Funding Opportunities for Faculty

• Organizations may only submit one request in a 12-month period. This includes colleges and universities with several departments/outreach programs
• The grant range is from $20,000 to $75,000 over a one-year period
• Proposals should be submitted online
• No faxed applications will be accepted
• Support materials such as annual reports, pamphlets/brochures, newsletters, articles, DVDs, etc. should be mailed to the following address: American Honda Foundation, 1919 Torrance Blvd., Mailstop: 100-1W-5A, Torrance, CA 90501-2746

 

Proposal Evaluation and Notification

Every effort is made to respond to all submitted proposals in a timely manner. Upon receipt of a grant proposal, all materials will be evaluated according to the guidelines and criteria provided for each program area. If a proposal is not competitive within the current grant cycle, notification will be sent as soon as possible and may include an invitation to re-submit a revised proposal at a later date.

At times, and in consultation with the grant applicant, a proposal may be tabled for further consideration in the next grant cycle. Additional information may be requested for competitive grant proposals. The Arthur Vining Davis Foundations’ Board of Trustees renders all final decisions.

 

 

NOTE: The Build-A-Bear Workshop Foundation is not currently accepting applications for 2015 grants. We are evaluating our grant making process and criteria. Please check back in the coming months for additional information.

 

 

The Urban and Higher Education Program’s goals are centered on creating pathways to educational and economic opportunity by generating systemic change across a K-16 continuum, with particular emphasis on secondary and higher education. We work to enable many more students, including historically underserved populations, to achieve academic success. Our grantees help all students perform with the high levels of creative, scientific, and technical knowledge and skill needed to compete in a global economy and exercise leadership. Grant-making in this program concentrates on three main areas. By supporting a push for common core standards and next generation assessments, we counter low expectations for schools and students. By investing in innovation in human capital preparation and management, we address development of talent. Lastly, through new designs for innovation in classrooms, schools, colleges and systems in K-16, we look to strengthen student engagement, motivation, effort, and persistence. In addition, the program integrates these three areas through efforts to improve policy, and thus create stronger conditions and platforms for accountability, innovation, and systemic reform.

Applications for grants are considered in the following areas:

• Education
• Social Service
• Healthcare
• Civic and cultural
• Environmental

The categories above are not intended to limit the interest of the Foundation from considering other worthwhile projects.  In general the Foundation guidelines are broad to give us flexibility in providing grants.

Over the past decade, approximately 35% of our grants have been related to education, 15% to social services, 27% to hospitals and healthcare, 19% to civic and cultural with the remaining percentage spread out in the above categories.  During the same period, 68% of our grants have been made in Illinois.  However, like Dr. Scholl, we recognize the need for a global outlook.

ANNUAL GRANT CYCLE

Grants are considered on an annual basis. The Dr. Scholl Foundation application form can be submitted between November 1 and March 1 of the following year. All applications are acknowledged by mail. Prospective grantees are notified in November and, if approved, grant payments are made in December of the grant year.

TO OBTAIN A GRANT APPLICATION 
The application form and instructions are available after September 1 each year by written request on organization letterhead only. Application forms must be requested each year.  Phone, fax or e-mail requests are not accepted.

Please indicate if you would like a paper copy of the form mailed to you or an electronic Adobe version. If you would like the application e-mailed, please include your e-mail address in your letter rather than a general organization e-mail address.

The Foundation awards grants on an annual basis to valid Internal Revenue Service 501(c)3 organizations. Non-U.S. applicants without a 501(c)3 must complete a notarized affidavit.

 

CAREER: The Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Program is a Foundation-wide activity that offers the National Science Foundation's most prestigious awards in support of early-career faculty who have the potential to serve as academic role models in research and education and to lead advances in the mission of their department or organization. Activities pursued by early-career faculty should build a firm foundation for a lifetime of leadership in integrating education and research. NSF encourages submission of CAREER proposals from early-career faculty at all CAREER-eligible organizations and especially encourages women, members of underrepresented minority groups, and persons with disabilities to apply.

