10/12/2010 Responses

Responses to OMB questions about NSF’s Evaluation of
EAPSI/IRFP
1.

Evaluation design
a.
Please provide the research questions the evaluation is designed to answer and how
those cross walk to program goals.

The evaluation is designed to answer the following seven overarching research questions:
1. What are the characteristics of people who apply for and participate in the EAPSI and
IRFP programs?
2. What motivates individuals to apply for and participate in the programs, and what are
individuals’ experiences during the application process?
3. What are the program experiences of program participants and managers?
4. What are the perceived outcomes of program participation?
5. Do fellows’ post-award career activities and job characteristics differ from unfunded
applicants?
6. Does the extent to which former Fellows engage in international collaborations differ
from those of unfunded applicants?
7. Do the outcomes of program participation extent beyond the direct participants?
The table below demonstrates how the research questions maps onto the program goals.
IRFP/EAPSI Program Goals
Introduce early career scientists and engineers to
opportunities for international research collaboration
Build research capacity and global perspective of
participants
Forge long-term relationships between US and foreign
STEM researchers

RQ1

RQ2

x

x

x

RQ3

RQ4

RQ5

RQ6

RQ7

x

x

x

x
x

x
x

b. Please explain whether the program’s goal and administration has basically stayed
the same since 1999 or whether there have been changes that would affect the
interpretation of survey results.
OISE has prepared 2 spreadsheets (one for EAPSI and one for IRFP) to address this question. (See
spreadsheets attached at the end of the responses to questions that provide the program
details for the EAPSI and IRFP programs.) The spreadsheets present information from all EAPSI
and IRFP solicitations since 1999. These spreadsheets show that the program goals and
administration of IRFP and the EAPSI programs have remained relatively stable since 1999.
EAPSI goal—The goal of the EAPSI program has not changed since its inception. The goal of this
program is “to introduce U.S. graduate students to East Asian science and engineering and to
initiate personal relationships that will enable collaboration with foreign counterparts in the
future”.
EAPSI administration—The number of awards during the period has gradually increased from
140 to 195. The funding amount has increased from approximately $500,000 in 2000 to almost
Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

1

$2 million in 2009. Deadline dates have remained the same—December of each year. The
number of sponsors and co-sponsors (NSF, NIH, USDA) has decreased from 3 to 1—NSF. The
fellowship period has remained the same at--8 weeks. The award amount has gradually
increased during the period from $2500 stipend (provided by the NSF EAPSI
program)+travel+living expenses (provided by foreign hosts) to $5000 stipend (provided by the
NSF EAPSI program)+travel+living expenses (provided by foreign hosts). The number of foreign
host East Asian countries has gradually increased from Japan, Korea, Taiwan in 2000 to
Australia, China, Japan, Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, Taiwan in 2009. While eligibility criteria
and evaluation criteria have had some changes between 2000 and 2009 we do not believe these
changes will affect the interpretation of the study results, as long as they are accounted for in
the analysis.
IRFP goals--The goals of the EAPSI program since its inception had only two small changes. The
wording in the first part of the goal “to introduce scientists and engineers in the early stages of
their careers to opportunities abroad” remained the same throughout the time period. The
second part of the goal had a small change in 2003 from “thereby furthering NSF’s goal of
establishing productive, mutually beneficial relationships between U.S. and foreign science and
engineering communities” to “thereby furthering NSF’s goal of creating a diverse, competitive,
and globally-engaged U.S. workforce of scientists, engineers, and technologists, and wellprepared citizens”. Again in 2007 there was another small change from “thereby furthering
NSF’s goal of creating a diverse, competitive, and globally-engaged U.S. workforce of scientists,
engineers, and technologists, and well-prepared citizens” to “thereby furthering their research
capacity and global perspective and forging long-term relationships with scientists,
technologists, and engineers abroad”.
IRFP administration— The number of awards made during the period has gradually increased
from 20 to 35. The funding amount has increased from approximately $1 million in 2000 to
almost $3.5 million in 2009. Deadline dates have varied during the period—September, October,
or November of each year. NSF has been the sole sponsor of this program since its inception.
The fellowship period has remained the same at between 9 months to 24 months. The award
amount has gradually increased during the period from $50,000 to $150,000 (provided by the
NSF IRFP program) for the fellowship period. While eligibility criteria and evaluation criteria
have had some changes between 2000 and 2009 we do not believe these changes will affect the
interpretation of the study results, as long as they are accounted for in the analysis.
c.
Please explain how applicants were selected for the programs. For example, were
applicants assigned scores and those above a certain cut off selected? What criteria or
inputs went into the application process?
Applicants were assigned scores by ad-hoc reviewers and/or panel members. The evaluation
criteria identified in the attachments were given consideration by the ad-hoc reviewers and/or
the panel members. In addition during panel discussions other criteria were also used for
portfolio balance purposes. These included: host country portfolio balance; disciplinary field
balance; adequate representation of underrepresented minorities; adequate representation of
women scientists and engineers; and preference for applicants who have not had international
research experiences. The panels were responsible for making these decisions.

Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

2

d. Please explain how the non-selected applicants provide for a sufficiently comparable
group when by definition they did not meet selection criteria. If scoring was used, did NSF
consider an RDD design instead?
In planning the evaluations of the IRFP and EAPSI fellowship programs, we considered using a
regression discontinuity design but deemed it to be inappropriate because of the way award
decisions are made for these programs. As described in our response to 1c, although reviewers
assigned scores to applicants’ proposals, final decisions are not made based on a cut-score, but
instead additional criteria (e.g., discipline, gender, membership in an under-represented
minority group, prior international experience, proposed host country) are used to maintain
portfolio balance of awards made. The use of such factors mitigated against a regression
discontinuity design.
Instead, we will use propensity-score matching to construct a comparison group based on the
pre-award characteristics of all applicants and their proposal scores. Each applicant’s mean
proposal score across reviewers will be included in the propensity-score matching along with
demographic characteristics, prior international experience, proposed host country, and
professional accomplishments at the time of application (e.g., number of peer-reviewed
publications). To ensure comparability between the treated (IRFP fellows) and comparison
(unfunded applicants) groups, only those applicants’ with propensity scores in the “area of
common support” will be included in impact analyses.
The exhibit below illustrates this notion. Using pre-award characteristics of all applicants, PSM
predicts the likelihood (or propensity) that each applicant would have received an award. The
propensity scores of actual awardees and declinees (unfunded applicants) are then compared.
Any awardee whose propensity score falls outside the range of scores in the unfunded applicant
group is dropped from impact analyses; likewise, any unfunded applicant whose propensity
score falls outside the range of scores in the awardee group is dropped from impact analyses.
As a result, only those applicants with propensity scores in an overlapping range (i.e., the area of
common support) are included in hypothesis tests of the impact of IRFP on post-award
outcomes.
Actual
awardee
status
Awardee

