post doctoral fellowship research proposal

Writing a Fellowship Proposal

What is a fellowship proposal?

The purpose of a fellowship proposal is to:

explain your proposed project and the motivations behind it.
introduce yourself to the committee.
reassure the committee that you are invested in this project and that you are the right person to carry it out.
demonstrate the preparation you have undertaken so far.

By the time applications are due, you will need to have done a lot of preparation and considered how your proposed experience fits into your “big picture”. However, it is understood that your plans will continue to evolve between the application deadline and your departure, so you may not have everything 100% finalized by the time you submit your proposal.

When selection committees read fellowship proposals, they are looking for evidence that:

the proposed activity is feasible.
you have the necessary background and skills to carry out the work that you are proposing.
you have clear and realistic objectives for the activity.
you have adequately researched and prepared for your project.
you will carry something forward from the proposed activity to your experience at Yale or beyond.
you have considered all the stakeholders, and their needs and expectations.
you have sought guidance from experts in the field and you have the support you need to successfully and responsibly carry out the work.

Below, you will find a list of questions you should aim to answer in your fellowship proposal. These range from questions about your exact plan to questions about how your proposed activity fits into your longer-term goals.

General advice

Start early.
Think of your fellowship proposal as a part of a larger whole that includes the letter(s) from your recommender(s) and other supporting documents (e.g., your resume and transcript).
Consider your audience; write for an intelligent non-specialist (i.e., make sure the terminology will be understandable to someone outside your field).
The tone should be neither too academic nor too personal. Aim for economy, enthusiasm, and directness; eloquence is welcome, but not at the expense of substance or honesty.
Make sure all information is accurate and that you will be prepared to discuss in some detail anything you mention.
Do not exaggerate your accomplishments, but also do not be falsely modest.
Do not try to guess what the selection committee might be seeking; they want to know you, not a fabrication.
All rules of good writing (clarity, conviction, correctness, and academic honesty) apply. Proposals are read as indications of clear and organized thinking and effective communication.
Ask for feedback. Consult especially your faculty advisers, recommenders, and your Writing Tutor. Ask your readers to tell you what questions your proposal raises that you might not have considered.
Revise. Plan to experiment and try completely different versions.
Keep to word limits and all other guidelines.
Proofread. Errors suggest you lack seriousness of purpose.

To get your pen/keyboard going…

If you can respond to these items clearly and thoroughly, you are in a great position to write your fellowship proposal:

What motivates/inspires you to pursue this project? Why is this project important to you?
With whom have you developed your proposed idea? Please note that any research projects should be discussed with a faculty mentor, and this person will be expected to write your letter of recommendation.
Where are you proposing to go, and why is it important that you conduct your project there instead of elsewhere?
If appropriate, describe your knowledge of the local language and/or the culture of the country to which you are proposing to go.
What contacts have you made (or do you plan to make) in your proposed destination?
What other coursework and job/research/extracurricular experience has prepared you to make a success out of your proposed activity? In other words, how are you qualified to carry out your project?
If conducting research, what theoretical framework will you employ and what methodology will you use? If planning interviews, is this acceptable in your proposed destination and how will you devise a valid interview instrument? If conducting interviews, or if your project involves human subjects in any other way, you must find out if you need IRB approval. If so, you must obtain this approval before you can receive your fellowship check, and you should start this process before you submit your fellowship application. Visit the Human Subjects Committee website for more information.
If participating in an internship, how will you be contributing to your chosen organization? The committees understand that you might not have all the details or even confirmation that you’ve secured the internship, but you should provide them with as much information as possible.
Provide a reasonable timeline and general explanation of how you will successfully carry out your project in the proposed timeframe.
What do you hope to accomplish as you carry out your project?
What are your longer-term academic and/or professional goals, and how might these benefit from your proposed experience? In addition to developing specific skills or learning more about a specific topic, you may consider how this experience might inform your choice of classes or major and how this experience might shape your career path or other future aspirations.
What challenges or difficulties do you anticipate to encounter, and how might you overcome these?
What aspects of your proposed project and/or preparation still need to develop, and how do you plan to address these before/while carrying out your project?

Other writing resources for undergraduates

Residential College Writing Tutors
Yale Writing Center
Yale Global Health Field Experience Guide
OCS "Telling your Story" guide
Editing Personal Statements for Style
Style for Students, by Joe Schall
Elements of Style, by William Strunk, Jr.
On Writing Well, by William Zinsser
Manual of Style, University of Chicago

Prepare and Apply

Creating a Budget
Crafting a Résumé
Interview Tips
Requesting Letters
Writing for External Fellowships
Interviewing for External Fellowships
Previous winners
Recorded Presentations & Workshops
Planning Toolkits
Institutional Review Board (IRB)
Pre-Departure Resources

Feb 20 2023

Writing a Winning Postdoctoral Research Proposal: A Guide and Template

Eddy Haminton

Career advice

If you are interested in pursuing a postdoctoral position, one of the first steps is to write a research proposal that outlines the project you plan to undertake. A postdoctoral research proposal is an important document that can help you secure funding, support, and a position at a university or research institution. In this blog post, we will provide a guide to writing a postdoctoral research proposal, as well as a template to help you get started.

The purpose of a postdoctoral research proposal is to demonstrate your research expertise, creativity, and vision, as well as to provide a clear plan for the research you plan to undertake. A good research proposal should be clear, concise, and well-organized, and should provide a strong rationale for the proposed research. It should also outline the research objectives, methods, and expected outcomes.

Here is a basic template for a postdoctoral research proposal:

I. Introduction

Provide a brief overview of the research area and context for your proposed research
State the research problem or question that your project will address
Provide a rationale for the importance of the proposed research

II. Objectives and Research Questions

Clearly state the research objectives of your project
Provide a list of specific research questions that you plan to address

III. Background and Literature Review

Provide a summary of the key literature in the research area
Discuss how your proposed research builds on and contributes to the existing research

IV. Methodology

Provide a clear and detailed description of the research methods you plan to use
Explain how your methodology will help you achieve your research objectives
Discuss any potential limitations of your proposed methodology and how you plan to address them

V. Expected Outcomes and Significance

Clearly state the expected outcomes of your research
Discuss the potential impact and significance of your research for the research area and beyond

VI. Timeline

Provide a timeline for the completion of the proposed research
Break the project into specific milestones and indicate the time required to complete each milestone

VII. Budget

Provide a detailed budget for the proposed research
Indicate the costs associated with equipment, materials, travel, and other expenses

VIII. Conclusion

Summarize the key points of your research proposal
Reiterate the importance and significance of your proposed research

When writing a postdoctoral research proposal, it is important to tailor your proposal to the specific research area and institution you are applying to. It is also important to be realistic about the feasibility of your proposed research, given the time and resources available.

In conclusion, a postdoctoral research proposal is a critical document that can help you secure a postdoctoral position and funding for your research. By following the template above and tailoring your proposal to the specific research area and institution you are applying to, you can increase your chances of success. Good luck with your postdoctoral research proposal!

Tags: Writing a Winning Postdoctoral Research Proposal: A Guide and Template

Visiting Vietnam: A nice place with beautiful beaches and islands

April 20, 2023

High Quality Data Science Courses

December 17, 2022

Maximizing Data Quality in Cohort Research: Strategies and Tools

February 29, 2024

Featured Jobs

Editors' picks, recent posts.

Why Engineering Might Be the Career for You

March 29, 2024

Water Catchment Systems: An Essential Guide for Homeowners

March 27, 2024

Revolutionising Food Production Recruitment in the UK: Overcoming Challenges &...

March 22, 2024

The different settings that FNPs work in

March 18, 2024

Digital Marketing as a Career

March 17, 2024

How to Choose a Healthcare Staffing Company: Caliber Health &...

This site uses cookies to deliver our services and to show you relevant ads and job listings. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Privacy Policy , and our Terms and Conditions . Your use of AcademicGates’s Products and Services, is subject to these policies and terms. If you do not use the cookie, some functions may not work properly.

Postdoctoral Fellowship Research Statements: What I Wish I Knew Before Writing

Written by Andrew Feldman

Photo of Andrew outside, with trees in the background. He wears glasses and a gray t-shirt.

Of course, the odds of receiving postdoctoral fellowships are not high (typically single digit percentages). Knowing these odds, I applied for eight fellowships: four through university departments and four through government agencies. I initially felt like I had no idea how to be successful, especially since I received none of the 12 doctoral fellowships I had previously applied for. I also had a rough start: my first postdoctoral fellowship application was rejected a month after submission for being slightly out of scope. It certainly required mental fortitude to continue through this application process.

After speaking with colleagues in my field, common themes emerged in how they approach proposals, especially in how to write a stand-out research statement. At this point starting the fifth year of my PhD, I understood the importance of conveying a strong vision in my research statement: it is essential for getting and staying funded regardless of how stellar one’s publication record is. While I knew the motivation and methodology well, my colleagues taught me that conveying my vision in a convincing, focused, and exciting way for other scientists is a different matter. I believe their collective advice was pivotal to improving my research statement and ultimately getting me on the “funded” pile for three of the eight fellowships. I share some of these insights here.

1) Why now? Why me? When formulating your idea, focus on ensuring that your proposal answers why this research should be completed right now, as opposed to anytime. Many committees strongly weigh how much of a priority your research question is. The best introductions will extend beyond an informative literature review and directly state why answering your question is necessary and urgent.

They also want to know: why are you the best person to address this problem as opposed to someone else? Explicitly sell your fit to your research problem and your vision. Lean on your PI choice here – PIs can fill in any technical knowledge gaps and provide complementary tools to those learned during your PhD.

Most surprising to me is how much focus you need place on “why now? why me?” in your motivation. There is no fixed number, but be sure you spend more real estate motivating why the problem and approach is so amazing rather than on addressing every pitfall with your research question and approach.

2) Your audience is broader than you think. Many proposal writers will incorrectly assume (like I initially did) that their committee will include that harsh reviewer of their journal articles who can identify all methodological shortcomings. Rather than trying to defend against this omniscient and unlikely reader, keep the focus on convincing a researcher of an adjacent field that your questions and approach are spectacular. An excellent research statement will ultimately excite any researcher enough to fund the work.

Another nuance to consider: postdoctoral fellowships are mainly offered through federal government agencies (i.e., NSF, NIH, etc.) and specific university departments. Government-based fellowships will be reviewed by researchers closer to your field (but not quite as close as that of a journal article review). In this case, lean slightly towards convincing them that you understand the limitations of the approach and that your background fits the problem. By contrast, university departmental fellowships will typically have committees of professors that will not be in your exact field. For this audience, lean towards exciting them with an accessible, clear problem motivation, provide only a broad overview of the methods you would use, and be very brief.

3) Spend time just thinking: resist the urge to open Microsoft Word and start typing. Spend time purely thinking and schematically charting out your research problem and anticipated results. If you sufficiently plan, the statement will write itself.

4) Less is more: your reviewers are just as busy as you are. They want to see your main idea fast. You may see a ten page limit and feel an urge to cram in as much material as possible. I did this initially, but the statement will quickly become noisy. Instead, prioritize reader friendliness. This means more pictures and less walls of text. Reviewers are thankful for 1.5 spacing, 12 point font, and schematic figures with question marks and arrows that clearly convey your research questions. Use parsimony in discussing methods – mention only the essential methods and main anticipated challenges.

5) Start early: I started formulating my research statement in June 2020. My first deadline was in early August 2020. While this seems early to start, it was not! Give yourself at least two months before your first fellowship deadline to formulate a problem with your prospective PI (or any co-PIs) and write your statements. Provide adequate time for your PI(s) to provide feedback on your ideas and statements. If applying to multiple fellowships with different PIs and/or different project topics, start even earlier.

Lastly, I encourage asking your colleagues for help. Folks around you regardless of career stage have likely spent a significant portion of their time writing research statements. The MIT Communication Lab was a great source of help for me that I used multiple times! Don’t be afraid to ask for help. I was always glad I did.

Loading metrics

Open Access

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Postdoctoral Fellowship

Affiliation Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Affiliation Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford Neuroscience Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Affiliation Division of Hematology, Oncology, Stem Cell Transplantation, and Cancer Biology, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States of America

* E-mail: [email protected] (LM); [email protected] (CMB)

Affiliation Asian Liver Center and Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Affiliation Stanford Biosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Ke Yuan,
Lei Cai,
Siu Ping Ngok,
Li Ma,
Crystal M. Botham

Published: July 14, 2016

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004934
Reader Comments

Citation: Yuan K, Cai L, Ngok SP, Ma L, Botham CM (2016) Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Postdoctoral Fellowship. PLoS Comput Biol 12(7): e1004934. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004934

Editor: Fran Lewitter, Whitehead Institute, UNITED STATES

Copyright: © 2016 Yuan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: Dr. Ke Yuan is supported by American Heart Association Scientist Development Grant (15SDG25710448) and the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Proof of Concept Award (SPO121940). Dr. Lei Cai is supported by Stanford Neuroscience Institute and NIH NRSA postdoctoral fellowship (1F32HL128094). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Postdoctoral fellowships support research, and frequently career development training, to enhance your potential to becoming a productive, independent investigator. Securing a fellowship sends a strong signal that you are capable of conducting fundable research and will likely lead to successes with larger grants. Writing a fellowship will also increase your productivity and impact because you will learn and refine skills necessary to articulate your research priorities. However, competition is fierce and your fellowship application needs to stand out among your peers as realistic, coherent, and compelling. Also, reviewers, a committee of experts and sometimes non-experts, will scrutinize your application, so anything less than polished may be quickly eliminated. We have drawn below ten tips from our experiences in securing postdoctoral fellowships to help as you successfully tackle your proposal.

Rule 1: Start Early and Gather Critical Information

Crafting a competitive fellowship can take 6–9 months, so it is imperative that you start early. You may even want to start looking for postdoctoral fellowships before you finish your doctoral degree. Compile a comprehensive list of fellowships that you can apply to. This list should include key information to organize your game plan for applying, including Sponsor (agency sponsoring the fellowship) name; URL for funding information; Sponsor deadlines; and any other requirements or critical information.

To find suitable fellowships, start by asking your faculty mentor(s), laboratory colleagues, and recent alumni about their experiences applying for fellowships. Federal agencies in the United States, such as the National Institute of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF); foreign governmental agencies; and other organizations, such as societies, foundations, and associations, often solicit fellowship applications. Additionally, many institutions offer internally supported fellowships as well as institutional research training grants.

Once you have an exhaustive list of fellowships you are eligible for, start gathering critical information that you can use to inform your writing. Read the fellowship instructions completely and identify the review criteria. Investigate the review process; NIH’s Center for Scientific Review reviews grant applications for scientific merit and has a worthwhile video about the Peer Review Process [ 1 ]. Sometimes Sponsors offer notification alerts about upcoming funding opportunities, deadlines, and updated policies, so make sure to sign up for those when offered. Also, gather previously submitted applications and reviewers’ comments for the fellowships you will to apply to. Both funded and unfunded applications are useful. Sometimes Sponsors make available funded abstracts like NIH’s Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT), and these provide critical information about the scope of funded projects.

Many institutions have internal policies and processes that are required before a proposal can be submitted to a Sponsor. These requirements can include waivers to assess eligibility and internal deadlines (five business day internal deadlines are standard), so make sure you also gather relevant information about any internal policies and processes required by your institution.

Rule 2: Create a Game Plan and Write Regularly

Writing a compelling fellowship takes time, a lot of time, which is challenging to balance with a hectic laboratory schedule, other responsibilities, and family obligations. To reduce stress, divide the fellowship requirements into smaller tasks by creating a detailed timeline with goals or milestones. Having a game plan with daily and/or weekly goals will also help you avoid procrastination. Make sure you are writing regularly (i.e., daily or every other day) to establish an effective writing practice. This will increase your productivity and reduce your anxiety because writing will become a habit. It is also important to make your writing time non-negotiable so other obligations or distractions don’t impede your progress.

