Goose Creek CISD reports more than $6.5 million in outside grants to expand STEM, literacy and teacher development

Goose Creek Consolidated Independent School District staff told the Board of Trustees on Oct. 6 that the district has secured more than $6.5 million in supplemental outside funding for 2025–26 to support student programs, professional development and targeted campus intervention.

Sarah (last name not stated), a member of the district’s Curriculum and Innovation (CNI) team, told trustees, "we've received over $6,500,000 in outside funding," and then outlined student‑facing awards, teacher supports and reimbursement programs supporting special education costs.

Key student‑facing grants described by staff included: - Artist Boat programs focused on conservation and hands‑on workshops; - ExxonMobil STEM funding including robotics equipment for junior highs and VR headsets for career exploration; - ExxonMobil Science Wetlands and MathCounts supports; - LASSO (Learning Acceleration Support Opportunities) planning and implementation grants administered by the Texas Education Agency (TEA) in partnership with ESC Region 4; and - A Texas Reads Texas Leads (Moody Foundation) award to aid Goose Creek’s move from a "balanced literacy" to a "structured literacy" approach (staff said Goose Creek is one of eight Texas districts awarded that grant).

Presenters emphasized that some grants require substantial administrative effort and external partnerships. Sarah and other presenters noted that LASSO funding requires an ESC Region 4 partnership and that roughly 50% of certain awards is contracted to Region 4 as product and implementation advisors — a contractual requirement, not a discretionary payment. "There is a note there with that asterisk, because this is TEA funded, we must partner with our ESC region 4 to meet the assurances or mandates of these grants," staff said.

Staff listed additional funding and pending applications: a Port Houston Maritime Outreach award ($7,500) to support Lee High School’s maritime recruitment; a pending NOAA environmental literacy grant application (about $690,000, pending notification); special‑education reimbursements including a discretionary residential reimbursement (approximately $50,000), a Cycle 1 educators award ($26,000) and a high‑cost fund award (about $228,000); and $27,000 from the Gracious Foundation for robotics center support.

District leaders also explained administrative treatment of grant funds: when the district submits expenditure reports it receives reimbursements, and many grants are coded to separate fund accounts so they do not mix with the district’s general fund. Ginger McKay and others explained that grants commonly require deliverables, committees and multi‑session drafting and review processes (for example, the LASSO planning grant includes drafting committees, RBIS training and TEA review and scoring). "That is one of the easier grants that we have," a staff presenter said of the LASSO planning grant, while also warning trustees that grant work can be labor intensive.

Trustees asked how outside funding affects low‑performing campuses; staff replied that several grants were targeted at identified campuses and cited double‑digit gains at three elementary campuses that received Effective Schools Framework (ESF) supports and related grant interventions. Presenters repeatedly framed the awards as supplemental supports rather than replacements for core funding.

No board action was required for the informational presentation; the administration said some awards remain pending and will be brought forward in future budget amendments or agenda items as required.