Back to Grammarly

District AI Index — Vendor Score Report

Grammarly

by Grammarly Inc. · Report generated 4/13/2026

Executive Summary

8.2
Overall Score (of 10)
Recommended
Rating
Teacher Use Only
Privacy Status
Freemium
Pricing Model

“A mature, trusted writing tool with genuine AI capabilities. Education plans make it district-appropriate.”

Dimension Score Breakdown

9
Ease of Use
Weight: 20%
Excellent
8
Instructional Value
Weight: 40% (highest)
Strong
7
Data Privacy
Weight: 20%
Adequate
8
Accessibility
Weight: 20%
Strong

Ease of Use

9/10Excellent

Strengths

  • Exceptionally intuitive interface — minimal training required
  • Strong integration ecosystem (Google Docs, Microsoft Word, Canvas)
  • Supports common K–12 SSO/rostering (Google or Clever)
  • Free tier available for individual teacher evaluation

Gaps Identified

No critical gaps identified.

Recommendations to Improve Score

  • Support Clever and/or ClassLink for district rostering

Instructional Value

8/10Strong

Strengths

  • Strong instructional alignment with clear classroom applications
  • Versatile use cases: Writing improvement, Grammar feedback, Tone adjustment
  • Rich feature set with 5 documented capabilities
  • Clear instructional fit documentation provided

Gaps Identified

  • Significant limitations: Lesson planning, Math instruction

Recommendations to Improve Score

  • Publish detailed alignment documentation to pedagogy, standards, and instructional frameworks (UDL, Bloom's)
  • Expand grade-level coverage or provide grade-specific implementation guides
  • Consider pursuing alignment documentation with Common Core, NGSS, or state-specific standards

Data Privacy

7/10Adequate

Strengths

  • 3 compliance certifications verified: FERPA Compliant, SOC 2 Type II, DPA Available
  • FERPA Compliant documentation publicly accessible
  • SOC 2 Type II documentation publicly accessible
  • DPA Available documentation publicly accessible

Gaps Identified

  • COPPA Compliant: Not documented — critical gap for district adoption
  • Overall privacy level assessed as 'Medium' — not yet District Ready

Recommendations to Improve Score

  • Verify and document COPPA compliance if the tool is used by or collects data from students under 13
  • Explicitly document whether user/student data is used for AI model training — districts will ask

Accessibility

8/10Strong

Strengths

  • Strong accessibility posture across the platform
  • Screen reader compatibility noted

Gaps Identified

  • No VPAT/ACR document published — districts with Section 508 requirements will flag this

Recommendations to Improve Score

  • Commission a VPAT 2.5 / Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) and publish it on your website — this is increasingly a procurement requirement
  • Ensure full keyboard navigation throughout the application
  • Test with screen readers (VoiceOver, NVDA, JAWS) and document compatibility
  • Reference specific WCAG success criteria in your accessibility documentation

Compliance Gaps

SignalCurrent StatusAction Required
COPPA CompliantNot documentedObtain COPPA Compliant certification/documentation

VPAT / ACR Assessment

StatusNot published
ImpactDistricts with Section 508 obligations may be unable to procure this tool
RecommendationCommission a VPAT 2.5 ACR and publish it publicly on your accessibility page

Priority Actions to Improve Score

The following actions would have the highest impact on your District AI Index score, listed in priority order:

  1. 1Verify and document COPPA compliance if the tool is used by or collects data from students under 13
  2. 2Explicitly document whether user/student data is used for AI model training — districts will ask
  3. 3Commission a VPAT 2.5 / Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) and publish it on your website — this is increasingly a procurement requirement
  4. 4Ensure full keyboard navigation throughout the application
  5. 5Publish detailed alignment documentation to pedagogy, standards, and instructional frameworks (UDL, Bloom's)

Scoring Methodology

Scores are assigned by the District AI Index editorial team across four dimensions. Instructional Value carries the highest weight (40%) because our primary audience — educators and district leaders — prioritize tools that genuinely improve teaching and learning. Overall Score = (Ease × 0.20) + (Instructional Value × 0.40) + (Privacy × 0.20) + (Accessibility × 0.20). Scores are not influenced by listing tier, affiliate status, or vendor relationships.

Full methodology: districtaiindex.com/editorial-policy

Questions About This Report?

If you believe any information is inaccurate or have updated compliance documentation, contact our editorial team.

Contact Editorial Team