NSF GRFP

[jeeves]

I'm sure I'm not the only person on a waitlist waiting for other people to make their final decisions.

Also, it's not that hard to pick a conservative number, award that many fellowships this year, and carry over any surplus to next year.

This is not how bureaucratic surplus works. If they don't spend it this fiscal year, it disappears.

[shaydlip]

This is not how bureaucratic surplus works. If they don't spend it this fiscal year, it disappears.

This is also probably why they're having a tough time having to figure out how many awards to give. Ahem, if anyone's an expert on bureaucracy, can they offer a bunch of awards this year, put the money for 3 years in a bank account, and then pay us each year? Or does it all have to disappear this year?

Honestly... the above predicament is probably why they are taking so long to figure this out. Their lawyers are probably trying to answer the above question.

[blackbeard]

Ill take the 3 billion to put them out of their misery and help them release the list sooner

AAARRR, matey, be ye thinkin that ye may have the NSF loot? A foolish lubber ye are. Lucky are ye that me mateys an' me shan't keel haul ye, briggand! Thar be much amiss in yer head, or me name is not Blackbeard. ARRR!!!

[kdilks]

That is kind of the same as the place you have your waitlist for just rejecting all the waitlist people and making up for it the next year by accepting more. It just wouldn't be fair to the people on the this-year waitlist.

Who ever said graduate admissions have to be fair from year to year? There's different candidates, and different funding situations. If they are indeed getting a significantly higher number of funded awards this year, isn't that unfair to people who applied last year? Aren't graduate schools across the country cutting back on how many students they take because of the economy?

[blargh]

i actually do love the nsf and how they have that thing at the end of public tv that says that the show is brought to the station "by the national science foundation... and, by viewers like you."

<3

anyway, the money needs to be used by 2010. so that's either this cycle or next. let's assume they're halving it to use 1/2 this year. theoretically. that still leaves 1.5 billion dollars to go to grants (not just the grfp, but including it)... which is a lot of new nsf winners.

and ... don't worry, it'll still be prestigious even if it awards more this year.

[shaydlip]

anyway, the money needs to be used by 2010. so that's either this cycle or next. let's assume they're halving it to use 1/2 this year. theoretically. that still leaves 1.5 billion dollars to go to grants (not just the grfp, but including it)... which is a lot of new nsf winners.

and ... don't worry, it'll still be prestigious even if it awards more this year.

Yes... but they have to pay out all the money by then, but the GRFP is paid out over 3 years. So 2010 passes and they've spent all their stimulus money. They'll have to scrounge for money somewhere to pay for the fellows for the last year and a half.

[blargh]

Yes... but they have to pay out all the money by then, but the GRFP is paid out over 3 years. So 2010 passes and they've spent all their stimulus money. They'll have to scrounge for money somewhere to pay for the fellows for the last year and a half.

oh .. good point. well, that must explain why it's taking so long, then. that's somewhat complicated.

[zetetic]

Yes... but they have to pay out all the money by then, but the GRFP is paid out over 3 years. So 2010 passes and they've spent all their stimulus money. They'll have to scrounge for money somewhere to pay for the fellows for the last year and a half.

That's not how bureaucratic spending works. As long as it's budgeted for a purpose now and spent from the general fund, independent of how its spent, it is considered 'appropriated.'

[shaydlip]

That's not how bureaucratic spending works. As long as it's budgeted for a purpose now and spent from the general fund, independent of how its spent, it is considered 'appropriated.'

Sweet! I just talked to a friend who told me the opposite, but I'd prefer to believe you... for what should be obvious reasons.

[zetetic]

Sweet! I just talked to a friend who told me the opposite, but I'd prefer to believe you... for what should be obvious reasons.

I haven't read the text of the stimulus bill. However, in general, bureaucratic budgeting works like this: if there's an infusion of money into a general fund, it must be applied to department/directorate budgets and from there delegated down until it reaches a line item. If that line item is one that demands long-term costs, then it depends on how the funds are usually structured. Either the entire expenditure can be paid upfront and the money that will be used to pay for it will be moved from the budget to a trust of sorts (the safe way), or it will be committing future budgets to allocate that money as it comes in the future (risky, because you could have a budget shortfall but your discretionary spending amount is low so you have to cut anything you can, e.g. personnel overhead).

If the bill explicitly forbade the former practice, then I think it would mean no money from the stimulus bill could be spent on supporting NSF fellowships, or most other unsolicited grants, for that matter; all grants are spent over a certain period of time that would probably overrun the deadline for spending the stimulus bill money.

