviewed officials from relevant 

federal agencies.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making four recommendations, 

including three to the Committee on 

STEM Education to review 

performance assessments of STEM 

education programs, document those 

assessments, and report programs’

participation rates of underrepresented 

groups. The Committee on STEM 

Education agreed with GAO’s 

recommendations. 
Page i GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Letter 1

Background 3

From 2010 to 2016, the Number of STEM Education Programs 

Decreased While Spending Remained Stable, and Most 

Programs Continued to Overlap 9

Efforts to Assess Programs’ Performance and Participation Rates 

of Underrepresented Minorities Are Limited 16

Conclusions 20

Recommendations for Executive Action 21

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 22

Appendix I GAO’s Methodology for Program Identification and Data Collection 24

Appendix II Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Programs and Reported Fiscal Year 2016 Obligations 28

Appendix III Current Implementation Status of Selected COMPETES Act 

Provisions to Coordinate Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, 

and Mathematics Education 35

Appendix IV Comments from the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the 

Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 

Education 37

Appendix V GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 40

Tables

Table 1: Changes Agencies Reported in the Federal Portfolio of 

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 

(STEM) Education Programs between Fiscal Years 2010 

and 2016 26

Contents
Page ii GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Table 2: Programs Excluded from our Federal Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Inventory 27

Table 3: Federal STEM Education Programs and Reported Fiscal 

Year 2016 Obligations 28

Table 4: Current Implementation Status of Selected COMPETES 

Act Provisions to Coordinate Federal Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education 35

Figures

Figure 1: Leadership Structure for Policy on Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education 5

Figure 2: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 

(STEM) Education National Goals, Priority Investment 

Areas, and Coordination Objectives 6

Figure 3: Number of Science, Technology, Engineering, and 

Mathematics (STEM) Education Programs by Agency 

and Total Reported Spending, Fiscal Year 2016 11

Figure 4: Federal Oversight and Working Groups on Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education 15

Figure 5: Percentage of Science, Technology, Engineering, and 

Mathematics (STEM) Education Programs That Tracked 

Certain Participant Characteristics in Fiscal Year 2016 19
Page iii GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Abbreviations

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

March 23, 2018

The Honorable Trey Gowdy

Chairman

The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings

Ranking Member

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

House of Representatives

The Honorable Robert C. Scott

Ranking Member

Committee on Education and the Workforce

House of Representatives

Education programs in science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics (STEM) play an important role by preparing students for 

careers in STEM fields and are intended to enhance the nation’s global 

competitiveness. Various levels of government foster STEM education, as 

do other stakeholders, including institutions of higher education, 

professional and scientific societies, and private industries. In 2012, we 

reported that more than 200 federal STEM education programs across 13 

different agencies spent more than $3 billion in fiscal year 2010.1 We also 

found a high degree of overlap among those programs and made several 

recommendations to improve their coordination and management. You 

asked us to review the current landscape of federal STEM education 

programs. This report examines: 1) how the federal investment in STEM 

education programs changed from 2010 to 2016, and 2) to what extent 

the STEM education portfolio has been assessed.

To gather information on how the federal investment in STEM education 

changed from 2010 to 2016, we administered a web-based questionnaire 

to STEM education programs funded in fiscal year 2016. We identified 

these programs based on input from the 13 agencies that administered 

the STEM education programs we previously reported for fiscal year 

2010.2 Program officials provided information on all 163 programs funded 

 1 GAO, Science, Technology, Engineering, And Mathematics Education: Strategic 

Planning Needed to Better Manage Overlapping Programs across Multiple Agencies, 

GAO-12-108 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 20, 2012).

2 GAO-12-108

Letter
Page 2 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

in fiscal year 2016 that we determined met our definition of a STEM 

education program. For more information on our definition, program 

identification, and data collection, see appendix I. The questionnaire 

solicited information on the programs’ objectives, groups served, services 

provided, and spending, among other things, and we analyzed program 

officials’ responses. We used this information to gauge the level of 

overlap among programs funded in fiscal year 2016. We also compared 

the results to similar data previously collected for programs funded in 

fiscal year 2010.

To understand the extent to which the federal programs within the STEM 

education portfolio had been assessed, we reviewed the requirements in 

the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (COMPETES Act)3

regarding federal STEM education program assessment.4 Subsequently, 

we examined the information produced to fulfill these requirements, 

including a strategic plan and annual progress reports. We sent our initial 

determination of whether these COMPETES Act requirements had been 

fulfilled to the entities responsible for implementing them and solicited 

their views. We obtained a response from the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy as to whether the requirements had been fulfilled and 

considered any additional information the agencies provided in finalizing 

our analysis. In addition, we reviewed the assessment responsibilities of 

the Committee on STEM Education as specified in its authorizing charter 

and examined its efforts to meet those responsibilities. Further, we 

conducted a limited review to test whether program assessment 

 3 Pub. L. No. 111-358, 124 Stat. 3982.

4 For the purposes of our report, we use the term performance assessment to refer to 

agencies’ efforts to assess the effectiveness of their programs. We have previously 

reported that performance assessment is an important way to obtain evaluative 

information that can help demonstrate whether and why a program is working well. 

Agencies may use different methods to assess the performance of their programs. For 

example, performance measurement focuses on whether a program has achieved its 

objectives, expressed as measureable standards, while program evaluations typically 

examine a broader range of information on program performance and its context. See, 

GAO, Managing for Results: Enhancing Agency Use of Performance Information for 

Management Decision Making, GAO-05-927 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 9, 2005); 

Performance Measurement and Evaluation: Definitions and Relationships, 

GAO-11-646SP (Washington, D.C.: May 2011); and Program Evaluation: Strategies to 

Facilitate Agencies’ Use of Evaluation in Program Management and Policy Making, 

GAO-13-570 (Washington, D.C.: June 26, 2013).
Page 3 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

information was routinely contained within agency budget documents.5 In 

response to our questionnaire, program officials reported that 73 of the 

163 STEM education programs had been evaluated since fiscal year 

2010. From those 73, we randomly selected a nongeneralizable sample 

of 10 STEM education programs—one from each agency that reported it 

had evaluated at least one of its STEM education programs recently. We 

then searched for supporting information within the agencies’ budget

documents.

In addition, we interviewed officials responsible for coordinating federal 

STEM education efforts from the National Science Foundation and the 

Office of Science and Technology Policy. We also interviewed officials 

from the Office of Management and Budget and other federal agencies 

leading strategic interagency efforts on STEM education, including the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Departments of 

Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the Smithsonian 

Institution. Further, to inform both of our objectives, we reviewed relevant 

federal laws and regulations as well as reports on STEM education.

We conducted this performance audit from October 2016 to March 2018 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

The term “STEM education” includes educational activities across all 

grade levels—from preschool to graduate school. STEM education 

programs have a variety of primary objectives, which include preparing 

students for STEM coursework, providing postsecondary students with 

grants or fellowships in STEM fields, and improving STEM teacher 

training (see appendix I for our definition of STEM education programs).6

 5 For this review, we used the definition of performance assessment found in 

GAO-11-646SP. Therefore, if an entry referenced an evaluation or contained performance 

information, we included it in our total.

6 This definition is consistent with the definition of STEM education used in GAO-12-108.

Background

STEM Education
Page 4 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Federal STEM education programs have been created in two ways—

either by law or by federal agencies under their statutory authorities.

