Applying for the NSF GRFP
There is a ton of general information online about the National Science Foundation (NSF) Graduate Research Fellowship, so I won’t go into many details here. For a large, high-quality collection of advice and past examples across fields, check out Alex Lang’s website!
However, for folks interested in statistics/data science/AI applied to public health, a couple more tailored insights may be valuable. For context: I applied for the GRFP during my senior year of undergrad (fall of 2019). I am now entering my fifth and final year of a PhD program in Biostatistics.
To what extent should I focus on public health in my application?
One part of the GRFP solicitation that can trip people up is the section on “Ineligible areas of study” and the related section on “Limited exceptions to ineligible research”. Here are some text excerpts from 2024:
i. “Individuals are not eligible to apply if they will be enrolled in graduate study focused on clinical practice, counseling, social work, patient-oriented research, epidemiological and medical behavioral studies, outcomes research (interventions, treatment, or therapies), and health services research. Ineligible study includes pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic, and behavioral interventions for physical or mental disease or disorder, prophylaxis, diagnosis, therapy, or treatment. Research to provide evidence leading to a scientific basis for consideration of a change in health policy or standard of care is not eligible. Graduate study focused on community, public, or global health, or other population-based research including medical intervention trials is also not eligible.”
ii. “For applicants applying to degree programs in engineering, mathematical, physical, computer or information sciences disciplines, research with disease- or health-related goals (e.g., etiology-, diagnosis-, or treatment-related) that advance fundamental knowledge in engineering, mathematical, physical, computer or information sciences, is eligible for support.”
The question is: what is an appropriate balance between focusing on health vs the fundamental knowledge? Some advice I was given while applying was to keep in mind that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have a lot of funding and their own graduate fellowship(s), so you have to make the case that NSF should care about your work in this ecosystem. When I was writing my application, I tried to emphasize the statistical questions / proposed contributions, using the public health question(s) as motivation throughout.
My application materials
As a concrete example, here is my research proposal.
For additional context, here are the reviews I received, which also provide some documentation of my CV at the time.
How similar is my dissertation to my GRFP proposal from 5 years ago?
As emphasized throughout GRFP advice forums, this fellowship invests in the person, not the project. For a sense of how much your ideas can change / be refined (especially if you are applying as an undergrad), I encourage you to read the abstract of my first dissertation paper, which was originally based on my GRFP research proposal.
While the rest of my dissertation falls under the umbrella of statistics/data science for environmental health (consistent with the goals stated throughout my GRFP application), the topics of my second and third papers are quite different than my GRFP research proposal, in part because they explore methodological areas that I was unfamiliar with / unaware of before starting grad school.
In conclusion, as long as you genuinely represent your goals, your specific research ideas can (and likely will!) evolve.
