math123

Depends what state, but you will have to pay federal income taxes at a minimum. The portion of your award not used for tuition is considered taxable income. Generally, expect to pay about 10-15 percent. You'll have to make quarterly (estimated) payments to the IRS to avoid heavy penalties in April. Your institution should provide you with the necessary information. Be forewarned, many schools do not withhold taxes on your behalf; you'll have to do this yourself.

It's just a facade. Even after they put the info onto their server, the "default" award list won't be populated until they change the html to allow "2009" to appear in the drop-down menu. Point is, you catch them in between. It may not work, but it did last year. It gives me something to do. ;-)

I'm not hacking anything. I'm just editing the html file to allow me to see what's already there (albeit poorly hidden); nothing more, nothing less. The trick is explained in the previous year's thread if you are interested.

If the past few years are any indication, they should be making a slip-up sometime soon. I keep trying that html trick from last year. Eventually, I'm convinced, it will work...

That's not true. If you have an offer, they can't make you decide before April 15. As a result, you most likely won't get off the wait-list, if indeed you do, prior to April 15.

I'd like to believe you (and your sources) but I'm skeptical unless it's in writing. Needless to say, a generic boost in funding toward NSF is in no way a guarantee of increased number of graduate fellowships, this year, or in the future. But again, I hope you are right!

As potential grad students, citations are probably best ;-)

Are you still talking to me?

Well, "finalized" can be a relative term. From experience, it seems to mean that decisions, in total, are made at that time. Most of the schools let their offers be known quite early and just reject everyone later; it may be a few days later, or a few weeks later. Nevertheless, it can be quite cruel making people wait unnecessarily. Your profile seems quite impressive. Although it's a bit surprising you haven't heard anything yet, I guess it goes to show you you can't always rely on having solid numbers, etc. getting you in. Good Luck!

It's not as simple as "a few spots opening up." All schools take into account a few students deciding to go elsewhere instead. I think all of the schools you applied to have made their offers already, with the exception of Princeton.

My panel finished today! Why do they have to wait another month and a half to tell us? Ugh.

Jim, I would recommend seeing it through. The two-body problem is quite prevalent in academia. If you were to get in somewhere (and your wife didn't), and the department really wanted you, they'll pull strings. Now while every case is different, I've heard of departments un-rejecting the applicant's significant other simply to appease the person they really wanted. Egos may get hurt, your department may have a policy against this sort of thing, but at least give yourself that option in case.

From the FAQs: 30. Should I send a transcript of my grades after I complete my courses this fall for the GRFP? No. As part of the applications process, you should submit Official Transcripts of your academic records, graduate and undergraduate, completed as of the date of application. 47. Since applicants can't revise an application after it's been submitted, how do I make changes to my references in the application for the GRFP? After an application has been submitted, changes can only be made to References through the Manage References link listed under the Application Optional Task List.

Notification tends to be at the end of March / early April. Yeah, pretty lame considering the panels finish by mid-February anyway.

Maybe he thought you were a woman? But to answer your question, the application can not be changed.

touche. best of luck to you. hopefully we both have better luck this go around.

Ok, I retract the latter statement. But, I still don't think the numbers add up. I'm pretty sure I assumed NSF asks for money each year. I think the point I'm trying to make is that they didn't request enough money to make 1600 awards (to agree with your math and the article's contention). The budget says they requested 125 million for 2009; end of story. There are 913 second-years and 920 third-years. At 40,500 a pop, that's 74 236 500. So of the 125 million they asked for, there is only 50 763 500 left for first-years. That is, enough for 1253 awards (best case). Which, I think is the point of confusion. It is enough for about 30 percent more awards than last year, but is not the same 30 percent the article makes you believe.

btw, I got my numbers from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/ anyway, having re-read that blurb, the numbers there don't even make sense. they said they requested a modest 32 percent budget increase (didn't seem to fly) which the author said could lead to 700 new awards. Just ask yourself, how can you effectively double the number of awards on 30 percent more money while not affecting the total value of the award? I suppose the NSF could have cut other programs, etc, but I don't know. Seems fishy.

Yeah, I wish, but somehow I feel things will be different now since the economy sucks. Notwithstanding the bailout, the NSF has always seemed to put out liberal estimates on the number of awards to be given. Last year it was 1,100--and the end result was 913 awards. That's a 17 percent markdown. This year the estimate is 900-1600 (per the announcement). I hope, as I'm sure you do, that it is closer to the latter than the former number. However, looking at the current budget request, it seems to remain unchanged at 125 million (30 percent increase, according to them from the previous year) for mid-year adjustments. Whether you use the 30 percent figure or the 125 million one, I don't see how they could have foreseen 1600 awards. Using the former: 913*1.30 =1187 awards. Given the 125 million take away the previous two years of 913+920 = 1833 awards @ 40,500 a piece is about enough for 1253 awards this year. So, let's split it even and say 1,220 awards at best, with something like 1,015 more likely. But let's hope I'm wrong and there are 1600 awards ;-)

dude, snowcapk, you have an NDSEG already, why not give other people a chance?

ok now i'm sad. NSF is a bunch of douches. They should have just leveled with us. Contrary to their thinking, prolonging the inevitable doesn't make me feel any better.

bioangele, i'm with you. this makes me more panicky now. it's all or nothing, at this point. and you would think, with the NSF funding the best and brightest, one of the students would learn how to hack their system. i'm not surprised. EDIT: typo

dude, my heart was beating so fast as i scrolled down. my name is not there. so either, that's good, or i'm shit out of luck. EDIT: snowcapk, is your name there?

infinite, it was this poster I think he's referring to. you might have missed it amidst all the confusion earlier. that's why I think you shouldn't be so pessimistic :wink:

i share that optimism. someone called and said not everyone could see the offer yet. sure, cynics out there will just say they were being nice. who knows. and although not everyone who wins an award ventures onto this forum, i find it hard to believe that we only have a half dozen or so winners to congratulate. just seems ill-proportioned. I'm still keeping my fingers crossed.