Rule 3: Find Your Research Niche

It is crucial that you have a deep awareness of your field so you can identify critical knowledge gaps that will significantly move your field forward when filled. Keep a list of questions or problems inherent to your field and update this list after reading germane peer-reviewed and review articles or attending seminars and conferences. Narrow down and focus your list through discussions with your mentor(s), key researchers in your field, and colleagues. Because compelling projects often combine two seemingly unrelated threads of work to challenge and shift the current research or clinical practice paradigms, it is important to have a broad familiarity with the wider scientific community as well. Seek opportunities to attend seminars on diverse topics, speak with experts, and read broadly the scientific literature. Relentlessly contemplate how concepts and approaches in the wider scientific community could be extended to address critical knowledge gaps in your field. Furthermore, develop a few of your research questions by crafting hypotheses supported by the literature and/or preliminary data. Again, share your ideas with others, i.e., mentor(s), other scientists, and colleagues, to gauge interest in the significance and innovation of the proposed ideas. Remember, because your focus is on writing a compelling fellowship, make sure your research questions are also relevant and appropriate for the missions of the sponsoring agencies.

Rule 4: Use Your Specific Aims Document as Your Roadmap

A perfectly crafted Specific Aims document, usually a one-page description of your plan during the project period, is crucial for a compelling fellowship because your reviewers will read it! In fact, it is very likely your Specific Aims will be the first document your reviewers will read, so it is vital to fully engage the reviewers’ interest and desire to keep reading. The Specific Aims document must concisely answer the following questions:

Is the research question important? Compelling proposals often tackle a particular gap in the knowledge base that, when addressed, significantly advance the field.
What is the overall goal? The overall goal defines the purpose of the proposal and must be attainable regardless of how the hypothesis tests.
What specifically will be done? Attract the reviewers’ interest using attention-getting headlines. Describe your working hypothesis and your approach to objectively test the hypothesis.
What are the expected outcomes and impact? Describe what the reviewers can expect after the proposal is completed in terms of advancement to the field.

A draft of your Specific Aims document is ideal for eliciting feedback from your mentor(s) and colleagues because evaluating a one-page document is not an enormous time investment on part of the person giving you feedback. Plus, you don’t want to invest time writing a full proposal without knowing the proposal’s conceptual framework is compelling. When you are ready to write the research plan, your Specific Aims document then provides a useful roadmap.

As you are writing (and rewriting) your Specific Aims document, it is essential to integrate the Sponsor’s goals for that fellowship funding opportunity. Often goals for a fellowship application include increasing the awardee’s potential for becoming an independent investigator, in which case an appropriate expected outcome might be that you mature into an independent investigator.

We recommend reading The Grant Application Writer’s Workbook ( www.grantcentral.com ) [ 2 ] because it has two helpful chapters on how to write a persuasive Specific Aims document, as well as other instructive chapters. Although a little formulaic, the Workbook’s approach ensures the conceptual framework of your Specific Aims document is solid. We also advise reading a diverse repertoire of Specific Aims documents to unearth your own style for this document.

Rule 5: Build a First-Rate Team of Mentors

Fellowship applications often support mentored training experiences; therefore, a strong mentoring team is essential. Remember, reviewers often evaluate the qualifications and appropriateness of your mentoring team. The leader of your mentoring team should have a track record of mentoring individuals at similar stages as your own as well as research qualifications appropriate for your interests. Reviewers will also often consider if your mentor can adequately support the proposed research and training because fellowship applications don’t always provide sufficient funds. It is also useful to propose a co-mentor who complements your mentor’s qualifications and experiences. You should also seek out other mentors at your institution and elsewhere to guide and support your training. These mentors could form an advisory committee, which is required for some funding opportunities, to assist in your training and monitor your progress. In summary, a first-rate mentoring team will reflect the various features of your fellowship, including mentors who augment your research training by enhancing your technical skills as well as mentors who support your professional development and career planning.

As you develop your fellowship proposal, meet regularly with your mentors to elicit feedback on your ideas and drafts. Your mentors should provide feedback on several iterations of your Specific Aims document and contribute to strengthening it. Recruit mentors to your team who will also invest in reading and providing feedback on your entire fellowship as an internal review before the fellowship’s due date.

You also want to maintain and cultivate relationships with prior mentors, advisors, or colleagues because fellowships often require three to five letters of reference. A weak or poorly written letter will negatively affect your proposal’s fundability, so make sure your referees will write a strong letter of recommendation and highlight your specific capabilities.

Rule 6: Develop a Complete Career Development Training Plan

Most fellowships support applicants engaged in training to enhance their development into a productive independent researcher. Training often includes both mentored activities, e.g., regular meetings with your mentor(s), as well as professional activities, e.g., courses and seminars. It is important that you describe a complete training plan and justify the need for each training activity based on your background and career goals.

When developing this plan, it is helpful to think deeply about your training needs. What skills or experiences are missing from your background but needed for your next career stage? Try to identify three to five training goals for your fellowship and organize your plan with these goals in mind. Below are sample activities:

Regular (weekly) one-on-one meetings with mentor(s)
Biannual meeting with advisory committee
Externship (few weeks to a few months) in a collaborator’s laboratory to learn a specific technique or approach
Courses (include course # and timeline) to study specific topics or methods
Seminars focused on specific research areas
Conferences to disseminate your research and initiate collaborations
Teaching or mentoring
Grant writing, scientific writing, and oral presentation courses or seminars
Opportunities for gaining leadership roles
Laboratory management seminars or experiences

Rule 7: STOP! Get Feedback

Feedback is critical to developing a first-class proposal. You need a wide audience providing feedback because your reviewers will likely come from diverse backgrounds as well. Be proactive in asking for feedback from your mentor, colleagues, and peers. Even non-scientists can provide critical advice about the clarity of your writing. When eliciting feedback, inform your reviewer of your specific needs, i.e., you desire broader feedback on overall concepts and feasibility or want advice on grammar and spelling. You may also consider hiring a professional editing and proofreading service to polish your writing.

Some fellowships have program staff, such as the NIH Program Officers, who can advise prospective applicants. These individuals can provide essential information and feedback about the programmatic relevance of your proposal to the Sponsor’s goals for that specific fellowship application. Approaching a Program Officer can be daunting, but reading the article “What to Say—and Not Say—to Program Officers” can help ease your anxiety [ 3 ].

Rule 8: Tell a Consistent and Cohesive Story

Fellowship applications are often composed of numerous documents or sections. Therefore, it is important that all your documents tell a consistent and cohesive story. For example, you might state your long term goal in the Specific Aims document and personal statement of your biosketch, then elaborate on your long term goal in a career goals document, so each of these documents must tell a consistent story. Similarly, your research must be described consistently in your abstract, Specific Aims, and research strategy documents. It is important to allow at least one to two weeks of time after composing the entire application to review and scrutinize the story you tell to ensure it is consistent and cohesive.

Rule 9: Follow Specific Requirements and Proofread for Errors and Readability

Each fellowship application has specific formats and page requirements that must be strictly followed. Keep these instructions and the review criteria close at hand when writing and revising. Applications that do not conform to required formatting and other requirements might be administratively rejected before the review process, so meticulously follow all requirements and guidelines.

Proofread your almost final documents for errors and readability. Errors can be confusing to reviewers. Also, if the documents have many misspellings or grammar errors, your reviewers will question your ability to complete the proposed experiments with precision and accuracy. Remove or reduce any field-specific jargon or acronyms. Review the layout of your pages and make sure each figure or table is readable and well placed. Use instructive headings and figure titles that inform the reviewers of the significance of the next paragraph(s) or results. Use bolding or italics to stress key statements or ideas. Your final documents must be easy to read, but also pleasing, so your reviewers remain engaged.

Rule 10: Recycle and Resubmit

Fellowships applications frequently have similar requirements, so it is fairly easy to recycle your application or submit it to several different funding opportunities. This can significantly increase your odds for success, especially if you are able to improve your application with each submission by tackling reviewers’ comments from a prior submission. However, some Sponsors limit concurrent applications to different funding opportunities, so read the instructions carefully.

Fellowship funding rates vary but, sadly, excellent fellowships may go unfunded. Although this rejection stings, resubmitted applications generally have a better success rate than original applications, so it is often worth resubmitting. However, resubmitting an application requires careful consideration of the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. If available, speak to your Program Officers because he or she may have listened to the reviewers’ discussion and can provide a unique prospective or crucial information not included in the reviewers’ written comments. Resubmitted fellowships are many times allowed an additional one- to two-page document to describe how you addressed the reviewers’ comments in the revised application, and this document needs to be clear and persuasive.

The ten tips we provide here will improve your chances of securing a fellowship and can be applied to other funding opportunity announcements like career development awards (i.e., NIH K Awards). Regardless of funding outcomes, writing a fellowship is an important career development activity because you will learn and refine skills that will enhance your training.

1. National Institutes of Health. NIH Peer Review Reveal—a front-row seat to a review peer review meeting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBDxI6l4dOA .
2. Stephen W. Russell and David C. Morrison. The Grant Application Writer’s Workbook–National Institutes of Health Version. Available: www.grantcentral.com .
3. Spires MJ. What to Say—and Not Say—to Program Officers. The Chronicles of Higher Education. 2012. Available: http://chronicle.com/article/What-to-Say-and-Not-Say-to/131282 .

Slip to main content

Lex Academic®

Blog & Resources

How to Write a Postdoc Research Proposal | Lex Academic Blog

6 December 2021

post doctoral fellowship research proposal

By Dr Michelle Liu (DPhil Oxon)

In an increasingly competitive job market, securing a postdoc somewhere is probably the best option many recent graduates can hope for. In the UK, where I am writing from, there are postdoc positions tied to specific research projects with restricted areas of research. There are also postdoc positions (e.g., British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowships, Leverhulme Early Career Fellowships, Mind/Analysis Studentships, various JRFs at Oxford/Cambridge colleges) where areas of research are unrestricted.

Writing a postdoc research proposal is almost nothing like writing a paper for journal publication. For a start, grant referees may not be in your subject area, in which case striking the right tone and level of technicality in your proposal is important. Moreover, some of funders may care a lot more about impact than your average journal reviewers. So, it may be essential to think about whether your research project has wider applications and ramifications.

In this blog post, I will discuss what I think might be helpful for someone writing a postdoc research proposal. Given my area is philosophy, what I am offering here is perhaps more pertinent to philosophy than other subject areas (though I hope the general tips will apply across different disciplines in the Humanities). I shall mainly focus on writing research proposals where areas of specialisation are open. Of course, two successful research proposals can look quite different. So, it’s worth looking at some successful samples, if you can, before you start.

First, what topic should you propose? You should definitely propose a topic that you are already very familiar with. This could be an extension of your PhD thesis. Alternatively, it could be a new area that you have already begun to research. Not everyone can sustain a passion for one topic for 3-4 years. It’s likely that some of you started working on other topics during your PhDs. But if it’s a new area, then it should be a topic you already formed plans to write papers on – or even better, have published in. It is not an understatement to say that writing a research proposal is often a retrospective process. Sometimes, you already have a good idea of what your research outcomes will be, though the details still need filling in. You are working backwards in your proposal, guiding your grant reviewers through how one should go about investigating the topic.

A catchy title is also a good idea.

In terms of the overall structure of the proposal, I tend to think it’s helpful to have three sections: the introduction, the main body, and the outcome.

The opening paragraph is where you introduce your research topic to your (very often) non-specialist audience. Make sure you avoid jargon and write in plain English, but in an engaging way that captivates your readers. Think about why your topic is worth pursuing. Why should anyone care? It’s worth considering how your own research compares and contrasts with the existing research on the topic. Make sure you give the impression that your project is exciting and will make a new contribution to the field.

The main body of the proposal goes into details about your aims and methodology, and exactly how you will carry out the project. The first thing to consider is timeframe. How might you divide your research time? What issues do you want to investigate for each period? For a typical three-year research fellowship in the UK, you could, for instance, divide it into three one-year periods and focus on investigating one question for each period.

I find it very helpful to frame the research plan in terms of guiding questions, with one question naturally leading to the next. Framing it in this way helps bring out your research goals and outcomes. For each question, think how you might go about answering it. What kind of literature do you want to engage with? Is there a popular view in the literature that you would like to criticise? Is there a hypothesis you want to investigate? You might have already made up your mind that you want to argue for thesis T when answering the research question you pose. But in this case, it may still be helpful to frame T as a hypothesis that you want to investigate in order to give referees a future-orienting sense of the project. In my own experience, I often find myself unsure of how to answer a specific research question that I raised. The advice I have received is that it is better to be specific and clear about what you want to argue for, even if you are not quite sure of it. Sometimes, you might have to put things in a way that sounds more confident than you actually are. It’s okay to be speculative; you don’t necessarily need to stick to your research plan. Also, I think it is better to show ‘positive’ outcomes (e.g., arguing for a new theory T) rather than ‘negative’ outcomes (e.g., arguing against theory X).

Depending on the nature of the topic, it may be appropriate to investigate it using case studies. In my own Leverhulme-funded project on polysemy, I investigate three case studies: gender terms, sensation terms, and emotion terms. It is worth thinking about why these case studies were chosen. How are they related to each other? What overall purpose do they serve? In my own work, the three case studies were carefully chosen to encompass three different classes of words, i.e. nouns, verbs, and adjectives, from which wider philosophical implications about polysemy are to be drawn.

In the final section of the proposal, you should lay out the specific results you aim to achieve through your project as well as its wider impact. If your research is divided in several periods, think about what your output is for each period. It might be a specific paper for each period, in which case state the provisional title of the paper and the journal you are aiming to publish in. Again, this might not be what you in fact achieve if you secure the grant. It is also worth considering where you want to disseminate your research. Are there conferences that you want to attend or organise?

It is almost obligatory to include a section in the research proposal about the wider implications of the project. What significant impact does the research promise? It would be ideal if your project has wider social ramifications, such as clarifying conceptual confusions in a popular debate or resolving issues in certain clinical or policy-making contexts. If social impact is hard to find, it is still important to talk about how the project can advance debates in your field and what potential it has for applications in related research areas.

Finally, don’t forget to include references at the end as you are bound to cite research in your proposal.

Getting Feedback, etc.

There are other aspects of a postdoc application besides writing a research proposal. Some funding bodies give generous research allowances, in which case you will need to draft a budget outlining how you want to spend the money. This can involve various things from purchasing books to organising workshops or conferences. If the latter, it is important to give a breakdown of the costs. Where do you want to host the conference? How many speakers do you want to invite? How much would it cost to host each speaker? The last question depends on whether the speaker is domestic or international.

Often, you will also be asked to summarise your past and current research experience in your application. Here, you will inevitably mention your doctoral work and the papers that you have already published, that are under review, or that are in preparation. It is important to give the impression that your existing research experience naturally leads to your proposed project. Try to convey the idea that you are ideally suited to conduct the proposed project.

If your project is tied to a host institute, it is vital to explain (either in your proposal or elsewhere) the reasons for choosing a particular institution. What are its areas of expertise and how are they related to your research project? Mention members of the department whose work is relevant to yours. Also, how does your research contribute to the teaching and research in the host department?

Now that you have a draft for your research proposal, it is important to get a second opinion. In most universities, there are research offices dedicated to helping academics secure grants. Writing a grant application is a meticulous and formal process that involves peer reviews – something I was utterly unaware of when I was fresh out of my DPhil. However, graduate students or graduates who have not yet secured a university position are unlikely to have access to the expertise in the research office. In these cases, it would be wise to seek help from your supervisors as they are likely to offer useful insights.

Just as there are general tips that one can give to improve one’s chances for journal publication, I believe there are patterns that converge in successful grant applications. Like others, I am slowly figuring out both cases through experience and the helpful advice I’ve received from others over the years. Of course, it is undeniable that luck often plays a decisive role in grant success. My Leverhulme project on polysemy didn’t make it through the internal selection round at one institution, but I was lucky enough to apply at the last minute and eventually secure funding with my current institution. I hope that what I offer here may be helpful to some recent graduates, and I welcome others to share their successful experiences.

