NEH chances, working in Canada

[rabbitandfox23]

Good morning, everyone.

I know that NEH accepts applications from all US citizens, wherever they work. And I know one or two people who have received some kind of NEH grant over the years.  But I have noticed that almost all NEH grants go to US citizens working IN the US.  For example, last year, there was only ONE non-US based American who received an award.  This may just work out statistically this way...

But I wonder if there is another reason for this apparent skew. Does NEH assume that people working in countries outside of the US have their own funding agencies available to them?  For example, would a US citizen teaching in a Canadian university be disadvantaged in a NEH competition because the NEH assumes the applicant has SSHRC resources, whereas a stateside Americans sort of depend on NEH and related institutions for primary funding?

Would be grateful for any thoughts on this...

[traductio]

My impression is that NEH acceptance rates are so low that what you've observed is really just a reflection of statistics, as you suggest. I can't see why there's any harm in applying for both NEH and SSHRC, though, if you qualify. I'm an American working at a Canadian university, and if were at all grant-inclined, I'd apply for both. (When I did my PhD, I figured out how to design projects that were inexpensive to finance, and everything I've done since has followed that pattern, so grants are not my forte.)

[rabbitandfox23]

Thanks, traductio, and greetings to a fellow American-Canadian!
You're probably right that it's just the way the chips fall numbers-wise.

By the way, speaking of SSHRC: I am in the Humanities and do not really need that much money to do what I do. I don't like spending time applying for grants.  But my University -- and hence Chair --  has been pushing for us to begin thinking about incorporating a sciences-approach to graduate funding, where MA and PhD students will be funded by SSHRCs won by faculty rather than by the Faculty of Arts and Science. Obviously not ideal. Is your dept/university also discussing this (if you are in the Humanities or SS?)

[traductio]

Thanks, traductio, and greetings to a fellow American-Canadian!
You're probably right that it's just the way the chips fall numbers-wise.

By the way, speaking of SSHRC: I am in the Humanities and do not really need that much money to do what I do. I don't like spending time applying for grants.  But my University -- and hence Chair --  has been pushing for us to begin thinking about incorporating a sciences-approach to graduate funding, where MA and PhD students will be funded by SSHRCs won by faculty rather than by the Faculty of Arts and Science. Obviously not ideal. Is your dept/university also discussing this (if you are in the Humanities or SS?)

I'm in communication, which straddles the humanities and social sciences. I fall very much on the humanities side, although my department skews toward social science.

Our faculty has recently shifted how it funds grad students, essentially pulling funds from MA students (grrr!) and shifting them toward PhD students. Truth be told, even though we're a large, research-intensive university, we can't match offers students get from equivalent schools in the States. The faculty wants to emphasize PhD research, a desire that motivated the shift in funding priorities, but I think we're cutting off our nose to spite our face. I think it would be far more productive, if we want to attract more PhD students, to find ways (whether through SSHRC or MITACS) to fund them within the department. For reasons specific to my university, we're especially attractive to students from Europe or Africa who would be unlikely to go to the States for school, but also unlikely to have funding outside of what we provide.

I say that, though, but I don't apply for grants. I just don't approach research that way. I'm always glad to supervise students, but I always tell them I can't offer funding outside of whatever offer they receive from the university.