We previously reported that most federal STEM education programs 

overlapped to some degree with at least one other program, in that they 

offered similar services to similar groups in similar STEM fields to achieve 

similar objectives (see sidebar for definition of overlap).7

Although those programs may not be duplicative, we reported that they 

were similar enough that they needed to be well coordinated and guided 

by a robust strategic plan. And, through its strategic planning and other 

coordination efforts, the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the 

National Science and Technology Council implemented our 

recommendations to work with agencies to better align their activities with 

a government-wide strategy; develop a plan for sustained coordination; 

identify programs for potential consolidation or elimination; and assist 

agencies in determining how to better evaluate their programs.8

Enacted in 2007, the America COMPETES Act authorized several 

programs to promote STEM education.9 The America COMPETES 

Reauthorization Act of 2010 (COMPETES Act) reauthorized the America 

COMPETES Act and addresses coordination and oversight issues, 

including those associated with the coordination and potential duplication 

of federal STEM education efforts.10 The COMPETES Act required the 

Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to establish, 

under the National Science and Technology Council, the Committee on 

 7 GAO-12-108.

8 The National Science and Technology Council is the principal body within the executive 

branch that coordinates science and technology policy across the federal government’s 

research and development efforts. 

9 Pub. L. No. 110-69, 121 Stat. 572 (2007).

10 Pub. L. No. 111-358, 124 Stat. 3982. For ease of reference, for purposes of this report 

we refer to the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 as the COMPETES Act.

GAO’s Work on Duplication, Overlap,

and Fragmentation

This report, like GAO’s prior work, uses 

standard definitions to describe duplication, 

overlap, and fragmentation, among 

government programs:

• Duplication occurs when two or more 

agencies or programs are engaged in 

the same activities or provide the same 

services to the same beneficiaries.

• Overlap occurs when multiple agencies 

or programs have similar goals, engage 

in similar activities or strategies to 

achieve their goals, or aim to serve 

similar beneficiaries.

• Fragmentation refers to those 

circumstances in which more than

one federal agency (or more than one 

organization within an agency) is

involved in the same broad area of 

national need and opportunities exist

to improve service delivery.

Source: GAO, Fragmentation, Overlap, and Duplication: An 

Evaluation and Management Guide, GAO-15-49SP 

(Washington, D.C.: April 14, 2015). | GAO-18-290

America COMPETES 

Reauthorization Act of 

2010
Page 5 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

STEM Education to serve as the interagency coordination body for STEM 

education in the federal government (see fig. 1).11

Figure 1: Leadership Structure for Policy on Science, Technology, Engineering, and

Mathematics (STEM) Education

In May 2013, the Committee on STEM Education issued a 5-year 

Strategic Plan for federal STEM education efforts, as required by the 

COMPETES Act. To improve collaboration across the portfolio, the 

Strategic Plan identified five priority investment areas and two 

coordination objectives, specifying national goals for each (see fig. 2).

 11 Pub. L. No. 111-358, § 101(a), 124 Stat. 3982, 3984 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 6621(a)).
Page 6 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Figure 2: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education National Goals, Priority Investment Areas, 

and Coordination Objectives

Note: The Strategic Plan defines historically underrepresented groups as Hispanics and Latinos, 

African Americans, American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, the 

economically disadvantaged, people with disabilities, and women and girls.

The COMPETES Act also requires that the Committee create, and 

periodically update, an inventory of federal STEM education programs 

that includes documentation of program assessments and the 

participation rates of women, underrepresented minorities, and persons in 

rural areas.12

 12 42 U.S.C. § 6621(b)(6).
Page 7 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

In addition, the COMPETES Act requires that the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy publish annual reports on coordinating federal STEM 

education efforts. The law mandates that these reports include specific 

information, such as:

• a description of each federal agency’s STEM education programs 

funded in the previous and current fiscal years, as well as those 

proposed under the President’s budget request;

• the levels of funding for each participating federal agency’s programs 

described above;

• an evaluation of the levels of duplication and fragmentation of the 

programs described above; and

• a description of the progress made implementing the Strategic Plan, 

including a description of the outcome of any program assessments 

completed in the previous year, and any changes made to the 

Strategic Plan since the previous annual report.13

In January 2017, the President signed into law the American Innovation 

and Competitiveness Act, which, among other things, amended certain 

provisions of the COMPETES Act.14 The Act added some requirements 

for both the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Committee 

on STEM Education. For example, it created new mandates for the 

Committee to:

• review the measures federal agencies use to evaluate their STEM 

education programs, and

• make recommendations for reforming, terminating, or consolidating 

the federal STEM portfolio.15

 13 42 U.S.C. § 6621(d).

14 Pub. L. No. 114-329, 130 Stat. 2969 (2017).

15 Pub. L. No. 114-329, § 304(a)(3), 130 Stat. 2969, 3006 (2017) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 

6621(b)(8), (10)).
Page 8 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Any such recommendations for an upcoming fiscal year are to be 

included in the Office of Science and Technology Policy’s annual report.16

In 2014, the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the 

federal agencies that administer STEM education programs, established 

STEM education as a cross-agency priority goal.17 The Office of Science 

and Technology Policy and the National Science Foundation led the 

oversight and management of this goal, and as part of this work, goal 

leaders from these agencies identified milestones that aligned with the 

Strategic Plan’s priority investment areas and coordination objectives 

(see fig. 2). For example, goal leaders reported progress toward meeting 

key milestones associated with improving STEM instruction. In 2017, to 

ensure alignment with the current administration’s priorities, the Office of 

Management and Budget removed the priority status of all cross-agency 

priority goals, including STEM education; this ended the required public 

issuance of quarterly priority goal reports.18 The STEM Education goal’s 

final quarterly progress report was issued at the end of fiscal year 2016.

Other government-wide efforts are underway to improve the transparency 

around federal programs in general. These efforts are not directed at the 

STEM education programs specifically, but may assist in managing the 

STEM education portfolio. The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 requires 

the Office of Management and Budget to present a coherent inventory of 

all federal programs by making information about each federal program 

available on a website.19 However, we previously reported that, because 

agencies used different approaches to define their programs, 

comparability of programs within and across agencies on this inventory 

 16 The Office of Science and Technology Policy’s annual report is mandated to be sent to 

Congress at the time of the President’s budget request, which is required by law to be 

submitted no later than the first Monday in February. 42 U.S.C. § 6621(c), 31 U.S.C. § 

1105(a).

17 Cross-agency priority goals are 4-year outcome-oriented goals covering a number of 

complex or high-risk management and mission issues.

18 GAO, Managing for Results: Further Progress Made in Implementing the GPRA 

Modernization Act, but Additional Actions Needed to Address Pressing Governance 

Challenges, GAO-17-775 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2017).

19 Pub. L. No. 111-352, § 7, 124 Stat. 3866, 3876 (2011), codified at 31 U.S.C. § 1122. 

The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 enhanced the Government Performance and 

Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) (Pub. L. No. 103-62, 107 Stat. 285 (1993)).

Cross-agency Priority 

Goal on STEM Education

Other Data and 

Transparency 

Requirements
Page 9 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

was limited.20 We recently identified a potential framework for the 

development of a useful federal program inventory.21 The Office of 

Management and Budget decided to postpone further development of the 

inventory in order to coordinate with the implementation of related 

requirements of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 

2014.22 Once fully implemented, this act is expected to expand the types 

and transparency of public information on federal spending to make it 

easier to track it to specific federal programs. The act requires 

government-wide reporting on a greater variety of data related to federal 

spending, such as budget and financial information, as well as tracking of 

these data at multiple points in the federal spending lifecycle.23

 20 GAO, Government Efficiency and Effectiveness: Inconsistent Definitions and 

Information Limit the Usefulness of Federal Program Inventories, GAO-15-83, 

(Washington D.C.: Oct. 31, 2014).

21 GAO, Federal Programs: Information Architecture Offers a Potential Approach for 

Development of an Inventory, GAO-17-739 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 28, 2017).

22 Pub. L. No. 113-101, 128 Stat. 1146.

23 We recently reported on implementation of the Act. GAO, DATA Act: OMB, Treasury, 

and Agencies Need to Improve Completeness and Accuracy of Spending Data and 

Disclose Limitations, GAO-18-138 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 8, 2017).