PECASE: Each year NSF selects nominees for the Presidential Early Career Awards for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE) from among the most meritorious recent CAREER awardees. Selection for this award is based on two important criteria:  1) innovative research at the frontiers of science and technology that is relevant to the mission of NSF, and 2) community service demonstrated through scientific leadership, education, or community outreach. These awards foster innovative developments in science and technology, increase awareness of careers in science and engineering, give recognition to the scientific missions of the participating agencies, enhance connections between fundamental research and national goals, and highlight the importance of science and technology for the Nation’s future. Individuals cannot apply for PECASE. These awards are initiated by the participating federal agencies. At NSF, up to twenty nominees for this award are selected each year from among the PECASE-eligible CAREER awardees most likely to become the leaders of academic research and education in the twenty-first century. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy makes the final selection and announcement of the awardees.

 

The Institute of Education Sciences has an overarching priority to support research that contributes to school readiness and improved academic achievement for all students and particularly for those whose education prospects are hindered by inadequate education services and conditions associated with poverty, race/ethnicity, limited English proficiency, disability, and family circumstance. Please read an Overview of IES Research and Research Training Grants Programs for background information. Please note that not all of the Institute's research and research training programs are offered each funding year and that the requirements for research and research training programs may change from one year to the next.

 

FY 2017 Research Programs

In FY 2017, the Institute will support the following research programs (announced in the Federal Register on March 8, 2016).

Education Research

• Education Research Grants (84.305A)
• Statistical and Research Methodology in Education (84.305D)
• Partnerships and Collaborations Focused on Problems of Practice or Policy (84.305H)
  • Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships in Education Research
  • Evaluation of State and Local Education Programs and Policies
• Low-Cost, Short-Duration Evaluation of Education Interventions (84.305L)
• Research Networks Focused on Critical Problems of Education Policy and Practice (84.305N)
  • Exploring Science Teaching in Elementary School Classrooms
  • Scalable Strategies to Support College Completion

Special Education Research

• Special Education Research Grants (84.324A)
• Low-Cost, Short-Duration Evaluation of Special Education Interventions (84.324L)

 

FY 2017 Research Training Programs

In FY 2017, the Institute will support the following research training programs (announced in the Federal Register on March 8, 2016).

• Research Training Programs in the Education Sciences (84.305B)
  • Pathways to the Education Sciences Research Training Program
  • Postdoctoral Research Training in the Education Sciences
  • Methods Training for Education Researchers
• Research Training Programs in Special Education (84.324B)
  • Early Career Development and Mentoring

Other IES Funding Opportunities

• Comprehensive Center Evaluation RFP
• Grants for Statewide, Longitudinal Data Systems
• Unsolicited Grant Opportunities

 

• Myles G. Boylan, telephone: (703) 292-4617, email: mboylan@nsf.gov
• Katherine J. Denniston, telephone: (703) 292-8496, email: kdennist@nsf.gov
• Terry S. Woodin, telephone: (703) 292-4657, email: twoodin@nsf.gov

 

Purpose

International Programs International Travel Awards contribute to internationalization at the University of Iowa by funding the international scholarship and engagement of UI faculty and staff. Through the generous support of the Stanley-UI Foundation Support Organization, International Travel Awards support international travel for research, creative activity, and active conference participation or other collaborative activity.

Deadlines

The first of each month from January through December.