Dr Michelle Liu is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow at the University of Hertfordshire. Her project is titled ‘The abundance of meaning: polysemy and its applications in philosophy’. Liu completed her DPhil at the University of Oxford in 2019 and was a Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Hertfordshire from 2019 to 2021.

Be notified each time we post a new blog article

Search This Site All UCSD Sites Faculty/Staff Search Term
Meet the Team
Postdoc Listserve
News and Updates
Health, Vision, and Dental Insurance
Additional Insurance
Leaves & Time Off
Benefits & Services
Retirement, Welfare, & Financial Planning
Health & Wellness
Childcare Reimbursement & Dependent Care Programs
Other Benefits & Services
Taxability of Salary & Benefits
UCPath Preparation Tips
Appointment & Guidelines
PX Contract
Move Reimbursement
Postdocs Data
Postdoc Coffee Connection
Essential Training
EPIC Bootcamp
Ethical Challenges of Research
New Postdoc Orientation
Individual Development Plan
Foundational Training
Specialized Training Paths
Calendar of Events
Mentoring Award
Postdoctoral Scholar Award
National Postdoc Appreciation Week
Postdoctoberfest
Finding Funding Opportunities
Selecting a Funding Opportunity
Writing the Proposal
Writing Groups
Proposal Submission and Award Administration
UCSD Fellowships
Schmidt AI in Science Postdocs Program

Fellowships & Funding

Successful funding applications present reviewers with a strong research plan in an engaging and logical manner. They take commitment and time to craft. Below are events, strategies, and resources to help you during the writing stage of your proposal. Start writing your proposal early to take advantage of these resources!

✔ Establish a timeline for completion of proposal segments

✔ Start a writing group for peer-reviewing, accountability, and encouragement (See Successful Writing Groups )

✔ Follow the solicitation instructions exactly & use sponsor templates

UC San Diego Postdoc Proposal Development Events

Postdoc fellowship forum.

Monthly workshops with Professor Mark Lawson to answer all your questions and review your fellowship applications. This is a great way to meet fellow postdocs who are also developing proposals. Generally the 4th Tuesday of the month from 12-1:30pm.

Funding your Future Events

Funding workshops tailored to UC San Diego Postdocs. Check the website and your emails for upcoming events.

Funding Fest

Funding Fest is an annual series of funding workshops held in the spring/summer. Find the workshop right for you and your proposal!

Writing Resources

Opsa grant writing resource library.

How to Write a Lot: A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing , Paul J. Silvia, PhD.
They Say, I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing , Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstein
Guide to Effective Grant Writing: How to Write an Effective NIH Grant Application , Otto O. Yang
Everything You Wanted to Know About the NCI Grant Process But Were Afraid to Ask , The National Cancer Institute
Writing Science: How to write papers that get cited and proposals that get funded , Joshua Schimel
The Complete Writing Guide to NIH Behavioral Science Grants , Lawrence M. Scheier, William L. Dewey
NIH 101 , Grace C.Y. Peng, PhD
Writing the NIH Grant Proposal: A Step-by-Step Guide , William Gerin

UC San Diego Research Development

Explore the Research Development website for proposal writing resources, early career award guidance, and access to the Research Development & Grant Writing News articles.

New Faculty Guide to Competing for Research Funding

Strategies for identifying and competing for research grants. Geared towards new faculty, but includes tips applicable for postdoc grant writers.

EMU Handbook for Proposal Writers

Helpful tips for grant development, maintained by Eastern Michigan University.

Agency-Specific Resources

National institutes of health.

Write your Application
Planning & Writing
National Cancer Institute Preparing Grant Applications
National Institute of General Medical Sciences NRSA Postdoctoral Fellowships FAQs
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Fellowship (F) Advice

Environmental Protections Agency

Tips for Writing a Competitive Grant Proposal

National Science Foundation

Advice for Proposal Writers

Useful Links

Postdoc Funding (FR)
Office of Research Affairs (ORA)

More Resources

Postdoc Community
Listserve - Postdocs
Listserve - Staff
Search for a Position
Advertise a Position

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
PLoS Comput Biol
v.12(7); 2016 Jul

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Postdoctoral Fellowship

1 Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

2 Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford Neuroscience Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Siu Ping Ngok

3 Division of Hematology, Oncology, Stem Cell Transplantation, and Cancer Biology, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States of America

4 Asian Liver Center and Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Crystal M. Botham

5 Stanford Biosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Introduction

Rule 1: Start Early and Gather Critical Information

Rule 2: Create a Game Plan and Write Regularly

Rule 3: Find Your Research Niche

Rule 4: Use Your Specific Aims Document as Your Roadmap

Is the research question important? Compelling proposals often tackle a particular gap in the knowledge base that, when addressed, significantly advance the field.
What is the overall goal? The overall goal defines the purpose of the proposal and must be attainable regardless of how the hypothesis tests.
What specifically will be done? Attract the reviewers’ interest using attention-getting headlines. Describe your working hypothesis and your approach to objectively test the hypothesis.
What are the expected outcomes and impact? Describe what the reviewers can expect after the proposal is completed in terms of advancement to the field.

Rule 5: Build a First-Rate Team of Mentors

Rule 6: Develop a Complete Career Development Training Plan

Regular (weekly) one-on-one meetings with mentor(s)
Biannual meeting with advisory committee
Externship (few weeks to a few months) in a collaborator’s laboratory to learn a specific technique or approach
Courses (include course # and timeline) to study specific topics or methods
Seminars focused on specific research areas
Conferences to disseminate your research and initiate collaborations
Teaching or mentoring
Grant writing, scientific writing, and oral presentation courses or seminars
Opportunities for gaining leadership roles
Laboratory management seminars or experiences

Rule 7: STOP! Get Feedback

Rule 8: Tell a Consistent and Cohesive Story

Rule 9: Follow Specific Requirements and Proofread for Errors and Readability

Rule 10: Recycle and Resubmit

Funding Statement

Dr. Ke Yuan is supported by American Heart Association Scientist Development Grant (15SDG25710448) and the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Proof of Concept Award (SPO121940). Dr. Lei Cai is supported by Stanford Neuroscience Institute and NIH NRSA postdoctoral fellowship (1F32HL128094). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Utility Menu

FAS Research Administration Services

Funding opportunities for postdoctoral scholars.

Below is a listing of notable funding opportunities available to postdoctoral scholars. If you are aware of an internal or external opportunity for postdocs but do not see it posted here, please email [email protected] . Current Harvard FAS and SEAS postdoctoral fellows with questions about any of these opportunities may contact their department using the contact information listed below. If your department is not listed here, please email [email protected] with questions related to funding opportunities for postdoctoral scholars .

Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology (CCB): Delia Bardales ( [email protected] )
Department of Human Evolutionary Biology (HEB): Kristin Pennarun ( [email protected] )
Department of Mathematics: Anna Kreslavskaya ( [email protected] )
Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology (OEB): Kristin Pennarun ( [email protected] )
Department of Physics: Adam Ackerman ( [email protected] )
Department of Psychology: Jennifer Perry ( [email protected] )
Department of Statistics Laverne Martinez ( [email protected] )
Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology (SCRB): Doris Drake ( [email protected] )

Jump to: › External Opportunities › Harvard Internal Opportunities

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Facebook
Twitter
Linkedin
Digg
Reddit
Pinterest
Email

Latest Earthquakes | Chat Share Social Media

USGS Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program

The objective of the USGS Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program is to provide highly motivated recent Ph.D. graduates with the opportunity to conduct concentrated research in association with selected U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Scientists, as a final element to their formal career preparation. Selectees will utilize the excellent scientific resources available at the USGS in the conduct of scientific investigations and exploratory development associated with advanced scientific research. This program will provide selectees the opportunity to contribute to the overall research efforts of the USGS and in turn they will gain excellent professional research experience early in their careers.

Appointment Authority and Duration of Assignments

Appointments under the USGS Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program will be made under the Schedule A, 213.3102 (r) excepted appointing authority for a minimum period of 13 months and a maximum period of 4 years. The "r" authority is authorized for use by agencies to fill, "Positions established in support of fellowship and similar programs that are filled from limited applicant pools and operate under specific criteria developed by the employing agency and/or a non-Federal organization. These programs may include: internship or fellowship programs that provide developmental or professional experiences to individuals who have completed their formal education; training and associateship programs designed to increase the pool of qualified candidates in a particular occupational specialty; professional /industry exchange programs that provide for a cross-fertilization between the agency and the private sector to foster mutual understanding, an exchange of ideas, or to bring experienced practitioners to the agency; residency programs through which participants gain experience in a Federal clinical environment; and programs that require a period of Government service in exchange for educational, financial or other assistance."

Recruitment Process

Research opportunities will be advertised open to all qualified candidates on the Office of Human Resources Management's USA Jobs web site. In addition, these research opportunities will be announced on websites, in journals, etc. (e.g. GSA Today, Explorer, EOS, Black Issues in Higher Education, Geotimes, Association for Women Geoscientists, Sciencewise and the National Association of Black Geologists and Geophysicists) in order to attract a highly qualified diverse group of applicants. The advertisements in these journals/websites will refer interested candidates to the USGS Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program website where more in depth information about the Program can be found, and links to the specific USA Jobs vacancy announcements will be provided.

In some instances, where there is a need for a postdoctoral research fellow and a highly qualified candidate is identified for that opportunity without advertisement, a noncompetitive appointment can be made. A candidate being considered for noncompetitive appointment is to submit a resume and a description of the research to be conducted under the USGS Fellowship Program.

The research proposal should at a minimum, contain: research objectives, links to USGS science strategy, how and where the research is to be conducted, name of Research Advisor(s), required scientific facilities, and anticipated operating expenses (for field work, access to specialized equipment, conference travel, etc.)

Qualification Requirements

Candidates must meet the Office of Human Resources Management qualification requirements for the occupational series to which they are applying. In addition, they must have received their doctoral or equivalent graduate degree within the past five years. The degree must be in hand by the selectees starting date. Degrees must be attained in the last five years to meet the bureau's desire for current/recent expertise. In addition, the knowledge, skills and technical approaches of the candidates must be current. This is consistent with the criteria for postdoctoral research opportunities within academic communities.

Application Process

Application instructions will be set forth in the individual vacancy announcements. Applicants will be required to submit a resume, description of the proposed research to be conducted under the USGS Fellowship Program, and a narrative statement addressing the knowledges, abilities, skills, and other characteristics (KASOCs) identified for the position. The research proposal should at a minimum, contain: research objectives, links to USGS science strategy, how and where the research is to be conducted, name of Research Advisor(s), required scientific facilities, and anticipated operating expenses (for field work, access to specialized equipment, conference travel, etc.) Candidates are strongly encouraged to consult USGS Research Advisors during the development of the above proposal. Applications are due in the servicing Human Resources Office by the closing date indicated in the specific vacancy announcement.

Rating Process

The servicing personnel specialist will review applications received by the closing date for basic qualifications. All candidates who meet the basic qualification requirements for the research opportunity will be referred to the USGS postdoctoral research panel for rating. The panels will rate the applications based on an evaluation of the research proposals and the extent and quality of experience, education, and training relevant to the duties of the research opportunity.

Once the applications have been rated, the servicing personnel specialist will transmute the scores assigned to the applicants to the appropriate numerical value between 70 and 100. Then veterans preference points will be added as appropriate. The top 3 to 5 applicants will then be referred to the selecting official/selection panel in score order on a referral certificate.

Selection Process

Selections for research opportunities will be made in accordance with the rule of 3. Selecting officials are strongly encouraged to conduct interviews with all candidates referred who are within reach for selection. Reference checks are also strongly encouraged prior to final selection. Once a final selection is made, the referral certificate (notated with the selectee's name and the selecting official's signature) will be returned to the servicing personnel specialist. The servicing personnel specialist will then make the official job offer.

Appointment Process

Selected candidates will be appointed to a Schedule A excepted appointment (under the "r" authority).

Employees hired under the USGS Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program are entitled to all benefits afforded permanent employees (e.g., health and life insurance, retirement under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), annual and sick leave.)

Example Postdoctoral Research Fellow (PDF)

« Return to Hiring, Recruitment, and Staffing « Return to Options for Filling Short-term Needs « Return to Options for Filling Long-term Needs

2025 AHA Postdoctoral Fellowship

Find the answers to your proposal submission questions, plus links to the best resources for building a strong research application.

Important Notes

Proposals must be received no later than 3 p.m. Central Time on the deadline date. Early submission is encouraged.
Before beginning an application, see the AHA Application Resources page for requirements that apply to all AHA research awards. Also view AHA's research Policies and Statements .
Proposals must be submitted electronically via ProposalCentral . The system will open eight weeks prior to the application deadline to complete the proposal and upload required documents. Applicant can create required documents in advance; refer to the AHA Application Instructions (PDF) . All submissions require the signature of a designated institutional representative.
Applicants must be AHA Professional Members at the time of proposal submission. Membership must be done online. Join or begin the membership process well before the deadline. The AHA expects all mentors associated with training/mentored research awards to maintain active AHA membership, as well.

Items for New Research Proposals

International applicants
Use of large language models & generative AI
Biosketch addition: Inclusive, safe, diverse environment
Open data policy change
Supporting rheumatic heart disease research

To enhance the training of postdoctoral applicants who are not yet independent. The applicant must be embedded in an appropriate investigative group with the mentorship, support, and relevant scientific guidance of a research mentor. Recognizing the unique challenges that clinicians, in particular, experience in balancing research and clinical activity, this award mechanism aims to be as flexible as possible to enable applicants to develop academic careers in research alongside fulfilling clinical service commitments.

The trainee and mentor should collaboratively provide a thoughtfully planned, systematic proposal aimed at clearly answering an investigative question in cardiovascular, cerebrovascular or brain health research. (5-page limit). A fellow must have primary responsibility for the writing and the preparation of the application, understanding the mentor will play a significant part in providing guidance to the applicant. Because the fellow receives only a stipend from the award, additional monetary support for the proposed work MUST come from the mentor's laboratory. Therefore, the proposal will likely be related to the mentor's currently funded work. The mentor should clarify the role the applicant played in developing the proposal, the relationship of the proposal to ongoing work in the mentor's laboratory, and how the proposal will contribute toward the training and career development of the applicant.
A new fellow may not have had adequate time to generate preliminary data; therefore, applicants may present preliminary data generated by the mentor. The assessment of preliminary data, whether generated by the mentor or the applicant, should be put into perspective so that bold new ideas and risk taking by beginning investigators are encouraged rather than stymied. Submission of an application to the AHA with identical or significantly similar content as a submission by another investigator is prohibited. Also, the submission of an application to the AHA with identical or significantly similar content from a mentor to a grant program and his/her fellow to a fellowship program is prohibited. In such cases, both applications may be removed from funding consideration. If a grant application is submitted by the mentor of a fellowship application, both applications may be funded if there is no duplication of aims.

Eligibility

At the time of award activation, the applicant must hold a post-baccalaureate PhD degree or equivalent, or a doctoral-level clinical degree such as MD, DO, DVM, PharMD, DDS, DPh, or PhD in nursing, public health or other clinical health science.
At the time of award activation, the awardee may not be pursuing a doctoral degree.
At the time of award activation, the applicant may have no more than five years of research training or experience since obtaining a post-baccalaureate doctoral-level degree (excluding clinical training).
The awardee will be expected to devote at least 80 percent of full-time work either to research or to activities pursuant to independent research (instead of administrative, clinical duties that are not an integral part of the research training program, or teaching responsibilities).
This award is not intended for individuals of faculty rank.
Applicants are not required to reside in the United States for any period before applying for American Heart Association funding. However, AHA research awards are limited to U.S.-based non-profit institutions, including medical, osteopathic, and dental schools, veterinary schools, schools of public health, pharmacy schools, nursing schools, universities and colleges, public and voluntary hospitals and others that can demonstrate the ability to conduct the proposed research. An awardee must maintain an AHA-accepted visa throughout the duration of the award. Please refer to AHA Application Resources for acceptable visa types.

