Skip to content

Space Technology Research Grants (STRG)

Established: 2026-04-05 | Data snapshot: 2026-04-04

Program Summary

STRG funds university-led R&D grants, typically 1-3 year projects at TRL 1-4. The program is NASA's main mechanism for engaging academia in foundational technology research, complementing SBIR/STTR (which is industry-focused) and NIAC (which is concept-phase). STRG projects are run by academic PIs at US universities, often with NASA center collaborators.

STRG has the highest TRL data quality of any major program (98.7% coverage) and a distinctive TRL profile: tightly clustered at TRL 2-3 with almost nothing above TRL 5.

Data quality: HIGH — best TRL coverage, strong descriptions, university-structured reporting.

Quantitative Snapshot

Field Value Source
Total projects 1,102 aggregate by program
Active 195 (17.7%) aggregate by status filter
Completed 907 (82.3%) implied
Program ID 69 techport_programs
Mission Directorate STMD techport_programs
Parent Program Catalyst techport_programs

17.7% active rate is the second-highest of any large program (only MCO is higher at ~40%). A large recent cohort (IDs 183xxx, updated 2026-01-23) was added in early 2026, suggesting a new grant cycle.

TRL Distribution

TRL Count %
3 693 62.9%
2 266 24.1%
4 123 11.2%
(none) 14 1.3%
5 6 0.5%

Coverage: 98.7% — the most reliable TRL data in TechPort. TRL 2-3 = 87.0%. TRL 5+ is only 0.5% — consistent with grants that rarely advance to full prototype level.

See trl-distributions.md for comparison with other programs.

Active Projects Snapshot (195 total, 2026-04-04)

Sample of active STRG projects:

ID Title Lead Org TX Area TRL
156318 Institute for Model-Based AM Qualification Carnegie Mellon TX12.4.1 Manufacturing 2
118450 Rotating Detonation Engine Simulation U Illinois TX01.3.4 Airbreathing Propulsion 2
118383 Advanced Computational Center for EDL CU Boulder TX09.4.5 EDL Modeling 2
183683 Directed Energy Propulsion with Lightsails U Minnesota TX01.4.6 Advanced Propulsion —
183676 MW-Scale Generator for NEP Colorado School of Mines TX01.4.5 Nuclear Electric —
183686 Stabilized Z-Pinch Fusion Propulsion UT Austin TX01.4.6 Advanced Propulsion —
183685 Superconducting Power Transmission U Chicago TX03.3.2 Distribution —
183700 Piezoelectric Power Conversion for Lunar UC Berkeley TX03.3.3 Conversion —
183693 Lightweight Deployable Solar Reflectors Stanford TX03.1.1 Photovoltaics —
183697 Origami Diffractive Sail Purdue TX01.4.6 Advanced Propulsion —

Key observations: - Older active projects (IDs 118xxx, 156xxx, 158xxx) show TRL 2 — standard for mid-term grants - Newest cohort (183xxx, updated 2026-01-23) have no TRL yet — newly awarded - Strong university pedigree: Carnegie Mellon, CU Boulder, MIT, Stanford, Purdue, Georgia Tech, etc. - Topic breadth: advanced propulsion (nuclear, fusion, light sails), EDL, manufacturing, power systems, materials

Notable thematic clusters in active STRG: - Advanced propulsion: nuclear thermal/electric, fusion, directed energy — multiple grants in exotic propulsion - EDL (Entry, Descent, Landing): computational modeling and simulation tools - Lunar power: fuel cells, photovoltaics, power conversion for surface systems - Manufacturing: additive manufacturing qualification, AM modeling

See topics/strg-active-portfolio.md for full TX distribution analysis, cluster breakdowns, and the TX17 GN&C discovery (session 41).

Lead Organizations (Active)

From aggregate (active projects, all programs): universities prominent in STRG include MIT (17 total active), CU Boulder (17), UT Austin (16), Georgia Tech (11), U Michigan (10), Purdue (10), Caltech (9), UIUC (9). Many of these are STRG-heavy schools.

Outcome Tracking

Full-database query, 2026-04-06 (session 35). Data snapshot: 2026-04-04.

Transitioned_To: 103 projects (9.4% of 1,102) — confirmed, 2nd highest per-project rate of any program (behind NIAC 11.6%). This is 5× higher than SBIR/STTR (1.8%).