Eligibility

• All University of Iowa tenured, tenure-track, clinical, and research faculty, and International Programs' adjunct faculty, as well as permanent UI Professional & Scientific staff are eligible to apply. (Adjuncts, lecturers, and visitors of any rank in colleges / units other than IP are ineligible to apply.)
• Applications must involve international travel.
• Applications must be received prior to an applicant’s planned travel dates.
• Applications for funding to travel in June of a given year must be submitted before May 1st of that year (because of budgetary considerations related to the University’s fiscal year).
• Applicants are required to seek additional financial support from their departments and colleges and to indicate the level, source, and status of this funding clearly on the application. No application will be considered without information concerning other UI funding sought or awarded. Applicants are also encouraged to seek funds from sources external to the university.
• Attendance at conferences, exhibitions, concerts, or other events without direct and active involvement will normally not warrant funding.
• Only one application may be submitted per funding cycle. Incomplete or late applications will not be considered but may be resubmitted in a subsequent month, assuming all other eligibility criteria (above) are met.
• Preference will be given to applicants who have not recently received an International Travel Award.

Terms of Award

• International Travel Awards will typically range from $700 - $900 (although higher or lower amounts may be awarded in some instances) and can be paid as research and travel expenses only.
• Normally International Programs should notify applicants of awards by the beginning of the month following that in which the application is received (e.g., for applications received by January 1, notifications should be made by early February).
• Funds may be used only for the destination, purpose, and dates that appear in the award application.
• Funds awarded in a given fiscal year may be credited toward travel in the subsequent fiscal year but cannot normally be applied retroactively, that is, toward travel that occurred in a prior fiscal year. (For example, funding awarded in July 2013 may not be used for travel that occurred before that month.)
• Awards must be fully disbursed a) within 120 days following the date of return travel and b) in the fiscal year in which travel concludes.
• Funds will be disbursed upon receipt of a brief report, including the submission of photographs, on the activities connected with the award. See https://international.uiowa.edu/award-feedback-faculty for details. (link sends e-mail)

Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process

Proposals for the International Programs International Travel Awards are reviewed considering the following criteria:

• Highest priority will be given to applicants seeking support for active involvement and meaningful participation in research projects or creative activities involving international topics. Examples include collaborative work with foreign colleagues in venues outside the U.S., or presentations at internationally-based conferences, exhibitions, and performances.
• Attendance at conferences without active participation will normally not warrant funding.
• In an effort to provide resources and opportunities leading to tenure, junior faculty may receive higher levels of funding than other applicants.
• To reward service to International Programs, faculty and staff who are actively involved in our programs and curriculum may receive higher levels of funding.

Application Process

Complete the online application no later than 5 p.m. on the deadline date.

Contact Information

For questions regarding International Travel Awards please contact:

Kelly Kadera
Director of Academic Programs
319-335-1438
kelly-kadera@uiowa.edu

 

We occasionally initiate our own programmes or form initiatives in our areas of interest by issuing calls for proposals on our website, or convening policymakers and practitioners to explore solutions to critical issues.
 

Our principles

While each programme has its own areas of focus, as a whole, we adhere to seven funding principles. These include funding initiatives that:

• target root causes of problems;
• are replicable either within a sector or across geographical locations;
• include plans for long-term sustainability;
• strive to collaborate with like-minded organisations;
• demonstrate good financial and organisational management;
• value the participation of people (including children) and communities; and
• have secured co-funding;
   

Trends in our grant-making

Oak Foundation has an annual grant-making budget of more than USD 200 million and makes grants to organisations located in countries worldwide. See our recent Annual Report for more details on our grant-making.

Our grant-making has evolved over the years and in recent times we have increased:

• the length and size of grants;
• the number of core support grants;
• support to capacity building, policy work, campaigns and new types of social movements; and
• joint programming work to address issues from many different perspectives.

 

Funding Restrictions

We do not provide support to individuals, and do not provide funding for scholarships or tuition assistance for undergraduate or postgraduate studies. We also do not fund religious organisations for religious purposes or election campaigns.

Except in special circumstances or in Zimbabwe, we generally do not provide programme grants under USD 25,000.

 

No longer accepting grant applications.

 

RGK Foundation awards grants in the broad areas of Education, Community, and Health/Medicine.

 

 

This award program is designed to enhance our existing support of autism research by providing timely resources to enable focused experiments highly relevant to our mission. A deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying autism spectrum disorders or potential therapeutic approaches will require investigation at multiple levels, including but not limited to studies focused on gene discovery, molecular mechanisms, circuits, anatomy, and cognition and behavior. We will consider proposals at all of these levels.

