NSF CAREER

[arios0]

My status has not updated since the PO was assigned (CISE-IIS-III). Anyone hear anything yet?

[eigen]

Mine's been "pending" since October 9th.

[map]

For FRR, but PM from CISE-CCF, no status update since September.

[tryingtogetit]

Haven't been contacted by the PO and my status date has not changed since September (CISE-IIS-HCC). Still pending...

[Staywarm]

CMMI-AM. Has been pending since July.

[alex000]

E, V, V/G, G, G/F,  declined today, very disappointed!
Five reviewers, and the one giving G/F is not in this field and said it is hard to follow.

This is the third time.   CISE-CCF

[mamselle]

Sorry to hear that.

It's hard to understand how those not well-versed in a field or topic can hold so much sway over those who are.

I've dealt with that in other settings, it's quite frustrating.

M.

[alex000]

Thanks.

Is it possible to argue with the PO?  Did everyone have this kind of experience?

Sorry to hear that.

It's hard to understand how those not well-versed in a field or topic can hold so much sway over those who are.

I've dealt with that in other settings, it's quite frustrating.

M.

[research_prof]

Thanks.

Is it possible to argue with the PO?  Did everyone have this kind of experience?

Sorry to hear that.

It's hard to understand how those not well-versed in a field or topic can hold so much sway over those who are.

I've dealt with that in other settings, it's quite frustrating.

M.

Good luck with that. I do not think it will work.

[arcturus]

E, V, V/G, G, G/F,  declined today, very disappointed!
Five reviewers, and the one giving G/F is not in this field and said it is hard to follow.

This is the third time.   CISE-CCF

Frankly, these are not good scores and are indicative that there is a fundamental problem with either your research program or how you are describing your research program. Have you served on an NSF review panel? If not, I recommend that you volunteer to do so, as it can be quite illuminating. Every field has slightly different expectations as to how proposals are written and the evaluations may turn on unwritten rules (my field over emphasizes broader impacts, for example, because everyone's science is fantastic, so the broader impacts become the differentiator by default).

Is it possible to argue with the PO?  Did everyone have this kind of experience?

I definitely would not waste my time arguing with the PO. You will get a reputation...which you do not want.

[alex000]

I asked around, it seems it is hard to get E in my field.
Thanks for the suggestion.

E, V, V/G, G, G/F,  declined today, very disappointed!
Five reviewers, and the one giving G/F is not in this field and said it is hard to follow.

This is the third time.   CISE-CCF

Frankly, these are not good scores and are indicative that there is a fundamental problem with either your research program or how you are describing your research program. Have you served on an NSF review panel? If not, I recommend that you volunteer to do so, as it can be quite illuminating. Every field has slightly different expectations as to how proposals are written and the evaluations may turn on unwritten rules (my field over emphasizes broader impacts, for example, because everyone's science is fantastic, so the broader impacts become the differentiator by default).

Is it possible to argue with the PO?  Did everyone have this kind of experience?

I definitely would not waste my time arguing with the PO. You will get a reputation...which you do not want.

[Staywarm]

I dont think it is hard to get an E in any field, in particular for CAREER.
It won't work to argue with the PO. But you could try to ask if an EAGER award would be possible.

[flying_tree]

E, V, V/G, G, G/F,  declined today, very disappointed!
Five reviewers, and the one giving G/F is not in this field and said it is hard to follow.

This is the third time.   CISE-CCF

Sorry to hear that. Hope you can turn it into a regular proposal and have the hard work payoff.

[map]

Just to add my (non-CAREER) observations, since they don't totally match what others have seen. The meaning or rarity of an "E" can vary field-to-field or even panel-to-panel. I've been awarded a grant with scores of E/VG, VG, VG. On both panels that I've been on, any proposal with an "E" warranted serious consideration. That said, G's and F's are likely to not lead to awards. Compared to the panels I've been on, your scores of E, V, V/G, G, G/F would rank you somewhere in the 50-75% range. Not getting funded, but not far off.

More importantly, everything is being discussed by the panel! Your E reviewer would have a chance to convince the G/F non-expert. All other panel members would have a chance to read the proposal, perhaps overnight, and come back in with their own opinions. Ultimately, the initial scores from reviewers are just a starting point for the discussion (note that reviewers can also adjust their reviews following the panel's discussion). Hopefully some of this is reflected in the panel summary you received.

I would echo others in strongly advising you to not complain to the PD. Instead, reach out to the PD and ask to chat.l They can also provide some additional feedback from their observations of the panel discussion.

[MoO2]

I also recommend to contact the PM and get feedbacks.

They may offer an EAGER opportunities. My 1st try of CAREER was declined (now waiting for the results of 2nd shot). But 2 days after the official decline notice the PM emailed me and invited me for an EAGER proposal (of course, it is phrased in a skillful manner). And that money helps me a lot.

Even no EAGER opportunities, it is always good to chat with the PM and have some human interactions. You will be surprised about how much they are willing to share, as long as you ask a good question in a way that they are allowed to answer. Impression matters.

I asked around, it seems it is hard to get E in my field.
Thanks for the suggestion.

E, V, V/G, G, G/F,  declined today, very disappointed!
Five reviewers, and the one giving G/F is not in this field and said it is hard to follow.

This is the third time.   CISE-CCF

Frankly, these are not good scores and are indicative that there is a fundamental problem with either your research program or how you are describing your research program. Have you served on an NSF review panel? If not, I recommend that you volunteer to do so, as it can be quite illuminating. Every field has slightly different expectations as to how proposals are written and the evaluations may turn on unwritten rules (my field over emphasizes broader impacts, for example, because everyone's science is fantastic, so the broader impacts become the differentiator by default).

Is it possible to argue with the PO?  Did everyone have this kind of experience?

I definitely would not waste my time arguing with the PO. You will get a reputation...which you do not want.