survivorGuilt

MochaMocha: Every other year the STAR Fellows meet at a conference in DC, part of the time is spent meeting with members of Congress and/or their staffers to talk about the importance of science. This effort is partially supported by AAAS, who has extensive lobbying, including a Science Policy Fellowships. AGU also has a science policy branch. About that EPA STAR Conference: As a current STAR Fellow I received an email that the STAR Fellow Conference has been canceled for this year, from this page: dubstep:drop da NaOH: Fellows who are selected are told not to tell anyone about winning because the Fellowship is not official until the paperwork is filed. The EPA does not want to start the extensive Fellowship paperwork until after they know that the selected Fellow will accept, that is why the "secret" phone call occurs first. For example, the EPA does not want the candidates school to issue a press release until the Fellowship has been approved. This applies to the first through the last Fellow notified. Good luck to everyone.

As a successful applicant this year I can add some information. (By the way, I was an unsuccessful applicant last year). I received a phone call the week before Memorial Day 2011 letting me know I was "recommended for funding". There appears to be several steps, only some of which are transparent, between "recommended for funding" and "funded". I had a some forms to fill out and files to upload, including a letter from my adviser stating I had satisfactory performance academically and in research, and that my research topic had not changed significantly from what I submitted with my application. This paperwork had to be complete by June 3, 2011. Next, there are a series of steps the EPA needs to take, including a 5 business day hold on the award letter. This places the absolute earliest of the award letter reaching me to be June 10th, and more likely sometime around the middle of the month. Very possibly longer, considering how things have been dragging out this far. The steps between "recommended for funding" and "funded" are detailed on page four of the Star Fellows Handbook. If you google "EPA STAR Fellows Handbook" you'll see the pdf of the handbook at a scgcorp.com webpage. The introduction to the handbook says it was designed, in part, to be "a useful informational document for the general public to better understand the purpose and processes related to EPA’s STAR Graduate Fellowship Program", so I encourage you to share it with future applicants to the STAR Fellowship. My hypothesis on the few waiting to hear is that they are unofficial alternates. There's the possibility that some people "recommended for funding" are not funded, due to not meeting requirements (for instance for use of live animals). It's easier to keep an alternate list, than it is to call someone who was declined for funding and offer them funding. Even if 98.7% of the applicants recommended are funded, that still leaves 2 slots open (assuming 150 slots total). If you want, I'll post again when I receive the "award package". Edit (twice) to fix weird formatting.