From 2010 to 2016, 

the Number of STEM 

Education Programs 

Decreased While 

Spending Remained 

Stable, and Most 

Programs Continued 

to Overlap
Page 10 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Program officials from the 13 federal agencies that administer STEM 

education programs reported a total of 163 STEM education programs in 

fiscal year 2016, compared to 209 programs in fiscal year 2010. Three 

agencies—the Department of Energy, the Department of Health and 

Human Services, and the National Science Foundation—administered 

more than half of all STEM education programs in fiscal years 2010 and 

2016.

Despite collectively reporting fewer STEM education programs, program 

officials responding to our questionnaire reported spending about the 

same amount in fiscal year 2016 as they did in fiscal year 2010. In fiscal 

year 2016, program officials reported spending about $2.9 billion on the 

163 programs.24 Spending by individual programs ranged from about 

$14,000 annually to hundreds of millions of dollars.25 The National 

Science Foundation and the Department of Health and Human Services 

programs account for about 60 percent of this spending. Figure 3 

provides an agency-level summary of the number of programs and their 

reported spending. Appendix II contains a complete list of the 163 STEM 

education programs and their reported spending for fiscal year 2016.26

 24 Fiscal year 2010 obligations for STEM education programs were $3.1 billion. When 

adjusted for inflation, these program obligations are approximately $3.4 billion in 2016 

dollars. 

25 The Department of Agriculture’s 1890 National Scholars Program has not obligated any 

funds to the public. It is a share-cost program supported by Department of Agriculture 

agencies.

26 Federal agencies also carried out other activities related to STEM education; however, 

as we previously reported, these activities did not fit our definition of a STEM education 

program because STEM education was not the primary objective. These efforts include 

broad-based programs with STEM components, programs that enhance the general 

public’s knowledge of STEM, and research programs that may hire students. For example, 

grant programs may offer competitive preference to applicants that propose activities in 

alignment with the administration’s priority of advancing STEM education, without making 

it a requirement for funding.

Agencies Reported Fewer 

STEM Education 

Programs and Relatively 

Stable Levels of Spending 

in Fiscal Year 2016 

Compared to Fiscal Year 

2010
Page 11 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Figure 3: Number of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education Programs by Agency and Total 

Reported Spending, Fiscal Year 2016

Note: GAO asked program officials to report on obligations—defined as definite commitments that 

create a legal liability of the government for the payment of goods and services ordered or received, 

or a legal duty on the part of the United States that could mature into a legal liability. Payment may be 

made immediately or in the future. An agency incurs an obligation, for example, when it places an 

order, signs a contract, awards a grant, purchases a service, or takes other actions that require the 

government to make payments to the public or from one government account to another. In this 

report, we generally refer to obligations as spending.

While agencies reported many of the same STEM education programs in 

fiscal years 2010 and 2016, the federal portfolio evolved in various ways. 

About half of the 209 programs previously reported for fiscal year 2010 

were reported again for fiscal year 2016—accounting for about two-thirds 

(109 programs) of the fiscal year 2016 portfolio. The remaining third (54
Page 12 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

programs) were newly reported for fiscal year 2016. (See appendix I for 

more information on changes to the STEM portfolio between fiscal years 

2010 and 2016.)

The portfolio underwent various changes from fiscal years 2010 to 2016, 

including program consolidations, creations, and terminations.27

According to leadership of the Committee on STEM Education, these 

changes were due to many factors. One key factor is the STEM 

Education Strategic Plan, which, among other things, calls for greater

efficiency and cohesion across federal STEM education programs. Other 

factors include agencies’ individual priorities, including their mission and 

budget, and congressional interest in specific programs. For example, 

agencies reported:

• Consolidations. Starting in 2014, for greater efficiency and cohesion, 

the National Science Foundation consolidated a number of related 

undergraduate STEM education programs, including STEM Talent 

Expansion Programs, Transforming Undergrad Education in STEM, 

and Nanotechnology Undergraduate Education in Engineering.

• Creations. Department of Health and Human Services officials 

reported administering 28 new STEM education programs. These 

programs are housed in the Department’s National Institutes of 

Health, which generally bases its funding decisions on scientific 

opportunities and its own peer review process. One new program is 

the Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity Initiative. This program 

supports undergraduate institutions in implementing and studying 

approaches to engaging and retaining students from diverse 

backgrounds in biomedical research.

• Terminations. Department of Education officials reported that four 

STEM education programs funded in fiscal year 2010 were terminated 

before fiscal year 2016. One such program was the Women’s 

Educational Equity program. Congress last funded this program in 

fiscal year 2010.

 27 In addition, 20 programs previously identified as STEM education for fiscal year 2010 

were not recognized by their administering agency as STEM education programs in fiscal 

year 2016. (See appendix I for more information about the criteria and methodology we 

used to exclude a program from our inventory.)
Page 13 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Based on our analysis of questionnaire responses, nearly all STEM 

education programs in fiscal year 2016 overlapped with at least one other 

STEM education program, in that they offered at least one similar service 

to at least one similar group in at least one similar STEM field to achieve 

at least one similar objective (see text box). Similar levels of overlap 

occurred among programs funded in fiscal year 2010.

Similarities Among Overlapping Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education Programs

Similar Services

Many of the 163 STEM education programs provided similar services. To support students, most programs (143) provided research 

opportunities, internships, mentorships, or career guidance. In addition, 110 programs supported short-term experiential learning 

activities, and 99 programs supported long-term experiential learning activities. Short-term experiential learning activities include field 

trips, guest speakers, workshops, and summer camps. Long-term experiential learning activities last throughout a semester in length 

or longer. To support teachers, 77 programs provided curriculum development and 45 programs supported teacher in-service training, 

professional development, or retention activities.

Similar Groups Intended to be Served

Many programs also provided services to similar groups, such as K-12 students, postsecondary students, K-12 teachers, and college 

faculty. A majority of STEM programs reported primarily benefiting postsecondary students; specifically, 103 programs intended to 

serve 4-year undergraduate students, 76 intended to serve Master’s degree students, and 83 intended to serve doctoral students. 

Most programs also intended to serve multiple groups; 137 of the 163 programs served two or more groups.

Similar STEM Fields

More than 75 percent of programs focused on specific STEM academic fields of study. The most common fields were biology (85

programs), technology (75 programs), engineering (72 programs), and computer science (71 programs). Of those programs that 

focused on specific STEM fields of study, about 55 percent (68 programs) focused on 5 or more different fields.

Similar Objectives

Many STEM education programs had similar objectives. An objective of a majority of programs (115) was to provide training 

opportunities for undergraduate or graduate students in STEM fields. Most programs (139) also reported having multiple primary 

STEM objectives.

Source: GAO analysis of questionnaire responses provided by agency officials on STEM education programs.| GAO-18-290

Despite these similarities, overlapping programs may differ in meaningful 

ways, such as their specific field of focus and those programs’ stated 

goals. For example, a primary objective of the Department of Health and 

Human Services’ Cancer Education Grants program and the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration’s National Space Grant College 

and Fellowship Project is to provide training opportunities for 

undergraduate or graduate students in biological sciences, among other 

fields. However, these programs have different program goals:

Significant Overlap 

Continued to Exist Among 

STEM Education 

Programs, Although 

Programs May Differ in 

Meaningful Ways
Page 14 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

• The Cancer Education Grants program aims to develop innovative 

cancer education programs and cancer research dissemination 

projects.

• The National Space Grant College and Fellowship Project encourages 

interdisciplinary education, research, and public service programs 

related to aerospace.

