Review for NSF GRFP Proposals
Two short statements, two criteria, and reviewers reading many applications. Check that both statements are clear, consistent with each other, and free of typos before you submit.
$50, paid once · Refunded if you're not satisfied · PDF and Word
What a review can check in a GRFP application
A GRFP application is judged largely on two short statements written by someone early in their research career, often for the first time. The usual problems are in the writing, not the idea: a research plan whose question is stated only on page two, a personal statement that never says what the applicant will do next, Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts sections that repeat each other, a research topic described one way in one statement and another way in the other. The Grant Proposal Review reads your statements and reports language, structure, typos and inconsistencies, each with the passage quoted and a suggested fix, for $50, paid once. It does not score your application, predict an award or an honorable mention, or check your page limits and headings against the solicitation.
What the solicitation asks for, as of November 2026
From the GRFP solicitation NSF 26-526, consulted November 2026:
- Two statements: the Personal, Relevant Background, and Future Goals Statement, with a maximum of three pages (PDF), and the Graduate Research Plan Statement, with a maximum of two pages (PDF).
- Applicants must include separate sections, under individual headings, on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in each of the two statements.
- Eligibility depends on citizenship and career stage, and each applicant may submit one application per annual competition. Read section IV of the solicitation for the exact conditions.
The program page (last updated October 2, 2026) lists a $37,000 stipend per year of support and a $16,000 cost of education allowance paid to the institution, with three years of support over a five-year period. Deadlines change every year: take them from the current solicitation.
Before you submit
1. Check the solicitation
Page limits, required headings, eligibility and the deadline for your field are in the current solicitation. Check each against your draft yourself: the review does not.
2. Put both statements in one file
One upload, one payment, and the review can compare the two statements with each other.
3. Upload and pay once
$50, paid through Stripe before the review starts. Most reports are ready in under 30 minutes.
4. Fix what you agree with
Each finding quotes the passage. You decide what to change.
5. Show the result to a mentor
Your references and mentors know your work and your field. They judge what a review of the text cannot: whether the plan is credible for you.
What the review covers in the two statements
The two criteria
Whether each section says something distinct, or Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts repeat each other.
The research plan
Whether the question, the approach and the expected result are stated clearly, in an order a reader can follow.
Between the statements
Research interests, goals, names and dates that differ between the personal statement and the research plan.
Language and typos
Vague claims, sentences a reviewer would read twice, spelling and punctuation.
Review for NSF GRFP Proposals questions
Each upload is one review at $50. Put both statements in one file instead: you pay once, and the review can report where the two contradict each other.