foobaraq

I think confirmed is a little strong... perhaps it might be more appropriate to say that it has been suggested without evidence by one or two participants in an anonymous forum. I'd be a little surprised if the NSF started getting sociopolitical with the GRFP awards... My guess: 420 new awards, evenly distributed.

The first person to say that to my face is going to get punched in the nose.

I dunno... seems like a pretty low number to me... most of us had ~10% odds to begin with. Of course, this reflects my opinion that an HM isn't all that H. Has anyone looked closely at the .xls award list for the first 950 and computed discipline representation? I only saw about 2/3 of the number of awards given in my discipline compared to the last 2-3 years.

I wonder if the GRFP operations folks have firmer answers on the number of additional awards now that the announcement appears to be imminent... Anyone wanna do a little sweet-talking?

probably just a practice run....

Does anyone have any concrete information regarding what time of day announcements were made in 2008 and 2007?

I had no idea the first 950 were announced so early in the morning... I'm tempted to write a script to query the page and spam me with text messages as soon as the 950 turns into 1???.

Mehhh... Hard to imagine they will award more than 1600 this year then... The previous messages that indicated the total number of awards would be in the lower end of 900-1600 were probably right...

"very near" pshhhhhhh.

blah2009: How much correspondence have you had w/ the nsf director? What was the date/time of the "hang tight" message?

According to: http://www.recovery.gov/?q=/content/age ... ort_id=214 NSF transmitted a Current Plan to Congressional Appropriators as required by the Recovery Act on April 17th. Seems like the plan might contain some interesting specifics on planned expenditures. Anyone cozy with their congress person?

This makes alot of sense... There had been some previous speculation that the review committees would be re-reviewing applications to determine who would receive additional awards. I doubt this could happen, as my research indicates that the review process is so involved and requires so much administrative support that it's unlikely they could have put anything together between the announcement of stimulus funds and the notification of awards. Further, as the post above mentions, all of the applications should already have a numeric score, and thus it should be quite easy to determine who will receive additional awards - given a funding level. If this is the case, it would seem to indicate that there exists a real possibility that a significant number of the remaining ~2000 applicants will actually receive an award, and the cause of the delay is truly a funding level question in which a large portion of the remaining applications receiving an award is a viable option. Otherwise one would expect that they would have applied a numeric cut-off at some value and kicked a chunk of the limbo folks an HM.

I saw an earlier post about someone receiving a rejection email in response to a status inquiry... has anyone else received a rejection between Friday evening and now?

Wow.. congratulations... I think it depends on your field... don't forget you always get to put 'Fellowship X (declined)' on your CV.. .

Anyone take a swing at this one? Share your joy/pain. I drew the short straw March 16 via email.