Although many STEM education programs are designed to provide 

similar services to similar groups, some programs serve distinct 

populations within those broader groups, such as minority, 

disadvantaged, or underrepresented groups.28 Within the broad group—

middle and high school students, an individual program may focus on 

serving only minority, disadvantaged, or underrepresented students. For 

example, the Department of Transportation’s Garrett A. Morgan 

Technology and Transportation Education program focuses services on 

students who are girls and minorities, whereas the Department of 

Education’s Upward Bound Math-Science program aims to serve

students who are economically disadvantaged.

The Committee on STEM Education and the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy reported managing overlap in the portfolio by 

coordinating with other agencies through a:

• Cross-agency priority goal. Project management and oversight of 

this goal provided an additional mechanism to facilitate coordination. 

Goal leaders published quarterly progress reports describing their 

efforts to achieve each of the five priority investment areas and two 

coordination objectives.29

• Federal coordination subcommittee. Creating a federal 

coordination subcommittee and various interagency working groups 

helped to advance goals identified in the Strategic Plan. Committee 

leadership structured working groups to connect agencies with similar 

programs (see fig. 4).

 28 In response to our questionnaire, program officials reported that 64 of the 163 (39 

percent) programs administered in fiscal year 2016 were primarily intended to serve 

minority, disadvantaged, or underrepresented groups.

29 GAO has previously reported that the governance structure around cross-agency 

priority goals has been effective in improving coordination around those goals. GAO, 

Managing for Results: OMB Improved Implementation of Cross-Agency Priority Goals, but 

Could Be More Transparent About Measuring Progress, GAO-16-509 (Washington, D.C.: 

May 20, 2016).
Page 15 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Figure 4: Federal Oversight and Working Groups on Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education

Note: The cross-agency priority goal on STEM education ended in May 2017. Also, in August of 

2016, subsequent to the issuance of the Strategic Plan, the Committee on STEM Education initiated 

the Computer Science for All working group.
Page 16 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

The Committee on STEM Education and Office of Science and 

Technology Policy have not fully met their responsibilities to assess the 

STEM education portfolio.30 Specifically, the Committee on STEM 

Education has not reviewed performance assessments of STEM 

education programs to ensure effectiveness—a primary function of its 

authorizing charter.31 Committee leadership acknowledged that they have 

not conducted such reviews. Overall, the Committee made limited 

progress advancing its strategic goal of increasing the use of evidencebased approaches because, according to Committee leadership, they 

focused on achieving other strategic goals. By reviewing programs’ 

performance assessments, the Committee could leverage existing 

performance information to identify and share promising practices that 

agencies could use in designing or revising their programs. Moreover, in 

doing so, the Committee could further its strategic goal of increasing the 

use of evidence-based approaches across the portfolio of STEM 

education programs. We previously have reported that managers can use 

performance information to identify and increase the use of program 

approaches that are working well.32 Additionally, such a review could help 

the Committee meet its new responsibilities under the 2017 American 

Innovation and Competitiveness Act, including reviewing the measures 

federal agencies use to evaluate their STEM education programs and 

making recommendations for terminating, consolidating, and reforming 

programs in the federal STEM education portfolio.

 

30 See appendix III for the implementation status of selected COMPETES Act provisions.

31 In 2011, the National Science and Technology Council issued a charter establishing the 

Committee on STEM Education. The charter describes the Committee’s purpose and 

scope, functions, and membership. One of its three functions is to review STEM education 

activities and programs, and the respective assessments of each, throughout federal 

agencies to ensure effectiveness.

32 GAO, Managing for Results: Enhancing Agency Use of Performance Information for 

Management Decision Making, GAO-05-927 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 9, 2005). 

Efforts to Assess 

Programs’ 

Performance and 

Participation Rates of 

Underrepresented 

Minorities Are Limited

Performance Assessments 

of STEM Education 

Programs Are Not 

Reviewed or Documented
Page 17 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Further, the Committee on STEM Education has not met the COMPETES 

Act requirement to document the performance assessments of STEM 

education programs in its federal STEM inventory (see sidebar).

In 2011, the Committee on STEM Education reported summary 

information on programs’ performance assessments, including the total 

number of programs funded in fiscal year 2010 that had been evaluated 

since 2005.33 However, the information provided was not programspecific; therefore, it is unclear which programs were assessed for 

effectiveness. Further, that information is outdated, as the STEM 

education portfolio has changed considerably since 2010, as we have 

discussed in this report. Committee leadership said they do not have 

plans to update the summary information provided in 2011, noting that 

agency budget justifications include program performance assessments. 

However, we reviewed the budget justifications for 10 STEM education 

programs that program officials reported had been recently evaluated and 

found that 8 had no information on performance assessments. By 

periodically documenting in its federal STEM education inventory whether 

programs have been assessed for effectiveness, the Committee can 

enhance communication of performance information among agency 

officials and stakeholders. This could facilitate the use of performance 

information by agency managers and lead to greater public awareness 

regarding the effectiveness of many of the nation’s STEM education 

programs.

The Office of Science and Technology Policy has not done everything 

required of it either. It has not described the outcomes of programs’

performance assessments completed in the previous year in its annual 

reports, as required by the COMPETES Act (see sidebar).

 33 According to The Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Portfolio, the 252 STEM education investments reported in fiscal year 2010 

were categorized as either broader STEM education or agency-mission specific. Of the 

139 broader STEM education investments, 119 had been evaluated since 2005. The 113 

agency-mission specific investments were less thoroughly evaluated; 46 of the 113 had 

collected some outcome data.

COMPETES Act Requirement of the 

Committee on Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Education

• Create, periodically update, and maintain

an inventory of federal STEM education 

programs that includes documentation

of program assessments.

Source: 42 U.S.C. § 6621(b)(6). | GAO-18-290

COMPETES Act Requirement of the Office 

of Science and Technology Policy

• Include in its annual report a description 

of any program assessments completed 

in the previous year.

Source: 42 U.S.C. § 6621(d)(4). | GAO-18-290
Page 18 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Office of Science and Technology Policy officials said that they have not 

reported on recent program assessments, and added that many STEM 

education programs were not mature enough to provide sufficient data for 

a definitive assessment. However, many of the 2016 programs that we

identified were at least 7 years old and had been assessed. Specifically, 

67 percent (109) of the programs reported by program officials for fiscal 

year 2016 had also been reported for fiscal year 2010. Of the programs in 

existence since 2010, 49 percent (53) have been assessed, according to 

program officials’ questionnaire responses. By reporting information on 

the outcomes of performance assessments completed in the previous 

year, the Office of Science and Technology Policy could enhance 

awareness of promising practices in federal STEM education programs.

The Committee on STEM Education has not reported STEM education 

programs’ participation rates of groups historically underrepresented in 

STEM fields, although broadening participation of those groups is one of 

the Committee’s strategic goals.34 Moreover, the COMPETES Act 

requires that the Committee report the participation rates of women, 

underrepresented minorities, and persons in rural areas in its inventory of 

federal programs (see sidebar).

Committee leadership acknowledged they have not reported these data, 

and added that such participation data are not fully available across all 

STEM education programs. However, we found that such participation 

data were generally available.

In response to our questionnaire, nearly three-quarters of STEM 

education programs (120 of 163) reported tracking participants in fiscal 

year 2016. Of those programs, many also tracked specific participant 

characteristics. For example, 61 percent (73) of programs that tracked 

participants also captured whether their participants were women and 54 

percent (65) documented those who were African American. Programs 

primarily intended to serve minority, disadvantaged, or underrepresented 

groups tracked participant characteristics at higher rates than programs 

that intended to serve broader groups of beneficiaries (see fig. 5).

 34 One priority investment area specified in the Strategic Plan is to better serve groups 

historically underrepresented in STEM fields. It defines groups underrepresented in STEM 

fields as Hispanics and Latinos, African Americans, American Indians, Alaska Natives, 

Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, the economically disadvantaged, people with 

disabilities, and women and girls.