It is imperative that the fellow receive counsel and direction from a mentor who is an established investigator (as outlined in the peer review criteria for the mentor/training plan below) invested in the progress of the project.

A new fellow may not have had adequate time to generate preliminary data; therefore, applicants may present preliminary data generated by the mentor. The assessment of preliminary data, whether generated by the mentor or the applicant, should be put into perspective so that bold new ideas and risk-taking by beginning investigators are encouraged rather than stymied. Submission of an application to the AHA with identical or significantly similar content as a submission by another investigator is prohibited. Also, the submission of an application to the AHA with identical or significantly similar content from a mentor to a grant program and his/her fellow to fellowship program is prohibited. In such cases, both applications may be removed from funding consideration. If a grant application is submitted by the mentor of a fellowship application, both applications may be funded if there is no duplication of aims.

AHA does not require but strongly encourages institutions to develop and use Individual Development Plans (IDPs) for AHA training programs. IDPs provide a structure for the identification and achievement of career goals.

The trainee’s career goals, as stated in “Part A - Personal Statement” of the fellow's biosketch, and the mentor’s training plan must be complementary to one another and focused specifically on the individual. A standardized training plan will not be viewed favorably.

Each applicant must obtain three letters of reference. Those providing the references must upload them into ProposalCentral by the deadline date. The proposal cannot be submitted without the reference reports. A mentor, co-mentor, department head, collaborating investigator or consultant contributing to the proposal may not serve as a referent.

A referent is an individual familiar with the applicant’s scientific interests and abilities. Letters should be composed by the referent and should not originate from the applicant. Any appearance of substantially similar language in reference letters will be factored into the score for the Mentor and Environment, which will impact the overall score. Please visit the Reference Information page for information about the referent upload process and to download a template of the Reference Report form.

The AHA does not pay indirect costs on fellowships.

The AHA does not utilize the NIH salary cap.

The AHA 's annual stipend will match the published NIH sliding scale for postdoctoral fellows at the time the AHA begins to accept proposals (July 1, 2024)

+ $12,200 per year for health insurance. Note: Stipend may be used to further supplement health insurance cost, however, the health insurance allowance may not be used for any other purpose.

Project Support

$3,000 per year, in addition to the stipend. No limit on any line item (travel, computer, equipment, etc.). A minimum of $1,500 per year must be spent on travel to a national conference (attendance at AHA Scientific Sessions is strongly encouraged). International travel is permitted and does not require prior AHA approval.

Award Duration

One or two years. May apply for a second two-year award. All eligibility criteria apply. Maximum of four years of AHA postdoctoral fellowship support per individual.

Restrictions

An applicant may submit only one AHA Postdoctoral Fellowship application per deadline.
An AHA Postdoctoral Fellowship awardee may hold only one AHA award at a time.
The awardee must resign the award if promoted to a staff or faculty position. However, an awardee with a faculty position remains eligible for this award if that awardee maintains clinical responsibilities under the supervision of an instructor.
An AHA Postdoctoral Fellowship awardee may not hold another AHA award concurrently. However, the awardee may submit an application for a subsequent AHA award during the last year of the project and must resign the AHA Postdoctoral Fellowship if another AHA award is activated.
The awardee may not hold a comparable award (such as another fellowship) as a source of supplementation. An applicant who receives AHA funding, but has an ongoing training grant from another source, may defer the start of the AHA award up to six months to complete the existing fellowship. Prior AHA approval is required.
Hyperlinks to data/figures/additional information are not permitted in the Research Plan nor any other proposal documents. This includes use of the Precision Medicine Platform for applications and peer review purposes. AHA allows supplementation from other sources to meet the sponsoring institution’s stipend and benefit levels, however, the awardee may not hold a comparable award (such as another fellowship) as a source of supplementation.
A mentor may supervise no more than four AHA-funded fellows (predoctoral and/or postdoctoral) and no more than two AHA-supported student fellows (undergraduate and/or medical/graduate students) at any time. This restriction does not apply to co-mentors. Fellows who are part of an AHA Strategically Focused Research Network are excluded.
A new fellow may not have had adequate time to generate preliminary data; therefore, applicants may present preliminary data generated by the mentor. The assessment of preliminary data, whether generated by the mentor or the applicant, should be put into perspective so that bold new ideas and risk-taking by beginning investigators are encouraged rather than stymied. Submission of an application to the AHA with identical or significantly similar content as a submission by another investigator is prohibited. Also, the submission of an application to the AHA with identical or significantly similar content from a mentor to a grant program and his/her fellow to a fellowship program is prohibited. In such cases, both applications may be removed from funding consideration. If a grant application is submitted by the mentor of a fellowship application, both applications may be funded if there is no duplication of aims.
The American Heart Association permits the use of a large language model (LLM – e.g. ChatGPT) or an artificial intelligence tool to generate and/or edit content in research proposals submitted for funding. This information must be disclosed at the time of submission. Disclosure of this information does not impact peer review. Should this information not be disclosed accurately, and use of these tools is identified, the proposal may be administratively withdrawn.

Peer Review Criteria

An applicant is prohibited from contacting AHA peer reviewers. This is a form of scientific misconduct and will result in the removal of the application from funding consideration and institutional notification of misconduct.

The American Heart Association DOES NOT permit the use of a large language model (LLM – e.g. ChatGPT) or an artificial intelligence tool to generate and/or edit content in peer review critiques. Uploading of any portion of a research proposal into a large language model (LLM – e.g. ChatGPT) or an artificial intelligence tool to assist in writing a critique of the proposal is explicitly prohibited as it is a violation of the AHA’s Peer Reviewer Certification Statement (to include confidentiality, non-disclosure, and conflict of interest).

The AHA reserves the right to an initial triage, whereby a minimum of half of the submissions may be triaged.

To judge the merit of the application, reviewers will comment on the following criteria. Please address these in your proposal. Each criterion will account for one-third of the overall score. The AHA uses a 1-9 score scale and AHA Peer Review Guidance.

Criterion 1 – Evaluation of the Summary for Non-Scientists – 5%

AHA Mission: To be a relentless force for a world of longer, healthier lives.

How well written is the Non-Scientist Summary in explaining to a non-scientist audience the research proposed and its importance?
Does the Non-Scientist Summary adequately explain the major health problem being addressed by this study?
Does it provide specific questions and how the projects will address them?
Does it provide information on the overall impact of this work and the potential advances in the field?
Does it relay how the proposal supports the mission of the AHA?

Criterion 2 - Evaluation of the Applicant – 30%

Does the applicant have the potential for a research career?
Are the applicant’s career plans specified in the application?
Is this supported by the applicant's academic record and the assessment provided by the three letters of reference?
Does the applicant have prior research experience and/or publications?
Is there a clear rationale supporting the need for the proposed training?
What is the mentor's assessment of the applicant?

Criterion 3 - Mentor/Training Plan and Environment – 35%

Because the fellow receives only a stipend from the award, additional monetary support for the proposed work MUST come from the mentor's laboratory. Therefore, the proposal will likely be related to the mentor's currently funded work. The mentor should clarify the role the applicant played in developing the proposal, the relationship of the proposal to ongoing work in the mentor's laboratory, and how the proposal will contribute toward the training and career development of the applicant.
All applicants (excluding fellows) are to include a statement in the Personal Statement section of their biographical sketch that explicitly states how they contribute to a safe, inclusive, and diverse work environment.
In addition, mentors on Fellowships, Career Development Awards, and Diversity Supplements should complete recognized training specific to sexual and gender-based harassment.

Mentor (Sponsor) and Training Plan

Is the mentor an independent investigator?
Does the mentor have the experience to direct the proposed training, as evidenced by a track record regarding productivity, funding and prior trainees?
Does the mentor have adequate current funding to support the applicant’s project?
Does the mentor demonstrate familiarity with the applicant’s career and developmental goals and provide a comprehensive plan that supports the applicant's career goals, which should be outlined in the Personal Statement section of the applicant’s biosketch?
Is there a plan for instruction in the responsible conduct of research, considering the specific characteristics of the training program, the level of trainee experience, and the particular circumstances of the trainees? The reviewers will evaluate the adequacy of the proposed training in relation to the following: A sufficiently broad selection of subject matter, such as conflict of interest, authorship, data management, human subjects and animal use, laboratory safety, research misconduct, research ethics. AHA does not require submission of the NIH RCR form.

Environment

Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of a successful learning experience? Is there evidence of institutional commitment?

Criterion 4 - Evaluation of the Proposal - 30% The trainee and mentor should collaboratively provide a thoughtfully planned, systematic proposal aimed at clearly answering an investigative question in cardiovascular, cerebrovascular or brain health research. (5-page limit) Note: The proposal will be assessed on scientific merit, but equally as an integral part of the applicant's development into a career aligned with AHA’s mission. A new fellow may not have had adequate time to generate preliminary data; therefore, applicants may present preliminary data generated by the mentor. The assessment of preliminary data, whether generated by the mentor or the applicant, should be put into perspective so that bold new ideas and risk taking by beginning investigators are encouraged rather than stymied.

1. Is the Proposed Work :

Appropriate for the applicant, given his/her academic background, experience and career interests?
Does the proposal contain the right balance of challenge, importance of the research question, and feasibility in relation to the applicant's experience and training?

2. Does the Proposed Project

Include a specific hypothesis and describe the applicant's role;
Provide a concise account of the subject matter, an overview of each part of the proposal, specific aims and the methodology;
For all applications that include vertebrate animals or human subjects, applicants must explain how relevant biological variables, such as sex, are factored into the research design, analysis and reporting. Furthermore, strong justification from the scientific literature, preliminary data, or other relevant considerations, must be provided for applications proposing to study only one sex.

3. Significance

Does this study address an important problem that is a barrier to a world of longer, healthier lives?
Does the science accelerate the discovery, interpretation and application of scientific knowledge to enhance and treat cardiovascular and brain health?

2024 Holidays

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Abstract collage of science-related imagery

Postdoctoral Research Fellowships in Biology (PRFB)

View guidelines, important information for proposers.

All proposals must be submitted in accordance with the requirements specified in this funding opportunity and in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. It is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets these requirements. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Supports postdoctoral fellows in selected areas of the life sciences who focus on broadening participation of underrepresented groups in biology; study the rules governing interactions between genomes, environments and phenotypes; or study plant genomes.

The Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) awards Postdoctoral Research Fellowships in Biology (PRFB) to recent recipients of the doctoral degree for research and training in selected areas supported by BIO and with special goals for human resource development in biology. For proposals under this solicitation, these areas are (1) Broadening Participation of Groups Underrepresented in Biology, (2) Integrative Research Investigating the Rules of Life Governing Interactions Between Genomes, Environment and Phenotypes, and (3) Plant Genome Postdoctoral Research Fellowships.

The fellowships encourage independence at an early stage of the research career to permit Fellows to pursue their research and training goals in the most appropriate research locations in collaboration with sponsoring scientists. It is expected that the sponsoring scientists will actively mentor the Fellows and will greatly benefit from collaborating with these talented early-career scientists and incorporating them into their research groups. The research and training plan of each fellowship must address important scientific questions within the scope of BIO and the specific guidelines in this fellowship program solicitation. Because the fellowships are offered to postdoctoral scientists only early in their careers, NSF encourages doctoral students to discuss the availability of these postdoctoral fellowships with their doctoral mentors and potential postdoctoral sponsors early in their doctoral programs to take full advantage of this funding opportunity. Fellowships are awards to individuals, not institutions, and are administered by the Fellows.

Updates and announcements

Faqs on submitting postdoctoral research fellowships in biology (prfb) proposals, prfb virtual office hours, program contacts, program events.

September 21, 2023 - PRFB Virtual Office Hours
September 19, 2023 - PRFB Virtual Office Hours
September 13, 2023 - MCB Virtual Office Hour: Postdoctoral Research Fellowships…
September 13, 2023 - PRFB Virtual Office Hours
March 21, 2023 - Division of Biological Infrastructure (DBI) Virtual Office…
November 16, 2021 - Q&A Session for the Postdoctoral Research Fellowships…
September 8, 2021 - Post-doctoral Research Fellowships in Biology
October 9, 2020 - Postdoctoral Research Fellowships in Biology Webinars
October 6, 2020 - Postdoctoral Research Fellowships in Biology Webinars

Additional program resources

How to Apply for Fellowship Applicants
Sponsoring Scientist Statement Instructions
Reference Letter Author Submission Guide
For Current PRFB Fellows: PRFB Administrative guide (NSF 22-109)
For PRFB Applicants: PRFB Administrative Guide (NSF 23-137)

Awards made through this program

Organization(s).

Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO)

About the Center
Director’s Letter Fall 2023
Jordan Center Statement on the Russian Invasion of Ukraine
Faculty Advisory Board
Affiliated Faculty
Distinguished Journalist in Residence

Post-Doctoral Fellows

Visiting Scholars
Upcoming Events
Past Events
19v: A Working Group on 19th Century Russian Culture
Russian Internet Memes: The Short Course
Russian TV Commercials: The Short Course
NYC Russia Public Policy Series
Video Archive
Event Recaps
Event Livestream
The Jordan Center Blog
Submission Guidelines
19v: An Occasional Series on the 19th Century
Russia’s Alien Nations
Rereading Akunin
Immigrant Stories
Graduate Student Essay Competition 2021-2022
Fieldwork & Language Training Fellowship
Fellowship in Advanced Research
Jordan Center New York City Summer Fellowship
Short-Term Fellowship
Jordan Center Postdoctoral Fellowship Program
Publication Fund
Masters and Undergraduate Research Symposia
Jordan Center Experts’ List
Jordan Center in the Media
NYU Library Ukraine Research Guide
Teaching Russia Online Resource Database
Resources on Topics of Race and Racism in Russian Studies
Support the Center

Jordan Center for the Advanced Study of Russia

Current post-doctoral fellows.

Christy Monet (Brandly), September 2023 – August 2024 Dr. Monet Brandly is a political scientist and Slavicist specializing in intellectual history as viewed from the perspectives of the history of political thought and literary studies. She conducts research and teaches in the fields of political theory, literature, and history, with a focus on Russophone political thought and its engagements with empire, liberalism, and American culture over the last two centuries. She earned her Ph.D. in both Political Science and Slavic Languages and Literatures from the University of Chicago in 2023. She also holds an M.A. in International Relations from the University of Chicago, as well as a B.A. in Political Science from St. Mary’s College of Maryland. Her current book project on the family novel in Imperial Russia explores the ways in which the development of liberal thought in 19th-century Russia created space for the reimagining of both the form of the family and its role in the political—a reimagining in stark contrast to the eventual removal of the family from the political in Western liberal thought. This research is based, in part, on research undertaken in both Moscow and St. Petersburg in the archives of the Russian State Library and the Pushkin House, respectively. Her doctoral dissertation and current book project have been supported by an Alfa Fellowship, a University of Chicago Harper Dissertation-Year Fellowship, an Institute for Humane Studies Publication Accelerator Grant, and a Princeton University Press Book Proposal Grant. This is her first post-doctoral academic appointment, although she previously worked for the Moscow-based publishing house Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie (NLO) as an editorial assistant and translator during her graduate studies.