The maximum budget is $70,000, including indirect costs for one (1) year, non-renewable.

Explorer Awards are intended to provide resources to support exploratory experiments that will strengthen hypotheses and lead to the formulation of competitive applications for subsequent larger-scale funding by SFARI or other organizations. Innovative, high-risk/high-impact proposals are encouraged. We especially encourage applications from investigators who are new to the field of autism, but who have expertise that could be brought to bear on this complex disorder.

Receiving support for an exploratory grant does not guarantee future support from the Simons Foundation. Requests for supplemental funding from recipients of other SFARI grants will not be entertained.

 

The Small Research Grants program is intended to support education research projects with budgets of $50,000 or less. In keeping with the Spencer Foundation’s mission, this program aims to fund academic work that will contribute to the improvement of education, broadly conceived.
Historically, the work we have funded through these grants has spanned, a range of topics and disciplines, including education, psychology, sociology, economics, history, and anthropology, and they employ a wide range of research methods. The following examples of recently funded small grants illustrate the diversity of what we support:

• an experimental study of how college students use visual representations in solving math problems
• a study exploring the process of racial and rural identity formation among African American high-school students who attend de facto segregated schools in the rural South
• a mixed-methods study focusing on the different types of knowledge novice and experienced teachers draw on in teaching for reading comprehension

The majority of small grant proposals that are funded by the Foundation are “field-initiated” in the sense that they are not submitted in response to a Request for Proposal (RFP). In the past, we have requested that proposals within the Small Grants program be submitted within one of the areas of inquiry listed below. The Foundation does not use this information in the review process, but captures it in the application to better understand the variety of research that is proposed. The areas are broadly organized as follows:

Field-Initiated: Proposals in this area are those that fall under the Spencer Foundation's general mission of funding research on education, but don't appear to fit in one of the areas mentioned below. Although the areas below are broad, there are many projects that don't have a strong focus in any of them; those should be tagged with Field-Initiated as the research area in the online application.

The Relation between Education and Social Opportunity: This area would include projects that seek to shed light on the role education can play in reducing economic and social inequalities -- as well as, sometimes, reinforcing them -- and to find ways to more fully realize education's potential to promote more equal opportunity. Proposals where the primary aim is to examine the ways in which differences in social and educational experiences (such as quality and character of schooling or the number of years in school) translate into differences including employment, earnings, and civic and academic outcomes would be included in this area.

Teaching, Learning, and Instructional Resources: Studies in this area would be those that will lead to better understanding and improvements in the intellectual, material, and organizational resources that contribute to successful teaching and learning. They may investigate questions that are grounded directly in teaching practice, as well as research about important aspects of child and adult learning processes and contexts that hold promise for guiding informed policymaking.

The New Civics: This area represents the broader Foundation belief that cultivating knowledge and new ideas about civic education will ultimately improve students’ lives and enrich society. The designation “new” refers to an expanded understanding of civic education and its relationship to civic action. Thus, proposals with this focus would deepen our understanding of influences on civic action, attend to social inequalities in civic education, and have the potential to shape future research and practice in these fields.

Organizational Learning in Schools, School Systems, and Higher Education Systems: Research in this area would contribute to strengthening the capacity of schools and education systems to operate as learning organizations. Because the capacity and motivation for organizational learning depend as well on the larger institutional structures within which schools and systems operate, research on, among other things, the roles of school boards, governments and unions; the role of markets and competition in the funding of schools; and the perceptions, concerns, and opportunities for voice among parents and the broader public would fall under this area.

Purposes and Values of Education: Proposals in this area would be interested in advancing analytical, historical, and empirical work that probes effectively and creatively into deeply challenging and permanently important issues which can contribute toward social decision-making that moves education along constructive paths.

