NSFNIHONR

This post is not about the new expletive I invented while sneezing.

I am now 0/3 on getting the NSF to fund me (I applied for the postdoc, and now twice for a traditional grant). For the postdoc, basically no rationale is given for why they reject you. For regular grants you receive three reviews: one positive, one typical, and one bad from the three committee members. You also receive a summary of all the reviews of your proposal, which if you are not funded is generally bad. It is discouraging (at least) to hear how your research isn't - important, well thought out, or well written (relative to the competition). I am feeling very jaded about the process now, but will apply for jobs next year instead of NSF, so maybe a year off will rejuvenate me. In the meantime, PhD comics says I shouldn't be applying for NSF anyway, as the NSF Math and Phys. Division has an annual budget of $1.42 billion, where an alternative for me might be the ONR (office of naval research) with an annual budget of $1.8 billion ^†. Assuming of course that there is the same level of competition for each, then more money should equal better odds.

^†Sadly, I don't do any biology, since the NIH has an annual budget of 15.8 billion in grants alone!

Update : An unexpected consequence of applying for NSF is that your panel is often made up of journal editors - after applying you get more invitations to review articles.