Propensity scores for individual applicants
.99

.99

.97

Unfunded
Applicant
Dropped from
impact
analyses

.91

.84

.84

.83

…

.14

.13

.10

.09

.91

.84

.84

.84

…

.12

.11

.10

.09

Area of common support:
included in impact analyses

Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

.05

.01

.01

Dropped from
impact
analyses

3

2.

Sample size
a.
Please justify why NSF proposes to conduct a census of all participants when
sampling should be sufficient especially for groups larger than 1,000. We remain
concerned about the number of NSF and Dept of ED studies that target many of the same
faculty and advanced degree students and would like NSF to carefully consider trimming
the size of this study.

We have carefully reviewed available data from a variety of sources and considered sampling
participants by respondent type but quickly realized that by sampling we would not be able to
detect meaningful differences in the comparison groups. After identifying individuals who
appear in program records across multiple years so that they appear only once in our
respondent lists, the numbers in each of the respondent groups are as follows: EAPSI Fellows
(1,300), EAPSI Unfunded Applicants (810), EAPSI Advisors (1,047), EAPSI hosts (1,300), EAPSI
location staff (20), IRFP Fellows (581), IRFP Unfunded Applicants (1,105), and IRFP Hosts (581).
The tables of respondent burden have been adjusted to reflect the updated numbers in each of
the respondent groups as shown below.
Respondent Type

Target
group

Number of
responses

Time per
response (hours)

Total time burden
(hours)

EAPSI Fellows

1,300

975

0.5

487.5

EAPSI Unfunded Applicants

810

608

0.5

303.8

EAPSI US Advisors

1,047

785

0.25

196.3

EAPSI Foreign Hosts

1,300

975

0.25

243.8

EAPSI Location Staff

20

20

0.5

10.0

IRFP Fellows

581

436

0.5

217.9

IRFP Unfunded Applicants

1,105

829

0.5

414.4

IRFP Foreign Hosts
Total

581
6,744

436
5,063

0.25
N/A

108.9
1,982.5

Respondent Type

EAPSI Fellows
EAPSI Unfunded
Applicants
EAPSI US Advisors

Target
group

Number
of
Responses

Time per
response
(hours)

Total
Time
Burden
(hours)

Hourly
salary
estimate

Estimated
cost per
respondent

Estimated
overall
cost

1,300

975

0.5

487.5

35

17.5

17,062.50

35

17.5

10,631.25

810

608

0.5

303.8

1,047

785

0.25

196.3

43

10.75

8,441.44

10.75

10,481.25

EAPSI Foreign Hosts

1,300

975

0.25

243.8

43

EAPSI Location Staff
IRFP Fellows

20

20

0.5

10.0

43

21.5

430.00

581

436

0.5

217.9

35

17.5

7,625.63

IRFP Unfunded
Applicants
IRFP Foreign Hosts
Total

35

17.5

14,503.13

1,105
581
6,744

829
436
5,063

0.5
0.25

414.4
108.9
1982.5

43

10.75

4,684.31
73,859.50

Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

4

While the EAPSI Fellows, IRFP Unfunded applicants, and EAPSI Advisors and Hosts are larger
than 1,000, we propose to survey they entire population because there may be loss in the
analytic sample as a result of our find rate, the study’s response rate, and the loss as we exclude
respondents who fall outside the common support in the propensity score model.
We believe that reducing the target sample might create serious limitations for the study, in
that it might result in a study that is underpowered to detect differences between the awardees
and unfunded applicants. By targeting the entire population, our final analytic samples should
still be sufficiently powered to detect expected differences should our sample fall to 60%,
instead of the projected 75% response rate.
Below we present the minimum detectable effect sizes if our response rate is at 75% and at 60%
of the full populations. These estimates are based on the following assumptions and
parameters: (i) two-tailed hypothesis tests with the usual significance level = 0.05, (ii) statistical
power = 0.8, and (iii) amount of variation in the outcomes explained by covariates (R2) = 0.1.
Note that MDD estimates in the second table also depend on the mean value of the outcome in
the comparison group.
Minimum Detectable Effect Sizes for Continuous Outcomes (MDES)

EAPSI
Sample Size
MDE
IRFP
Sample Size
MDE

75% of all
applicants

60% of all
applicants

1582
0.14

1266
0.15

1264
0.17

1011
0.19

Minimum Detectable Differences for Binary Outcomes (MDD)

EAPSI
Control group mean
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.8
IRFP
Control group mean
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.8

75% of all
applicants
(n=1582)

60% of all
applicants
(n=1266)

6.1%
7.2%
7.2%
6.9%
5.4%
(n=1264)

6.9%
8.0%
8.1%
7.8%
6.0%
(n=1011)

7.0%
8.2%
8.3%
8.0%
6.3%

7.8%
9.1%
9.2%
8.9%
6.9%

Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

5

3.

Survey methods
a.
Please provide an estimate of the projected response rate for participants between 05 and 5-10 years separately.

We anticipate that response rates may vary by the length of time it has been since individuals
applied to and/or participated in the programs, with a lower response rate among those with a
longer length of time since the program. The projected response rates are supplied in the table
below.