Program Participation 

Rates of 

Underrepresented Groups 

Are Not Reported

COMPETES Act Requirement of the 

Committee on Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Education

• Create, periodically update, and maintain 

an inventory of federal STEM education 

programs that includes documentation of 

participation rates of women, 

underrepresented minorities, and persons 

in rural areas.

Source: 42 U.S.C. § 6621(b)(6). | GAO-18-290
Page 19 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Figure 5: Percentage of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education Programs That Tracked 

Certain Participant Characteristics in Fiscal Year 2016

In addition, 7 of the 13 administering agencies, such as the Department of 

Health and Human Services, reported that they tracked participation in 

fiscal year 2016 for at least two-thirds of their STEM education 

programs.35 Officials from the Department of Health and Human Services 

 35 The seven agencies that reported via our questionnaire that they tracked the number of 

participants for at least two-thirds of their programs are the Departments of Agriculture, 

Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, and Interior, and the 

Environmental Protection Agency.
Page 20 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

said that the department maintains data for many of its STEM education 

programs in a database that captures individual participants’ demographic 

data, including race and gender, and aggregates such information for 

internal reporting. Officials also said they use this information to evaluate 

whether individual programs are meeting their goals of serving particular 

groups. Although we found that many agencies reported collecting data 

on participants in their STEM education programs, the Committee on 

STEM Education has not reported such information in its inventory, as 

required.

Reporting information on the participation rates of women, 

underrepresented minorities, and persons in rural areas could help the 

Committee assess whether STEM education programs have broadened 

participation to groups historically underrepresented in STEM fields—a 

key goal of the Strategic Plan. Committee leadership said they measured 

progress toward this goal with general performance indicators, such as 

the number of women who earned STEM degrees, regardless of 

participation in federal programs, because such data were readily 

available. However, those performance indicators are influenced by 

various factors, including some external to federal STEM education 

efforts. For example, the number of women earning STEM degrees could 

be affected by broader economic factors or college enrollment trends, 

rather than the activities of the agencies.

The federal government continues to invest billions of dollars annually in 

STEM education programs to enhance the nation’s economic and 

educational competitiveness. Since 2010, the federal portfolio of STEM 

education programs has evolved considerably. The Committee on STEM 

Education reported that, through its leadership and strategic planning 

efforts, it fostered coordination among agencies administering STEM 

education programs, which helped them implement the STEM Education 

Strategic Plan. Such efforts to encourage interagency coordination can 

help ensure efficient use of resources, particularly given the overlap of 

programs in the STEM education portfolio.

The Committee on STEM Education and the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy have not fulfilled their responsibilities to review, 

document, and report performance information on STEM education 

programs. Reviewing performance assessments of the many programs in 

the federal STEM education portfolio is a vital management responsibility 

that could, for example, improve the Committee’s ability to disseminate 

information on promising practices or make recommendations that 

Conclusions
Page 21 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

agencies can use to make well-informed decisions about designing or 

revising their programs. Further, documenting programs’ performance 

assessments in the Committee’s federal STEM education inventory and 

reporting the outcomes of recent assessments in the Office of Science 

and Technology Policy’s annual reports could enhance the availability of 

performance information.

In addition, the Committee falls short in reporting required information on 

programs’ participation rates of women, underrepresented minorities, and 

persons from rural areas. Without such information, it is unclear whether 

the federal investment in STEM education is ultimately supporting its 

strategic goal of broadening participation to groups historically 

underrepresented in STEM fields.

Moreover, as the Committee on STEM Education begins to implement its 

new responsibilities prescribed by the American Innovation and 

Competitiveness Act, its efforts to review programs’ performance 

assessments could improve its capacity to make well-informed 

recommendations to further enhance the portfolio of STEM education 

programs.

We are making a total of four recommendations, including three to the 

Committee on STEM Education and one to the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy. Specifically:

The leadership of the Committee on STEM Education should 

review performance assessments of federal STEM education 

programs and then take appropriate steps to enhance 

effectiveness of the portfolio, such as by sharing promising 

practices that agencies could use in designing or revising their 

programs. (Recommendation 1)

The leadership of the Committee on STEM Education should 

improve public awareness of information on programs’

performance assessments by documenting program-level 

information on performance assessments in its federal STEM 

education inventory. (Recommendation 2)

The leadership of the Committee on STEM Education should 

report required information on the participation rates of women, 

underrepresented minorities, and persons from rural areas in 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action
Page 22 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

federal STEM education programs that collect this information. 

(Recommendation 3)

The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy 

should report the outcomes of programs’ performance 

assessments completed in the previous year in its annual report. 

(Recommendation 4)

We provided a draft of this report to the National Science and Technology 

Council’s Committee on STEM Education and the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy for review and comment. These entities jointly 

provided written comments, which are reproduced in appendix IV, and 

technical comments, which we incorporated, as appropriate. They agreed 

with all four of our recommendations and noted initial strategies for how 

they would implement three of them. Regarding implementation of the 

fourth recommendation to report on participation rates of 

underrepresented groups in federal STEM education programs, they 

noted plans to examine confounding factors inhibiting the reporting of the 

information required under the COMPETES Act. Gaining insight on the 

challenges agencies face collecting this information is an important first 

step. However, to comply with the requirement of the COMPETES Act 

and help ensure programs reach populations historically 

underrepresented in STEM fields, we continue to believe that the 

Committee should report the participation rates of women, 

underrepresented minorities, and persons from rural areas in federal 

STEM education programs that collect this information. To do so, the 

Committee may also need to develop strategies to help agencies 

overcome some of these confounding factors.

We are sending copies of this report to leadership of the Committee on 

STEM Education, and the Assistant Director of STEM Education at the 

Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the appropriate 

congressional committees. In addition, the report will be available at no 

charge on GAO’s website at http://www.gao.gov.

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
Page 23 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

If you or your staff should have any questions about this report, please 

contact me at (617) 788-0534 or emreyarrasm@gao.gov. Contact points 

for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be 

found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key 

contributions to this report are listed in appendix V.

Melissa Emrey-Arras

Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues
Appendix I: GAO’s Methodology for Program 

Identification and Data Collection

Page 24 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

To identify the programs that should receive our questionnaire, we sought 

input from the 13 agencies that administer federal science, technology, 

engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs. We provided 

each of the agencies with our definition of a STEM education program 

and asked agency officials to identify programs funded in fiscal year 2016 

that met this definition (see text box). We also asked agency officials to 

provide information on the status of the 209 STEM education programs 

we included in our previous report on STEM education programs.1

Specifically, we asked whether the programs were funded in fiscal year 

2016 and, if not, whether they were consolidated or terminated.

 1 GAO, Science, Technology, Engineering, And Mathematics Education: Strategic 

Planning Needed to Better Manage Overlapping Programs across Multiple Agencies, 

GAO-12-108 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 20, 2012).

Appendix I: GAO’s Methodology for Program 

Identification and Data Collection

How GAO Identified 

Federal Education 

Programs on Science, 

Technology, Engineering, 

and Mathematics
Appendix I: GAO’s Methodology for Program 

Identification and Data Collection

Page 25 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Definition of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education Program

GAO defined “STEM education program” as a program funded by allocation or congressional appropriation. An organized set of 

activities was considered a single program even when its funds were also allocated to other programs. A STEM education program 

that met the definition had one or more of the following as a primary objective:

• attract or prepare students to pursue classes or coursework in STEM areas through formal or informal education activities 

(informal education programs provide support for activities that offer students learning opportunities outside of formal schooling 

through contests, science fairs, summer programs, and other means; outreach programs aimed at the general public were not 

included);

• attract students to pursue degrees (2-year, 4-year, graduate, or doctoral degrees) in STEM fields through formal or informal 

education activities;

• provide training opportunities for undergraduate or graduate students in STEM fields (this can include grants, fellowships, 

internships, and traineeships that are intended for students; general research grants that involve hiring a student for lab work 

were not considered a STEM education program);

• attract graduates to pursue careers in STEM fields;

• improve teacher (preservice or in-service) education in STEM fields;

• improve or expand the capacity of K-12 schools or postsecondary institutions to promote or foster education in STEM fields; and 

• conduct research to enhance the quality of STEM education programs provided to students.