Mina Magda, September 2023 – August 2024 Dr. Magda is a scholar of Russian literature, visual art, and performance spanning the long nineteenth century and early Soviet period. Her interdisciplinary research centers politics of racial representation, gendered labor, and colonial culture. Becoming Modern: Negrophilia, Russophilia, and the Making of Modernist Paris, her current book project, examines the aesthetic interplay among modernists of the Russian and Black diasporas in Paris—namely, Josephine Baker and the Ballets Russes—the visual technologies of race-making that framed their careers, and their shared imbrication in the histories of celebrity and coloniality. She demonstrates how the comparison between Baker and the Ballets Russes helps us think of racial formation as a network of political, aesthetic, and commercial negotiations through which we can examine the limits and relational contingencies of racial self-determination, and ask at what cost conceptions of modern subjecthood were afforded. Magda received her PhD in Slavic Languages and Literatures at Yale University in 2023 and holds an MA in Russian and Slavic Studies from New York University. Her doctoral dissertation was supported by fellowships at the Houghton Library and Beinecke Library and the MacMillan International Dissertation Research Fellowship.

Anastasiia Vlasenko, September 2022-August 2023 Dr. Vlasenko is a postdoctoral fellow who studies electoral politics and democratization with specialization in politics of Ukraine and Russia. Her monograph project, ‘The Electoral Effects of Decentralization: Evidence from Ukraine’ investigates how decentralization reform affects electoral mobilization and diversity in a weakly institutionalized democracy. Vlasenko is particularly interested in transitional period reforms, propaganda, legislative politics, and forecasting. Her research has been published in the Journal of Politics. She received her Ph.D. from the Department of Political Science at Florida State University in 2022, M.A. in Political Science from Florida State University in 2018, M.A. in International Relations from New York University in 2016, and M.Sc. in European Affairs from Lund University in 2013, and B.A. in Political Science from the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in 2011. In 2020-2021, she worked at Hertie School in Berlin as a visiting researcher. In 2014-2016, Vlasenko was a Fulbright scholar at New York University. At Florida State University, she taught courses on comparative politics and post-Soviet studies.

Margarita Kuleva, December 2022-November 2023 Dr. Kuleva is a sociologist of culture, interested in exploring social inequalities in the art world and cultural industries in Russia and the UK. Primarily, she works as an ethnographer to discover the ‘behind the scenes’ of cultural institutions to give greater visibility to the invisible workers of culture. Kuleva received her PhD in art sociology from the National Research University Higher School of Economics in collaboration with Bielefeld University in 2019. The dissertation entailed a comparative study of the careers and professional identities of young cultural workers in visual art sectors in Moscow, St Petersburg and London. Based on more than 70 in-depth interviews, it was one of the first systematic studies of post-Soviet creative labour. Some findings from these studies were recently presented in journal publications including Cultural Studies (2018) and International Journal of Cultural Studies (2019), as well as European Journal of Cultural Studies (2022). Her current research project, The Right to Be Creative , focuses on hidden political struggles at contemporary Russian cultural institutions. Dr. Kuleva previously worked at National Research University Higher School of Economics as an Associate Professor and held the position of Chair of the Department of Design and Contemporary Art in St Petersburg. In 2019-2020, Kuleva was a fellow of the Center for Art, Design and Social Research (Boston, Massachusetts). As a researcher, artist, and curator, she has collaborated with a number of Russian and international cultural institutions, including Manifesta Biennale, Pushkin House in London, Boston Center for the Arts, Garage MoCA, Goethe Institute, Helsinki Art Museum, Street Art Museum, Ural Industrial Biennale and New Holland St. Petersburg.

Past Post-Doctoral Fellows

Nikolay Erofeev, March 2022-May 2022

Dr. Erofeev is an architectural historian whose work focuses on socialist architecture and urban planning. His monograph project, ‘Architecture and housing in the Comecon’ looks at architecture and urbanisation patterns produced by global socialism. Combining in-depth scrutiny of the design of the built environment with an analysis of the everyday processes of subject-making that shaped the socialist project in Mongolia, the project aims to provide a new understanding of the urban and domestic spaces produced in the Global South. Erofeev received his D.Phil (PhD) in History from the University of Oxford in 2020 where he was a Hill Foundation Scholar and his specialist degree (M.A.) in the History of Art from the Moscow State University in 2014. His doctoral project discussed the design and production of prefabricated mass housing in the Soviet Union and argued the architectural story of this understudied ‘bureaucratic modernism’ represents a much more creative and influential development in the history of modern architecture as a whole. Erofeev had academic appointments at Manchester Metropolitan University where he was teaching Master of Architecture dissertations. Erofeev is currently conducting research at the University of Basel as a postdoctoral fellow supported by the Swiss Government Excellence Scholarship.

Jennifer Flaherty, September 2020-August 2021

Dr. Flaherty is a postdoctoral fellow specializing in nineteenth- and twentieth- century Russian literature, culture and intellectual history, with current research interests in Hegel’s influence on Russian thought as well as labor theory. Her book project on representations of peasants investigates how the stylistic innovations of nineteenth-century Russian literature express the tensions of modernity that lie at the heart of its agrarian myth. She received her Ph.D. in Slavic Languages and Literatures from the University of California at Berkeley in 2019, her M.A. in Humanities from the University of Chicago in 2010, and her B.A. in Philosophy from Appalachian State University in North Carolina. She’s had academic appointments as a visiting assistant professor in the department of Modern Languages and Literatures at the College of William of Mary, and as a lecturer at in the Slavic department at UC Berkeley. Flaherty has conducted research as an American Councils Fellow in Moscow and with Harvard’s Institute for World Literature. Her doctoral dissertation received support from UC Berkeley’s Townsend Center for Humanities. She has a forthcoming article in The Russian Review and has published in Tolstoy Studies Journal and PMLA.

Nataliia Laas, September 2022-August 2023 Dr. Laas specializes in political economy, consumer society, gender, the history of the social sciences, and environmental history in the Soviet Union. She currently works on a book manuscript, provisionally titled A Soviet Consumer Republic: Economic Citizenship and the Economy of Waste in the Post-WWII Soviet Union. This project departs from the standard economy-of-shortages narrative and offers a different dimension, an “economy of waste,” to describe Soviet consumption. It argues that after World War II and especially with the onset of Cold War competition with the West, in addition to periodic shortages the Soviet state regularly confronted a new challenge: glutted markets, overproducing factories, and excess commodities. Unlike shortages that were often vindicated by the official Bolshevik ideology as the people’s sacrifice on the road to the country’s industrialization and economic growth, excess and waste were endemic to the malfunctioning of a command economy but far more difficult for authorities to explain and justify. By focusing on the emergence of socialist market research and consumer studies, the book explores how the economy of waste reshaped relationships between the state and its citizens. Laas received her PhD in History from Brandeis University in 2022. Her doctoral dissertation was supported by a Harriman Institute Carnegie Research Grant and a Mellon Dissertation Completion Fellowship from Brandeis, among others.

Emily Laskin, September 2022-August 2023

Dr. Laskin specializes in the literature of Central Asia, working extensively in Russian and Persian. Her current book project, No Man’s Land: The Geopoetics of Modern Central Asia , focuses on the literature of the so-called Great Game, the Russo-British rivalry for influence in Central Asia, putting Russian and British imperial writing on Central Asia in dialogue with contemporaneous Persian literature published across the region, from Kabul, to Bukhara, to Istanbul. Laskin’s recent work on the literature of the Great Game appears in Novel: A Forum on Fiction , and she is an editor of the forthcoming volume Tulips in Bloom: An Anthology of Modern Central Asian Literature . She received her Ph.D. in 2021 in Comparative Literature at the University of California, Berkeley, and also holds an M.A. in Russian, East European, and Eurasian Studies from Columbia University. Her doctoral dissertation was supported by a Mellon/ACLS fellowship and a Berkeley Dean’s Fund grant for archival research in Moscow and St. Petersburg.

Vladimir Ryzhkovskyi, November 2020-October 2021

Dr. Ryzhkovskyi studied Russian, Soviet and East European history in Ukraine, Russia, and the US, where he recently earned a PhD from Georgetown University. By foregrounding the link between empire, culture, and knowledge, Ryzhkovskyi’s research probes the place of Russia and the Soviet Union within global history, particularly in relation to forms of Western imperialism and colonialism. His current book project, Soviet Occidentalism: Medieval Studies and the Restructuring of Imperial Knowledge in Twentieth-Century Russia, explores the twentieth-century history of medieval studies in late imperial and Soviet Russia as a model for demonstrating the crucial importance of Soviet appropriation of Western culture and knowledge in the post-revolutionary reconstituting and maintaining the empire following 1917. In addition to pursuing the imperial and postcolonial theme in the history of Soviet modernity, Ryzhkovskyi has published articles and essays on the history of late imperial and Soviet education, the history of late Soviet intelligentsia, and Soviet philosophy. A volume of unpublished writings by the Soviet historian and philosopher Boris Porshnev, co-edited with Artemy Magun, is forthcoming from the European University Press in 2021.

Delgerjargal Uvsh, November 2020-October 2021

Dr. Uvsh received her Ph.D. in political science from the University of Wisconsin–Madison in 2020. She conducts research and teaches primarily in the field of comparative politics, with a focus on post-Soviet politics, the political economy of natural-resource dependence, institutional and regime change, and research methods. Using Russia as a critical case, Delgerjargal’s book project, “Reversal of the Resource Curse? Negative Revenue Shocks and Development in Russia and Beyond,” develops a theory of when and how declines in natural-resource revenue (negative revenue shocks) incentivize political elites to support private business activity and reverse the “resource curse.” Delgerjargal expanded her interest in the relationship between natural resources and institutional changes in a forthcoming book chapter, where she explores the short-term effects of negative revenue shocks on political regimes. Another extension, published in Land Use Policy , analyzes novel satellite data on forest-cover change in western Russian regions and shows that the dynamics of forest growth and deforestation have been different in the first versus the second decade of Russia’s transition. You can read more about Delgerjargal’s work at www.delgerjargaluvsh.com .

Sasha de Vogel, September 2021-August 2022

Dr. de Vogel studies the politics of authoritarian regimes and collective action, particularly in Russia and the post-Soviet region. Her research examines when and why autocratic regimes promise concessions to protestors, how these promises affect mobilization and their impact on policies. Her research underscores that reneging, or deliberately failing to implement concessions as promised, is a fundamental strategic dimension of concessions. Her book project focuses on protest campaigns against the Moscow City government about policy-related grievances in the mid-2010s. During this period, more protest campaigns were promised a concession than experienced a detention, yet these concessions rarely resolved protesters’ grievances. Other research interests include comparative politics, authoritarian institutions, repression, authoritarian responsiveness and urban politics. Sasha received her PhD in Political Science from the University of Michigan in 2021, and also holds an MA in Russian, Eastern European and Eurasian Regional Studies and a BA in Slavic Studies from Columbia University. Her research has been supported by the National Science Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation/Harriman Institute, among others.

Post Doctoral Fellowship

Google Plus

1.1 The main objective of ICSSR Post-Doctoral Fellowship is to encourage and retain young Indian Social Science scholars who have completed their Ph.D. and wish to pursue a regular career in teaching and research. They should have a high potential and promise for conducting full time research on specific themes and issues. These studies are expected to contribute to theoretical and conceptual advancement in different disciplines, help to generate field work based empirical data and contribute towards policy making.

1.2 The broad disciplines of study, within the domain of social sciences are:

Economics/ Development Studies
Social Work
Social Anthropology
Cultural Studies
Sanskrit Studies
Socio-Philosophical Studies
Sociolinguistics
Gender Studies
Health Studies
Political Science
International Relations/Geopolitics
Public Administration
Diaspora Studies
National Security and Strategic Studies
Social Psychology
Legal Studies
Social Geography
Environmental Studies
Modern Social History
Media Studies
Library Science
Language Studies

2. Eligibility

2.1 The scholar should not be more than 45 years of age as on the last date of application. There shall be an age relaxation of 5 years for SC/ST/Persons with Benchmark Disability candidates;

2.2 The scholar must possess Ph.D. Degree at the time of application and have, in the opinion of the ICSSR, the necessary competence to conduct research in social sciences or social aspects of other disciplines.

2.3 A fellow must affiliate himself/herself to an ICSSR Research Institute/Institutes of national importance, approved by MoE /government research institutes/public funded Indian university including deemed university/college having approved Ph.D. programme of his/her choice. Funds are disbursed through the affiliating institution.

2.4 The selected fellow has to work under the guidance of a senior social scientist (not below Associate Professor with proven research supervision experience and publications). The supervisor should not be superannuated and should belong to the affiliating institution. The selection of the supervisor is subject to the approval of the ICSSR.

3. How to apply

3.1 Applications will be invited through open advertisement on ICSSR website and its social media platforms and should be received before the deadline mentioned in the advertisement.

3.2 The candidates shall submit online application. All applicants are requested to take a print out of the application submitted online and send the same along with its attachments to the ICSSR to reach within 10 days from the last date of the submission of application. Please send these documents through Speed Post to the “In charge, RFS Division, Indian Council of Social Science Research, Aruna Asaf Ali Marg, New Delhi – 110067”.

In case, the hard copy of application is not received within 10 days, the candidature of applicant may be treated as cancelled.

3.3 The Research Proposal should either be in Hindi or English (Use Unicode 8 (UTF-8) to fill the form in Hindi)

3.4 One applicant can submit only one application under Post-Doctoral Fellowship scheme. However, he/she can apply separately for another scheme.

4. Procedure for the Award

4.1 Applications are scrutinized.

4.2 Thereafter Expert Committee(s) short-list the meritorious proposals from the eligible applications.

4.3 The short-listed applicants may then be invited for an interaction/presentation before an Expert Committee.

4.4 After interaction, the Expert Committee/s makes recommendation for the award by the ICSSR, which are finalised and approved by the competent authority.

5. Duration and Value

5.1 Post-Doctoral Fellowship is a full time research work.

5.2 The duration of fellowship shall be for two years and no extension will be considered.

5.3 The value of the fellowship is Rs.31,000/- per month and contingency grant is Rs.25,000/- per annum.

6. Joining & Release of Fellowship

6.1 The scholar has to join the fellowship within one month of the date of the award letter by submitting all required documents through the affiliating institution. This may be extended by the ICSSR in exceptional circumstances.

6.2 The fellowship will be sanctioned initially for a period of one year, effective from the date of joining Fellowship by the scholar. The renewal of the Fellowship for the subsequent year shall be subject to the receipt of satisfactory Annual Progress Report and statement of account for the fellowship released for first year.

6.3 The first year fellowship and contingency will be released in two equal instalments. The first instalment will be released after receiving the Grant-in-Aid-Bill (GIB) and the second instalment after receiving a satisfactory Six Monthly Progress Report in the prescribed format along with the Statement of Account to be issued by the Affiliating Institution.

6.4 The second-year fellowship and contingency grant will be released in three instalments. The first instalment of six-month fellowship will be released on receipt of the Grant-in-Aid Bill (GIB). The second instalment of 03 months fellowship will be released on receipt of a satisfactory Progress Report of next six months in the prescribed format along with the Statement of Account. The final instalment of remaining fellowship along with contingency will be released after receiving the final report and its acceptance by the ICSSR and Statement of Accounts with Utilization Certificate in GFR-12A Form duly signed by the competent authority of the affiliating institution. However, in case of non-public funded institution, the final instalment of fellowship will be released on receipt of the Audited Statement of Accounts with Utilization Certificate in GFR-12A Form and verification of the documents by the ICSSR.

6.5 The 7.5% overhead charges to the public funded affiliating institution will be released only after the submission of the audited statement of accounts with utilization certificate in GFR-12A Form and verification of the documents by the ICSSR.

6.6 The accounts and utilization certificate will be signed by the Finance Officer/Registrar/ Principal/Director in case the accounts of the Institution are audited by the CAG/AG. Otherwise, they need to be signed, both by the competent authority of the affiliating institution along with a chartered accountant.

7. Monitoring of Fellowship

7.1 Regular monitoring of Fellowship is done on the basis of Six Monthly and Annual Progress Reports in the prescribed format submitted by the scholar. In case of delayed Progress Reports, the scholar may be asked to give the justification of the delay on which the final decision shall be taken by the ICSSR. The scholar may be asked to furnish an Undertaking specifying the date of final report submission to the ICSSR.