Projected Response Rate

85%
60%
b.

Length of Time Between
Participation and Data
Collection
0-5 years
6-10 years

Why does NSF believe it can do so much better than the GK-12 Fellow program?

Because no other single NSF program exactly duplicates the EAPSI and IRGP programs, estimates
for response rates were made using actual response rates from a variety of NSF programs.
NSF’s expectations that we will exceed the GK-12 response rates for individuals who
participated in the program over 5 years ago are based on two important differences (1) EAPSI
and IRFP applicants apply directly to NSF and grants are awarded directly to individuals, while
the faculty at institutions of higher education apply for the GK-12 grants, these are awarded to
intuitions, who in turn distribute funding to individuals; and (2) the records of program
participants for IRFP and EAPSI are maintained by NSF, while the records for GK-12 are
maintained by individual PIs. The first difference, the applicants’ direct relationship with NSF,
makes our sample more familiar with NSF and the programs under study than the GK-12 sample.
The second difference, the manner or record keeping, should improve both the identification of
participants as well as their contact information.
c.
Is NSF concerned that those who did not remain in academia will be much harder to
locate?
OISE conducted a small in-house experiment using Google to find current resumes on IRFP
fellows and succeeded in locating resumes for approximately 80 percent of a small random
sample of the IRFP fellows and 70 percent of a small random sample of the EAPSI fellows. IRFP
fellows have a higher likelihood of remaining in academia because they already have a doctorate
(the doctorate in S&E is an eligibility requirement for the fellowship). An S&E doctorate is not a
requirement for an EAPSI fellowship, enrollment in an S&E graduate program is the eligibility
requirement. Accordingly there is a larger portion of EAPSI fellows than IRFP fellows who are
employed outside of academia. The methodology reports of the NSF Survey of Doctorate
Recipients and the National Survey of Recent College Graduates confirm that there is a lower
response rate for sample members who are employed outside of academia in both of those
surveys. There is also more difficulty locating sample members who are employed outside of
academia. We expect to experience the same difficulty in locating and response for the nonResponse to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

6

academic cohort in our surveys of IRFP and EAPSI fellows. Abt Associates will employ a variety of
methods to locate all sample members in both surveys. They will conduct web searches and
contact former institutions to locate current contact information for individuals. In addition,
they will use available SSNs, along with name and address to locate individuals using the locator
AccurInt, which will identify the last known addresses and phone numbers for the respondent.
This approach has yielded current addresses for 84% of the IRFP applicants and phone numbers
for 86% of the sample, and we expect similar rates for the EAPSI fellows. The use of SSNs has
been approved by NSF’s Office of General Counsel, and the use of SSNs and process for data
security have been approved by Abt’s Institutional Review Board ( IRB).
4.

Questionnaire
a.
What testing of survey items was done on with individuals from the older cohort?
We believe that recall could be a challenge for a number of items.

A total of 9 respondents from the 1992, 1993 and 2000 cohorts participated in a pilot test of the
applicant survey. Pilot respondents were asked to identify items for which recall was a problem,
comment on the length of time needed to complete the survey, point out any question wording
that was unclear, and list any response options they felt were omitted or redundant.
Based on the results of the pilot test, we have eliminated 29 items from the IRFP applicant
survey and 28 items from EAPSI applicant survey. Items eliminated included several that pilot
respondents indicated difficulty recalling the relevant information (e.g., “How did you first learn
about [the program]?” and “Did you experience any of the following difficulties during the
application process?” In addition, pilot respondents pointed out a few redundancies in the
survey items and some found it to be lengthy (although all completed the entire survey in its
original form). A list of the items removed from the IRFP and EAPSI applicant surveys is below:

IRFP Item
B1
How did you learn about IRFP?
B4
Any difficulties during the application
process?
C7
Table with # of different types of pre-award
publications

Change
Cut (poor recall)
Cut (poor recall)

Net
change
(# items)
-1
-1

3 rows eliminated:
Original computing software,
algorithms, etc.
Books, graduate level
Books, undergraduate or layperson
level
Cut (redundant with other items)
Combined with Item D8

-1
-1

Cut (too vague)

-1

Combined with Item D5

0

Cut (poor recall)

-1

Cut (poor recall)

-1

Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

7

D2
D5
D6
D8
D9
D10

Was language a barrier?
Did you experience any barriers to
participation in cultural/professional events
What were the primary benefits of the
cultural and professional activities you
attended…?
Did you experience any of the following
difficulties during your fellowship…?
About how often did you meet with your host
research?
What type of advice or guidance did your
host…give you?

-3

IRFP Item
F2
Is your employer an educational institution?
F3
Which of the following best describes your
primary employer during the week of October
1, 2010
F5
Between [date] and [date], did you receive
any awards or honors based on your
research?
F5b
What was the name of the most prestigous
award for research you have received and
who was it from?
F6
Table with # of different types of post-award
publications

F8

F9

F10
F10a
F10b
F10c
F13

Between [date] and [date] did you ever:
Host a foreign colleague in US…?
Co-sponsor a professional conference…?
Communicate with colleagues from other
countries?
Between [date] and [date] did you ever:
Serve as chairperson
Serve as director of research center
Obtain tenure
Receive elevation in faculty rank
Receive an award for teaching
Receive an award for service
Receive an endowed chair
Receive a prize or recognition from a
professional association…
Serve as editor
Serve on a visiting committee or advisory
panel
Between [date] and [date] did you ever
receive funding as PI/co-PI?
Was the funding you received during this
period as a PI, co-PI, or both
What was the total awarded amount of the
most prestigious single research grant/award
you received as a Principal Investigator
What was the total awarded amount of the
most prestigious single research grant/award
you received as a Co-Principal Investigator
At institutions where you have worked
between [year of IRFP application +2] and
October 1, 2010, have you done any of the
following: I have persuaded others to pursue
an international collaboration

Change
Swap order of F2 & F3; if employer is
educational institution, SKIP F3

Net
change
(# items)
-1 or 0

Combine with F10 (redundant with
other items)