[mechemems]

Here is the way the stimulus money works:

Each department gets awarded a certain amount of money, and they more or less get to decide where the money gets spent. However, any stimulus spending must then be approved by the OMB, a section of the executive branch. This is why it takes so long. Depending on how anal your rep in the OMB is, getting your desired expenditures confirmed can take a long time.

Also, the stimulus money only needs to be allocated after 18 months, not actually spent. So stimulus money can be used to pay us in 3 years because it was allocated to us this year.

[doctavic]

Being in a biomedical science Ph.D. program, I get a stipend, and I'm applying for fellowships to bring in some extra cash flow for my lab, but I didn't realize how many of you need this to go on with your grad school careers. Having said that, I genuinely wanted to say good luck to all of you. For those of you trying to get into grad school, its a lot of work and fun. You're almost there!

[snowcapk]

i actually do love the nsf and how they have that thing at the end of public tv that says that the show is brought to the station "by the national science foundation... and, by viewers like you."

<3

Stockholm called. They want their syndrome back.

[blackbeard]

Stockholm called. They want their syndrome back.

Scurvy dog! Ye be a fool which do want all of the plunder from the GRFP for yerself. Prepare to repel boarders, fer ye be askin fer trouble. :twisted:

[blargh]

Stockholm called. They want their syndrome back.

yeah, you think you're hilarious. i've been saying that bit about the nsf since 2005.

so hush.

[zarniwoop3]

I called the 866 number - someone try calling the others and tell us what happens!

I've followed this forum for the same reasons as everyone else, and for a while, it was mildly amusing. But now I must throw in my two cents.

CALM DOWN, and QUIT CALLING FASTLANE/NSF. Some of you seem to think that you'll be the first to know the results if you call their offices repeatedly. There are others who think that they'll have success calling the office where so many others have not... maybe you've got a really sexy phone voice... I don't know. But if you're applying for an NSF grant, you've got to be reasonably educated... so chew on this: Did it ever occur to you (you know who you are) that every minute the office staff spends taking your neurotic phone calls is a minute NOT spent towards finalizing the awardee lists? If you had a job to do, would YOU like to answer the phone every 2 minutes? Do you somehow think that making their phone ring off the hook will make them move faster? Trust me when i tell you this... THEY WANT TO GET THE RESULTS PUBLISHED AS QUICKLY AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE, if for no other reason that to placate all you crazies who call them day after day after day. For all those who are depending on this notification to aid their grad school decision (or other equally important decision) I feel for you. It sucks. Been there, done that. But you're all educated people, so think about it... freaking out won't change the reality of the situation. So suck it up, act like that adults you are, roll with the punches, and BE PATIENT. Don't let your crazy bleed over to the NSF staff... let them do their job. That said, best of luck to you all. Maybe sometime before the semester ends we'll find out if we're gonna be funded.

[curiousD]

I'd like to emphasize something on this forum. Repeatedly, people have said things like the NSF fellowship is an "enormous amount of money." Let's have a reality check. It's NOT. To the US government, it's a fraction of a penny, figuratively speaking. Even to us, we could have taken a job that gives us 40K a year, and we'd have 120K after 3 years. Some of us could have had jobs right out of college that would make us 120K in one year. It's really not a lot of money, and it doesn't even come with government benefits. The fact is, yes, the government should judiciously hand out money in general, as it is comes from tax-payers like you and me. However, the fact that we're even having this whole tense conversation is a reflection of the fact that the US government (and I suppose by extention American voters) don't think it's very important to make an investment in the future via science. This is the great trajedy of the NSF GRFP. In many coutries, school is virtually free, or at the very least, extremely affordable to anyone, even if they have to take out a loan to finance the whole thing themselves. Education in America is incredibly expensive. There are not that many PhD candidates in the United States. I see no reason why the government couldn't sponsor almost all of them if they decided that it were a worthwhile investment for the future. There would be nothing wrong with having a special prestigious fellowship that one can still apply for that maybe pays a bit more money, but that doesn't mean everyone else should be left in the dust, making unfortunate choices concerning their education because lawmakers in America would rather keep reducing taxes for people who can comfortably afford to pay them, funding immoral and hopeless wars, and continuing to expand the gap between the rich and the poor. America needs broad restructuing of priorities and values. Funding the education of as many students as possible (which means yes, greatly increasing the budgets of the NSF, endowment for the arts etc, which receive such tiny bits of the federal budget in the first place it seems like hardly a stretch to do so without huge changes elsewhere) is just a piece of that puzzle. While I hope that we can all follow our hearts and gut instincts in deciding what to do with our lives, we should really remember these last few days and use it as a personal catalyst to help effect change so that students in the future can broadly do as well as they would be able to if they were citizens of other countries.