7.2 The fellowship may be discontinued if research progress is found unsatisfactory or any ICSSR rules are violated.

7.3 The ICSSR may ask for annual presentation/mid-term appraisal of the research work.

7.4 During the course of the fellowship, the scholar are required to publish at least two research papers preferably in Scopus Indexed or UGC Care listed research journals or edited books on the theme of the research undertaken.

7.5 The scholars must give due acknowledgement to ICSSR while getting their research paper published.

8. Completion of Fellowship

8.1 If a fellow leaves the fellowship within one year, he/she has to submit a detailed progress report of the work done during that period ensuring the final settlement of account by the affiliating institution up to the period of the fellowship. However, if a fellow leaves the fellowship after one year, he/she may be asked to submit the final report on completion of the duration of fellowship without claiming fellowship of the remaining period. If a candidate leaves the fellowship without completion, he/she will have to apply to ICSSR for permission and the ICSSR will take the final decision in this regard.

The scholar is expected to submit the final report within three months after completion of the duration of the fellowship. However, extension for submission of final report may be granted on justified reasons without any additional financial commitment of the ICSSR.

In case the fellow submits the final report late directly after missing submission of periodic progress reports, the ICSSR will decide for accepting the final report and releasing the balance amount of fellowship.

8.2 On completion of the fellowship tenure, the scholar should submit the following:

a. A book-length final report along-with a Summary of the report (3000-4000 words) and two published research papers preferably in Scopus Indexed or UGC Care listed research journals or edited books on the theme of the research undertaken.

b. These documents are be submitted in hard copy (two copies of final report and two copies each of the Summary and research articles) and a soft copy.

8.3 ICSSR gets every report checked for plagiarism and the Similarity Report is also generated. As a policy, ICSSR does not accept contents beyond 10 percent on Similarity Index. Scholars are required to get their final report checked on their own for Similarity Index and attach a report of the same at the time of submission.

9. Expectations of the Affiliating Institution

9.1 The affiliating institution is required to provide the requisite research infrastructure to the scholar and maintain proper accounts. For this, the Council shall pay to the affiliating/administering institution overhead charges of seven and a half percent (7.5%) of the total Fellowship (fellowship amount plus contingency).

9.2 The affiliating institution is required to give an undertaking in the prescribed format contained in the Application Form to administer and manage the ICSSR fellowship including disbursement of fellowship amount to the fellow.

9.3 The affiliating institution shall maintain a dedicated bank account for ICSSR grant (Scheme Code-0877) that is duly registered at PFMS portal for release of the Fellowship Grant.

9.4 The affiliating institution will be under obligation to ensure submission of the final report and audited Statement of Accounts along with Utilization Certificate (in the prescribed Performa GFR 12-A) duly certified by the competent authority of the institution.

9.5 In case a scholar leaves /discontinues his fellowship/dies before completion of fellowship tenure, the affiliating institution shall immediately inform ICSSR, settle the accounts including the refund of any unspent balance within three months of submission.

9.6 The affiliating institution shall make suitable arrangements for preservation of data such as filled in schedules, tabulation sheets, manuscripts, reports, etc. relating to the study.

9.7 The ICSSR reserves the right to demand raw data, or such part of it as may be specified, to be transferred to the ICSSR.

9.8 The overhead charges shall be paid only after the completion of the fellowship and on receipt of the final audited Statement of Accounts.

10. Conditions

10.1 The post-doctoral research work should not be the same as Ph.D. work.

10.2. The contingency grant may be utilized for books, stationery, computer related costs, and the field work expenses related with the research work.

10.3 The Copyright © of the manuscript will rest with the ICSSR. The ICSSR reserves all rights to publish the fellowship report funded by it, provided the work is recommended for publication by Expert/Experts. The scholars can get it published themselves only after seeking permission from ICSSR.

10.4 The scholar shall acknowledge ICSSR’s support in all publications resulting from the research output of the fellowship.

10.5 All fellowships are subject to income tax deductions as per the Government of India rules at the level of the affiliating/ administering institution.

10.6 Defaulters of any previous fellowship/project/grant of the ICSSR will not be eligible for consideration until the applicant obtains the clearance from the concerned administrative division.

10.7 A fellow is not entitled for the same fellowship more than once.

10.8 While accepting any fellowship from the ICSSR, a fellow should not accept any other fellowship or research project from any other institution or regular financial benefit/assignment from any other institution.

10.9 The research proposal/final report of the fellowship cannot be submitted for the award of any University degree/diploma or funding by any other institution. The ICSSR however, will have no objection if the scholar utilizes the research data for this purpose.

10.10 The fellowship may be transferred from one affiliating institution to another on the request of the scholar under special circumstance with ICSSR approval, subject to submission of the following documents:

(1) Satisfactory progress report;

(2) No objection certificate from both previous and the proposed university/institute;

(3) Consent letter along with C.V. of the new supervisor;

(4) Audited statement of account and utilization certificate along with unspent balance, if any.

10.11 During the tenure of fellowship, the fellow will be governed by the rules of the affiliating institution in all matters including drawals of TA/DA, holidays/leave and contingency grant, etc. However, the duration and amount of fellowship will not exceed twenty four months.

10.12 The selected fellows are expected to do full time research in India. They could, however, undertake data collection outside India in exceptional cases and if warranted by the needs of the proposal. For this they are required to apply separately for consideration under the Data Collection Scheme of the ICSSR International Collaboration Division.

10.13 The scholar should not have been subjected to any disciplinary/legal action/proceedings/financial penalties in his/her career/ research career.

10.14 The final report submitted by the scholar will be considered satisfactory, only after its evaluation by the ICSSR.

10.15 Books/periodicals/equipment purchased by the scholar out of the contingency grant should be deposited with the affiliating institution.

10.16 Application submitted against one Call will not be considered for the subsequent Calls.

10.17 The Council reserves the right to reject any application/nomination. It is also not responsible for any postal loss/delays in communication.

10.18 Incomplete applications in any respect shall not be considered for fellowship.

10.19 The final authority related to the interpretation of the guidelines or any issue left is vested with the ICSSR.

10.20 Those who have completed their duration of fellowship and if continue to write it with their name, they should prefix ‘Former’ and suffix ‘the duration’ with the name of the fellowship e.g. Former National/Senior/Post-Doctoral Fellow ICSSR (2016-18).

National Fellowship Guidelines
Senior Fellowship Guidelines
Post Doctoral Fellowship Guidelines
Doctoral Fellowship Guidelines

Postdoctoral Fellowship in Translational Medicine

The PhRMA Foundation’s Postdoctoral Fellowship in Translational Medicine supports individuals (U.S. and non-U.S. citizens) engaged in a multidisciplinary, collaborative research training program at an accredited U.S. university that will extend their credentials in translational medicine.

Letter of Intent Deadline: May 1, 2024, at 12:00 p.m. (noon) ET

Applications will be accepted for a minimum of one year and a maximum of two years of stipend support.

$60,000 per year, up to two years

Applicants (U.S. and non-U.S. citizens) must currently be in a PhD and/or MS degree-granting accredited U.S. university.
Applicants must have a firm commitment from a research supervisor or sponsor at their university.
Applicants must hold a PhD, PharmD, MD, or appropriate terminal research doctorate. If you do not hold one at the time of application submission, please state in your extended letter when you expect to receive it, as it must be received before funding can begin. Funding can begin as early as January 1, 2025 , or as late as August 1, 2025 . 
You are not eligible if your doctoral degree was granted before January 1, 2022.
Applicants who have taken leave from their career (e.g., parenting of a child, childbirth, long-term care of a parent/spouse/child/dependent, personal health issues) that puts them outside of the eligibility time frame can reach out to PhRMA Foundation staff ahead of their LOI submission to determine their eligibility. The Foundation aims to be flexible and adjust these time frames if appropriate.
Applicants who are applying for funds to support postdoctoral work in the laboratory where their graduate work was performed will be given lower preference. One of the objectives of this fellowship is to gain new skills and therefore an ideal candidate will be conducting their research in a new laboratory and not where their graduate work was performed.
Only one postdoctoral applicant per lab may apply for this award. If multiple applicants apply, they will automatically be ineligible. Potential applicants and their mentors and/or lab managers should decide who should apply.
The Foundation will not consider multiple applications for similar efforts on the same project. For instance, if a predoc, postdoc, and faculty member from the same lab are all submitting applications for proposed efforts on the same project, the efforts must be separate activities and not duplicative.

[email protected]

Three From Rhodes Selected for National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program

college of three college students who graduated from Rhodes

Rhodes College alums Kelsey Rena Glasper ’21, Eraine Leland ’21, and Scotty Wicker ’22 have been selected for the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program (NSF GRFP) , following a national competition.

The program recognizes and supports outstanding graduate students in NSF-supported science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines who are pursuing research-based master’s and doctoral degrees at accredited U.S. institutions. Fellowships provide the recipient with a three-year annual stipend of $37,000, as well as access to opportunities for professional development.

Glasper, who received a bachelor’s degree in neuroscience from Rhodes, is now pursuing a Ph.D. in neuroscience at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center. She was a member of the STEM Cohort Mentoring Program at Rhodes, founded by Dr. Shana Stoddard. Glasper also completed research in Stoddard’s biochemistry course and worked in her lab as an undergraduate and a post-baccalaureate student.

“The invaluable support I received from Dr. Shana Stoddard and the STEM Cohort Mentoring Program undoubtedly helped me achieve this goal,” said Glasper about being selected for the NSF GRFP. “The environment at Rhodes College not only nurtured my academic growth but also fostered my development as a well-rounded individual. It was there that I learned to integrate my passion for neuroscience with the many other things that I love. I am now able to use my involvement and experiences at Rhodes as a template to advocate for broadening diversity and equity in the STEM community and providing representation for other emerging scientists of color. It’s this unique blend of scholarly excellence and a holistic lifestyle that played a pivotal role in securing the fellowship.”

Leland is pursuing a Ph.D. in psychology at the University of Miami. She received a bachelor’s degree in psychology and Spanish from Rhodes. She was a member of Dr. Kiren Khan’s Language and Literacy Lab and conducted research related to the Summer Success kindergarten readiness program co-developed by Khan. Leland continues to conduct research focusing on bilingual children's language and social emotional development, as well as the impact of peers and teachers on early development.

“My experiences in the Language and Literacy lab at Rhodes really jump-started my passion for applied, classroom-based research,” said Leland. I am especially grateful to Dr. Khan for supporting me in designing my own study focusing on bilingual narrative structures. Although COVID-19 disrupted the study, it launched my research on dual language learners and code switching, which has continued to be the focus of my research and is the topic of my NSF GRFP proposal.”

Wicker, who received a bachelor’s degree in chemistry, also completed research with Stoddard and was a member of the STEM Cohort Mentoring Program. Wicker was a member of Dr. William Eckenhoff’s lab from his first year at Rhodes and emerged as a leader, conducting research on hydrogen production using a nickel catalyst and publishing a paper on the project in Inorganic Chemistry . Wicker currently is pursuing a Ph.D. in chemistry at The University of Texas at Austin.

“Rhodes College offered a diverse range of research opportunities and courses which proved to be invaluable while preparing for this award,” said Wicker. ”I first applied to the NSF GRFP my senior year at Rhodes, but the feedback provided by Dr. Stoddard’s STEM Cohort Mentoring program, and previous research experience gained from over three years in Dr. Eckenhoff’s research lab, proved to be crucial points in building the foundation I used to win this year’s fellowship. Dr. Stoddard and Dr. Eckenhoff ensured the development of my scientific communication and laboratory skills, but also encouraged the continuous pursuit of personal growth and development which further inspired me to pursue higher goals in the STEM field.”

Skip to main menu
Skip to user menu

Expression of Interest – Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions – Postdoctoral Fellowships 2024 (MSCA-PF)

The Marie Skłodowska Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship programme (MSCA-PF) is a highly renowned European funding scheme. It offers talented scientists the unique chance to set up 2-year research and training projects with the support of a supervising team. Besides providing an attractive grant including mobility, family and research allowances, it represents a major opportunity to boost the career of promising researchers.

The submission deadline of proposals to the European Commission is set on the 11 th September 2024 and successful research proposals  selected for funding may start in May 2025 at the earliest.

2PE – Bretagne initiated an original action towards potential candidates for the MSCA Postdoctoral fellowships (MSCA-PF).

This action aims to increase chances of success for motivated fellows by offering dedicated support from both scientific and technical staff to write an excellent research and training project.

2PE – Bretagne and academic institutions in Brittany are thus looking for excellent postdoctoral researchers with an international profile willing to apply for a Marie S. Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship with a competitive proposal in September 2024.

Eligibility criteria for prospective applicants

Academic qualification: By the MSCA-PF call deadline (11 th September 2024), applicants must be in possession of a doctoral degree , defined as a successfully defended doctoral thesis, even if the doctoral degree has yet to be awarded.

Research experience: Applicants must have a maximum of 8 years full-time equivalent experience in research , measured from the date applicants were in possession of a doctoral degree. Years of experience outside research and career breaks (e.g. due to parental leave), will not be taken into account.

Nationality & Mobility rules: Applicants can be of any nationality but must not have resided more than 12 months in France between the 12/09/2021 and the 11/09/2024 .

Research fields and pre-identified topics

Chemistry [CHE]

ADDITINIB

UNIVREN, ISCR, François-Hugues POREE, Rennes

CNRS, ISCR, Ludovic FAVEREAU, Rennes

Chalcogenide glasses

CNRS, ISCR, Louisiane VERGER, Rennes

UNIVREN, ISCR, Nathalie AUDEBRAND, Rennes

UNIVREN, ISCR, Lucie NOREL, Rennes

Materials

UNIVREN, ISCR, Stéphane RIGAUT, Rennes

New electrolytes

CNRS, ISCR, Florence GENESTE, Rennes

Optical control

UNIVREN, IPR, Ernest PASTOR, Rennes

Economic Sciences [ECO]

UR2, LiRIS, Alexandra BERTHE, Rennes

Information Science and Engineering [ENG]

Aerial Robotics

INRIA, INRIA, Marco TOGNON, Rennes

Deep Learning Accelerators

INRIA, INRIA, Olivier SENTIEYS, Rennes

ENERGUMENE

UNIVREN, IPR, Tanguy ROUXEL, Rennes

eXtendedReality INRIA, INRIA, Ferran ARGELAGUET, Rennes

CNRS, IRISA, Laurent AMSALEG, Rennes

INSERM - UNIVREN, LTSI, Pierre JANNIN, Rennes

Haptic interfaces

CNRS, IRISA, Claudio PACCHIEROTTI, Rennes

Knowledge Graph Embeddings

INRIA, INRIA, Luis GALLARAGA, Rennes

Metasurfaces

CNRS, IETR, David GONZALEZ-OVEJERO, Rennes

INSERM- UNIVREN, LTSI, Pierre JANNIN, Rennes

Multi-robot systems

Network Neutrality

INRIA, INRIA, Bruno TUFFIN, Rennes

UBO, Lab-STICC, Rozenn ALLANIC, Brest

Environment and Geoscience [ENV]

BATHYCARBON

UNIVREN, ECOBIO, Sarah COFFINET, Rennes

CARBOPHAGE

CNRS, ECOBIO, Cécile MONNARD, Rennes

CDK-Links

CNRS, Géosciences Rennes, Marc JOLIVET, Rennes

UBO, LOPS, Xavier CARTON, Plouzané

UBO, GO, France FLOC’H, Plouzané

IARA, SAS, Edith LE CADRE, Rennes

ValleyDyn

UNIVREN, Géosciences Rennes, Philippe STEER, Rennes

Life Sciences [LF]

Cell Cycle

CNRS, IGDR, Giulia BERTOLIN, Rennes

Celldeathbreast

INSERM, OSS, Elodie LAFONT, Rennes

Child health

INSERM, IRSET, Charline WAREMBOURG, Rennes

DIT-CAN-BIOINF

UNIVREN- INSERM, OSS, Marc AUBRY, Rennes

IARA, STLO, Frédérique PEDRONO, Rennes

INRAE, LPGP, Julien BOBE, Rennes

UNIVREN, BRM, Vincent CATTOIR, Rennes

CNRS, IGDR, Hélène BOUVRAIS, Rennes

Staphylococcus aureus

INSERM- UNIVREN, BRM, Svetlana CHABELSKAYA, Rennes

CNRS, BEEP, Karine ALAIN, Plouzané

Mathematics [MAT]

UBO, LMBA, Eric LOUBEAU, Brest

Social Sciences and Humanities [SOC]

UR2, LIRIS, Alexandra BERTHE, Rennes

HOW TO APPLY

We encourage all motivated and eligible postdoctoral researchers to send their expressions of interest through the EU Survey application form ( link here ) , before 5 th of May 2024 .

