Applications for the Award are accepted in the spring and fall, with application deadlines of April 15 and October 15. For the April 2009 deadline, the Committee received two applications, and funded one. For the October 2009 deadline, the Committee received 36 applications and funded one. We have absolutely no idea what caused this large rise in applications for the fall 2009 deadline.
During 2009, the Committee changed the reviewing process to eliminate using numerical scores, but instead ranking the applications based on financial need. The ranking is based on a numeric scale of 1 – n, depending on number of applicants, with 1 indicating the highest (greatest) need for financial support. The following five questions are used to determine if an application should be ranked for a possible award.
Does the candidate meet the general academic qualifications?
Does the host scientist meet the general qualifications?
Did the applicant demonstrate a financial need?
Does the duration of the scientific visit meet the minimum three (3) months?
Does the duration of the family’s visit meet the minimum one month?
If the answer is yes to all the questions above, the application is ranked based on financial need and duration of separation from family, otherwise the application will not be considered further.
The ranking was extremely difficult with 39 applications so a triage system was instituted taking into consideration the following:
Any applicant whose family was already in the US or who has stated that they would bring their family, irrespective of funding was eliminated from consideration. Applicants with an annual salary of $40,000 or more were removed from consideration.
This left a list of 10 applications and the criteria used for ranking these applications were:
1. Salary/location.
2. Duration of separation from family (i.e., an applicant who would be in the US for just three months would score less than an applicant in the US for 12 months, etc.).
3. How developed the country of origin is (i.e., an applicant from Eastern Europe or Africa would score higher than an applicant from Japan or Australia.)
4. Completeness of application both from applicant and sponsor.
Because of the large number of applicants, and also the wide range of individuals who applied for the award, the initial intent of the award was re-reviewed. To further clarify the requirement for eligibility of the award, the following wording will be added to the award description:
This award is intended to support family visits to the US for postdoctoral fellows and junior faculty from overseas.