0

Added request for respondent to write
out full name of awarding agency

+1

3 rows eliminated:
Original computing software,
algorithms, etc.
Books, graduate level
Books, undergraduate or layperson
level
Cut all 3 rows
(redundant with other items)

-3

Cut all 10 rows (redundant with other
items or information not critical to the
study)

-10

Cut; incorporated into F5

-1

Incorporated into F5

0

Cut

-1

Cut

-1

Cut last row in table (Redundant with
other items)

-1

Total net change
Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

-3

-29 items
8

EAPSI Item
B1
How did you learn about program?
B4
Any difficulties during the application
process?
C8
Table with # of different types of preaward publications

D2
D5
D6
D8
D9
D10
F1
F1a
F2
F3

F5
F5b
F6

F8

Was language a barrier?
Did you experience any barriers to
participation in cultural/professional
events
What were the primary benefits of the
cultural and professional activities you
attended…?
Did you experience any of the following
difficulties during your fellowship…?
About how often did you meet with your
host research?
What type of advice or guidance did your
host…give you?
As of October 1, 2010, what is the
highest degree you have completed?
Since receiving your first doctoral degree
how many postdoctoral appointments
have you held? have?
Is your employer an educational
institution?
Which of the following best describes
your primary employer during the week
of October 1, 2010
Between [date] and [date], did you
receive any awards or honors based on
your research?
What was the name of the most
prestigous award for research you have
received and who was it from?
Table with # of different types of postaward publications

Between [date] and [date] did you ever:
Host a foreign colleague in US…?
Co-sponsor a professional conference…?
Communicate with colleagues from other
countries?

Change
Cut (poor recall)
Cut (poor recall)

Net
change
(# items)
-1
-1

3 rows eliminated:
Original computing software,
algorithms, etc.
Books, graduate level
Books, undergraduate or layperson
level
Cut (redundant with other items)
Combined with Item D8

-1
-1

Cut (too vague)

-1

Combined with Item D5

0

Cut (poor recall)

-1

Cut (poor recall)

-1

Added (needed for outcome)

+1

Cut (not an outcome of interest for
EAPSI)

-1

Swap order of F2 & F3; if employer is
educational institution, SKIP F3

-3

-1 or 0

Combine with F10 (redundant with
other items)

0

Added request for respondent to write
out full name of awarding agency

+1

3 rows eliminated:
Original computing software,
algorithms, etc.
Books, graduate level
Books, undergraduate or layperson
level
Cut all 3 rows
(redundant with other items)

-3

Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

-3

9

EAPSI Item
F9
Between [date] and [date] did you ever:
Serve as chairperson
Serve as director of research center
Obtain tenure
Receive elevation in faculty rank
Receive an award for teaching
Receive an award for service
Receive an endowed chair
Receive a prize or recognition from a
professional association…
Serve as editor
Serve on a visiting committee or advisory
panel
F10
Between [date] and [date] did you ever
receive funding as PI/co-PI?
F10a
Was the funding you received during this
period as a PI, co-PI, or both
F10b
What was the total awarded amount of
the most prestigious single research
grant/award you received as a Principal
Investigator
F13
At institutions where you have worked
between [year of IRFP application +2]
and October 1, 2010, have you done any
of the following: I have persuaded others
to pursue an international collaboration

Change
Cut all 10 rows (redundant with other
items or information not critical to the
study)

Net
change
(# items)
-10

Cut; incorporated into F5

-1

Incorporated into F5

0

Cut

-1

Cut last row in table (Redundant with
other items)

-1

Total Net Change:

28

In addition, survey sections have been re-ordered to ensure that respondents complete the
items most critical for the impact analyses first, before Fellows complete items that will inform
descriptive analyses (e.g., aspects of the Fellowship experience). Thus, if a respondent
discontinues the survey part-way through, we have a greater likelihood of receiving responses
on items critical to impact analyses. Revised versions of the instruments are included in
Appendix A.
b.

The race question must include the instruction – Mark (or check) one or more.

The question has been revised to read.
##. What is your race? Check one or more.
 American Indian or Alaska native
 Asian
 Black or African American
 Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
 White

Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

10

c.

US Federal and international statistical agency work has determined that a yes/no
question about disability does not produce valid results. Please replace the disability
question. Our suggestion is to consider using the one from the SDR (currently
pending at OMB but also used for the latest round of the other SRS SESTAT surveys).
We agree. NSF’s Division of Science Resources Statistics has tested this question in focus groups
and in pretests of SESTAT survey questionnaires. In addition, the Survey of Doctorate Recipients
(SDR) has produced valid statistical estimates with their disability question (questions E13-E15
from the SDR). Accordingly, per your recommendation we will use the same disability question
in our IRFP and EAPSI evaluation questionnaires (see questions from SDR below). The question
has been revised in our surveys.
The next several questions are designed to help us better understand the career paths of
individuals with different physical abilities.
##. What is the USUAL degree of difficulty you have with.
Mark one answer for each item.

None

Slight

Moderate Severe Unable
to Do

1 SEEING words or letters in ordinary newsprint (with
glasses/contact lenses, if you usually wear them) ............... 1

2

3

4

5

2 HEARING what is normally said in conversation with
another person (with hearing aid, if you usually wear one) .. 1

2

3

4

5

3 WALKING without human or mechanical assistance
or using stairs ....................................................................... 1

2

3

4

5

4 LIFTING or carrying something as heavy as 10 pounds,
such as a bag of groceries ................................................... 1

2

3

4

5

##.
Mark this box if you answered “None” to all the activities in question ##, and go to
question ##.
##. What is the earliest age at which you first began experiencing any difficulties in any of these areas?
AGE

OR

SINCE BIRTH

Response to OMB comments for NSF Evaluation of EAPSI/ IRFP programs

11

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM

Goals

Cohort
Program
announcement
number

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

NSF 00-141
To introduce scientists and
engineers in the early stages of
their careers to opportunities
abroad, thereby furthering
NSF's goal of establishing
productive, mutually beneficial
relationships between U.S. and
foreign science and
engineering communities.