 

In the Spring of 2014, the Spencer Foundation introduced an ambitious new grant program, The Lyle Spencer Research Awards: Advancing Understanding of Education Practice and Its Improvement. This program is the successor to our long-standing field-initiated major grant program.

With this program, we aim to reinforce our commitment to intellectually ambitious research, oriented ultimately to improving the practice of education, and independent of any particular reform agendas or methodological strictures. This is not at base a change of direction for a foundation that has always aimed to foster creative and open-minded scholarship; it is however an emphatic assertion of our determination to search for and support the most challenging, original, and constructive scholarship and research we can find. We intend through this endeavor to press our colleagues in the research community to raise their level of intellectual ambition, to encourage work that is more thoughtful, more critical of prevailing assumptions, more self-critical about their own work and its limitations, and more relevant to the aim of building knowledge for improved educational practice.

We aim to give excellent work undertaken in this spirit more visibility and greater opportunity for support. We have noted that the more open-ended type of investigation we seek has been under something of a shadow in recent years, as foundations devoted to “strategic philanthropy” have increasingly used research instrumentally, to help pursue their pre-determined goals. This is certainly a legitimate way for a foundation to operate, but when it becomes widespread, it tends to curtail the range of questions and possibilities that get explored. We have also taken note that the popularity of doing research to learn “what works” has a tendency to squeeze out deeper questions of how, when, for whom, and why an intervention works. The current climate is often also not welcoming of work that explores systematically whether some set of predefined purposes or those outcomes measured in a “what works” experiment are the right ones to focus on. Questions of what and how to measure, and what and how to value the things we do measure, need more attention than they get.

It is vital to make clear that in seeking to support work that is less tied to particular policy agendas or particular research methods, we are not aiming to pursue knowledge for its own sake or taking the view that anything goes. We believe that in fact the kind of searching inquiry that we aim to promote and support is not only quite demanding but also deeply relevant, indeed essential, to the “lasting improvement in education” that our founder Lyle Spencer challenged his foundation to promote. We want the scholars who seek our support to have convincing, well-reasoned answers to the question: How in the end does the work you are undertaking contribute to making the practice of education better?

In foregrounding the notion of “education practice” we risk misunderstanding. We do not intend that this program should seek only directly applied research about interactions between teachers and students, important as such research is. Successful educational practice depends upon an infrastructure that includes the conditions under which teachers practice, the curricular frameworks that guide their work, the provision made for their training and professional development, and so on. We envision a large-minded conception of educational practice that encompasses the institutional, policy, and normative frameworks within which instructional practice is enacted. Moreover, we recognize as well that instruction is not confined to the classroom but is an aspect of life in settings that can range from the workplace to the playing field, any of which may in the right circumstance provide the basis for rewarding study.

To clarify this point about connecting to practice – connecting the dots, as it were – we suggest that a significant share of the successful proposals we will fund under this initiative will fall into one of three broad categories.

• Studies that focus more or less directly on teaching and learning processes themselves, at the classroom level (or in instructional settings outside classrooms).
• Studies that pay attention to the larger policy and institutional environments within which educational transactions take place. Key to our interest here is attention to the conceptual and empirical links between elements of the infrastructure and the actual character of educational practice. Studies that aim at better understanding how different ways of defining, measuring, and rewarding teacher performance affect teachers’ professional goals, time use, and understanding of success would fall into this category.
• Studies that help develop research tools that can support advancing the kinds of research we have identified here. The development of improved measurement tools, stronger theoretical frameworks and analytical methods, and the development of new databases and the archiving of data bases we have – none of these will make educational practice better today, but we regard advances on these fronts as essential to that lasting improvement in education that we seek.

These three categories might be labeled studies of instructional practice, of the educational infrastructure that supports or hinders effective practice, and of the research infrastructure that supports inquiry into educational practice. These categories are definitely not meant to be either exhaustive or mutually exclusive, but we think they do helpfully map the terrain. One point we emphasize particularly: scholars whose work is identified in one of the three general buckets we have roughly identified often come out of very different research traditions across which communication is often wanting. There are good reasons for specialization, but we want to stress that in our initiative we see these strands of work as deeply related. Failure to examine the connections or appreciate their importance is in fact one of the problems we aim to address through this initiative.