Programs designed to retain current employees in STEM fields were not included. Programs that fund retraining of workers to pursue a 

degree in a STEM field were included because these programs help increase the number of students and professionals in STEM fields 

by helping retrain non-STEM workers to work in STEM fields. Also included were health care programs that train students for careers 

that are primarily in scientific research, but not those that train students for careers that are primarily in patient care (e.g. those that 

trained nurses, doctors, dentists, psychologists, or veterinarians).

Lastly, GAO considered STEM fields to include any of the following broad disciplines: agricultural sciences; astronomy; biological 

sciences; chemistry; computer science; earth, atmospheric, and ocean sciences; engineering; material science; mathematical 

sciences; physics; social sciences (e.g., psychology, sociology, anthropology, cognitive science, economics, behavioral sciences); and 

technology. 

GAO used this same definition of STEM education program in its 2012 report. However, in the current report, GAO explicitly specified

astronomy and material science as STEM fields and also revised “mathematics” to be “mathematical sciences” based on feedback 

from agency officials.

Source: GAO | GAO-18-290

We reviewed the information agencies submitted and took steps to 

corroborate it, such as by reviewing program descriptions and budget 

documents. Based on our analysis of this information, we sent a webbased questionnaire to 198 programs (see table 1).
Appendix I: GAO’s Methodology for Program 

Identification and Data Collection

Page 26 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Table 1: Changes Agencies Reported in the Federal Portfolio of Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education Programs between 

Fiscal Years 2010 and 2016

Agency reported portfolio changes Number of 

programs 

Previously reported for fiscal year 2010 209

Programs removed from the 2016 portfolio

 Terminated or consolidated 77

 No longer reported as STEM educationa 11

Programs added to the 2016 portfolio

 Newly created 74

 Newly reported as STEM educationb 3

Identified for fiscal year 2016 and sent a questionnaire 198

Source: GAO analysis of agency submissions on their STEM education programs. | GAO-18-290

a We previously reported these 11 programs as STEM education for fiscal year 2010 because their 

administering agencies reported them as STEM education programs in fiscal year 2010. For this 

report, the administering agencies for these 11 programs did not report them as meeting the STEM 

education definition in fiscal year 2016.

b Officials from the Department of Agriculture reported 2 programs as STEM education for 2016 that 

they had not reported previously for 2010, despite being funded then. Officials from the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration reported 2 programs separately for fiscal year 2016 that they 

had previously reported together as one program for fiscal year 2010. Thus, we sent questionnaires 

to 3 programs newly reported as STEM education for 2016.

To develop the questionnaire and collect the data, we used recognized 

survey design practices to enhance data quality. For instance, we ordered 

the questionnaire appropriately and ensured the questions were clearly 

stated and easy to understand. The questionnaire solicited information on 

federal STEM education programs, including programs’ objectives, 

intended groups served, services provided, STEM fields, and obligations. 

We did not conduct pretests because most of the questions were included 

in our prior questionnaire and had already been pretested.2

On May 8, 2017, we sent an email announcing the online questionnaire to 

the officials responsible for programs identified as STEM education and 

also notifying them that the questionnaire would be activated that week. 

On May 10, 2017, we sent a second message to officials informing them 

that the questionnaire was activated and providing them with unique 

usernames and passwords. As necessary, we followed-up with program 

 2 We administered a similar questionnaire for our 2012 report on STEM education 

programs (GAO-12-108). 
Appendix I: GAO’s Methodology for Program 

Identification and Data Collection

Page 27 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

officials by telephone and email. We collected responses through August 

31, 2017.

Based on our analysis of the questionnaire responses and other 

information we received from program officials, we excluded 35 programs 

from our inventory. (See table 2 for a summary of those 35 programs and 

the reasons we excluded them.)

Table 2: Programs Excluded from our Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, 

and Mathematics (STEM) Education Inventory 

Reason

Number

of programs 

Program did not have STEM education as a primary objective 20

Program did not receive congressional allocation or appropriation 

in fiscal year 2016 

13

Program was reported twice by the agency 2

Total 35

Source: GAO analysis of information on federal STEM education activities. | GAO-18-290

Nine of the 35 excluded programs had been reported by agency officials 

as STEM education programs in our previous report. In most cases (8 of 

9), we excluded these programs in this report because the programs did 

not include STEM education as a primary objective in fiscal year 2016. In 

the remaining case, we excluded the program because it was a 

component of another fiscal year 2016 STEM education program, and 

thus would be duplicative. We confirmed this information and the 

programs’ exclusion with the administering agencies.

After we completed our analysis, we identified 163 programs as STEM 

education for fiscal year 2016. Programs officials responsible for all 163

of these programs completed our questionnaire. We used standard 

descriptive statistics to analyze responses to these completed 

questionnaires. We also used recognized survey design practices to 

process and analyze data collected via the questionnaire. For instance, 

we performed automated checks to review the data and identify 

inappropriate answers. We also reviewed the data for missing or 

ambiguous responses and followed up with program officials when 

necessary to clarify their responses. We did not verify all responses since 

we had applied recognized survey design practices and follow-up 

procedures, and had determined that the data used in this report were of 

sufficient quality for the purposes of our reporting objectives.
Appendix II: Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Programs and Reported Fiscal Year 

2016 Obligations

Page 28 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Table 3: Federal STEM Education Programs and Reported Fiscal Year 2016 Obligations

Agency Program

Reported

fiscal year 2016

STEM education

program obligations

(in dollars)

National Aeronautics 

and Space 

Administration

Minority University Research and Education Project (MUREP) 31,995,826

National Space Grant College and Fellowship Project (Space Grant) 39,999,988

STEM Education and Accountability Project (SEAP) 24,844,939

National Science 

Foundation

Advanced Technological Education (ATE) 66,040,000

Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) 62,500,000

Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) 8,000,000

Cultivating Cultures for Ethical STEM (CCE STEM) 2,670,000

CyberCorps(R): Scholarship for Service (SFS) 49,980,000

Discovery Research PreK-12 (DRK-12) 84,300,000

East Asia & Pacific Summer Institutes for U.S. Graduate Students (EAPSI) 1,380,000

Education and Human Resources Core Research (ECR) 67,570,000

Graduate Research Fellowship (GRF) Program 332,340,000

Historically Black Colleges and Universities Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP) 35,010,000

Improving Undergraduate STEM Education (IUSE) 104,770,000

Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented 

Discoverers in Engineering and Science (NSF INCLUDES) 13,970,000

International Research Experiences for Students (IRES) 5,930,000

Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation (LSAMP) 46,010,000

National Science Foundation Research Traineeship (NRT) 55,980,000

Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) in Engineering and Computer Science 6,140,000

Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) 97,720,000

Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program 64,500,000

STEM + Computing (STEM+C) Partnerships 64,370,000

Tribal Colleges and Universities Program (TCUP) 14,010,000

Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission

Integrated University Program (IUP) 15,102,000

Minority Serving Institutions Program (MSIP) 1,008,285

Department of 

Agriculture

Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection 

Service

AgDiscovery Program 907,034

1890 National Scholars Program 0a

Appendix II: Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Programs and Reported Fiscal 

Year 2016 Obligations
Appendix II: Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Programs and Reported Fiscal Year 

2016 Obligations

Page 29 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Agency Program

Reported

fiscal year 2016

STEM education

program obligations

(in dollars)