Your application shall include:

(i) the exact dates for each position and its location (country)
(ii) a list of publications
a cover letter including a research outline (up to 2 pages) identifying the research synergies with the project supervisor(s) and proposed research topics described above.

Following the reception of your expression of interest, we will check the eligibility of your profile for a MSCA-PF application. Supervisor(s) will then select the most promising applications. Subsequently, supervisors will contact you in due time (mid-May) for further discussions and proposal writing until September 2024. If funded, the MSCA-PF project submitted in September 2024 could start from May 2025 onwards.

Please note: as a selected applicant, you will be responsible for developing and writing your own MSCA-PF proposal , even though you will benefit from the support of your supervisor(s). In addition, you will receive dedicated support from the European project office in order to write a competitive proposal that meets the European Commission’s expectations.

Estimated timetable

Deadline for sending an expression of interest : 5 th May 2024

Selection of the most promising application(s): May – June 2024

Writing the MSCA-PF proposal with the support of the supervisor(s) and the European project office: June – September 2024

MSCA-PF 2024 call deadline : 11 th September 2024

Publication of the MSCA-PF evaluation results: February 2025

Start of the MSCA-PF project (if funded): May 2025 (at the earliest)

Share this job

Get job alerts

Create a job alert and receive personalised job recommendations straight to your inbox.

Similar jobs

Young talents in the fields of natural science and engineering technology.

Shenyang, Liaoning, China

Post-doctoral Opportunity at EPFL (Switzerland) : Epigenomics of Neurodevelopment

Geneva, Canton of Geneva (CH)

Postdoctoral Research Associate - Chemical Biology / Organic Chemistry.

Waco, Texas

Sasha de Vogel

Raphael Morrison Dorman Memorial Postdoctoral Fellow, Weatherhead Scholars Program

I am a political scientist researching the politics of authoritarian regimes and collective action in Russia and the post-Soviet region.

I am a Raphael Morrison Dorman Memorial Postdoctoral Fellow at the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard University . I received my PhD in Political Science from the University of Michigan in 2021 and I was a post-doctoral fellow at New York University 's Jordan Center for the Advanced Study of Russia from 2021-2022.

My work examines when and why autocratic regimes promise concessions to protestors, how these promises affect mobilization and their impact on policies.

In my book project , I emphasize that a concession entails a process of potential policy change that begins with a promise of future action. Because these promises are not inherently credible, concessions are vulnerable to reneging, or the deliberate failure to implement concessions. I argue that while concessions can be an avenue to address problems about which the government lacked information, in many cases, they are used to undermine mobilization in the short-term, even if later reneging allows the grievance to endure. The book uses an original database on protest campaigns against the Moscow City government about policy-related grievances and is also informed by interviews with activists I conducted during fieldwork in Moscow. My related dissertation won the Juan Linz Prize for Best Dissertation in the Comparative Study of Democracy.

My other research interests in comparative politics include authoritarian institutions, repression, authoritarian responsiveness, urban politics and post-Soviet politics.

I also hold an MA in Russian, Eastern European and Eurasian Regional Studies and a BA in Slavic Studies, both from Columbia University . My research has been supported by the National Science Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation/Harriman Institute , among others.

My Insights:

A War With No End in Sight

"More Russians have died in Ukraine than in all wars the country has fought since 1945 combined. But escalating repression and a culture of helpless disengagement have kept support for the war high," writes Sasha de Vogel.

Read more about A War With No End in Sight

Mathematical and Physical Sciences Ascending Postdoctoral Research Fellowships (MPS-Ascend)

The purpose of the Mathematical and Physical Sciences Ascending Postdoctoral Research Fellowship (MPS-Ascend) program is to support postdoctoral Fellows who will broaden the participation of members of groups that are historically excluded and currently underrepresented in MPS fields in the U.S., defined in this solicitation as Blacks or African Americans, Hispanics, Latinos, Indigenous and Native Americans, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and other Native Pacific Islanders, as future leaders in MPS fields. The program is intended to recognize beginning investigators of significant potential and provide them with experience in research that will broaden perspectives, facilitate interdisciplinary interactions, and help broaden participation within MPS fields. The program funds postdoctoral Fellows in research environments that will have maximal impact on their future scientific development and facilitates their transition into a faculty appointment. Awards will support research in any scientific area within the purview of the five MPS Divisions: the Divisions of Astronomical Sciences (AST), Chemistry (CHE), Materials Research (DMR), Mathematical Sciences (DMS), and Physics (PHY). Fellowships are awards to individuals, not institutions, and are administered by the Fellows.

Full Proposal Deadline Date: Oct. 18, 2023

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

MPS-Ascend Postdoctoral Research Fellowships are awards to individuals; proposals are submitted directly by the fellowship candidate to NSF. Each candidate must identify one or more scientific mentor(s) and host institution(s) in the proposal. Activities supported by the MPS-Ascend Fellowship program may be conducted at any appropriate U.S. host institution as defined in Section II, "Program Description."

Proposers must self-certify that they are eligible to receive the Fellowship. An individual (also referred to as a Fellow or proposer) is eligible to submit a proposal to the MPS-Ascend Postdoctoral Research Fellowship program if all the following criteria are met:

Must be a U.S. citizen (or national) or legally admitted permanent resident of the United States (i.e., have a "green card") at the time the proposal is submitted;
Presents research, professional development, and broadening participation plans that fall within the purview of one of the Divisions (Astronomical Sciences, Chemistry, Materials Research, Mathematical Sciences, or Physics) within the Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences;
May not have previously been a principal investigator or co-principal investigator of an NSF award (other than a graduate research fellowship or an award in support of a conference or workshop);
May not submit a research plan duplicated in another NSF proposal currently under consideration;
Must have completed all the requirements for a doctoral degree before the postdoctoral appointment start date;
It is anticipated that the research will be conducted at an institution other than the Fellowship candidate's doctoral-granting or current postdoctoral fellowship institution. However, if the Fellowship candidate chooses to remain at their current institution, the Project Description should include a strong justification of how this choice benefits their research and career development.

Proposals that fail to meet the above eligibility requirements may be returned without review.

Proposers uncertain about the eligibility requirements are strongly encouraged to contact a cognizant NSF program officer listed in this solicitation before preparing the proposal. Fellowships must begin no later than September 1, following the submission deadline.

By signing and submitting the proposal, the fellowship candidate is certifying that they meet the eligibility criteria specified in this program solicitation. Willful provision of false information in this request and its supporting documents or in reports required under an ensuing award is a criminal offense (U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001).

Only individuals may submit proposals. There is no limit on the number of candidates or Fellows that an organization may host. Scientific mentors are strongly discouraged from serving as the primary scientific mentor of more than one Ascend Fellow at a time.

Individuals may submit only one fellowship proposal per deadline to this program. Co-PIs are not allowed.

For the Colorado River and beyond, a new market could save the day

The Colorado River, “the lifeblood of the West,” is in trouble. Decades of overuse and drought have sharply reduced its water supply, threatening an ecosystem that supports 40 million people and 5.5 million acres of farmland in nearby states and parts of northern Mexico.

Steep cutbacks in water use are critical. But the seven states that rely on the Colorado River can’t agree on how much less each of them needs to take over the long run, in large part because it’s not entirely clear who holds what legal rights to the river and who should get priority over others to its available water. If the states can’t agree, the federal government is reportedly threatening to make the hard choices for them.

Paul Milgrom , the Shirley R. and Leonard W. Ely, Jr. Professor in Humanities and Sciences in Stanford’s Department of Economics and a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research ( SIEPR ), has encountered intractable problems like this before. In 2020, he won the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for his pioneering work creating markets for goods and services that can’t be sold in traditional ways.

Water management, he says, is ripe for a market fix — not just for the Colorado River Basin but around the world as water shortages, made worse by climate change, become a defining issue of the 21st century. It’s no longer enough to leave decisions around water use up to federal, state, and local governments alone.

“We are trying to meet a 21st century set of challenges with 20th century technology and 19th century laws,” says Milgrom, who is also a professor, by courtesy, at the Stanford Graduate School of Business (GSB) and at the Department of Management Science and Engineering in the School of Engineering. “What we have, fundamentally, is a market design problem.”

Milgrom is part of an interdisciplinary Stanford team — led by Billy Ferguson , a PhD student in economics at the GSB and a former SIEPR undergraduate research fellow — that has developed an elaborate plan for how new markets for trading water could overcome key policy challenges around water allocation while providing incentives to high-volume users to find ways to do more with less.

Milgrom and Ferguson recently highlighted their proposal in a working paper released by the National Bureau of Economic Research. Their use case is California, one of the Colorado River Basin’s biggest stakeholders and whose system for divvying up surface water, which comes from rivers and streams, is especially complex and opaque.

Much of their blueprint is drawn from Milgrom’s work a decade ago helping the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) overcome obstacles in delivering more radio wave frequencies to wireless companies so they could meet exploding consumer demand for mobile services.

Milgrom led a team of experts in economics and computer science through his company, Auctionomics, in the creation of a voluntary market for trading a new type of radio spectrum license, which is credited with enabling mobile communication as we know it, today. The two-part auction process he helped engineer so that the FCC could make those trades possible also delivered $20 billion in total to the radio and TV operators that gave up their old licenses and another $10 billion to the U.S. Treasury.

Milgrom says there are lessons from the 2017 Broadband Incentive Auction that apply to water scarcity in the United States and around the world.

Water rights are broken

As a second-year PhD student in 2021, Ferguson was already interested in water scarcity when he took Milgrom’s market design course and thought that lessons from the FCC’s broadband fix could apply to water. His class project on California’s convoluted system of water rights caught Milgrom’s attention and they started talking about working together. Ferguson then enrolled in a water law course taught by Barton “Buzz” Thompson , a Stanford Law School professor and water rights expert who had also been thinking about the potential role of markets. Thompson is also the faculty director of the Water in the West program led jointly by the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment and the Bill Lane Center for the American West.

“I really need to get Buzz and Paul in the same room,” Ferguson recalls thinking. With Thompson on board, the team pressed ahead.

At its core, their idea for a water market starts with creating a new type of property right — one designed to overcome many of the drawbacks with current policies. California, for instance, has a “first come, first served” approach to surface water in which the earliest rights holders — among them, farms and ranches dating 100 or more years ago — have been given priority to rivers and streams over the water-hungry entities that came later, notably coastal cities like Los Angeles and San Diego.

California also has a “use or lose it” provision that requires rights holders to consume their yearly allotment or surface water or risk getting less water in the future. They can technically sell any excess water to other users, but in practice, it’s really hard to do, according to Ferguson: Sellers first have to show that no one downstream from where the water would otherwise go — a phenomenon known as “return flow” — is harmed.

“The system is set up in a way that you have every incentive to use your entire allocation and no incentive to conserve,” Ferguson says.

Going all in with econ

Billy Ferguson was part of the inaugural cohort of undergraduate research fellows at SIEPR. He learned, as a sophomore at that time, about the power of economic tools and data-backed research and never looked back. Today, his PhD work with advisor Paul Milgrom boldly introduces a novel approach to a longstanding issue over the allocation of water rights.

A solution designed for optimal flexibility

A more efficient approach, write Ferguson and Milgrom in their working paper , would be to establish a new property right aimed at delivering water to those who need it most and are willing to pay for it. Among other features, this new right would be based on how much water gets consumed, not diverted, and adjust as precipitation levels change from one year to the next.

This new water market, Ferguson says, would give rights holders incentives to save water — maybe by switching to low-water crops or installing more efficient water treatment systems — and sell off what they don’t need without damaging downstream users. And because water would then be a financial asset, Ferguson and Milgrom say farmers and other rights holders would have easier access to loans or other capital to pay for investments in water-saving technologies.

To kickstart the market, in which participation would be voluntary, the Stanford team is borrowing another page from the radio spectrum playbook: a one-time auction in which governments, in a process known as a “reverse” auction, first buy back water rights from those who are willing to give them up in exchange for the new right. In a subsequent “forward” auction, governments would sell the new water rights to the highest bidders, who would then be free to privately trade their entitlements going forward.

“Our whole approach is to ensure a level of flexibility in allocating water that’s needed but currently missing,” Ferguson says.

Government, he adds, also has a critical role to play in adopting policies to protect vulnerable populations. This includes, for example, limiting how much farmland can be fallowed in pursuit of water profits so that local communities aren’t impacted by job losses and other economic fallout.

Why the timing is right

Milgrom and Ferguson aren’t harboring any illusions: As the Colorado River impasse shows, water scarcity is rife with political, economic, and technological challenges.

But they are also optimistic that their vision for a water market will gain traction — in large part because there’s an urgent need to figure out how to make better use of dwindling water supplies.

“There’s both pressure and possibility,” says Milgrom, just like there was when he took on the challenge of freeing up radio spectrum for wireless companies. And like then, technology has reached the point where water supplies can be measured in new ways and with enough accuracy to give users confidence in their ability to get the water they need.

“There’s every reason to think this can work,” he says. “While it won’t reverse climate change or make it rain, it would go a long way toward providing long-run water resilience.”

The biggest roadblock, says Milgrom, is the politics around water — at the federal, state, and local levels. This is one reason why Milgrom sees introducing water markets as an even bigger problem to solve than reallocating radio spectrum.

The challenge is also deeply personal for Milgrom. “I’m 75 years old,” he says. “If I’m lucky, I have one really big project left in me and I’d like this to be it.”

A conference on Advancing Sustainable Water Management — organized by Milgrom and Thompson, and hosted by Stanford Graduate School of Business and the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability — will be held on April 18-19. Find info on the event here .

Policy challenges of the Colorado River was one of the topics at the 10th Annual Eccles Family Rural West Conference organized by the Bill Lane Center for the American West. See coverage of the March 27 event here .

The ‘sandwich generation’ faces pressure as the world ages. Here are 3 tips to prevent burnout.

Media Mention

One-Third of Employees Nap During Work Hours, a New Study Finds. Good for Them

Novel CT Exam Reduces Need for Invasive Artery Treatment

Ct-fractional flow imaging helps identify patients in need of further testing, revascularization procedures.

A new study showed that a non-invasive imaging test can help identify patients with coronary artery blockage or narrowing who need a revascularization procedure. The findings were published as a Special Report in Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging .

Coronary CT angiography (CTA) is used to diagnose narrowed or blocked arteries in the heart. A CTA exam receives a score from mild (0-1) to moderate (2-3) to severe (4-5). Patients with scores above 3 typically require medical treatments and can potentially benefit from stents or surgeries to restore blood flow to the heart.

“CTA tells you the degree to which a vessel is blocked,” said Mangun Kaur Randhawa, MD, a post-doctoral research fellow in the Department of Radiology at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) in Boston. “But the degree of blockage doesn't always reliably predict the amount of blood flow in the vessel.”

Doctors have traditionally relied on invasive coronary angiography to image vessels and more recently have added other invasive tests like fractional flow reserve (FFR) to identify and assess significant blockages in the vessels. CT-FFR is a relatively new alternative that non-invasively models a patient’s coronary blood flow using CTA images of the heart, AI algorithms and/or computational fluid dynamics.