NSF 01-135
To introduce scientists and
engineers in the early stages
of their careers to
opportunities abroad, thereby
furthering NSF's goal of
establishing productive,
mutually beneficial
relationships between U.S.
and foreign science and
engineering communities.

NSF 02-149
To introduce scientists and
engineers in the early stages of
their careers to research
opportunities abroad, thereby
furthering NSF's goal of creating
a diverse, competitive, and
globally-engaged U.S. workforce
of scientists, engineers,
technologists, and well-prepared
citizens.

NSF 02-149
To introduce scientists and
engineers in the early stages of
their careers to research
opportunities abroad, thereby
furthering NSF's goal of
creating a diverse, competitive,
and globally-engaged U.S.
workforce of scientists,
engineers, technologists, and
well-prepared citizens.

NSF 02-149
To introduce scientists and
engineers in the early stages
of their careers to research
opportunities abroad, thereby
furthering NSF's goal of
creating a diverse,
competitive, and globallyengaged U.S. workforce of
scientists, engineers,
technologists, and wellprepared citizens.

NSF 05-599
To introduce scientists and engineers
in the early stages of their careers to
research opportunities abroad,
thereby furthering NSF's goal of
creating a diverse, competitive, and
globally-engaged U.S. workforce of
scientists, engineers, technologists,
and well-prepared citizens.

NSF

NSF

NSF

NSF

NSF

20-30

30-35

30-35

30-35

30-35

Anticipated
funding amount $1,000,000

$1,000,000

$3,500,000

$3,500,000

$3,500,000

$3,500,000

Applicants must: A) be U.S
citizen or permanent resident as
of the second Tuesday in
October annually. B) have been
awarded a doctoral degree
within three years before the
date of the application or expect
to receive the doctoral degree by
the award date. C) desire to
conduct scientific research at
appropriate academic,
government or non-profit
research institutions, which are
located outside of the United
States. D) Applicants who are
permanent residents of the U.S.
may not request a host site in
their native country. E)
Recipients of previous
International Research
Fellowship Awards are not
eligible. Applicants may submit
only one fellowship application
each year.
Fellowship

Applicants must: A) be U.S
citizen or permanent resident
Applicants must: A) be U.S
as of the second Tuesday in
citizen or permanent resident October annually. B) have
as of the second Tuesday in
been awarded a doctoral
October annually. B) have been degree within three years
awarded a doctoral degree
before the date of the
within three years before the application or expect to
date of the application or
receive the doctoral degree by
expect to receive the doctoral the award date. C) desire to
degree by the award date. C) conduct scientific research at
desire to conduct scientific
appropriate academic,
research at appropriate
government or non-profit
academic, government or non- research institutions, which
profit research institutions,
are located outside of the
which are located outside of
United States. D) Applicants
the United States. D) Applicants who are permanent residents
who are permanent residents of the U.S. may not request a
of the U.S. may not request a host site in their native
host site in their native country. country. E) Recipients of
E) Recipients of previous
previous International
International Research
Research Fellowship Awards
Fellowship Awards are not
are not eligible. Applicants
eligible. Applicants may submit may submit only one
only one fellowship application fellowship application each
each year.
year.
Fellowship
Fellowship

Eligibility

Sponsors and cosponsors
NSF
Estimated
number of
awards
20-30

Type of award

Applicants must: A) be U.S
citizen or permanent resident
as of November 15, 2000. B)
have been awarded a doctoral
degree within six years before
the date of the application or
expect to receive the doctoral
degree by the award date. C)
desire to conduct scientific
research at appropriate
academic, government or nonprofit research institutions,
which are located outside of
the United States.
Fellowship

IRFP Program Details

Applicants must: A) be U.S
citizen or permanent resident
as of October 22, 2001. B)
have been awarded a doctoral
degree within six years before
the date of the application or
expect to receive the doctoral
degree by the award date. C)
desire to conduct scientific
research at appropriate
academic, government or nonprofit research institutions,
which are located outside of
the United States.
Fellowship

Applicants must: A) be U.S citizen or
permanent resident as of the
application deadline date; B) have
been awarded a doctoral degree
within n three years of the
application deadline date or expect
to receive the doctoral degree by the
start of the project (if the Ph.D. has
not been awarded by the of an award
recommendation, a clause will be
written in the grant letter stating that
no funds will be released until proof
of the degree is provided.); C) desire
to conduct scientific and engineering
research at appropriate institutions
of higher education, industrial
research institutions/laboratories,
government research
institutes/laboratories/centers,
nonprofit research organizations, and
foreign centers of excellence located
outside of the U.S.
Fellowship

1

Cohort

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Average Amount
of award
$50,000
Deadline date
November 15, 2000
Anticipated
Duration
of date March

$50,000
October 1, 2001
March

$100,000
Second Tuesday in October
March

$100,000
Second Tuesday in October
March

$100,000
Second Tuesday in October
March

$100,000
October 11, 2005
March

fellowship

9-24 months

9-24 months

9-24 months

9-24 months

9-24 months

1) What is the intellectual
merit of the proposed activity;
2) What are the broader
impacts of the proposed
activity; 3) Integration of
Research and Education; 4)
Integrating Diversity into NSF
Programs, Projects, and
Activities; 5) Prospective
benefits to the applicant, the
scientific discipline and the
United States; 6)
Qualifications of proposed
host and host institution and
complementarily; 7)
Qualifications of applicant,
including applicant's potential
for continued growth; 8)
Merit of the proposed
international collaboration; 9)
Expected mutual benefit to be
derived from the contribution
of the scientists and engineers
in each country.

1) What is the intellectual merit of
the proposed activity; 2) What are
the broader impacts of the proposed
activity; 3) Integration of Research
and Education; 4) Integrating
Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects,
and Activities; 5) Prospective benefits
to the applicant, the scientific
discipline and the United States; 6)
Qualifications of proposed host and
host institution and complementarily;
7) Qualifications of applicant,
including applicant's potential for
continued growth; 8) Merit of the
proposed international collaboration;
9) Expected mutual benefit to be
derived from the contribution of the
scientists and engineers in each
country.