National Institute 

of Food and 

Agriculture

1890 Institution Teaching, Research and Extension Capacity Building Grants (CBG) 

Program 17,457,425

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Education and Literacy Initiative Research 

and Extension Experiences for Undergraduate Fellowships 4,101,236

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Education and Literacy Initiative 

Professional Development for Secondary School Teacher and Education 

Professionals 2,000,000

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Fellowships (Predoctoral and Postdoctoral)b 11,417,025

Agriculture in the Classroom 398,028

Distance Education Grants Program for Institutions of Higher Education in Insular 

Areas 800,000

Higher Education Challenge Grants Program 4,378,970

Hispanic Education Partnership Grants 8,840,842

Multicultural Scholars 936,873

National Needs Fellowships 336,203

Secondary Education, Two-Year Postsecondary Education and Agriculture in the K12 Classroom Grants 852,300

Resident Instruction Grants Program for Institutions of Higher Education in Insular 

Areas 1,000,000

Women and Minorities in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Fields 

Grant Program (WAMS)

b 382,650

Department of 

Commerce

National Institute 

of Standards and 

Technology 

(NIST) 

NIST Summer Institute for Middle School Science Teachers 200,000

NIST Graduate Student Measurement Science & Engineering (GMSE) Fellowship 

Program 640,000

NIST Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) Program 1,700,000

National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric 

Administration 

(NOAA)

Bay Watershed Education and Training (B-WET) Program 7,952,700

Environmental Literacy Program 3,000,000

Educational Partnership Program with Minority Serving Institutions 14,431,000

Ernest F. Hollings Scholarship Program 5,830,000

National Sea Grant College Program (National Sea Grant College ProgramEducation Component) 904,061

Teacher at Sea Program 600,000

Department of 

Defense

Air Force Air Force K-12 STEM Outreach (AFSTEM) 3,995,000

National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) Fellowship 43,905,926
Appendix II: Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Programs and Reported Fiscal Year 

2016 Obligations

Page 30 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Agency Program

Reported

fiscal year 2016

STEM education

program obligations

(in dollars)

Army Army Educational Outreach Program (AEOP) 10,220,356

Navy Science and Engineering Apprentice Program (SEAP) c

SeaPerch 57,000

The Naval Research Enterprise Intern Program (NREIP) c

Secretary of 

Defense

DoD STARBASE Program 25,000,000

National Defense Education Program (NDEP) Military Child Pilot Program 13,466,982

National Defense Education Program (NDEP) K-12 5,512,106

National Defense Education Program (NDEP) Science, Mathematics And Research 

for Transformation (SMART) 33,602,660

Department of 

Education

Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions: STEM and Articulation Programs 92,425,366

Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Needd 29,293,000

Mathematics and Science Partnerships 152,717,000

Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program 9,648,000

Research in Special Educationd 44,775,891

Research, Development, and Disseminationd 179,032,382

Strengthening Predominantly Black Institutionsd 13,905,000

Upward Bound Math-Science 44,289,274

Department of 

Energy

Advanced Vehicle Competitions 2,500,000

American Chemical Society Summer School in Nuclear and Radiochemistry 561,000

BioenergizeME 300,000

Collegiate Wind Competition 750,000

Community College Internships (CCI) 1,000,000

Computational Science Graduate Fellowship 11,500,000

Environmental Management-Minority Serving Institution Partnership Program 

(MSIPP) 5,615,075

Environmental Management Traineeship in Robotics 3,000,035

Hampton University Graduate Studies 50,000

Industrial Assessment Centers 7,000,000

Integrated University Program (IUP) 4,980,486

Mickey Leland Energy Fellowship Program 700,000

Minority Educational Student Partnership Program (MEISPP) (summer interns) 933,900

National Nuclear Security Administration-Minority Serving Institutions Partnership 

Program 16,500,000

National Science Bowl (NSB) 2,900,000

Office of Science Graduate Student Research (SCGSR) 2,500,000
Appendix II: Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Programs and Reported Fiscal Year 

2016 Obligations

Page 31 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Agency Program

Reported

fiscal year 2016

STEM education

program obligations

(in dollars)

Race to Zero Student Design Competition 472,500

Radiochemistry Summer School 300,000

Science and Technology Workforce Development Initiative 1,000,000

Science Undergraduate Laboratory Internships (SULI) 8,300,000

Solar Decathlon 2,500,000

Traineeship in Radiochemistry 3,000,000

Visiting Faculty Program (VFP) 1,700,000

Department of Health 

and Human Services

National 

Institutes of 

Health

Aging Research Dissertation Awards to Increase Diversity 451,361

Blueprint Program for Enhancing Neuroscience Diversity through 

Undergraduate Research Education Experiences 2,333,036

Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative: 

Short Courses in Computational Neuroscience 401,280

Bridges to the Baccalaureate Program 9,549,894

Bridges to the Doctorate 3,424,610

Cancer Education Grants Program 10,771,449

Cancer Research Education Grants Program-Research Experiences 912,361

Center for Cancer Research Cancer Research Interns (Cancer Research Interns) 182,232

Center for Cancer Research/John Hopkins University Master of Science in 

Biotechnology Concentration in Molecular Targets and Drug Discovery Technologies 266,976

Courses for Skills Development in Biomedical Big Data Science 4,356,583

Drug Abuse Dissertation Research 413,106

Enriching the Hematology Research Workforce through Short-term Educational 

Experiences in Emerging Science Research Education Program Grant 311,644

Graduate Partnerships Program 10,873,246e

Initiative for Maximizing Student Development 22,442,998

Initiative to Maximize Research Education in Genomics: Diversity Action Plan 2,995,000

Innovative Programs to Enhance Research Training (IPERT) 6,761,954

Intramural National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Research 

Opportunities 260,396

Maximizing Access to Research Careers (MARC) U-STAR 17,484,652

Medical Informatics Training Program 900,000

Mental Health Research Dissertation Grant to Increase Diversity 70,725

National Cancer Institute Predoctoral to Postdoctoral Fellow Transition Award (F99 

portion only) 1,366,103
Appendix II: Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Programs and Reported Fiscal Year 

2016 Obligations

Page 32 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Agency Program

Reported

fiscal year 2016

STEM education

program obligations

(in dollars)

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Division of Intramural Research 

(DIR) Office of Training and Diversity (OTD) Sponsorship Program 561,778

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Division of Intramural Research 

(DIR) Summer Diversity Program 14,106

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Research 

Education Program Grants for Summer Research Experiences (R25) 1,200,000

National Institute of Mental Health Mentoring Networks for Mental Health Research 

Education 786,789

National Institute of Mental Health Research Education Mentoring Programs for 

HIV/AIDS Research 2,812,201

National Institute of Mental Health Short Courses for Mental Health-Related 

Research Education 1,416,275

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Neuroscience Development 

for Advancing the Careers of a Diverse Research Workforce 1,020,046

National Institute of Nursing Research Summer Genetics Institute 65,000

National Institute on Aging Medicine, Science, Technology, Engineering and 

Mathematics: Advancing Diversity in Aging Research (ADAR) through 

Undergraduate Education 4,248,443

National Library of Medicine Institutional Training Grants for Research Training in 

Biomedical Informatics and Data Science 12,672,914

NIH Big Data to Knowledge (BD2K) Enhancing Diversity in Biomedical Data Science 673,730

NIH Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Initiative (RL5 portion only) 10,480,823

NIH Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Initiative (TL4 portion only) 16,427,440

Postbaccalaureate Intramural Research Training Award Program 32,642,180e

Postbaccalaureate Research Education Program (PREP) 11,193,892

Research Education Grants for Statistical Training in the Genetics of Addiction 505,160

Research Initiative for Scientific Enhancement 27,291,181

Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research 35,956,662

Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award Institutional Research Training 

Grants (T32, T35, T90, TL1) 295,884,161

Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award for Individual Predoctoral 