To assess the impact of the selective use of CT-FFR on clinical outcomes, Dr. Randhawa’s research team conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent coronary CTA at MGH between August 2020 and August 2021.

During the study period, 3,098 patients underwent coronary CTA. Of these, 113 coronary bypass grafting patients were excluded. Of the remaining 2,985 patients, 292 (9.7%) were referred for CT-FFR analysis, and eight of these exams were excluded, leaving a final study group of 284.

Randhawa Radiology Correlation of CAD-RADS score with atomic stenosis fig 3

Correlation of CAD-RADS score with anatomic stenosis. CAD-RADS = Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System, CT-FFR = CT fractional flow reserve, ICA = invasive coronary angiography.

CT-FFR Analysis Successful Despite Challenging Factors

“In patients with moderate narrowing or blockage of the arteries, there can be ambiguity about who would benefit from invasive testing and revascularization procedures,” Dr. Randhawa said. “CT-FFR helps us identify and select those patients who are most likely to benefit.”

Out of the 284 patients, 160 (56.3%) had a negative CT-FFR result of > 0.80, 88 patients (30.9%) had a clearly positive (abnormal) result of ≤ 0.75, and the remaining 36 patients (12.6%) had a borderline result between 0.76-0.80.

Patients with significant narrowing/blockages on coronary CTA who underwent CT-FFR had lower rates of invasive coronary angiography (25.5% vs. 74.5%) and subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention (21.1% vs. 78.9%) than patients who were not referred for a CT-FFR.

“CT-FFR helps us identify patients who would most benefit from undergoing invasive procedures and to defer stenting or surgical treatment in patients who likely won’t,” said senior author Brian B. Ghoshhajra, MD, MBA, associate chair for operations and academic chief of cardiovascular imaging at MGH. “CT-FFR makes the CT ‘better’, but we found that the benefits were highest when used selectively.”

Dr. Ghoshhajra added that their CT-FFR analysis was successful in most patients, regardless of challenging factors such as elevated or irregular heart rates and obesity.

“When you objectively measure coronary artery flow with CT-FFR, you induce fewer patients to be further investigated and treated, because you tend to treat not just what the eyeball sees, but what the physiology supports,” he said.

The researchers said the study results demonstrate the utility of CT-FFR in clinical practice, when used selectively, highlighting its potential to reduce the frequency of invasive procedures in patients with significant coronary artery narrowing or blockages without compromising safety.

For More Information

Access the Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging study, “ Selective Use of CT Fractional Flow at a Large Academic Medical Center: Insights from Clinical Implementation after 1 Year of Practice .”

Read these previous RSNA News stories about cardiac imaging:

Photon-Counting CT Enables Lower Contrast Media for Aortic Imaging
Using Coronary Artery Calcium Score to Predict Patient Risk of Heart Attacks and Stroke
Assessing Radiation Exposure in the SCOT-HEART Trial

IMAGES

College Essay Examples: Phd research proposal on development studies
Research Proposal
How to Make Research Proposal for Mathematics PhD Project
(PDF) Proposal for Research Fellowship at Walter Sisulu University
How to write a research proposal for a fellowship
Postdoctoral Research Fellow Mentoring Plan

VIDEO

JRF Fellowship Increment
Single Girl Child Fellowship, Post Doctoral Fellowship, Research Grants
Writing Your Postgraduate Research Proposal
Fellowships for women II WISE-KIRAN Scheme (Ph.D./Post-Doc/Project/WIDUSHI/CURIE) of DST
ICSSR PDF 2023-24| Post Doctoral Fellowship| PDF Application Form| Social Science Research|
Postdoc/PhD Fellowship in Israel 🇮🇱| Living Expenses for Students in Israel| Life After PhD

COMMENTS

PDF Writing a Successful Postdoctoral Fellowship Proposal
NSF and Ford. NSF funds some postdoctoral fellowships (see specific programs) and research grants. Ford: "The awards will be made to individuals who, in the judgment of the review panels, have demonstrated superior academic achievement, are committed to a career in teaching and research at the college or university level, show promise of ...
Writing a Fellowship Proposal
Start early. Think of your fellowship proposal as a part of a larger whole that includes the letter (s) from your recommender (s) and other supporting documents (e.g., your resume and transcript). Consider your audience; write for an intelligent non-specialist (i.e., make sure the terminology will be understandable to someone outside your field).
Writing a Winning Postdoctoral Research Proposal: A Guide and Template
Here is a basic template for a postdoctoral research proposal: I. Introduction. Provide a brief overview of the research area and context for your proposed research. State the research problem or question that your project will address. Provide a rationale for the importance of the proposed research. II.
PDF EXAMPLE OF AN EXCELLENT POST-DOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP APPLICATION Contents
The beneficiaries of this Fellowship include academic and non-academic audiences. The research will contribute to scholarship across disciplines including geography, sociology, politics, cultural studies, housing studies, design and the built environment. Opportunities to present at conferences across the UK and North America have been
Postdoctoral Fellowship Research Statements: What I Wish I Knew Before
An excellent research statement will ultimately excite any researcher enough to fund the work. Another nuance to consider: postdoctoral fellowships are mainly offered through federal government agencies (i.e., NSF, NIH, etc.) and specific university departments.
Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Postdoctoral Fellowship
Postdoctoral fellowships support research, and frequently career development training, to enhance your potential to becoming a productive, independent investigator. ... drawn below ten tips from our experiences in securing postdoctoral fellowships to help as you successfully tackle your proposal. Rule 1: Start Early and Gather Critical Information.
How to Write a Postdoc Research Proposal
There are also postdoc positions (e.g., British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowships, Leverhulme Early Career Fellowships, Mind/Analysis Studentships, various JRFs at Oxford/Cambridge colleges) where areas of research are unrestricted. Writing a postdoc research proposal is almost nothing like writing a paper for journal publication.
Writing the Proposal
Postdoc Fellowship Forum. Monthly workshops with Professor Mark Lawson to answer all your questions and review your fellowship applications. This is a great way to meet fellow postdocs who are also developing proposals. Generally the 4th Tuesday of the month from 12-1:30pm. Funding your Future Events. Funding workshops tailored to UC San Diego ...
PDF Writing a Successful Fellowship Proposal
Fellowship Proposal January 10th, 2013 Stephen Bell. Review Criteria • Signiﬁcance/Relevance • Approach • Innovation • Investigator ... Structure of a Proposal • Research Design • Describe experiments to address each aim • Preface each section with a brief rationale • Level of detail will vary.
Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Postdoctoral Fellowship
Postdoctoral fellowships support research, and frequently career development training, to enhance your potential to becoming a productive, independent investigator. ... drawn below ten tips from our experiences in securing postdoctoral fellowships to help as you successfully tackle your proposal. Rule 1: Start Early and Gather Critical Information.
Funding Opportunities for Postdoctoral Scholars
The program funds the following areas of research: health, natural sciences and/or engineering, and social sciences and/or humanities. The Fellowship provides $70,000 per year (taxable) for 2 years. Beckman Institute: Postdoctoral Fellows Program. Ph.D. must have been completed within the last 10 years. March.
NSF 23-620: Postdoctoral Research Fellowships in Biology
For proposals under this solicitation, these areas are (1) Broadening Participation of Groups Underrepresented in Biology, (2) Integrative Research Investigating the Rules of Life Governing Interactions Between Genomes, Environment and Phenotypes, and (3) Plant Genome Postdoctoral Research Fellowships.
USGS Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program
A candidate being considered for noncompetitive appointment is to submit a resume and a description of the research to be conducted under the USGS Fellowship Program. The research proposal should at a minimum, contain: research objectives, links to USGS science strategy, how and where the research is to be conducted, name of Research Advisor(s ...
Proposal (research statement) for a Postdoctoral Fellowship in the
Proposal (research statement) for a Postdoctoral Fellowship in the Humanities (2016) Read; History; Document type: Proposal / Research Statement Job type: Postdoc Discipline: humanities (general) Year: 2016. Attachments. 1568227771-jm_wisconsinProposal.pdf; Research Statement or Proposal. Discussion (0)
PDF Postdoctoral Fellowship Proposal Reference Letter Submission Module Guide
You will be on the Research.gov homepage after signing in. Click the Manage Reference Letters (Writers) link under Fellowships. You will be navigated to the Reference Letter Submission module. Manage Reference Letters (Writers) link. Step 3 : Enter Invitation Code to add postdoctoral fellowship proposer.
SBE Postdoctoral Research Fellowships (SPRF)
Synopsis. The Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences (SBE) offers Postdoctoral Research Fellowships to encourage independence early in the fellow's career by supporting his or her research and training goals. The research and training plan of each fellowship must address important scientific questions within the scope of the ...
2025 AHA Postdoctoral Fellowship
Proposals must be received no later than 3 p.m. Central Time on the deadline date. Early submission is encouraged. Before beginning an application, see the AHA Application Resources page for requirements that apply to all AHA research awards. Also view AHA's research Policies and Statements.; Proposals must be submitted electronically via ProposalCentral.
Postdoctoral Research Fellowships in Biology (PRFB)
The Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) awards Postdoctoral Research Fellowships in Biology (PRFB) to recent recipients of the doctoral degree for research and training in selected areas supported by BIO and with special goals for human resource development in biology.For proposals under this solicitation, these areas are (1) Broadening Participation of Groups Underrepresented in Biology ...
Post-Doctoral Fellows
Current Post-Doctoral Fellows. Christy Monet (Brandly), September 2023 - August 2024. Dr. Monet Brandly is a political scientist and Slavicist specializing in intellectual history as viewed from the perspectives of the history of political thought and literary studies. She conducts research and teaches in the fields of political theory ...
Post Doctoral Fellowship
5.1 Post-Doctoral Fellowship is a full time research work. 5.2 The duration of fellowship shall be for two years and no extension will be considered. 5.3 The value of the fellowship is Rs.31,000/- per month and contingency grant is Rs.25,000/- per annum. 6.
Postdoctoral Fellowship in Translational Medicine
The PhRMA Foundation's Postdoctoral Fellowship in Translational Medicine supports individuals (U.S. and non-U.S. citizens) engaged in a multidisciplinary, collaborative research training program at an accredited U.S. university that will extend their credentials in translational medicine.
Ian awarded an NIH F32 postdoctoral fellowship! · DeGrado Lab
Ian awarded an NIH F32 postdoctoral fellowship! Thu Apr 11, 2024. Congratulations to DGL post-doc Ian Bakanas for receiving the prestigious F32 NIH Individual Post Doctoral Research Award for his proposal, " De novo design of photoacid-binding proteins to study proton dynamics in biological systems"! The award will fund Ian's work on building ...
Anastasiia Ivanova, PhD
Scripps Research. Jan 2022 - Present 2 years 1 month. San Diego, California, United States. Identified role of inflammatory cytokine, IL-1, in modulating lacrimal and salivary gland regeneration ...
Three From Rhodes Selected for National Science Foundation Graduate
Rhodes College alums Kelsey Rena Glasper '21, Eraine Leland '21, and Scotty Wicker '22 have been selected for the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program (NSF GRFP), following a national competition.. The program recognizes and supports outstanding graduate students in NSF-supported science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines who are pursuing ...
Expression of Interest
The Marie Skłodowska Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship programme (MSCA-PF) is a highly renowned European funding scheme. It offers talented scientists the unique chance to set up 2-year research and ...
Sasha de Vogel
Sasha de Vogel. I am a political scientist researching the politics of authoritarian regimes and collective action in Russia and the post-Soviet region. I am a Raphael Morrison Dorman Memorial Postdoctoral Fellow at the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard University. I received my PhD in Political Science from the University ...
Mathematical and Physical Sciences Ascending Postdoctoral Research
The purpose of the Mathematical and Physical Sciences Ascending Postdoctoral Research Fellowship (MPS-Ascend) program is to support postdoctoral Fellows who will broaden the participation of members of groups that are historically excluded and currently underrepresented in MPS fields in the U.S., defined in this solicitation as Blacks or African Americans, Hispanics, Latinos, Indigenous and ...
For the Colorado River and beyond, a new market could save the day
Milgrom and Ferguson recently highlighted their proposal in a working paper released by the National Bureau of Economic Research. Their use case is California, one of the Colorado River Basin's biggest stakeholders and whose system for divvying up surface water, which comes from rivers and streams, is especially complex and opaque.
Aliya Sharipova
Marie Skłodowska-Curie Postdoctoral Fellow at Fraunhofer IKTS · My research centers around Cold Sintering Processes for developing biomaterials and biomedical devices. I'm also interested in using solid-state dewetting of thin metallic films for biomedical applications. · Berufserfahrung: Fraunhofer IKTS · Ausbildung: Technion - Israel Institute of Technology · Standort: Dresden ...
Novel CT Exam Reduces Invasive Surgery Need
To assess the impact of the selective use of CT-FFR on clinical outcomes, Dr. Randhawa's research team conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent coronary CTA at MGH between August 2020 and August 2021. During the study period, 3,098 patients underwent coronary CTA. Of these, 113 coronary bypass grafting patients were excluded.

You are here

What is a fellowship proposal?

General advice

To get your pen/keyboard going…

Other writing resources for undergraduates

Prepare and Apply

Feb 20 2023

Visiting Vietnam: A nice place with beautiful beaches and islands

High Quality Data Science Courses

Maximizing Data Quality in Cohort Research: Strategies and Tools

Featured Jobs

Why Engineering Might Be the Career for You

Water Catchment Systems: An Essential Guide for Homeowners

Revolutionising Food Production Recruitment in the UK: Overcoming Challenges &...

The different settings that FNPs work in

Digital Marketing as a Career

How to Choose a Healthcare Staffing Company: Caliber Health &...

Postdoctoral Fellowship Research Statements: What I Wish I Knew Before Writing

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Postdoctoral Fellowship

Introduction

Rule 1: Start Early and Gather Critical Information

Rule 2: Create a Game Plan and Write Regularly

Rule 3: Find Your Research Niche

Rule 4: Use Your Specific Aims Document as Your Roadmap

Rule 5: Build a First-Rate Team of Mentors

Rule 6: Develop a Complete Career Development Training Plan

Rule 7: STOP! Get Feedback

Rule 8: Tell a Consistent and Cohesive Story

Rule 9: Follow Specific Requirements and Proofread for Errors and Readability

Rule 10: Recycle and Resubmit

Lex Academic®

How to Write a Postdoc Research Proposal | Lex Academic Blog

Getting Feedback, etc.

Fellowships & Funding

UC San Diego Postdoc Proposal Development Events

Funding your Future Events

Funding Fest

Writing Resources

UC San Diego Research Development

New Faculty Guide to Competing for Research Funding

EMU Handbook for Proposal Writers

Agency-Specific Resources

Environmental Protections Agency

National Science Foundation

Useful Links

More Resources

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Postdoctoral Fellowship

Siu Ping Ngok

Crystal M. Botham

Introduction

Rule 1: Start Early and Gather Critical Information

Rule 2: Create a Game Plan and Write Regularly

Rule 3: Find Your Research Niche

Rule 4: Use Your Specific Aims Document as Your Roadmap

Rule 5: Build a First-Rate Team of Mentors

Rule 6: Develop a Complete Career Development Training Plan

Rule 7: STOP! Get Feedback

Rule 8: Tell a Consistent and Cohesive Story

Rule 9: Follow Specific Requirements and Proofread for Errors and Readability

Rule 10: Recycle and Resubmit

Funding Statement

FAS Research Administration Services

USGS Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program

Appointment Authority and Duration of Assignments

Recruitment Process

Qualification Requirements

Application Process

Rating Process

Selection Process

Appointment Process

2025 AHA Postdoctoral Fellowship

Important Notes

Items for New Research Proposals

Eligibility

Project Support

Award Duration

Restrictions

Peer Review Criteria

Postdoctoral Research Fellowships in Biology (PRFB)

Updates and announcements