Evaluation criteria

9-24 months

1) What is the intellectual merit 1) What is the intellectual
1) What is the intellectual merit
of the proposed activity; 2)
merit of the proposed activity;
of the proposed activity; 2)
What are the broader impacts 2) What are the broader
1) What is the intellectual merit What are the broader impacts
of the proposed activity; 3)
impacts of the proposed
of the proposed activity; 2) What of the proposed activity; 3)
Integration of Research and
activity; 3) Integration of
are the broader impacts of the Integration of Research and
Education; 4) Integrating
Research and Education; 4)
proposed activity; 3) Integration Education; 4) Integrating
Diversity into NSF Programs,
Integrating Diversity into NSF of Research and Education; 4)
Diversity into NSF Programs,
Projects, and Activities; 5)
Programs, Projects, and
Integrating Diversity into NSF
Projects, and Activities; 5)
Prospective benefits to the
Activities; 5) Prospective
Programs, Projects, and
Prospective benefits to the
applicant, the scientific
benefits to the applicant, the Activities; 5) Prospective benefits applicant, the scientific
discipline and the United
scientific discipline and the
to the applicant, the scientific
discipline and the United
States; 6) Qualifications of
United States; 6) Qualifications discipline and the United States; States; 6) Qualifications of
proposed host and host
of proposed host and host
6) Qualifications of proposed
proposed host and host
institution and
institution and
host and host institution and
institution and
complementarily; 7)
complementarily; 7)
complementarily; 7)
complementarily; 7)
Qualifications of applicant,
Qualifications of applicant,
Qualifications of applicant,
Qualifications of applicant,
including applicant's potential including applicant's potential including applicant's potential
including applicant's potential
for continued growth; 8) Merit for continued growth; 8) Merit for continued growth; 8) Merit of for continued growth; 8) Merit
of the proposed international of the proposed international the proposed international
of the proposed international
collaboration; 9) Expected
collaboration; 9) Expected
collaboration; 9) Expected
collaboration; 9) Expected
mutual benefit to be derived
mutual benefit to be derived mutual benefit to be derived
mutual benefit to be derived
from the contribution of the
from the contribution of the from the contribution of the
from the contribution of the
scientists and engineers in each scientists and engineers in
scientists and engineers in each scientists and engineers in each
country.
each country.
country.
country.

IRFP Program Details

2

Goals

Cohort
Program
announcement
number

2007

NSF 06-582
To introduce scientists and engineers in
the early stages of their careers to
international collaborative research
opportunities, thereby furthering their
research capacity and global perspective
and forging long-term relationships with
scientists, technologists and engineers
abroad.

2008

2009

NSF 06-582
To introduce scientists and engineers in
the early stages of their careers to
international collaborative research
opportunities, thereby furthering their
research capacity and global perspective
and forging long-term relationships with
scientists, technologists and engineers
abroad.

NSF 06-582
To introduce scientists and engineers in
the early stages of their careers to
international collaborative research
opportunities, thereby furthering their
research capacity and global perspective
and forging long-term relationships with
scientists, technologists and engineers
abroad.

NSF

NSF

30-35

30-35

Anticipated
funding amount $3,500,000

$3,500,000

$3,500,000

Applicants must: A) be U.S citizen or
permanent resident as of the application
deadline.(Applicants who are permanent
residents of the U.S. may not request a
host site in their country of origin.); B)
have been awarded a doctoral degree
within two years before the date of the
application or expect to receive the
doctoral degree by the start of the
project.(If an applicant is recommended
for an award, the award may be made
before the Ph.D. is awarded, but the
applicant must provide proof of the
degree before any funds are released);
C) Propose collaboration with foreign
host (cannot be an American national) to
conduct scientific and engineering
research at appropriate institutions of
higher education, industrial research
institutions/laboratories, government
research institutes/laboratories/centers,
nonprofit research organizations, and
foreign centers of excellence located
outside of the U.S.
Fellowship

Applicants must: A) be U.S citizen or
permanent resident as of the application
deadline.(Applicants who are permanent
residents of the U.S. may not request a
host site in their country of origin.); B)
have been awarded a doctoral degree
within two years before the date of the
application or expect to receive the
doctoral degree by the start of the
project.(If an applicant is recommended
for an award, the award may be made
before the Ph.D. is awarded, but the
applicant must provide proof of the
degree before any funds are released); C)
Propose collaboration with foreign host
(cannot be an American national) to
conduct scientific and engineering
research at appropriate institutions of
higher education, industrial research
institutions/laboratories, government
research institutes/laboratories/centers,
nonprofit research organizations, and
foreign centers of excellence located
outside of the U.S.
Fellowship

Eligibility

Sponsors and cosponsors
NSF
Estimated
number of
awards
30-35

Type of award

Applicants must: A) be U.S citizen or
permanent resident as of the application
deadline.(Applicants who are permanent
residents of the U.S. may not request a
host site in their country of origin.); B)
have been awarded a doctoral degree
within two years before the date of the
application or expect to receive the
doctoral degree by the start of the
project.(If an applicant is recommended
for an award, the award may be made
before the Ph.D. is awarded, but the
applicant must provide proof of the
degree before any funds are released); C)
Propose collaboration with foreign host
(cannot be an American national) to
conduct scientific and engineering
research at appropriate institutions of
higher education, industrial research
institutions/laboratories, government
research institutes/laboratories/centers,
nonprofit research organizations, and
foreign centers of excellence located
outside of the U.S.
Fellowship

IRFP Program Details

3

Cohort

2007

2008

2009

$150,000
September 11, 2007
March

$150,000
September 9, 2008
March

fellowship

9-24 months

3-24 months

9-24 months

1) What is the intellectual merit of the
proposed activity; 2) What are the
broader impacts of the proposed activity;
3) Integration of Research and Education;
4) Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs,
Projects, and Activities; 5) Prospective
benefits to the applicant, the scientific
discipline and the United States; 6)
Qualifications of proposed host and host
institution and complementarily; 7)
Qualifications of applicant, including
applicant's potential for continued
growth; 8) Merit of the proposed
international collaboration; 9) Expected
mutual benefit to be derived from the
contribution of the scientists and
engineers in each country.