[shaydlip]

I'd like to emphasize something on this forum. Repeatedly, people have said things like the NSF fellowship is an "enormous amount of money." Let's have a reality check. It's NOT. To the US government, it's a fraction of a penny, figuratively speaking. Even to us, we could have taken a job that gives us 40K a year, and we'd have 120K after 3 years. Some of us could have had jobs right out of college that would make us 120K in one year. It's really not a lot of money, and it doesn't even come with government benefits. The fact is, yes, the government should judiciously hand out money in general, as it is comes from tax-payers like you and me. However, the fact that we're even having this whole tense conversation is a reflection of the fact that the US government (and I suppose by extention American voters) don't think it's very important to make an investment in the future via science. This is the great trajedy of the NSF GRFP. In many coutries, school is virtually free, or at the very least, extremely affordable to anyone, even if they have to take out a loan to finance the whole thing themselves. Education in America is incredibly expensive. There are not that many PhD candidates in the United States. I see no reason why the government couldn't sponsor almost all of them if they decided that it were a worthwhile investment for the future. There would be nothing wrong with having a special prestigious fellowship that one can still apply for that maybe pays a bit more money, but that doesn't mean everyone else should be left in the dust, making unfortunate choices concerning their education because lawmakers in America would rather keep reducing taxes for people who can comfortably afford to pay them, funding immoral and hopeless wars, and continuing to expand the gap between the rich and the poor. America needs broad restructuing of priorities and values. Funding the education of as many students as possible (which means yes, greatly increasing the budgets of the NSF, endowment for the arts etc, which receive such tiny bits of the federal budget in the first place it seems like hardly a stretch to do so without huge changes elsewhere) is just a piece of that puzzle. While I hope that we can all follow our hearts and gut instincts in deciding what to do with our lives, we should really remember these last few days and use it as a personal catalyst to help effect change so that students in the future can broadly do as well as they would be able to if they were citizens of other countries.

Dude, talking politics and how things "should be" is a BAD IDEA.

[blargh]

In many coutries, school is virtually free, or at the very least, extremely affordable to anyone, even if they have to take out a loan to finance the whole thing themselves. Education in America is incredibly expensive. There are not that many PhD candidates in the United States.

i just wanted to point out that even if college is free somewhere else, college entrance exams in a lot of other countries bar a large population of students in other countries from ever attending college, let alone grad school...

[cogdiss]

Hi guys,

I started the NSF GRFP thread last year, and from time to time I've been checking in on this forum to see how you guys are doing. I applied three times (and my academic future was really contingent on the award), so believe me when I say that I empathize with you guys, and know how mind-numbingly awful the waiting can be. Let's just say I developed quite the "anxious drinking" habit around this time last year:)

I can't believe 1. how big your thread is, and 2. that they haven't released the results and put you out of your misery yet. To help pass the time, I thought I'd share some information that might be helpful/interesting. More than anything, I just want to say that I am wishing you all luck and hoping that you get good news soon.

1. I was one of the people who found out about the award by logging in and seeing the "congratulations" letter last year. I nearly passed out and then IMMEDIATELY printed a copy of the award letter, "just in case they try to take it back" (said my adviser). You guys have been a lot more sophisticated about various hack-type techniques this year (out of necessity/insanity, I'm sure) so I'm surprised they didn't put results out there after a few people saw their scores. Then again, wtf am I saying, this is NSF and nothing should surprise me. All this to say: keep trying. I (like many of you) think it's more likely that you'll find out initially through a website issue than an official notice.

2. They aren't requiring current fellows to declare our fellowship tenure for next year until May 1, so the hold-up isn't related to them waiting to hear how many people will want to keep using their award money next year (but, I submitted mine early anyway, just in case:) ).

