SUCCESS METRICS
WASHINGTON, D.C.
2021-2022 SCHOOL YEAR
GOAL 1
Increase STEM literacy, curiosity, and identity in youth from historically under-resourced communities.
GOAL 2
Increase the capacity of schools and community organizations to implement high-quality, informal STEM learning experiences in historically under-resourced communities.
GOAL 1
Increase STEM literacy, curiosity, and identity in youth from historically under-
resourced communities.
How much did we do?
77
Number of STEM Learning Experiences
744
Number of Youth served
262
Unique youth served
5
Number of program sites
1
Number of schools LETS GO partnered with to deliver services
2
Number of youth organizations LETS GO partnered with to deliver services
How well did we do?
10%
Average % growth in STEM knowledge indicated by content assessments
100%
% partners reporting positive impact on their students
Is anyone better off?
75%
% of students who report positive change for STEM engagement
50%
% of students who report positive change for STEM identity (4th grade and above)
75%
% of students who report positive change for STEM curiosity (4th grade and above)
100%
% of students who report positive change for STEM career interest (6th grade and above)
GOAL 2
Increase the capacity of schools and community organizations to implement high-quality, informal STEM learning experiences in historically under-resourced communities.
How much did we do?
7
Number of STEM instructor training workshops for partner staff/instructors
48
Number of STEM instructor training workshop participants/headcount
19
Number of unique STEM instructor training workshop participants
How well did we do?
89%
% instructors trained STRONGLY agreed that training content was useful and relevant (Workshop Training Evaluation)
89%
% of instructors trained STRONGLY agreed that the training met their expectations (Workshop Training Evaluation)
89%
% of instructors trained STRONGLY agreed that they knew they could reach out to LETS GO for support as they brought STEM to their classrooms (Workshop Training Evaluation)
Is anyone better off?
67%
% of instructors trained STRONGLY agreed that they were competent to teach students about the Engineering Design process and/or the Scientific Method (Workshop Training Evaluation)
78%
% of instructors trained STRONGLY agreed that they could deliver the STEM content taught in the training (Workshop Training Evaluation)
67%
% of instructors trained STRONGLY agreed that they were able to engage students in STEM practices (Workshop Training Evaluation)