1) What is the intellectual merit of the 1) What is the intellectual merit of the
proposed activity; 2) What are the
proposed activity; 2) What are the
broader impacts of the proposed
broader impacts of the proposed activity;
activity; 3) Integration of Research and 3) Integration of Research and Education;
Education; 4) Integrating Diversity into 4) Integrating Diversity into NSF
NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities; 5) Programs, Projects, and Activities; 5)
Prospective benefits to the applicant, the Prospective benefits to the applicant, the
scientific discipline and the United
scientific discipline and the United States;
States; 6) Qualifications of proposed
6) Qualifications of proposed host and
host and host institution and
host institution and complementarily; 7)
complementarily; 7) Qualifications of
Qualifications of applicant, including
applicant, including applicant's potential applicant's potential for continued
for continued growth; 8) Merit of the
growth; 8) Merit of the proposed
proposed international collaboration; 9) international collaboration; 9) Expected
Expected mutual benefit to be derived mutual benefit to be derived from the
from the contribution of the scientists
contribution of the scientists and
and engineers in each country.
engineers in each country.

Evaluation criteria

Average Amount
of award
$150,000
Deadline date
October 3, 2006
Anticipated
Duration
of date March

IRFP Program Details

4

Cohort

EAST ASIA PACIFIC SUMMER INSTITUTES
2001
2002

2000

Goals

Program
announcement
number

NSF-99-152
To introduce U.S.
graduate students to
East Asian science and
engineering and to
initiate personal
relationships that will
enable collaboration
with foreign
counterparts in the
future

Sponsors and cosponsors
NSF, NIH, USDA
Estimated
number of
awards
140

Eligibility

Anticipated
funding amount $500,000

Type of award

2003

2004

2005

NSF-99-152
To introduce U.S.
graduate students to
East Asian science and
engineering and to
initiate personal
relationships that will
enable collaboration
with foreign
counterparts in the
future

NSF-02-007
To introduce U.S.
graduate students to
East Asian science and
engineering and to
initiate personal
relationships that will
enable collaboration
with foreign
counterparts in the
future

NSF-02-174
NSF-02-174
To introduce U.S.
To introduce U.S.
graduate students to
graduate students to
East Asian science and East Asian science and
engineering and to
engineering and to
initiate personal
initiate personal
relationships that will relationships that will
enable collaboration
enable collaboration
with foreign
with foreign
counterparts in the
counterparts in the
future
future

NSF 03-608

NSF, NIH, USDA

NSF, NIH

NSF, NIH

NSF, NIH

NSF, NIH

140

105

135

175

165

$500,000

$500,000

$650,000

$887,500

$1,000,000

To introduce U.S. graduate
students to East Asian
science and engineering and
to initiate personal
relationships that will
enable collaboration with
foreign counterparts in the
future

(1)US citizen or permanent
resident; (2) enrolled in a
(1)US citizen or
(1)US citizen or
U.S. master's or doctoral
permanent resident; (2) permanent resident; S&E program or MD
enrolled in a U.S.
(2) enrolled in a U.S. program with interest in
US citizen or
master's or doctoral
master's or doctoral biomedical
permanent resident US citizen or permanent US citizen or
S&E program or MD
S&E program or MD research;(3)Pursuing studies
and enrolled in a U.S. resident and enrolled in permanent resident
program with interest program with interest in fields of S&E supported
master's or doctoral a U.S. master's or
and enrolled in a U.S. in biomedical
in biomedical
by NSF and NIH;(4)Pursuing
S&E program or MD doctoral S&E program master's or doctoral
research;(3)Pursuing
research;(3)Pursuing studies in S&E fields
program with interest or MD program with
S&E program or MD
studies in fields of S&E studies in fields of S&E represented among host
in biomedical
interest in biomedical program with interest supported by NSF and supported by NSF and institutions at desired
research
research
in biomedical research NIH
NIH
location
Fellowship
Fellowship
Fellowship
Fellowship
Fellowship
Fellowship

EAPSI Program Details

1

Cohort

EAST ASIA PACIFIC SUMMER INSTITUTES
2001
2002

2000

2003

2004

2005

$2500 stipend + travel
+ living expenses
December 1-1999
May 1-2000

$2500 stipend + travel +
living expenses
December 1-2000
May 1-2001

$2500 stipend + travel
+ living expenses
December 1-2001
May 1-2002

$2500 stipend + travel +
living expenses
December 1-2002
May 1-2003

$3000 stipend + travel
+ living expenses
December 1-2003
May 1-2004

$3000 stipend + travel +
living expenses
December 1-2004
May 1-2005

8 weeks

8 weeks

8 weeks

8 weeks

8 weeks

8 weeks

East Asia
countries

Japan, Korea, Taiwan Japan, Korea, Taiwan

Japan, Korea, Taiwan

China, Japan, Korea,
Taiwan

Australia, China,
Australia, China, Japan,
Japan, Korea, Taiwan Korea, Taiwan

Evaluation criteria

Amount of award
Deadline date
Anticipated
Duration of date
fellowship

(1) Competence in
S&E and potential for
continued
professional growth
as a research scientist
and engineer; (2)
Relevance of
professional interest
to research done in
East Asian countries;
(3) Willingness and
preparation to live
and adapt to foreign
cultures

EAPSI Program Details

(1) Competence in S&E
and potential for
continued professional
growth as a research
scientist and engineer;
(2) Relevance of
professional interest to
research done in East
Asian countries; (3)
Willingness and
preparation to live and
adapt to foreign
cultures