We are convinced that there are excellent opportunities for interesting, eye-opening, and rigorous work to be done by those who push at the boundaries of prevailing research and policy frameworks. As a way of pointing toward possible opportunities, we present here a few stylized examples of kinds of work that are of interest.

• Often reports on experiments have focused scholarly attention on the average effect of an intervention on all those who were treated (or at least who were selected for treatment), even though in large studies different experimental sites often display quite different outcomes. The variation in outcomes across experimental sites as well as across population subgroups may yield important information about how, why, and for whom interventions “work” – information that is too often submerged in average effects.
• The attention focused on seeking out successful interventions seems to have diverted attention from another type of causal research, which is to explain what caused certain things to happen. Why, for example, did the black-white test score gap fall significantly during the 1980s and then roughly stagnate for many years thereafter? Claude Steele’s celebrated work on stereotype threat is a fine example of seeking an explanation for an observed phenomenon: that particular groups of people (African Americans or women on math tests; white men in basketball) do worse than expected under test conditions. Steele’s insightful work has since led to interventions to combat the effects of stereotype threats, but it is important to note that these interventions were based on knowledge gained in explaining observed phenomena.
• At a time when causal research is gaining in prestige and effectiveness in education scholarship, we may sometimes overlook valuable work on description, measurement, and conceptual clarification. Growth in understanding often depends on developing ways to measure or describe phenomena of interest clearly, reliably, and insightfully. The terms we use to label phenomena can often carry unacknowledged theoretical weight. Talk of “teacher” quality invites thinking about personal characteristics; “teaching” quality directs attention to the work of teaching. Labeling as “non-cognitive” those qualities that are not captured in tests of academic learning presupposes a quite narrow conception of cognition.
• There are, finally, many challenging questions that can be found in the borderlands of empirical research and normative questions of value and purpose – the “why” of education, one might say, along with the how and where and for whom. Problems that range from the comparative merits of different ways of defining and measuring educational inequality to the limits of parents’ authority to determine the terms of their children’s education provide rich opportunity for fruitful investigation.

We hope these few illustrations convey something of the wide range of questions and approaches we are open to. But as open as we intend to be about problems and techniques, we do want to be clear that our consistent aim is to support work that has the clear potential to contribute to improved education practice, understanding practice and the conditions of practice in the large-minded way we described earlier.

Hallmarks of the research we seek to fund include conceptual and empirical attention to educational practice and a determination to approach research with well-reasoned and constructive skepticism toward the unexamined assumptions that shape current beliefs, actions, and research agendas.

 

• Direct Impact

• Organizational Impact and Research

1. Postsecondary retention and degree completion among the populations of focus noted above;
2. Student financial aid, to include self-help aid, such as student or parent loans; or
3. Transfers, persistence, degree attainment and career placement for community college students including examination or evaluations of promising practices for community college advising.

• Strategic Impact

1. Leverage other resources (funding/intellectual) and partnerships with foundations, corporations, and institutions
2. Affect/benefit a critical mass of eligible individuals (target community)
3. Inform institutional/organizational policy and/or macro-level policy discussions
4. Use viable evaluation methods and data

• There is a compelling rationale and need for the proposed project.
• The project's goals/objectives are clearly and directly tied to measurable deliverables/outcomes/expectations, identified by each applicant as a part of the proposal.
• There are collaborative partnerships to help augment the impact of the grant and that the efforts will promote increased coordination among organizations and institutions within the community. Letters of support or copies of memoranda of understanding must be included with the full application for any proposed organizational partners.
• There is sufficient institutional/organizational or other support to ensure that the efforts will be implemented and continued if the project intends to remain in place beyond the grant period.
• The efforts have the potential to inform practices or policy development, increase knowledge across the higher education community, or could be adapted by other organizations or institutions.

