Guides
Open to US-based PIs and international collaborators on co-funded projects. The 15-page Project Description is unforgiving but every section is well-defined.

Key takeaways
The Broader Impacts criterion is unusual: half the score is whether your project benefits society - teaching, mentoring underrepresented students, public engagement, technology transfer. Treat it as a substantive section, not a checklist. Programme Officers (the NSF staff who run each division) are accessible by email and a 30-minute call before submission is normal etiquette.
Strict 15-page limit (single column, 11pt minimum, 1-inch margins). Standard structure: motivation + research questions, prior NSF support (separate section), research plan with measurable milestones, broader impacts, project management. Over by even one line and the proposal is returned without review. The reference list goes after the 15 pages and has no page limit.
Three reviewers read each proposal in detail, then a panel of 10-20 discusses and rates. Ratings: Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor. To be funded you generally need 2 Excellent ratings + 1 Very Good or better. Funding rates vary by division - typically 18-30%. Programme Officers may co-fund proposals that score borderline but address strategic priorities.
FAQ
Free plan, no credit card. We host in Germany. You can export and delete everything self-serve.
Read next
ERC Starting Grant: €1.5M over 5 years for early-career frontier research
Eligibility window, Part B1 vs B2, and the Brussels interview.
Read
DFG Sachbeihilfe: the workhorse grant for German academic research
How DFG reviewers actually read the proposal.
Read
EXIST Ideenpapier: structure, length, and the seven sections that decide your application
Section-by-section template with what reviewers expect.
Read