Partner type distribution (robust sample, n=29, sessions 35–36):

Category Count/29 % Named examples
Other NASA Program/Directorate ~18 ~62% SMD (4909) ×4, NIAC (2558) ×2, FO (2541) ×2, GCD (130) ×1, SBIR (2571) ×1, SST (2573) ×1, LaRC center ×1, JPL center ×2, unnamed NASA ×3
Other Government Agency (OGA) ~6 ~21% NSF (551) ×2, DoD (4835) ×1, USDA ARS (4939) ×1, unnamed OGA ×2
International 1 3% European Service Module (2540) ×1
Academia 1 3% Unnamed academia continuation ×1
Other/unlabeled ~3 ~10% "Other" (industry or unknown) ×3

Named destination breakdown (dominant NASA targets): - SMD: fundamental science results absorbed by SMD for mission development - NSF: results with broad scientific value picked up by basic research funder — a "reverse infusion" path - NIAC: STRG concepts graduating to NIAC Phase I/II (e.g., Mars atmosphere aerocapture → NIAC [11492], insect brain model → NIAC [4327]) - FO: hardware/algorithm results ready for flight testing (e.g., cryogenic propellant modeling [91735], flux pinning robotics [91473]) - DoD: dual-use technology (optical communications [96220] → DoD, photonics [91516] → unnamed OGA/defense) - Industry transitions: rare in this sample (~5%), consistent with STRG's academic mission

Key interpretation: STRG Transitioned_To records are genuine and diverse — not administrative noise. SMD dominates (~25-30% of all named targets), but the OGA tail is substantial (~21%) and more diverse than any other program sampled. NSF as a downstream funder is unique to STRG. FO-as-destination reflects STRG supplying algorithms/models that then need flight validation. The NIAC-as-destination confirms that STRG → NIAC is a documented pipeline for concept maturation.

Contrast with other programs: - GCD Transitioned_To: nearly all mission programs (ISS, SLS, SMD) — hardware-to-mission transfers - CIF Transitioned_To: center-specific (GSFC→HRP, JSC→ECI) — internal center seeding - SBIR Transitioned_To: NASA-internal dominant but with higher "Other" unlabeled (~35-40%) — industry more likely but poorly tracked

Outcome tracking rating: ★★★★ — Transitioned_To coverage is genuine and high. Infused_To records exist (41 STRG Infused_To in TechPort) but carry weak attribution (no partner, no project ID) — not interpretable as mission infusion. Closed_Out full count not yet queried.

Completed Projects — Key Observations

STRG completed projects are well-documented with 103 confirmed Transitioned_To outcomes.

Sample completed STRG projects with strong outcomes: - 4263 — Automatic Parallelization for Space Computing → SMD - 4287 — High-Fidelity Ablation/CFD Modeling: 2 Transitioned_To - 4293 — Flow Boiling Heat Transfer → 3 outcomes - 4319 — CubeSat Control System → 4 Transitioned_To outcomes - 91466 — Aerothermodynamic CFD → European Service Module (ESM) - 91732 — Engineering Cyanobacteria → USDA Agricultural Research Service

Data Quality

Field Quality Notes
TRL ★★★★★ (98.7%) Best in TechPort
Description ★★★★ Academic grant descriptions are thorough
Contacts ★★★★ PI + co-investigators typical
Library items ★★ Not checked systematically; likely lower than NIAC
Outcome tracking ★★★★ 103 Transitioned_To (9.4%, 2nd highest rate); Infused_To weak attribution
TX assignment ★★★★ Not checked but expected good

Threads for Phase 2

  1. Technology substance: STRG covers fundamental topics that feed future mission capabilities. Reading documents from STRG grants could reveal what NASA considers the key open research questions.
  2. Propulsion cluster: Advanced propulsion appears prominently in active STRG (nuclear, fusion, light sails) — a theme worth deeper investigation.
  3. Transition tracking: 103 Transitioned_To confirmed (session 35). Partners include SMD (dominant), USDA, European Service Module, Prizes/Challenges. SMD→STRG pipeline is the key structural finding. A systematic breakdown by partner type (NASA vs OGA vs international) across all 103 would be valuable.
  4. STRG vs SBIR topic overlap: Do SBIR companies pick up where STRG grants leave off? Investigating the TX overlap between programs could reveal handoff patterns.