Fellows, including Underrepresented Racial/Ethnic Groups and Students from 

Disadvantaged Backgrounds 78,108,710

Science Education Drug Abuse Partnership Award 483,000

Science Education Partnership Award 18,541,000

Short Courses on Mathematical, Statistical, and Computational Tools for Studying 

Biological Systems 2,416,584

Short-Term Research Education Program to Increase Diversity in Health-Related 

Research 4,574,028
Appendix II: Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Programs and Reported Fiscal Year 

2016 Obligations

Page 33 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Agency Program

Reported

fiscal year 2016

STEM education

program obligations

(in dollars)

Short-Term Research Experience for Underrepresented Persons (STEP-UP; R25) 14,588,697

Student Intramural Research Training Award Program 7,276,883e

Summer Institute for Research Education in Biostatistics 1,470,346

Summer Research Education Experience Programs 3,620,084

Team-Based Design in Biomedical Engineering Education 615,518

Training in Computational Neuroscience: From Biology to Model and Back Again 

(R90 portion only) 865,048

Undergraduate Research Education Program (UP) to Enhance Diversity in the 

Environmental Health Sciences 645,215

Undergraduate Scholarship Program for Individuals from Disadvantaged 

Backgrounds 2,249,743

Undergraduate Summer Institutes in Kidney, Urologic and Hematologic Diseases 

(R25) 621,600

Department of 

Homeland Security 

Science and 

Technology 

Directorate 

Homeland Security STEM Summer Internship Program 500,000

Minority Service Institutions-Scientific Leadership Awards 3,600,000

Minority Service Institutions-Summer Research Team 500,000

Department of the 

Interior

U.S. Geological 

Survey

Education Component of the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program 

(EDMAP) 419,438

National Association of Geoscience Teachers (NAGT)-USGS Cooperative Summer 

Field Training Program 208,000

Student Intern in Support of Native American Relations (SISNAR) 68,738

Bureau of Indian 

Affairs

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Trust Services, Pathways Internship Program 475,082

Science Post Graduate Scholarship Fund 2,450,000

Department of 

Transportation

Office of the 

Secretary of 

Transportation

University Transportation Centers Program

67,700,000

Federal Aviation 

Administration

Joint University Program 

250,000

Federal Highway 

Administration

Garrett A. Morgan Technology and Transportation Education Program 332,150

National Summer Transportation Institute 2,620,293

Summer Transportation Internship Program for Diverse Groups 1,300,000
Appendix II: Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

Education Programs and Reported Fiscal Year 

2016 Obligations

Page 34 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Agency Program

Reported

fiscal year 2016

STEM education

program obligations

(in dollars)

Environmental 

Protection Agency

Cooperative Training in Environmental Sciences Research 532,768

Environmental Education Grants Program 3,306,600

Environmental Research Training Grant (University of Cincinnati/EPA Research 

Training Grant) 175,000

National Environmental Education Program 2,175,500

People, Prosperity, and Planet Award: National Student Design Competition for 

Sustainability 223,795

President’s Environmental Youth Award 80,000

Source: GAO questionnaire of STEM education programs. | GAO-18-290

Note: Amounts obligated for each program for fiscal year 2016 were reported to us by program 

officials in response to our questionnaire. We did not independently verify this information.

a This program has not obligated any funds to the public. It is a share-cost program supported by 

Department of Agriculture agencies.

b Department of Agriculture officials reported two programs as STEM education for 2016 that they had 

not reported previously for 2010, despite being funded then.

c Department of Defense officials reported a combined obligation amount for these two programs: 

$2,216,482

d According to Department of Education officials, these programs also support a wide variety of nonSTEM related fields and activities.

e According to Health and Human Services officials, obligations for these programs are estimates.
Appendix III: Current Implementation Status of 

Selected COMPETES Act Provisions to 

Coordinate Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Page 35 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Table 4: Current Implementation Status of Selected COMPETES Act Provisions to Coordinate Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education 

COMPETES Act provisions Implementation status

1. The Office of Science and Technology Policy should establish a committee comprised of specified 

agencies that have STEM education programs and activities.

Mandated responsibilities of the Committee:

2. Coordinate the STEM education activities and programs of the federal agencies.

3. Coordinate STEM education activities and programs with the Office of Management and Budget.

4. Encourage the teaching of innovation and entrepreneurship as part of STEM education activities.

5. Ensure that STEM education activities and programs across the agencies are not duplicative.

6. Develop and implement a 5-year STEM education strategic plan, update every 5 years.

Elements required in the 5-year strategic plan:

a. Annual and long-term objectives.

b. Common metrics to assess progress toward achieving the objectives.

c. Approaches each participating agency will take to assess the effectiveness of its STEM 

education programs.

d. The role of each agency in supporting programs and activities designed to achieve the annual 

and long-term objectives in the strategic plan.

7. Establish, periodically update, and maintain an inventory of federal STEM education programs and 

activities, including documentation of assessments of program effectiveness and the participation 

rates of women, underrepresented minorities, and persons in rural areas.

Mandated responsibilities of the Office of Science and Technology Policy:

8. Encourage and monitor the efforts of the participating agencies to ensure the strategic plan is 

developed and executed effectively.

9. Transmit an annual report to Congress on the 5-year STEM education strategic plan.

Elements required in the Office of Science and Technology Policy’s annual report:

10. A description of the STEM education programs and activities for the previous and current fiscal 

years, and any proposed programs under the President’s budget request.

11. The funding levels for the STEM education programs and activities for each participating federal 

agency for the previous fiscal year and under the President’s budget request.

12. An evaluation of the levels of duplication and fragmentation of federal STEM education programs and 

activities.

13. Progress made in implementing the 5-year plan, including a description of the outcome of any 

program assessments completed in the previous year and any changes made to that plan since the 

previous report.

Appendix III: Current Implementation Status 

of Selected COMPETES Act Provisions to 

Coordinate Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Education
Appendix III: Current Implementation Status of 

Selected COMPETES Act Provisions to 

Coordinate Federal Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Page 36 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

COMPETES Act provisions Implementation status

14. How the participating federal agencies will disseminate information about federal resources for STEM 

education practitioners.

Legend: = Fully implemented: actions taken fully addressed the provision

 = Partially implemented: actions taken addressed some, but not all, parts of the provision

Source: GAO analysis of efforts to implement provisions of the COMPETES Act based on document review and agency input. | GAO-18-290
Appendix IV: Comments from the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy and the 

Committee on Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Page 37 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Appendix IV: Comments from the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy and the 

Committee on Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Education
Appendix IV: Comments from the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy and the 

Committee on Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Page 38 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education
Appendix IV: Comments from the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy and the 

Committee on Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Page 39 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education
Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 40 GAO-18-290 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education

Melissa Emrey-Arras, (617) 788-0534 or EmreyArrasM@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Bill J. Keller (Assistant Director), 

Kathryn O’Dea Lamas (Analyst-in-Charge), Morgan Jones, and Karissa 

Robie made significant contributions. Also contributing to this report were 

James Bennett, Deborah Bland, Charles Culverwell, Jill Lacey, Sheila 

McCoy, James Rebbe, Kathleen van Gelder, and Sarah Veale.

Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(101178)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and investigative 

arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the 

federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public 

funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through GAO’s website (https://www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, GAO 

posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, go to https://www.gao.gov

and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of production and 

distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and whether 

the publication is printed in color or black and white. Pricing and ordering 

information is posted on GAO’s website, https://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard, 

Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.

Visit GAO on the web at https://www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: https://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Orice Williams Brown, Managing Director, WilliamsO@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400, 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125, 

Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

James-Christian Blockwood, Managing Director, spel@gao.gov, (202) 512-4707

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7814, 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Strategic Planning and 

External Liaison

Please Print on Recycled Paper.