• Annual fund-raising events or general sustaining drives
• Performances or competition expenses
• Building infrastructure, physical plant, and/or brick-and-mortar construction
• Motor vehicles
• Endowments
• Debt retirements
• Indirect costs
• Lobbying efforts, to include attempts to influence specific legislation

 

 

To ensure that all children get the development and education they need as a foundation for independence and success, the foundation seeks opportunities to invest in early child development (ages zero to eight), leading to reading proficiency by third grade, high school graduation, and pathways to meaningful employment. 

All children need the support of parents and community to assure their healthy development and education. The foundation is partnering with organizations working on early childhood education, with a commitment to whole child development, educational advocacy, family literacy, innovative educational practices, policy reform and lifelong learning. The foundation focuses on communities where children and families are most in need of high quality early intervention to achieve success by third grade and maintain it beyond. The foundation's approach is both bottom-up and top-down. The foundation seeks opportunities to increase its strategic presence by investing in national organizations and their networks. At state and local levels, the foundation simultaneously explores approaches to helping children and families in ways supported by their local communities.

The foundation's strategies and programs in this funding area are as follows:
1. Whole Child Development - Support comprehensive and integrated approaches to healthy child development that strengthen the social, emotional, cognitive, physical, cultural and civic development of young children.

2. Family Literacy - Give the knowledge, skills, tools and environmental support that parents, guardians, extended family members and caregivers need to successfully navigate systems and advocate on behalf of individual children's development and well-being.

3. Educational Advocacy - Support parents, students, educators and others in their efforts to change the formal educational system in ways that help children succeed in school and life.

 

Requirements: Academic Institution, Nonprofit

 

Funding Type: Program or Curriculum Development or Provision

 

Award ceiling not specified.

 

• School Leadership: Strengthening the leadership of principals and other key figures to improve student achievement.
• After School: Helping cities improve access to high-quality after-school programs through coordinating the work of government agencies, private funders, nonprofits and others groups.
• Summer and Expanded Learning: Supporting school district and other efforts to expand learning time during summer and the school day or year.
• Arts Education: Expanding arts learning opportunities for children and teens in school and beyond.
• Audience Development for the Arts: Supporting arts organizations to develop and test ideas for reaching new audiences so that many more people might enjoy the benefits of the arts.

 

Wells Fargo makes contributions in areas that we believe are important to the future of our nation's vitality and success. Our first priority is to support programs and organizations whose chief purpose is to benefit low- and moderate-income individuals and families. We look for projects that keep our communities strong, diverse, and vibrant. 

Wells Fargo makes grants in three primary areas:

Community Development

Wells Fargo supports the improvement of our local communities through programs that:

• Create and sustain affordable housing for low- and moderate-income individuals
• Promote economic development by financing small businesses or small farms
• Provide job training and workforce development
• Provide financial education and promote economic empowerment
• Help to revitalize low- and moderate-income communities

Education

Wells Fargo supports organizations that:

• Work to eliminate the pre-K – 12th grade achievement gap through services that support low- and moderate-income students.
• Provide mentoring and out-of-school programs.
• Facilitate merit-based access to higher education for underrepresented groups.

Human Services

Wells Fargo supports social and human service organizations whose work chiefly benefits at risk populations and:

• Addresses critical needs such as hunger and homelessness
• Promotes leadership, empowerment, and inclusion
• Promotes wellness education and services

Wells Fargo also considers grants in the following area:

Community Engagement

Wells Fargo will consider requests from organizations that enhance a community's quality of life, diversity, and environment through projects involving:

• Community Beautification
• Community Education
• Cultural Diversity
• Access to cultural experiences for low- and moderate-income individuals
• Availability of a broad array of artistic opportunities and venues that reflect the community's diversity
• Arts and cultural educational programs
• Conservation of natural resources
• Environmental education
• Transitions to a sustainable environment