(1) Competence in S&E
and potential for
continued professional
growth as a research
scientist and engineer;
(2) Relevance of
professional interest to
research done in East
Asian countries; (3)
Willingness and
preparation to live and
adapt to foreign
cultures

(1) What is the
(1) What is the
intellectual merit of
intellectual merit of the the proposed
proposed activity;(2)
activity;(2) What are
What are the broader the broader impacts
impacts of the
of the proposed
proposed
activity;(3)Relevance
activity;(3)Relevance of of professional
professional interests to interests to research
research done in
done in chosen
chosen location;(4)The location;(4)The
probable effect of
probable effect of
participation on the
participation on the
applicant's career
applicant's career

(1) What is the intellectual
merit of the proposed
activity;(2) What are the
broader impacts of the
proposed
activity;(3)Qualifications of
applicant, including
potential for continued
growth and probable effect
of participation in Summer
Institute on the applicant's
career;(3) Resources and
capabilities of the proposed
host institutions and
researchers and/or the
current stature of research
in the student's field of
interest in the chosen
location;(4)Merit,
complimentarity, and
expected mutual benefits of
the proposed international
collaboration
2

Cohort

2006

Goals

Program
announcement
number

2009

NSF 06-602

NSF 07-584

NSF 08-603

To introduce U.S. graduate
students to East Asian science
and engineering and to initiate
personal relationships that will
enable collaboration with
foreign counterparts in the
future

To introduce U.S. graduate
students to East Asian science
and engineering and to initiate
personal relationships that will
enable collaboration with
foreign counterparts in the
future

To introduce U.S.
graduate students to East
Asian science and
engineering and to initiate
personal relationships
that will enable
collaboration with foreign
counterparts in the future

To introduce U.S. graduate
students to East Asian
science and engineering
and to initiate personal
relationships that will
enable collaboration with
foreign counterparts in the
future

NSF, NIH

NSF

NSF

180

195

195

$1,300,000

$1,950,000

$1,950,000

Anticipated
funding amount $1,000,000

Eligibility

2008

NSF 05-617

Sponsors and cosponsors
NSF, NIH
Estimated
number of
awards
165

Type of award

2007

(1)US citizen or permanent
resident; (2) enrolled in a U.S.
master's or doctoral S&E
program or MD program with
interest in biomedical
research;(3)Pursuing studies in
fields of S&E supported by NSF
and NIH;(4)Pursuing studies in
S&E fields represented among
host institutions at desired
location
Fellowship

EAPSI Program Details

(1)US citizen or
permanent resident; (2)
enrolled in a research
(1)US citizen or permanent
oriented master's or Ph.D.
resident; (2) enrolled in a U.S. program at a U.S.
master's or doctoral S&E
institution located in the
program or MD program with United States(3)Pursuing
interest in biomedical
studies in fields of S&E
research;(3)Pursuing studies in research and education
fields of S&E supported by NSF supported by
and NIH;(4)Pursuing studies in NSF;(4)Pursuing studies in
S&E fields represented among fields supported by
host institutions at desired
foreign cosponsoring
location
organization
Fellowship
Fellowship

(1)US citizen or permanent
resident; (2) enrolled in a
research oriented master's
or Ph.D. program at a U.S.
institution located in the
United States(3)Pursuing
studies in fields of S&E
research and education
supported by
NSF;(4)Pursuing studies in
fields supported by foreign
cosponsoring organization
Fellowship
3

Cohort

2006

Amount of award
Deadline date
Anticipated
Duration of date
fellowship

2007

2008

$3000 stipend + travel + living
expenses
December 13-2005
May 1-2006

$4000 stipend + travel + living
expenses
December 12-2006
May 1-2007

$5000 stipend + travel +
living expenses
December 12-2007
May 1-2008

$5000 stipend + travel +
living expenses
December 9-2008
May 1-2009

8 weeks

8 weeks

8 weeks

8 weeks

Australia, China, Japan,
Australia, China, Japan, Korea, Australia, China, Japan, Korea, Korea, New Zealand,
Taiwan
New Zealand, Taiwan
Singapore, Taiwan

Evaluation criteria

East Asia
countries

2009

(1) What is the intellectual
merit of the proposed
activity;(2) What are the
broader impacts of the
proposed
activity;(3)Qualifications of
applicant, including potential
for continued growth and
probable effect of
participation in Summer
Institute on the applicant's
career;(3) Resources and
capabilities of the proposed
host institutions and
researchers and/or the current
stature of research in the
student's field of interest in
the chosen location;(4)Merit,
complimentarity, and
expected mutual benefits of
the proposed international
collaboration

EAPSI Program Details

(1) What is the intellectual
merit of the proposed
activity;(2) What are the
broader impacts of the
proposed
activity;(3)Qualifications of
applicant, including potential
for continued growth and
probable effect of participation
in Summer Institute on the
applicant's career;(3) Resources
and capabilities of the
proposed host institutions and
researchers and/or the current
stature of research in the
student's field of interest in the
chosen location;(4)Merit,
complimentarity, and expected
mutual benefits of the
proposed international
collaboration

(1) What is the intellectual
merit of the proposed
activity;(2) What are the
broader impacts of the
proposed
activity;(3)Qualifications
of applicant, including
potential for continued
growth and probable
effect of participation in
Summer Institute on the
applicant's career;(3)
Resources and capabilities
of the proposed host
institutions and
researchers and/or the
current stature of
research in the student's
field of interest in the
chosen location;(4)Merit,
complimentarity, and
expected mutual benefits
of the proposed
international
collaboration

Australia, China, Japan,
Korea, New Zealand,
Singapore, Taiwan

(1) What is the intellectual
merit of the proposed
activity;(2) What are the
broader impacts of the
proposed
activity;(3)Qualifications of
applicant, including
potential for continued
growth and probable
effect of participation in
Summer Institute on the
applicant's career;(3)
Resources and capabilities
of the proposed host
institutions and
researchers and/or the
current stature of research
in the student's field of
interest in the chosen
location;(4)Merit,
complimentarity, and
expected mutual benefits
of the proposed
international collaboration
4