3. I'm going to preface this by saying that it's about fourth or fifth-hand information, but I'll share it anyway in case it's useful. My adviser is involved in an NSF granting panel, and he says the delay is definitely related to adding more awards due to the stimulus package. According to him, they are really fighting to offer fellowships to as many people as possible, because they feel that this is the most promising way to "stimulate" future science. Apparently it's incredibly complicated to get a large number of new awards organized and approved at this late date, resulting in the "total shit show" going on at NSF right now (again, his words:) ). There are a couple of people in my department anxiously waiting to get results, and he was telling them he heard that NSF was actually calling reviewers to have them re-evaluate people who were slated for HMs, and even provide third reviews for those who had strong proposals but didn't get a third review the first time around. So, if that information is accurate (and again, I really can't check it), even if you did manage to log in and only had two reviews, it doesn't necessarily mean your chances are shot this year (especially if the reviews were positive). Either way, it may be easier to manage the waiting knowing that it's maybe related to NSF going to bat for you money-wise rather than them sitting on their hands gleefully postponing and eeking out tantalizing bits of information on Fastlane. Although, if someone had said that to me last year at this time, I probably would have slapped them in the neck, so I'll understand if you don't feel glowingly appreciative of NSF right now:)

4. Don't get me wrong, I am incredibly grateful for my fellowship, and it has helped me to get a lot done that I wouldn't have had time for otherwise. BUT: I think I had unrealistically high expectations for how much it would change my research, my career, my love life, world peace, etc. My department was excited, and then moved on (most Profs have now completely forgotten about it). I felt briefly energized, and then everything just kind of...normalized. I do not mean this to say that I'm ungrateful, or that the GRFP isn't a wonderful opportunity. I just think, as many on this thread have mentioned, that there are a lot of ways to be a wonderful scientist without it. People in my cohort who didn't win or got HMs have had incredible accomplishments this year as well, many dwarfing my own. I just want to remind everyone that as much as not winning the award can make you want to throw up for a while (two years in a row, for me), your life and work goes on, and contrary to what I had hoped (and what some people on here have been mentioning), it does NOT open all future career and granting doors down the road (ugh). There are lots of ways to move forward and have an amazing career, and a GRFP is just one possible piece.

Mostly I just hope you all get good news soon, and can stop haunting this forum and return to your lives. GOOD LUCK!

PS if anyone has any questions or what not I'd be more than happy to answer. Let me know if there's anything I can do to be helpful.

[MrHippo]

thanks for the helpful insights/information!

[singalong]

cogdiss, that was extremely insightful. thank you.

[Polymath1976]

Indeed. Thank you for your perspective on this.

[Friar.Tuck]

I'd like to emphasize something on this forum. Repeatedly, people have said things like the NSF fellowship is an "enormous amount of money." Let's have a reality check. It's NOT. To the US government, it's a fraction of a penny, figuratively speaking. Even to us, we could have taken a job that gives us 40K a year, and we'd have 120K after 3 years. Some of us could have had jobs right out of college that would make us 120K in one year. It's really not a lot of money, and it doesn't even come with government benefits. The fact is, yes, the government should judiciously hand out money in general, as it is comes from tax-payers like you and me. However, the fact that we're even having this whole tense conversation is a reflection of the fact that the US government (and I suppose by extention American voters) don't think it's very important to make an investment in the future via science. This is the great trajedy of the NSF GRFP. In many coutries, school is virtually free, or at the very least, extremely affordable to anyone, even if they have to take out a loan to finance the whole thing themselves. Education in America is incredibly expensive. There are not that many PhD candidates in the United States. I see no reason why the government couldn't sponsor almost all of them if they decided that it were a worthwhile investment for the future. There would be nothing wrong with having a special prestigious fellowship that one can still apply for that maybe pays a bit more money, but that doesn't mean everyone else should be left in the dust, making unfortunate choices concerning their education because lawmakers in America would rather keep reducing taxes for people who can comfortably afford to pay them, funding immoral and hopeless wars, and continuing to expand the gap between the rich and the poor. America needs broad restructuing of priorities and values. Funding the education of as many students as possible (which means yes, greatly increasing the budgets of the NSF, endowment for the arts etc, which receive such tiny bits of the federal budget in the first place it seems like hardly a stretch to do so without huge changes elsewhere) is just a piece of that puzzle. While I hope that we can all follow our hearts and gut instincts in deciding what to do with our lives, we should really remember these last few days and use it as a personal catalyst to help effect change so that students in the future can broadly do as well as they would be able to if they were citizens of other countries.

Verily, thy brains hath a capacity for thought which doth be less than that of Martin of London, who doth be known as the most piteous fool in all the realm. Thou art a blot on the honour of the GRFP, and mine quarterstaff hath the wish to smite thine head for this foolishness. Thou wouldst be well advis

[vice]

Yeah, thanks for the perspective. It is easy to put too much hope into one thing.

As for some of the political rumblings, awesome, I feel the government should definitely offer as much support to native PhD students as it can. We need to have the best researchers in the world to keep a strong position in the future flat-world.

However, I think almost anyone wanting to get a PhD can get funding, just not always at the school of their choice.