NSF Fellowship

The National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship ( NSF GRFP ) is a great way to start a research career. I was a successful applicant in 2010. Below are some details about the program and some tips for applying. You will also find many examples of successful essays and you can even submit your own essays if you are willing to serve as inspiration for the next round of applicants.

Note, this advice was last updated in Sept 2021.

The NSF GRFP provides $34,000 to the student and some money to your department for three years. You have the flexibility to defer for up to two years in case you have another source of funding (but you cannot defer to take a year off).

The basic requirements are:

1. US Citizen, US National, or permanent resident

2. Currently a graduating Senior or First/Second year graduate student

4. Going into science research (does not apply to medical school)

Check out the official requirements at the NSF GRFP website . Here is the more detailed NSF presentation on the requirements. The deadlines are usually the last week of October , but it is never too early to start.

• You will need to write two essays:
  • Personal Statement, Relevant Background, and Future Goals (3 pages)
  • Graduate Research Statement (2 pages)

  And that's really it. The challenge is to sell yourself in 5 pages and to successful address the two criteria.

  Tips for Getting Started
  • Read over the official NSF GRFP website , especially their tips .
  • Look through the NSF GRFP FAQ , with detailed answers here.
  • Here is a detailed website from Robin Walker . She has a very very thorough guide to the application .
  • Look at advice from past winners. There are lots of great advice out there, but in an interest to not overload you, here are my personal top choices. You can find more in my examples table at the bottom of the page.
    • Mallory Ladd - If you can follow her schedule, you should be more than prepared
    • Claire Bowen - Lots of advice interleaved with excerpts from successful essays
    • DJ Strouse - Applied under old system, but still great advice.
    • Blengineers - Fun video series of application tips
    General Advice
    • Every essay should address both Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts.
    • Each essay needs explicit headers of Intellectual Merit / Broader Impacts .
    • NSF GRFP funds the person, not the project. The most important choice you make is designating the primary field (Chemistry vs Physics & Astronomy, etc). The subfield is less important. If you are an undergrad doing research, I would strongly suggest to make your research proposal related to what you are currently researching as long as: 1. you are going to apply to programs in the same primary field and 2. there is at least a small chance (even if only a few percent) that you could do something related to your proposal in graduate school. NSF will not force you to follow through with the research; instead they just want to see that you can actually write a proposal. I personally wrote about my undergraduate research. It was in physics and I only applied to physics graduate schools (so same primary field), but I was not sure I wanted to continue with it in graduate school, and in fact it ended up being impossible since I did not get into any graduate schools with anyone doing research in my proposed subfield.
    • Write for a general science audience and assume the reviewer is in your primary field, but not your subfield. This is NSF's tentative review panels , you can see that the only guarantee is that the reviewer is in your primary field.
    • Ask for letters of reference early and gently remind your writers of the deadline. Get a diverse set of letter writers. I had my current adviser (who was doing research similar to what I proposed), a past research adviser, and my boss at a tutoring center. Therefore, I had two letters addressing my intellectual merit, while one letter addressed broader impacts.
    • Ask for help. Your current university probably has a writing center . Don't be shy, they will love to help you. Also try asking around your department to find students who have applied previously.
    Review Criteria Details

    (Below is direct text from NSF but with sentences cut and added highlights)

    In considering applications, reviewers are instructed to address the two Merit Review Criteria as approved by the National Science Board - Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts. Therefore, applicants must include separate statements on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their written statements in order to provide reviewers with the information necessary to evaluate the application with respect to both Criteria as detailed below.

    Reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

    • Intellectual Merit: the potential to advance knowledge
    • Broader Impacts: the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

    The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

    1. What is the potential for the proposed activity to
       1. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
       2. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?

       Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself , through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects , or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project . NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the US; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

       • Intellectual Merit Criterion : the potential of the applicant to advance knowledge based on a holistic analysis of the complete application, including the Personal, Relevant Background, and Future Goals Statement, Graduate Research Plan Statement, strength of the academic record, description of previous research experience or publication/presentations, and references.
       • Broader Impacts Criterion : the potential of the applicant for future broader impacts as indicated by personal experiences, professional experiences, educational experiences and future plans.
       Review Criteria: My Two Cents

       Here is how I like to think of the review criteria, point by point.

       1. How would answering this research question change science (Intellectual Merit) or society (Broader Impacts)?
       2. Why should I fund you specifically, and not just this research question? What innovation do you specifically bring to the table?
       3. Is there a detailed plan? With built in measures of success?
       4. What are your qualifications?
       5. Can you actual carry out the needed research?

       At the end of each essay, you should be able to check off how you answered each point above for BOTH Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts.