postdoctoral research work plan

Feb 20 2023

• Writing a Winning Postdoctoral Research Proposal: A Guide and Template

Eddy Haminton

Career advice

If you are interested in pursuing a postdoctoral position, one of the first steps is to write a research proposal that outlines the project you plan to undertake. A postdoctoral research proposal is an important document that can help you secure funding, support, and a position at a university or research institution. In this blog post, we will provide a guide to writing a postdoctoral research proposal, as well as a template to help you get started.

The purpose of a postdoctoral research proposal is to demonstrate your research expertise, creativity, and vision, as well as to provide a clear plan for the research you plan to undertake. A good research proposal should be clear, concise, and well-organized, and should provide a strong rationale for the proposed research. It should also outline the research objectives, methods, and expected outcomes.

Here is a basic template for a postdoctoral research proposal:

I. Introduction

• Provide a brief overview of the research area and context for your proposed research
• State the research problem or question that your project will address
• Provide a rationale for the importance of the proposed research

II. Objectives and Research Questions

• Clearly state the research objectives of your project
• Provide a list of specific research questions that you plan to address

III. Background and Literature Review

• Provide a summary of the key literature in the research area
• Discuss how your proposed research builds on and contributes to the existing research

IV. Methodology

• Provide a clear and detailed description of the research methods you plan to use
• Explain how your methodology will help you achieve your research objectives
• Discuss any potential limitations of your proposed methodology and how you plan to address them

V. Expected Outcomes and Significance

• Clearly state the expected outcomes of your research
• Discuss the potential impact and significance of your research for the research area and beyond

VI. Timeline

• Provide a timeline for the completion of the proposed research
• Break the project into specific milestones and indicate the time required to complete each milestone

VII. Budget

• Provide a detailed budget for the proposed research
• Indicate the costs associated with equipment, materials, travel, and other expenses

VIII. Conclusion

• Summarize the key points of your research proposal
• Reiterate the importance and significance of your proposed research

When writing a postdoctoral research proposal, it is important to tailor your proposal to the specific research area and institution you are applying to. It is also important to be realistic about the feasibility of your proposed research, given the time and resources available.

In conclusion, a postdoctoral research proposal is a critical document that can help you secure a postdoctoral position and funding for your research. By following the template above and tailoring your proposal to the specific research area and institution you are applying to, you can increase your chances of success. Good luck with your postdoctoral research proposal!

Tags: Writing a Winning Postdoctoral Research Proposal: A Guide and Template

10 Tips Help You Hunt Scholarships Successfully

January 29, 2023

Midwifery in the Digital Age: Leveraging Technology for Better Patient...

January 03, 2024

The Ultimate Roadmap for Building a Successful Academic Career

February 07, 2023

Featured Jobs

Editors' picks, recent posts.

Why Engineering Might Be the Career for You

March 29, 2024

Water Catchment Systems: An Essential Guide for Homeowners

March 27, 2024

Revolutionising Food Production Recruitment in the UK: Overcoming Challenges &...

March 22, 2024

The different settings that FNPs work in

March 18, 2024

Digital Marketing as a Career

March 17, 2024

How to Choose a Healthcare Staffing Company: Caliber Health &...

This site uses cookies to deliver our services and to show you relevant ads and job listings. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Privacy Policy , and our Terms and Conditions . Your use of AcademicGates’s Products and Services, is subject to these policies and terms. If you do not use the cookie, some functions may not work properly.

Slip to main content

Lex Academic®

• Blog & Resources

How to Write a Postdoc Research Proposal | Lex Academic Blog

6 December 2021

By Dr Michelle Liu (DPhil Oxon)

In an increasingly competitive job market, securing a postdoc somewhere is probably the best option many recent graduates can hope for. In the UK, where I am writing from, there are postdoc positions tied to specific research projects with restricted areas of research. There are also postdoc positions (e.g., British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowships, Leverhulme Early Career Fellowships, Mind/Analysis Studentships, various JRFs at Oxford/Cambridge colleges) where areas of research are unrestricted.

Writing a postdoc research proposal is almost nothing like writing a paper for journal publication. For a start, grant referees may not be in your subject area, in which case striking the right tone and level of technicality in your proposal is important. Moreover, some of funders may care a lot more about impact than your average journal reviewers. So, it may be essential to think about whether your research project has wider applications and ramifications.

In this blog post, I will discuss what I think might be helpful for someone writing a postdoc research proposal. Given my area is philosophy, what I am offering here is perhaps more pertinent to philosophy than other subject areas (though I hope the general tips will apply across different disciplines in the Humanities). I shall mainly focus on writing research proposals where areas of specialisation are open. Of course, two successful research proposals can look quite different. So, it’s worth looking at some successful samples, if you can, before you start.

First, what topic should you propose? You should definitely propose a topic that you are already very familiar with. This could be an extension of your PhD thesis. Alternatively, it could be a new area that you have already begun to research. Not everyone can sustain a passion for one topic for 3-4 years. It’s likely that some of you started working on other topics during your PhDs. But if it’s a new area, then it should be a topic you already formed plans to write papers on – or even better, have published in. It is not an understatement to say that writing a research proposal is often a retrospective process. Sometimes, you already have a good idea of what your research outcomes will be, though the details still need filling in. You are working backwards in your proposal, guiding your grant reviewers through how one should go about investigating the topic.

A catchy title is also a good idea.

In terms of the overall structure of the proposal, I tend to think it’s helpful to have three sections: the introduction, the main body, and the outcome.

The opening paragraph is where you introduce your research topic to your (very often) non-specialist audience. Make sure you avoid jargon and write in plain English, but in an engaging way that captivates your readers. Think about why your topic is worth pursuing.  Why should anyone care? It’s worth considering how your own research compares and contrasts with the existing research on the topic. Make sure you give the impression that your project is exciting and will make a new contribution to the field.

The main body of the proposal goes into details about your aims and methodology, and exactly how you will carry out the project. The first thing to consider is timeframe. How might you divide your research time? What issues do you want to investigate for each period? For a typical three-year research fellowship in the UK, you could, for instance, divide it into three one-year periods and focus on investigating one question for each period.

I find it very helpful to frame the research plan in terms of guiding questions, with one question naturally leading to the next. Framing it in this way helps bring out your research goals and outcomes. For each question, think how you might go about answering it. What kind of literature do you want to engage with? Is there a popular view in the literature that you would like to criticise? Is there a hypothesis you want to investigate? You might have already made up your mind that you want to argue for thesis T when answering the research question you pose. But in this case, it may still be helpful to frame T as a hypothesis that you want to investigate in order to give referees a future-orienting sense of the project. In my own experience, I often find myself unsure of how to answer a specific research question that I raised. The advice I have received is that it is better to be specific and clear about what you want to argue for, even if you are not quite sure of it. Sometimes, you might have to put things in a way that sounds more confident than you actually are. It’s okay to be speculative; you don’t necessarily need to stick to your research plan. Also, I think it is better to show ‘positive’ outcomes (e.g., arguing for a new theory T) rather than ‘negative’ outcomes (e.g., arguing against theory X).

Depending on the nature of the topic, it may be appropriate to investigate it using case studies. In my own Leverhulme-funded project on polysemy, I investigate three case studies:  gender terms, sensation terms, and emotion terms. It is worth thinking about why these case studies were chosen. How are they related to each other? What overall purpose do they serve? In my own work, the three case studies were carefully chosen to encompass three different classes of words, i.e. nouns, verbs, and adjectives, from which wider philosophical implications about polysemy are to be drawn.

In the final section of the proposal, you should lay out the specific results you aim to achieve through your project as well as its wider impact. If your research is divided in several periods, think about what your output is for each period. It might be a specific paper for each period, in which case state the provisional title of the paper and the journal you are aiming to publish in. Again, this might not be what you in fact achieve if you secure the grant. It is also worth considering where you want to disseminate your research. Are there conferences that you want to attend or organise?

It is almost obligatory to include a section in the research proposal about the wider implications of the project. What significant impact does the research promise? It would be ideal if your project has wider social ramifications, such as clarifying conceptual confusions in a popular debate or resolving issues in certain clinical or policy-making contexts. If social impact is hard to find, it is still important to talk about how the project can advance debates in your field and what potential it has for applications in related research areas.

Finally, don’t forget to include references at the end as you are bound to cite research in your proposal.

Getting Feedback, etc.

There are other aspects of a postdoc application besides writing a research proposal. Some funding bodies give generous research allowances, in which case you will need to draft a budget outlining how you want to spend the money. This can involve various things from purchasing books to organising workshops or conferences. If the latter, it is important to give a breakdown of the costs. Where do you want to host the conference? How many speakers do you want to invite? How much would it cost to host each speaker? The last question depends on whether the speaker is domestic or international.

Often, you will also be asked to summarise your past and current research experience in your application. Here, you will inevitably mention your doctoral work and the papers that you have already published, that are under review, or that are in preparation. It is important to give the impression that your existing research experience naturally leads to your proposed project. Try to convey the idea that you are ideally suited to conduct the proposed project.

If your project is tied to a host institute, it is vital to explain (either in your proposal or elsewhere) the reasons for choosing a particular institution. What are its areas of expertise and how are they related to your research project? Mention members of the department whose work is relevant to yours. Also, how does your research contribute to the teaching and research in the host department?

Now that you have a draft for your research proposal, it is important to get a second opinion. In most universities, there are research offices dedicated to helping academics secure grants. Writing a grant application is a meticulous and formal process that involves peer reviews – something I was utterly unaware of when I was fresh out of my DPhil. However, graduate students or graduates who have not yet secured a university position are unlikely to have access to the expertise in the research office. In these cases, it would be wise to seek help from your supervisors as they are likely to offer useful insights.

Just as there are general tips that one can give to improve one’s chances for journal publication, I believe there are patterns that converge in successful grant applications. Like others, I am slowly figuring out both cases through experience and the helpful advice I’ve received from others over the years. Of course, it is undeniable that luck often plays a decisive role in grant success. My Leverhulme project on polysemy didn’t make it through the internal selection round at one institution, but I was lucky enough to apply at the last minute and eventually secure funding with my current institution. I hope that what I offer here may be helpful to some recent graduates, and I welcome others to share their successful experiences.

Dr  Michelle Liu is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow at the University of Hertfordshire. Her project is titled ‘The abundance of meaning: polysemy and its applications in philosophy’. Liu completed her DPhil at the University of Oxford in 2019 and was a Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Hertfordshire from 2019 to 2021.

Be notified each time we post a new blog article

• Utility Menu

FAS Research Administration Services

Nsf postdoctoral mentoring plan template.

Each NSF proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include, as a supplementary document, a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals.

Filter by Policy Area

• Faculty Research Policies
• Effort Policies
• Research Compliance Policies
• Research Finances Policies
• Proposal Submission Policies

Filter by Policy Type

• FAS Policies
• University Policies

Loading metrics

Open Access

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Postdoctoral Fellowship

Affiliation Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Affiliation Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford Neuroscience Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Affiliation Division of Hematology, Oncology, Stem Cell Transplantation, and Cancer Biology, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States of America

* E-mail: [email protected] (LM); [email protected] (CMB)

Affiliation Asian Liver Center and Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Affiliation Stanford Biosciences Grant Writing Academy, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

• Ke Yuan, 
• Lei Cai, 
• Siu Ping Ngok, 
• Li Ma, 
• Crystal M. Botham

Published: July 14, 2016

• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004934
• Reader Comments

Citation: Yuan K, Cai L, Ngok SP, Ma L, Botham CM (2016) Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Postdoctoral Fellowship. PLoS Comput Biol 12(7): e1004934. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004934

Editor: Fran Lewitter, Whitehead Institute, UNITED STATES

Copyright: © 2016 Yuan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: Dr. Ke Yuan is supported by American Heart Association Scientist Development Grant (15SDG25710448) and the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Proof of Concept Award (SPO121940). Dr. Lei Cai is supported by Stanford Neuroscience Institute and NIH NRSA postdoctoral fellowship (1F32HL128094). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Postdoctoral fellowships support research, and frequently career development training, to enhance your potential to becoming a productive, independent investigator. Securing a fellowship sends a strong signal that you are capable of conducting fundable research and will likely lead to successes with larger grants. Writing a fellowship will also increase your productivity and impact because you will learn and refine skills necessary to articulate your research priorities. However, competition is fierce and your fellowship application needs to stand out among your peers as realistic, coherent, and compelling. Also, reviewers, a committee of experts and sometimes non-experts, will scrutinize your application, so anything less than polished may be quickly eliminated. We have drawn below ten tips from our experiences in securing postdoctoral fellowships to help as you successfully tackle your proposal.

Rule 1: Start Early and Gather Critical Information

Crafting a competitive fellowship can take 6–9 months, so it is imperative that you start early. You may even want to start looking for postdoctoral fellowships before you finish your doctoral degree. Compile a comprehensive list of fellowships that you can apply to. This list should include key information to organize your game plan for applying, including Sponsor (agency sponsoring the fellowship) name; URL for funding information; Sponsor deadlines; and any other requirements or critical information.

To find suitable fellowships, start by asking your faculty mentor(s), laboratory colleagues, and recent alumni about their experiences applying for fellowships. Federal agencies in the United States, such as the National Institute of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF); foreign governmental agencies; and other organizations, such as societies, foundations, and associations, often solicit fellowship applications. Additionally, many institutions offer internally supported fellowships as well as institutional research training grants.

Once you have an exhaustive list of fellowships you are eligible for, start gathering critical information that you can use to inform your writing. Read the fellowship instructions completely and identify the review criteria. Investigate the review process; NIH’s Center for Scientific Review reviews grant applications for scientific merit and has a worthwhile video about the Peer Review Process [ 1 ]. Sometimes Sponsors offer notification alerts about upcoming funding opportunities, deadlines, and updated policies, so make sure to sign up for those when offered. Also, gather previously submitted applications and reviewers’ comments for the fellowships you will to apply to. Both funded and unfunded applications are useful. Sometimes Sponsors make available funded abstracts like NIH’s Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT), and these provide critical information about the scope of funded projects.

Many institutions have internal policies and processes that are required before a proposal can be submitted to a Sponsor. These requirements can include waivers to assess eligibility and internal deadlines (five business day internal deadlines are standard), so make sure you also gather relevant information about any internal policies and processes required by your institution.

Rule 2: Create a Game Plan and Write Regularly

Writing a compelling fellowship takes time, a lot of time, which is challenging to balance with a hectic laboratory schedule, other responsibilities, and family obligations. To reduce stress, divide the fellowship requirements into smaller tasks by creating a detailed timeline with goals or milestones. Having a game plan with daily and/or weekly goals will also help you avoid procrastination. Make sure you are writing regularly (i.e., daily or every other day) to establish an effective writing practice. This will increase your productivity and reduce your anxiety because writing will become a habit. It is also important to make your writing time non-negotiable so other obligations or distractions don’t impede your progress.

Rule 3: Find Your Research Niche

It is crucial that you have a deep awareness of your field so you can identify critical knowledge gaps that will significantly move your field forward when filled. Keep a list of questions or problems inherent to your field and update this list after reading germane peer-reviewed and review articles or attending seminars and conferences. Narrow down and focus your list through discussions with your mentor(s), key researchers in your field, and colleagues. Because compelling projects often combine two seemingly unrelated threads of work to challenge and shift the current research or clinical practice paradigms, it is important to have a broad familiarity with the wider scientific community as well. Seek opportunities to attend seminars on diverse topics, speak with experts, and read broadly the scientific literature. Relentlessly contemplate how concepts and approaches in the wider scientific community could be extended to address critical knowledge gaps in your field. Furthermore, develop a few of your research questions by crafting hypotheses supported by the literature and/or preliminary data. Again, share your ideas with others, i.e., mentor(s), other scientists, and colleagues, to gauge interest in the significance and innovation of the proposed ideas. Remember, because your focus is on writing a compelling fellowship, make sure your research questions are also relevant and appropriate for the missions of the sponsoring agencies.

Rule 4: Use Your Specific Aims Document as Your Roadmap

A perfectly crafted Specific Aims document, usually a one-page description of your plan during the project period, is crucial for a compelling fellowship because your reviewers will read it! In fact, it is very likely your Specific Aims will be the first document your reviewers will read, so it is vital to fully engage the reviewers’ interest and desire to keep reading. The Specific Aims document must concisely answer the following questions:

• Is the research question important? Compelling proposals often tackle a particular gap in the knowledge base that, when addressed, significantly advance the field.
• What is the overall goal? The overall goal defines the purpose of the proposal and must be attainable regardless of how the hypothesis tests.
• What specifically will be done? Attract the reviewers’ interest using attention-getting headlines. Describe your working hypothesis and your approach to objectively test the hypothesis.
• What are the expected outcomes and impact? Describe what the reviewers can expect after the proposal is completed in terms of advancement to the field.

A draft of your Specific Aims document is ideal for eliciting feedback from your mentor(s) and colleagues because evaluating a one-page document is not an enormous time investment on part of the person giving you feedback. Plus, you don’t want to invest time writing a full proposal without knowing the proposal’s conceptual framework is compelling. When you are ready to write the research plan, your Specific Aims document then provides a useful roadmap.

As you are writing (and rewriting) your Specific Aims document, it is essential to integrate the Sponsor’s goals for that fellowship funding opportunity. Often goals for a fellowship application include increasing the awardee’s potential for becoming an independent investigator, in which case an appropriate expected outcome might be that you mature into an independent investigator.

We recommend reading The Grant Application Writer’s Workbook ( www.grantcentral.com ) [ 2 ] because it has two helpful chapters on how to write a persuasive Specific Aims document, as well as other instructive chapters. Although a little formulaic, the Workbook’s approach ensures the conceptual framework of your Specific Aims document is solid. We also advise reading a diverse repertoire of Specific Aims documents to unearth your own style for this document.

Rule 5: Build a First-Rate Team of Mentors

Fellowship applications often support mentored training experiences; therefore, a strong mentoring team is essential. Remember, reviewers often evaluate the qualifications and appropriateness of your mentoring team. The leader of your mentoring team should have a track record of mentoring individuals at similar stages as your own as well as research qualifications appropriate for your interests. Reviewers will also often consider if your mentor can adequately support the proposed research and training because fellowship applications don’t always provide sufficient funds. It is also useful to propose a co-mentor who complements your mentor’s qualifications and experiences. You should also seek out other mentors at your institution and elsewhere to guide and support your training. These mentors could form an advisory committee, which is required for some funding opportunities, to assist in your training and monitor your progress. In summary, a first-rate mentoring team will reflect the various features of your fellowship, including mentors who augment your research training by enhancing your technical skills as well as mentors who support your professional development and career planning.

As you develop your fellowship proposal, meet regularly with your mentors to elicit feedback on your ideas and drafts. Your mentors should provide feedback on several iterations of your Specific Aims document and contribute to strengthening it. Recruit mentors to your team who will also invest in reading and providing feedback on your entire fellowship as an internal review before the fellowship’s due date.

You also want to maintain and cultivate relationships with prior mentors, advisors, or colleagues because fellowships often require three to five letters of reference. A weak or poorly written letter will negatively affect your proposal’s fundability, so make sure your referees will write a strong letter of recommendation and highlight your specific capabilities.

Rule 6: Develop a Complete Career Development Training Plan

Most fellowships support applicants engaged in training to enhance their development into a productive independent researcher. Training often includes both mentored activities, e.g., regular meetings with your mentor(s), as well as professional activities, e.g., courses and seminars. It is important that you describe a complete training plan and justify the need for each training activity based on your background and career goals.

When developing this plan, it is helpful to think deeply about your training needs. What skills or experiences are missing from your background but needed for your next career stage? Try to identify three to five training goals for your fellowship and organize your plan with these goals in mind. Below are sample activities:

• Regular (weekly) one-on-one meetings with mentor(s)
• Biannual meeting with advisory committee
• Externship (few weeks to a few months) in a collaborator’s laboratory to learn a specific technique or approach
• Courses (include course # and timeline) to study specific topics or methods
• Seminars focused on specific research areas
• Conferences to disseminate your research and initiate collaborations
• Teaching or mentoring
• Grant writing, scientific writing, and oral presentation courses or seminars
• Opportunities for gaining leadership roles
• Laboratory management seminars or experiences

Rule 7: STOP! Get Feedback

Feedback is critical to developing a first-class proposal. You need a wide audience providing feedback because your reviewers will likely come from diverse backgrounds as well. Be proactive in asking for feedback from your mentor, colleagues, and peers. Even non-scientists can provide critical advice about the clarity of your writing. When eliciting feedback, inform your reviewer of your specific needs, i.e., you desire broader feedback on overall concepts and feasibility or want advice on grammar and spelling. You may also consider hiring a professional editing and proofreading service to polish your writing.

Some fellowships have program staff, such as the NIH Program Officers, who can advise prospective applicants. These individuals can provide essential information and feedback about the programmatic relevance of your proposal to the Sponsor’s goals for that specific fellowship application. Approaching a Program Officer can be daunting, but reading the article “What to Say—and Not Say—to Program Officers” can help ease your anxiety [ 3 ].

Rule 8: Tell a Consistent and Cohesive Story

Fellowship applications are often composed of numerous documents or sections. Therefore, it is important that all your documents tell a consistent and cohesive story. For example, you might state your long term goal in the Specific Aims document and personal statement of your biosketch, then elaborate on your long term goal in a career goals document, so each of these documents must tell a consistent story. Similarly, your research must be described consistently in your abstract, Specific Aims, and research strategy documents. It is important to allow at least one to two weeks of time after composing the entire application to review and scrutinize the story you tell to ensure it is consistent and cohesive.

Rule 9: Follow Specific Requirements and Proofread for Errors and Readability

Each fellowship application has specific formats and page requirements that must be strictly followed. Keep these instructions and the review criteria close at hand when writing and revising. Applications that do not conform to required formatting and other requirements might be administratively rejected before the review process, so meticulously follow all requirements and guidelines.

Proofread your almost final documents for errors and readability. Errors can be confusing to reviewers. Also, if the documents have many misspellings or grammar errors, your reviewers will question your ability to complete the proposed experiments with precision and accuracy. Remove or reduce any field-specific jargon or acronyms. Review the layout of your pages and make sure each figure or table is readable and well placed. Use instructive headings and figure titles that inform the reviewers of the significance of the next paragraph(s) or results. Use bolding or italics to stress key statements or ideas. Your final documents must be easy to read, but also pleasing, so your reviewers remain engaged.

Rule 10: Recycle and Resubmit

Fellowships applications frequently have similar requirements, so it is fairly easy to recycle your application or submit it to several different funding opportunities. This can significantly increase your odds for success, especially if you are able to improve your application with each submission by tackling reviewers’ comments from a prior submission. However, some Sponsors limit concurrent applications to different funding opportunities, so read the instructions carefully.

Fellowship funding rates vary but, sadly, excellent fellowships may go unfunded. Although this rejection stings, resubmitted applications generally have a better success rate than original applications, so it is often worth resubmitting. However, resubmitting an application requires careful consideration of the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. If available, speak to your Program Officers because he or she may have listened to the reviewers’ discussion and can provide a unique prospective or crucial information not included in the reviewers’ written comments. Resubmitted fellowships are many times allowed an additional one- to two-page document to describe how you addressed the reviewers’ comments in the revised application, and this document needs to be clear and persuasive.

The ten tips we provide here will improve your chances of securing a fellowship and can be applied to other funding opportunity announcements like career development awards (i.e., NIH K Awards). Regardless of funding outcomes, writing a fellowship is an important career development activity because you will learn and refine skills that will enhance your training.

• 1. National Institutes of Health. NIH Peer Review Reveal—a front-row seat to a review peer review meeting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBDxI6l4dOA .
• 2. Stephen W. Russell and David C. Morrison. The Grant Application Writer’s Workbook–National Institutes of Health Version. Available: www.grantcentral.com .
• 3. Spires MJ. What to Say—and Not Say—to Program Officers. The Chronicles of Higher Education. 2012. Available: http://chronicle.com/article/What-to-Say-and-Not-Say-to/131282 .

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 09 October 2020

What next for postdocs?

Nature Cancer volume  1 ,  pages 937–938 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

3769 Accesses

36 Altmetric

Metrics details

Postdoctoral researchers face substantial challenges and stresses that have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Positive action is needed from research institutions, funders and individual investigators to support postdocs and fortify the research endeavor.

In theory, a postdoctoral fellowship may sound like an ideal situation — a short-term, funded research position under the mentorship of an established investigator that offers the opportunity to learn new fields, expand and hone technical skills and develop one’s own research ideas on the route to professional independence. However, the reality of the postdoc life is much harsher.

Even though, according to one survey, the majority of PhD graduates who undertook postdoctoral research did so aiming to secure a tenure-track faculty position 1 , a postdoc placement provides no such guarantee. Separate research indicates that even though the vast majority of research faculty have done postdoctoral work, the likelihood of securing a tenured or tenure-track position 10 years after obtaining a PhD was only 27.4% for PhDs awarded between 1980 and 2003 and dropped to 21% for those who graduated in 2001–2003 (ref. 2 ). Although in recent years the industry has been absorbing a larger number of postdoctorally trained researchers 2 , many are left feeling professionally unmoored by their postdoctoral experience. A postdoc that would lead to an independent research position is in most cases synonymous with impactful first-author publications. As a result, securing postdoctoral funding and positions in prestigious institutes is very competitive, and the time constraints of fellowships and grants place high expectations and pressure to generate results in a limited amount of time. Those who would like to stay in academia but not as independent investigators have no clear career path, as their research experience rarely translates into more stable types of relevant employment, which leads many to abandon research.

Despite the time pressures that conducting research entails, the average postdoc lasts ~4 years (ref. 2 ). Whether such positions can be considered ‘short-term’ is debatable, especially as for many people, their postdoc years coincide with major life decisions, including where to settle down and whether to start a family. Postdocs often struggle to reconcile professional and personal goals, a challenge that is magnified by financial difficulties. Postdoc positions are not well paid, especially compared with positions in academia and industry 2 , and this includes large and expensive metropolitan areas. Although some universities and institutes provide subsidized accommodation and other benefits, such as childcare, this is not the norm. Instead, despite being an essential part of the research workforce, postdoctoral positions are not always formally recognized as employment but often fall into the ‘trainee’ category, a gray and precarious zone between being a student and being a full-time employee that affords fewer working rights and benefits. This is especially true in the USA, although countries with strong employment laws and social policies, such as the UK and members of the European Union, may provide better professional protection.

In addition, many PhD graduates are compelled to emigrate due to the limited postdoctoral research options in their home countries, or in search of higher quality training. The fact that their career prospects and important life decisions are tied to their immigrant status can be a source of constant anxiety, especially in recent times 3 .

Whittling down one of the most experienced, driven and productive group of researchers is a very counterproductive way to run the scientific enterprise. The inadequacy of the current system has been laid bare by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has magnified existing challenges and created substantial new ones. Lab closures forced researchers in many countries to stop all non-essential or non-COVID-19-related work, often for extended time periods, which meant that precious reagents and experiments had to be terminated at short notice and months of work were frequently lost. Although many labs have since re-opened, work is proceeding at a slower pace or with restrictions due to the implementation of necessary health and safety measures that include enhanced cleaning and disinfection procedures and working in a physically distanced manner or in shifts. The pandemic has also reduced the ability of many postdocs to work, due to increased family and caretaking responsibilities arising from school closures and lack of childcare options, or because of the need to care for ailing relatives, something that unfortunately affects women more than men . Many postdocs are also facing their own health issues, whether caused by COVID-19 directly, or indirectly by its devastating impact on healthcare and by the exacerbation of mental health problems 4 .

Although some institutes and funders have offered support, such as by extending grant deadlines and postdoc salaries during lab closures, it is unclear how this financial burden will be borne, as these institutions are feeling the crunch of the ongoing major financial crisis 5 . Budget cuts are already signaling that the competition for funding will become even more vigorous. Those who do secure funds might have to extend their postdoc years beyond what they originally planned. Others might have to cut their postdoc short regardless of the stage of their project and look for professional opportunities elsewhere. Postdocs affected by border closures, travel bans and increasingly aggressive anti-immigration measures are particularly vulnerable in this context 3 .

The dire financial situation is also translating into broader hiring freezes, diminishing the career prospects of postdocs on the cusp of academic independence, who find themselves in a professional limbo, as they may need to leave their current positions without having the opportunity to test themselves in the academic job market. In cases in which interviewing and hiring continues, candidates’ chances may be affected by traveling restrictions and the need to rapidly adapt to virtual job-hunting. The uneven global response to COVID-19, the uncertainty over how long the pandemic may last and the developing economic crisis set up the potential of a ‘two-tiered’ post-COVID-19 research landscape, in which the workforce of harder-hit regions will be at a financial and research disadvantage compared with countries that manage to control outbreaks more effectively and avoid lengthy lockdowns.

All the above add to the anxiety of postdocs about their future, as reflected in a recent worldwide survey conducted by Nature 6 . The majority of respondents experienced more work-related anxiety and depression during the pandemic and felt impeded in their ability to work. They also felt more disconnected, as they found it more difficult to share their results or even discuss ideas with their supervisors. Competition for funding, lack of jobs and the economic impact of the pandemic featured high among the challenges postdocs identified for their career progression.

These feelings of uncertainty, anxiety and isolation are not unique to postdocs but are widespread across the workforce in 2020. However, postdocs are a vulnerable group that is particularly valuable for the scientific enterprise, and thus it is crucial to address their needs. It has been heartening to see many research institutes and individual investigators step up to the challenge. These efforts come across in the Nature survey 6 , with more than half of participants stating that they felt well supported by their PIs during the pandemic. However, it is rather concerning that one third of postdocs queried said they lacked the necessary support. This may reflect the fact that although some institutions rolled out well-coordinated, centralized plans and guidance to PIs for supporting lab personnel, in other places the response has been ad hoc and has depended largely on individual postdocs raising issues or individual PIs striving to support their teams. Moreover, the vast majority of respondents noted that the duration of their postdoc had not changed, with only 10% reporting extensions to funding or postdoc contracts, which indicates that much work needs to be done to alleviate pressing stresses. Unfortunately, the financial problems of postdocs represent a Gordian knot, as even if universities, institutes and funders are willing to help, they currently face considerable economic challenges of their own.

Thus, it is important that postdocs themselves mobilize and be proactive. Nowadays, universities and research institutes typically have dedicated offices of postdoctoral affairs that can offer support and advice. In addition, there exist many independent postdoctoral associations, such as the European Council of Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers , the National Postdoctoral Association in the US and the UK Research Staff Association , that offer useful resources and fora through which postdocs can be heard. More formal representation can come in the form of postdoctoral unionization, a trend that has increased in the USA over the past decade, with the University of California postdoc union being the first to be established, in 2010, and that of Columbia University being the first to form at a private university, in 2018. A more informal but useful way to create support networks, build resilience, obtain advice and exchange information is to maximize digital connectivity through virtual social groups, social media and networking at virtual conferences.

There are no easy solutions to the challenges that postdocs face. In looking for silver linings, perhaps for some postdocs who entered this arena as a perceived default next step after their PhD, this could be an opportunity to re-evaluate career options and seek different, more fulfilling and secure professional routes. For those dedicated to a research career, concerted efforts by all parties involved are needed to provide improvements in the short and longer term. For PIs, institutes and universities, this should be a wake-up call to come up with innovative solutions to ensure that the scientific enterprise avoids hemorrhaging talent in the form of bright but disillusioned postdocs. The dire times of the COVID-19 pandemic demand that stakeholders revisit the concept of postdoctoral training and act to support and protect early-career investigators — they are the future of research and their value cannot be underestimated.

Sauermann, H. & Roach, M. Science 352 , 663–664 (May 2016).

Kahn, S. & Ginther, D. Nat. Biotechnol. 35 , 90–94 (2017).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Nat. Cancer 1 , 665–666 (2020).

Pfefferbaum, B. & North, C. S. N. Engl. J. Med. 383 , 510–512 (2020).

Nature 585 , 160 (2020).

Woolston, C. Nature 585 , 309–312 (2020).

Download references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

What next for postdocs?. Nat Cancer 1 , 937–938 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43018-020-00137-w

Download citation

Published : 09 October 2020

Issue Date : October 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s43018-020-00137-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• Postdocs: The Definitive Guide
• After a PhD

As soon as you step outside the world of academia, the number of people who know what a postdoctorate is, what they involve and how to secure one quickly plummets. Given that a postdoctorate can be a popular option, especially for Science and Technology-related PhD graduates, it’s essential to address this current gap in knowledge.

What Is a Postdoc?

A postdoc is only one of many paths you can take after having completed your PhD. A postdoc (also referred to as a postdoc or postdoctoral) can be best thought as a temporary position designed to refine your research and teaching skills while undertaking practical research work. Because of this, most regard a postdoc position as a temporary stepping stone for developing a career in a more permanent position.

There’s a common misconception that a postdoctorate is an advanced doctoral degree that is undertaken after having completed a PhD. This misconception arises from individuals associating the word “post” in “postdoctorate” with the word “after”. While you will learn a lot during your time in a postdoc position, it is nothing like a degree. There are no fees, coursework, exams or vivas to deliver (thankfully!). A postdoc is, in fact, a job, and as someone in a postdoc position, you will be considered an ‘employee’. And just like any other job, the position will come with its own salary, responsibilities, training and employers.

Most postdocs are awarded by universities or research institutes as temporary contracts. However, they can also be undertaken in private companies, non-profit charities or government bodies.

What Is The Purpose Of A Postdoc?

As mentioned above, the primary purpose of a postdoc is to help bridge the gap between your current skills and your current level of experience. Due to this, postdoctoral positions are popular amongst those who have recently obtained their PhD. This is especially true for individuals who which to pursue a career in academia or research but don’t yet have adequate experience in teaching or publishing.

For the ‘learning’ nature of this role, postdocs provide an excellent option for those to continue their self-development while pursuing research in a field they’re interested in.

What Does a Postdoc Do?

A postdoc works under the supervision of an experienced researcher known as a postdoctoral advisor. What you will do on a day-to-day basis will, therefore, depend on what they require support on at any given time.

While your responsibilities will depend on your postdoctoral advisor, you can expect the following duties as part of your role:

• Contribute to the supervision of PhD students who are undertaking research projects in a closely related field.
• Supporting the research team in managerial tasks related to planning, organisation and administration.
• Undertake research, including but not limited to: qualitative data collection, data analysis and data and lab management.
• Contribute to the production, review and dissemination of academic and non-academic writing, including publications.

Your responsibilities will also depend on who your postdoc position is with. Positions offered by universities will often place a high emphasis on the academic aspects of the role. This involves aspects such as working more independently, developing your supervisory and teaching capabilities, and improving your communication skills through participation in seminars and conferences. In doing so, they’re helping you to become an individual capable of both conducting research and transferring knowledge – in other words, a university lecturer!

The opposite is true for postdoc positions held in industry, such as a private organisation or government body. As you can expect, these roles will place almost all of its emphasis on conducting research and advancing projects forward, with little focus on anything that falls outside of this.

How Long Should I Be A Postdoc For?

There is no set rule for how long you should remain in a postdoc position. Regardless of this, most individuals stay within a postdoc position for between 2 to 4 years. During this period, it’s not uncommon to move between one or two postdoc positions, with one position being abroad for a more rounded experience.

The time you may choose to spend in a given postdoctoral position will depend on several factors. The most influential of these will be:

• The size of the research project’s scope,
• The support needs of the principal investigator/postdoc advisor,
• The amount of funding available.

Although you could undertake a postdoctorate for a year or less, most will advise against this. This is simply because you will likely not have enough time to gain valuable experience associated with producing publications, writing research grant proposals and speaking at conferences. Although it may be possible to complete these within a single year, most researchers will opt for a minimum of two years for a single position. This will provide them with ample opportunity to contribute a significant amount to a project, publish a handful of papers and attend several conferences. On top of this, it will allow you to develop a deeper relationship with the students you help teach or supervise. This will prove invaluable experience should you plan on becoming a university lecturer .

How Are Postdoc Positions Funded?

Postdocs are usually funded in one of three ways:

• The postdoc secures the funding themselves . This can be achieved in several ways, with the most common being applying to opportunities put out by government, research or charity bodies. Examples of these opportunities include the  NWO Talent Programme Veni  and the  Marie Skłodowska-Curie Fellowship . Securing funding under any of these schemes will provide you with a ‘stipend’ (which acts as your salary), and ‘’research funds’ for enabling the project. It’s worth noting that if you secure funding in this way, you won’t typically be restricted to any one university. Although when applying to these opportunities you’ll be required to indicate where you intended to undertake your research, if successful, you can take your funding and associated research project to any university or research institution of your choice.
• A Principal Investigator (PI) secures a research grant  for a project, part of which will go towards hiring one or more postdoctoral assistants. In these scenarios, the university will employ you to work on the project they gained funding for.
• A research body hires postdoctoral assistants irrespective of any new funding . In these scenarios, the researching body, who could be anyone from universities to research centres, charities and private organisations, may put aside their own funds to secure a postdoc assistant as a regular salaried employee.

What is the Average Postdoc Salary?

It goes without saying that the average salary for a postdoc will vary from role to role, with factors such as your country, your employer and your level of experience being influential factors.

If working as a university employee, your salary as a postdoc will be determined via a set pay scale known as the “ HE single pay spine “. Under this pay spine, a postdoc can expect to earn an average of £31,000 per year, though, in reality, a postdoc’s salary can range between £29,000 to £34,800.

On the other hand, the stipend (which will act as your postdoc salary) associated with the funding you have secured yourself will directly depend on the opportunity you acquire. Because of the wide range of possibilities, your potential stipend can vary considerably. As well as having a high variance, they also tend to have a higher ceiling compared to the salaries associated with a PI’s research grant or a research body’s employment. For example, the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Fellowship can be worth over £50,000 per year. However, these types of fellowships are not only highly competitive but are also not an entirely fair comparison to postdoc assistant roles. This is due to the fact that a research fellow will be expected to have a greater amount of experience and to assume a higher level of responsibility than a regular postdoctoral researcher.

In case you’re thinking of working abroad, it would be useful to know that the median salary of a postdoctoral researcher in the United States is approximately $42,000 (£33,000 at the time of writing) per year.

Browse PhDs Now

Join thousands of students.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Committee to Review the State of Postdoctoral Experience in Scientists and Engineers; Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy; Policy and Global Affairs; National Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Engineering; Institute of Medicine. The Postdoctoral Experience Revisited. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2014 Dec 8.

The Postdoctoral Experience Revisited.

• Hardcopy Version at National Academies Press

5 Recommendations

Postdoctoral researchers are a significant, but often overlooked, segment of the science and engineering research workforce. Many different types of positions come under the postdoctoral researcher designation, but an appropriate umbrella term that describes these individuals is the current definition agreed upon by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Science Foundation (NSF), and the National Postdoctoral Association (NPA): “An individual who has received a doctoral degree (or equivalent) and is engaged in a temporary and defined period of mentored advanced training to enhance the professional skills and research independence needed to pursue his or her chosen career path.” Although the individual postdoctoral experience varies significantly depending upon a number of factors such as location, field, or funding source, as examples, there is little debate about the potential value that the general postdoctoral experience provides to either the postdoctoral researcher or to his or her host institution.

Over the past 20 years, the percentage of new Ph.D.'s with definite commitments taking postdoctoral positions has increased in all fields, reaching a recent peak in 2010 when the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided a temporary boost in research funding. Among research disciplines, this growth has been most rapid in engineering and the social sciences—fields in which postdoctoral training was relatively uncommon a decade ago. Comparing the various sources of funding, research positions funded by a principal investigator's grant are the most common and have also seen the largest increases in the past decade. The demographics of the postdoctoral population have also been changing: there are more women and more temporary residents, and their median age has increased, as scientists are spending more time in postdoctoral positions.

Although the broad trends are known, exact statistics about the changing nature of postdoctoral positions and researchers have significant uncertainties. Information on the actual number of postdoctoral researchers and how they are supported is difficult to obtain and those data that do exist are often incomplete, covering only certain subsets of the postdoctoral population. In addition, most funding agencies and research institutions do not track the career outcomes of postdoctoral researchers.

The problem of incomplete data is linked to the problems with the postdoctoral experience itself. The paucity of data concerning the number and characteristics of postdoctoral researchers in the United States is due in part to their poorly defined status at many institutions, the wide variety of titles applied to postdoctoral researchers, and the number of postdoctoral researchers who come to the United States subsequent to receiving their doctoral training abroad. Unlike undergraduates, graduate students, staff, and faculty, which are well-organized groups, postdoctoral researchers are not a well-defined population at many institutions and therefore can be invisible to administrators.

Research practices and expectations of postdoctoral researchers are quite different across disciplines and institutional settings, and these variations are translated into differences in postdoctoral experiences. In general, the practice of employing postdoctoral researchers as long-term researchers, with little mentoring and little hope of moving into a career that requires advanced research training, is becoming more common. The mentored training aspect of a postdoctoral researcher's experience can be inconsistent and often inadequate. The mismatch between the expectations and outcomes of the postdoctoral experience causes disappointment and disillusionment for some postdoctoral researchers, and may discourage undergraduate students and graduate students from continuing to pursue careers in research, thereby reducing the pool of talent on which the research enterprise depends.

Although there have been a number of improvements since the release in 2000 of the National Academies' report Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers , postdoctoral researchers at many institutions continue to lack adequate mentoring, recognition, status, and benefits. Many institutions do not have a coherent set of policies, practices, and procedures for postdoctoral researchers that are equivalent to those available for students, faculty, or staff, and many postdoctoral researchers do not know about those policies that do exist. This lack of support structure and official status is often cited as a bigger concern than salary issues in studies of current postdoctoral researchers.

In addition, there is a lack of data on the career aspirations, preferences, and reasons that influence graduate students and postdoctoral researchers to pursue research careers. It appears that many Ph.D. recipients have been conditioned to see a postdoctoral position as the logical next step in their career progression, without careful consideration as to whether advanced research training is required to further their career goals. Although it is ultimately the individual doctorate holder's decision, it is unclear whether they or their faculty mentors have sufficient resources to make a fully informed choice.

There is a continuous need for researchers with advanced training in the U.S. research enterprise. Postdoctoral researchers are playing a crucial, but often unrecognized, role in research. They are contributing significantly to academic research and they fill important roles in research groups at national laboratories, in government, and in industry. However, some principal investigators hire postdoctoral researchers to fill the need for advanced researchers in lieu of permanent research staff, instead of as a symbiotic practice that provides advanced training. Unfortunately, there is some evidence that this practice is increasing.

Given the current levels of total research spending in the United States, the practice of hiring postdoctoral researchers to staff laboratories has created a situation where the number of postdoctoral researchers is out of equilibrium with the number of available positions that require advanced training, and there is no reasonable correlation between the change in the total number of postdoctoral researchers and positions that require postdoctoral training. Significantly fewer than half of all postdoctoral researchers continue into academic tenure-track positions and an increasing fraction end up in nonacademic or non-research careers that do not require the years of advanced research training provided by the postdoctoral position.

Because of this mismatch, postdoctoral training does not always contribute to the career advancement of postdoctoral researchers. There is a need to reexamine the human capital needs (i.e., job structure, salary practices, and career pathways) of the research enterprise. Some of the work now being done by postdoctoral researchers might more appropriately be done by permanent research staff, who receive the salary, benefits, and job security commensurate with full-time employment. Such research staff positions are common in government, industrial laboratories, and outside the United States. The postdoctoral experience itself should be refocused, with training and mentoring at its center.

Graduate students should be made aware of the wide variety of career paths are open to them. For some careers, particularly for faculty positions in the physical and biomedical sciences at research universities, the postdoctoral experience can be very helpful. However, for many careers, a new Ph.D. can benefit more from other types of work experience—a postdoctoral position is not the only way to enhance one's skills and advance one's career.

The primary focus of this report is on the largest segment of the postdoctoral population: postdoctoral researchers working at universities and being paid as part of a principal investigator's research grant. Other postdoctoral researchers may have a very different experience. For example, the relatively small percentage of postdoctoral researchers working in national laboratories (including the NIH and other publically-funded research institutions) and in industry tend to earn more, have shorter appointment periods, and receive training and guidance with direct relevance to their career aspirations. Although, undoubtedly, there are many postdoctoral researchers at universities who gain valuable research experiences and receive useful mentoring to fulfill their career aspirations, this is not the case for a large number of postdocs, and the committee finds a need for significant reform. For this reason the recommendations that follow are intended to address the problems primarily encountered by postdoctoral researchers in the academic setting.

Using a definition of a postdoctoral researcher agreed upon by the NPA, NIH, and NSF as a guide—“An individual who has received a doctoral degree (or equivalent) and is engaged in a temporary and defined period of mentored advanced training to enhance the professional skills and research independence needed to pursue his or her chosen career path”—the committee has developed recommendations for best practices covering five aspects of the postdoctoral experience: period of service, title and role, career development, compensation and benefits, and mentoring. In addition, the committee stresses the importance of data collection through a sixth recommendation. While the recommendations are numbered, this is for ease of reference and should not be taken to imply prioritization; these six items are necessarily interconnected.

Period of Service : The committee endorses the recommended practice, put forward by the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, and the National Postdoctoral Association in 2007, that postdoctoral research training is and should be a “temporary and defined period.” Postdoctoral appointments for a given postdoctoral researcher should total no more than 5 years in duration, barring extraordinary circumstances. This maximum term should include cumulative postdoctoral research experience, though extensions may be granted in extraordinary circumstances (e.g. family leave, illness).

This recommendation requires direct actions by the host institutions and the funding agencies.

Host institutions should maintain a record of how long a postdoctoral researcher remains in a position and provide that information to funding agencies as part of grant proposals.

To facilitate tracking of postdoctoral researchers, funding agencies could assign each postdoctoral researcher an identifier and keep a record of the total length of time any given individual is holding such a position.

Title and Role : In many instances, positions currently occupied by postdoctoral researchers are more appropriately filled by permanent staff scientists (e.g., technicians, research assistant professors, staff scientists, laboratory managers). The title of “postdoctoral researcher” should be applied only to those people who are receiving advanced training in research. When the appointment period is completed, the postdoctoral researchers should move on to a permanent position externally or be transitioned internally to a staff position with a different and appropriate designation and salary.

This recommendation requires action primarily by the funding agencies and the host institutions.

Funding agencies should have a consistent designation for “postdoctoral researchers,” and require evidence that advanced research training is a component of the postdoctoral experience.

Host institutions should create or identity professional positions for individuals who are conducting research but who are not receiving training, and these individuals should receive appropriate remuneration, benefits, and privileges.

Career Development : Host institutions and mentors should, beginning at the first year of graduate school, make graduate students aware of the wide variety of career paths available for Ph.D. recipients, and explain that postdoctoral positions are intended only for those seeking advanced research training. Career guidance should include, where feasible, the provision of internships and other practical experiences. The postdoctoral position should not be viewed by graduate students or principal investigators as the default step after the completion of doctoral training.

This recommendation requires action by all the different members of the research system: the funding agencies, the host institutions, the professional societies, the mentors, the postdoctoral researchers, and even the graduate students before becoming postdoctoral researchers.

Host institutions, especially those with graduate student populations, should provide multiple engagement activities to help students explore all avenues of career development. Funding agencies should help to support these efforts.

Professional societies should gather and disseminate information about the full range of career paths within their discipline. Useful activities could include collecting statistics about job openings and salaries, identifying individuals in various sectors who can provide career advice, and organizing career fairs at professional meetings.

Mentors, in addition to providing guidance based on their own experience, should become familiar with and disseminate information about all forms of career development opportunities available either at the host institution or through their professional society.

Postdoctoral researchers and graduate students have a responsibility to participate in the career development opportunities provided by their institutions, to explore other sources of information such as professional societies, and to use available career-development tools.

Compensation and Benefits of Employment : Current postdoctoral salaries are low. Salaries should be increased to (1) reflect the qualifications of postdoctoral scholars, (2) address the slow progress the community has made toward implementing salary increases as recommended in several National Research Council reports, and (3) adjust the relative wage of postdoctoral researchers to appropriately reflect their value and contribution to research. The committee considered five different approaches for determining an appropriate minimum salary: (1) indexing to contemporary college graduates, (2) indexing to graduate stipends, (3) indexing to newly hired assistant professors, (4) inflation of previous recommendations, and (5) Research Grade Evaluation Guide. All of these approaches, which are discussed in detail in Appendix B , suggest an amount of $50,000 or more. In addition, despite considerable variation in salaries by field, geographic area, and sector, data on starting postdoctoral salaries reveal that the starting salary prescribed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) postdoctoral award (currently set at $42,000 for 2014) has become the de facto standard for many disciplines and on many academic campuses. The NIH should raise the NRSA postdoctoral starting salary to $50,000 (2014 dollars), and adjust it annually for inflation. Postdoctoral salaries should be appropriately higher where regional cost of living, disciplinary norms, and institutional or sector salary scales dictate higher salaries. 39

In addition, host institutions should provide benefits to postdoctoral researchers that are appropriate to their level of experience and commensurate with benefits given to equivalent full-time employees . Comprehensive benefits should include health insurance, family and parental leave, and access to a retirement plan.

This recommendation requires action primarily by the funding agencies, with additional actions by the host institutions and the professional societies.

Federal agencies should require host institutions to provide documentation of the salary a postdoctoral researcher will receive with all grant proposals.

Professional societies should collect data on salaries for all positions and make these publicly available.

Mentoring : Mentoring is an essential component of the postdoctoral experience and entails more than simply supervision. Mentoring should not be solely a responsibility of the principal investigator, although he or she should be actively engaged in mentoring. Host institutions should create provisions that encourage postdoctoral researchers to seek advice, either formally or informally, from multiple advisors, in addition to their immediate supervisor. Host institutions and funding agencies should take responsibility for ensuring the quality of mentoring through evaluation of, and training programs for, the mentors.

This recommendation requires action by the funding agencies and the host institutions, with supporting actions by the professional societies, the mentors, and the postdoctoral researchers themselves.

In addition to providing mentorship training and guidance to the immediate supervisors of the postdoctoral researchers, host institutions should establish mechanisms that make it easy for postdoctoral researchers to seek guidance from additional faculty or senior professionals who can enrich the postdoctoral training experience.

Funding agencies should identify better ways of evaluating or rewarding mentoring as an essential component of research. This could include mandatory self-reporting by mentors as well as blinded assessments by the postdoctoral researchers.

Professional societies are in an ideal position to provide additional mentors to supplement those at a postdoctoral researcher's host institution. This would be of particular value to postdoctoral researchers considering major career shifts such as a move from academia to industry.

Postdoctoral researchers need to recognize that a great research investigator is not necessarily equivalent to a great mentor and that many if not most principal investigators or senior research faculty have not received any formal training in mentoring. Therefore, postdoctoral researchers should seek guidance from a variety of people, and should be encouraged to do so.

Data Collection : Current data on the postdoctoral population, in terms of demographics, career aspirations, and career outcomes are neither adequate nor timely. Every institution that employs postdoctoral researchers should collect data on the number of currently employed postdoctoral researchers and where they go after completion of their research training, and should make this information publicly available. The National Science Foundation should serve as the primary curator for establishing and updating a database system that tracks postdoctoral researchers, including non-academic and foreign-trained postdoctoral researchers. Host institutions and federal agencies should cooperate with NSF on the data collection and maintenance process. Federal agencies and research institutions that report these data to the NSF should take advantage of various technologies that have become available in recent years to assist in timely and thorough collection.

Recognizing that this recommendation on data collection has been made many times before with little effect, the committee stresses that research institutions and professional societies should explore what they can do to enrich what is known about postdoctoral researchers and that all institutions make better use of new technologies and social and professional networks to collect relevant and timely data.

Funding agencies must improve their data collection on the postdoctoral segment of the workforce. This is especially true for the NSF, given its congressional mandate to “collect, acquire, analyze, report, and disseminate statistical data related to the science and engineering enterprise in the United States and other nations that is relevant and useful to practitioners, researchers, policymakers, and the public, including statistical data on research and development trends, [and] the science and engineering workforce…” (Section 505 of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010). The NSF should work with other research agencies, particularly the NIH, to develop more reliable means of collecting data on postdoctoral researchers during and after their appointments. The use of a common identifier system for each postdoctoral researcher is a possible approach.

Host institutions should assist in the data collection efforts by remaining consistent with their labeling of postdoctoral researcher, keeping track of new hires and departures, and conducting exit interviews to determine career outcomes of their postdoctoral population. This information should be made publically available, particularly to prospective postdoctoral researchers.

Funding agencies should look favorably on grant proposals that include outcome data for an institution's postdoctoral researchers.

Professional societies should utilize their networks to collect information about career paths of their members and make this data easily available.

All of the reforms recommended here should be coordinated through a strong and separate or stand-alone postdoctoral office (PDO) at each host institution. These offices have become much more common since the publication of the 2000 Postdoctoral Report , and many have become members of the National Postdoctoral Association. However, more work is needed to truly enrich the postdoctoral experience. PDOs need to continue sharing experiences to help one another fulfill their potential to train mentors, organize career development activities, be a one-stop source of information for domestic and international postdoctoral researchers, manage postdoctoral researcher grievances, oversee data-gathering efforts, monitor institutional compliance with salary and benefits policy, and track the career progress of former postdoctoral researchers. Although currently these offices are often embedded within a larger graduate student affairs operation, they are essential for improving the visibility and recognition of postdoctoral researchers in their host institutions and deserve specialized recognition.

POTENTIAL IMPLEMENTATION AND BEST PRACTICES

The recommendations put forward by the committee define five aspects of the postdoctoral experience. Although postdoctoral researchers play a key role in the science and engineering enterprise, they are only one part of an increasingly complex system. All participants in this system can take directed and concrete steps towards the implementation of this vision for a better postdoctoral experience. This section outlines some potential outcomes, inspired by many of the best practices already implemented throughout the United States and around the world.

Given its complexity, it is important to approach the system holistically, as no single segment of the science and engineering enterprise can induce change on its own. Therefore, while the following potential outcomes and best practices are arranged by principal actor, many overlap in who would be involved.

Graduate Students

Ideally, doctoral students would give careful consideration to whether advanced research training in a postdoctoral position is required to further their career goals. They would seek information about the variety of career options early and often in their doctoral training. In addition to utilizing regular mentoring, graduate students would take full advantage of institutional and local resources that provide career development services.

Postdoctoral Researchers

Similarly to graduate students, postdoctoral researchers would ideally make repeated, realistic, and critical self-evaluations before, during, and after their postdoctoral experience concerning their career choices. They would take advantage of every opportunity for career planning, including, for example, the creation of an individual development plan. Postdoctoral researchers would not limit their focus solely to academic careers. To that end, they would seek advice and information from a variety of different sources, including their mentors and institutions, professional societies, and peers.

Mentors and postdoctoral supervisors serve a particularly critical role in the science and engineering enterprise. With respect to postdoctoral researchers, mentors would recognize that the postdoctoral period should be viewed as a training period, and consequently that their role is to help individuals develop the necessary writing, laboratory management and leadership, communications, and other essential career-related skills. In most instances this will be best accomplished by a formal training program. However, it must be recognized that not all skills can be learned within the laboratory environment, especially those relating to non-research careers. Therefore, mentors, with the assistance of their institutions, would also provide postdoctoral researchers with substantial protected time to pursue career development activities.

In addition, because of the ever-increasing globalization of the science and engineering enterprise, mentors would be attuned to the special needs of temporary visa holders pursuing postdoctoral research, and consult with or provide referrals to experts within their institutions, including international offices.

Every postdoctoral researcher would have an individual development plan that is created with a mentor and reviewed yearly by someone in addition to the postdoctoral researcher's mentor (i.e., the head of the school or department or research division, or by the postdoctoral researcher's advisory committee, or by a specially appointed director of postdoctoral affairs). Similarly, institutions would encourage the establishment of advisory mechanisms to enable postdoctoral researchers to gain mentoring from a number of sources to complement the work of the primary mentor.

Institutions

Every institution would have at least one office or unit designated as responsible for the postdoctoral experience, policies, and activities, beyond that provided by the mentors. Ideally, there would be an independent office of postdoctoral affairs. Every effort would be made to provide postdoctoral researchers with the same type of recognition given to undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, and staff. The designated office would be responsible for collecting and maintaining statistics on the postdoctoral community within the institution, including long-term career outcomes. Institutions would make this information publicly available.

Like graduate and undergraduate students, postdoctoral researchers would receive an orientation upon arrival at their institution. This would include topics relating to safety, ethics, human resources, and other essential training as needed for the research discipline. In addition, postdoctoral researchers would receive an appointment letter that provides clear information and expectations about salary, benefits, duration of service, process for termination or resignation, protected time for career development, and intellectual property rights. Institutions would create formal and neutral grievance procedures to address conflicts between postdoctoral researchers and their direct supervisors. This procedure would also be identified in the appointment letter.

Institutions would invest resources to provide postdoctoral researchers and graduate students with information concerning the wide range of career opportunities. Where feasible, opportunities for practical experiences in other settings, such as teaching and both research- and non-research-based nonacademic employment, would be made available. Wherever possible, these career development activities would include internships for postdoctoral researchers and graduate students.

Above all, institutions would track, provide services, and have similar policies and procedures for postdoctoral researchers regardless of their source of funding.

All funding agencies would report annually to the National Science Foundation the number of postdoctoral researchers they have supported by discipline, visa status, degree-granting institution, and types of support. The NSF, through its National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, would thereby track the number of postdoctoral researchers (according to the current agreed-upon definition) and follow their career outcomes in the same way as is currently done for Ph.D. recipients.

In addition, and because of the critical role of mentoring in the science and engineering enterprise, all funding agencies would place an emphasis on mentoring as a key criterion in evaluating grant proposals and the performance of principal investigators.

Professional Societies

Professional societies would recognize postdoctoral researchers as a distinct class of membership within their organizations and help postdoctoral researchers create a sense of community by facilitating postdoctoral researcher activities and networking at their meetings. They would involve postdoctoral researchers in the activities of their societies by promoting postdoctoral researcher service on committees, inviting postdoctoral researchers as speakers, and having postdoctoral researchers help to organize meetings.

Professional societies would provide postdoctoral researchers with career information and counseling similar to what they provide for graduate students. To this end, professional societies would help make broadly available information about job markets, career trajectories, and salaries for postdoctoral researchers and graduate students in their disciplines (e.g., through bulletins, or special sessions about career opportunities at meetings). Where possible, professional societies would collect, analyze, and publicize related information such as statistics about the numbers and kinds of job postings.

Two of the committee members do not support the recommendation for a prescriptive “salary standard” based upon one particular field and funding agency (here, the National Institutes of Health [NIH] and life sciences) for two reasons: first, salaries—not just postdoctoral salaries—differ so much by discipline, region, funding agency, and type of institution (for example, the 2012 National Postdoctoral Association report indicates that about half of the institutions have minimum salaries that are lower than the 2013 NIH minimum of $39K; NPA 2012), and second, this “salary standard”, meant to reflect a reasonable salary, will likely be used as a minimum salary. While they believe that institutions need flexibility to accommodate particular circumstances, they also firmly believe that a postdoctoral researcher's salary should be fair and fit rationally within the spectrum of salaries for researchers in that discipline, at that institution: for example, well above that of a graduate student and significantly less than that of an entry-level, career-track researcher, that is, permanent staff scientist, research track assistant professor, or tenure-track assistant professor.

• Cite this Page Committee to Review the State of Postdoctoral Experience in Scientists and Engineers; Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy; Policy and Global Affairs; National Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Engineering; Institute of Medicine. The Postdoctoral Experience Revisited. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2014 Dec 8. 5, Recommendations.
• PDF version of this title (3.1M)

Recent Activity

• Recommendations - The Postdoctoral Experience Revisited Recommendations - The Postdoctoral Experience Revisited

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Psychology in Action

Postdoctoral research: the who, what, where, when, why, and how.

As someone interested in research, you may have previously heard the terms “postdoc” or “postdoctoral research” before. But what do these terms really mean, and what does this involve? See below for detailed answers to some basic questions about postdoctoral research, including tips for how you can go about becoming a postdoc.

Who is a postdoc (a.k.a. A postdoctoral researcher or postdoctoral fellow)? The term “postdoc” is short for postdoctoral, which literally means “after earning your Ph.D.”. So, a postdoc generally refers to someone who has already completed their Ph.D. and is continuing to conduct research. However, a postdoc is not yet a professor or Principal Investigator (PI), so they still have a research mentor whose lab they work in.

What does a postdoc do? A postdoc is mostly focused on conducting research. That is, postdocs typically do not spend much time on teaching or other service requirements at their university. Because they already have a Ph.D., a postdoc is usually capable of working relatively independently and conducting studies/writing up research papers. However, a postdoc may also be focused on learning new research skills in this role. For example, if your primary focus in graduate school has been on working with young children, but you’d really like to be able to collect data with babies in the future, you could focus on infant data collection for your postdoc! New research skills could involve working with new populations (e.g., infants versus children), learning new ways of collecting data (e.g., brain scans versus questionnaires), or learning new statistical techniques. If there’s something new that you want to learn, a postdoc is a great time to try to learn it!

Where can a postdoc conduct their research? Postdocs are generally found at universities around the world where most research is conducted. However, some postdocs also may work in research hospitals or other settings. Postdocs can be found where they have a Principal Investigator mentor who they can work with and a lab setting where they can conduct their research. Many postdocs choose to work at a different institution from where they received their Ph.D. in order to work with someone new and gain new skills/experiences. However, some postdocs may also be able to gain new skills and experiences as a postdoc at the same university where they received their Ph.D.

When can you be a postdoc? Essentially any time after completing your Ph.D. you can work as a postdoc. However, typically postdocs are those who have completed their Ph.D. but have not yet received a job as a professor or other more permanent research position.

Why be a postdoc? A postdoc is usually seen as a steppingstone position between completing your Ph.D. and receiving a more permanent position in academia (e.g., as a professor at a university). Working as a postdoc can be a valuable way to expand your research experience in order to become more competitive on the academic job market. As postdocs tend to spend most of their time on research, your postdoc years can help you to efficiently spend your time completing studies and writing up studies for publication so that your application for professor positions is even stronger than before. Often, postdocs also spend this time learning new skills that they believe would be helpful for setting up and running their own research lab in the future, while also hopefully making them more competitive on the job market. Another valuable aspect of being a postdoc is that it can give you an opportunity to work with new people and (potentially) work at a new location to give a broader sense of how different universities and labs work. This can be helpful for people who are on the fence about whether or not they want to stay in academia to decide if it is right for them. It can also be helpful for those who are certain that they do want to stay in academia to learn how other places operate so that they can determine what sort of university they would like to work at or how they would like to run their own lab. Overall, working as a postdoc can be a valuable experience for learning more about academia, gaining skills, and becoming competitive for professor positions.

How does one become a postdoc? Although a potentially beneficial experience, it is often not clear how to become a postdoc in the first place. To be a postdoc necessitates that you have your Ph.D., and that you have a way of being paid for your new work as a postdoctoral researcher. This funding can come in a couple of different forms. In general, there are two main avenues to receiving postdoc funding, which are detailed below:

Applying for Funding: Reach out to potential postdoc advisors/mentors proactively and ask if you can apply for postdoc funding together. If you know that you are interested in working with someone specific, this can be a great option. In short, you can reach out to someone who you know does exciting work in your area that you would love to work with (your potential postdoc mentor) and explain your research experience as well as your goals for experiences you would like to gain in a postdoc. If the potential mentor believes it is a good fit, you can discuss the possibility of applying for funding together. Both the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) have funding options for postdocs. For psychological research, the NSF SBE Postdoctoral Research Fellowship can be a good option to apply for as well as the NIH F32 Postdoctoral Individual National Research Service Award. However, it is important to note that these applications are 1) very time consuming and 2) will require a clear plan for the research that you are hoping to complete in your postdoc as well as how it will help you to achieve your career goals. For these reasons if you are interested in applying for funding, you should start reaching out to a potential postdoc mentor early! I would personally recommend reaching out approximately 18 months prior to when you would like to start your postdoc. This should give you an adequate amount of time to discuss with your potential advisor the idea of working together, to develop a research plan, to complete the lengthy application, and to potentially resubmit the application if needed. It is worth noting that these applications are quite competitive, but just applying can be a valuable experience and also help you to get a sense for your potential mentor’s working style! Additionally, if you happen to receive your own funding, you are being paid directly by your funding source to conduct your postdoc research (i.e., you are not paid through your mentor’s funding), so this tends to free up postdocs to spend their time as they see fit. This might include wrapping up old projects from graduate school as well as working on new projects from their postdoc.

Applying Directly for the Postdoc Job: Apply for postdoctoral positions that principal investigators (PIs) post themselves. Sometimes professors/PIs have their own funding and are looking to hire a postdoc to work on research in their lab. Postdocs can be great for PIs to hire because they already have a Ph.D. and can be very successful at completing and writing up research relatively independently. PIs looking to hire postdocs often post applications for these jobs in winter or spring (although applications can pop up at any time of the year). In these cases, seek out postdoctoral positions that involve research within your area of expertise and skill set. These job calls are often posted on listservs (try finding email listservs for organizations relevant to your research area). You can also look on the Psychology Jobs Wiki page ( http://psychjobsearch.wikidot.com/ ) under the “postdocs” section near the bottom to see any jobs that are posted there. In this situation you do need to apply for the specific job, but do not need to complete a long funding application as with the previous option. If the PI selects you for the job, you will receive your funding directly from the PI. This means that the PI may ask you to work on particular projects or spend your time in a certain way. With this type of postdoc, it is worth having a conversation up front with the PI about how they will expect you to spend your time and make sure that the way your time will be spent is a good fit for you.

Hopefully, these details help to clarify what postdocs are and how you can go about becoming one if it would be beneficial for you! Overall, thinking about skills and experiences that you want to gain after you receive your Ph.D. will be most important for determining if you want a postdoc, and if so for finding the postdoc position that is right for you.

Thumbnail photo credit: @giamboscaro on Unsplash

• NIH Grants & Funding
• Blog Policies

NIH Extramural Nexus

Plan Your Research Career at NIH

Thinking about a career in research or wondering how to move forward in your journey to becoming an independent researcher? Whether you’re an undergraduate or graduate student, a postdoc, early stage or an established investigator, there is an NIH funding program out there for you!

Explore the NIH Funding Programs by Career Stage page to get to know the different programs by career stage, learn useful tips, and better understand the lingo of NIH funding.

Once you identify a program of interest, you can find active funding opportunities with the “View Current Funding Opportunities” button on each program page. When you’re ready to apply, keep our How to Apply – Application Guide handy!

If you have questions along the way, check out our Need Help? page to find the right contact.

RELATED NEWS

Before submitting your comment, please review our blog comment policies.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• For Administrators
• For Faculty

POSTDOCTORAL AFFAIRS

• Announcements
• Positions at Northwestern

Postdoctoral Research Opportunity – Translational Brain Tumor Research

The Department of Neurological Surgery at Northwestern University is seeking outstanding postdoctoral scholars for expansion of basic and translational studies related to modulation of the blood-brain barrier to enhance passage of drugs, biologicals and cells for treatment of neurological diseases and brain cancer, precision medicine-based approaches to cancer drugs for gliomas, and the study of the effects of ultrasound therapy on the brain across species.  

This position offers an opportunity to work in the NIH-funded lab of Dr. Adam Sonabend , a neurosurgeon-scientist with a background in translational brain tumor research, the study of glioma progression, and regulation of transcription. The Sonabend Lab has a strong translational emphasis and relies on patient tumor specimens and clinical data, transgenic mouse glioma models, next-generation sequencing data (ChIP-seq, exome sequencing, RNA-seq), and cutting-edge technologies such as whole genome CRISPR screens for advancing our projects. Most projects involve analysis of clinical-trial related specimens, where biological questions are investigated.

The lab has strong collaborations with expert groups in complementary fields including Dr. Maciej Lesniak’s lab (Northwestern University) for tumor immunology, Dr. Ali Shilatifard (Northwestern University) for epigenetics, and Dr. Raul Rabadan’s lab (Columbia University) for computational and systems biology. The department offers a nurturing environment for career development, a stimulating community of several brain tumor research labs, weekly conferences and seminars of interest.

The postdoctoral fellow will be expected to build a publication record including submissions to leading cancer biology journals; supervise rotating undergraduate, graduate and medical students; apply for internal and/or extramural funding; and attend national meetings that will help to build an international reputation.  

Minimum Qualifications:

• PhD in immunology, molecular biology, biochemistry, cancer biology, gene therapy or neuroscience.  

Required Competencies:  

• Experience working with small animal models and mammalian cell culture.
• Ability to design and conduct experiments, maintain accurate GLP style recordkeeping, and collaborate effectively within a team environment.
• Strong verbal and written communication skills.
• Ability to prepare and present research at meetings and write scientific manuscripts in fluent English.

Preferred Competencies:  

• Expertise in immunology and flow cytometry techniques.
• Cloning, western blot, immunofluorescence, qPCR.
• Familiarity with next generation sequencing data and gene expression analysis.
• CRISPR, gene silencing and over-expression techniques.
• Assembly of viral vectors.  
• Basic coding and next-generation sequencing analysis.  

Interested applicants must send a current curriculum vitae, a cover letter containing a short summary of research experience and aspirations, and names and contact information for at least three professional references to Dawn Rose  via email at  [email protected] . Applicant must be able to begin employment no later than August 1, 2024 .  

Northwestern University is an Equal Opportunity, Affirmative Action Employer of all protected classes, including veterans and individuals with disabilities. Women, underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities, individuals with disabilities, and veterans are encouraged to apply. Hiring is contingent upon eligibility to work in the United States.  

BRET Career Development ASPIRE Program

Children’s tumor foundation (ctf) – young investigator award – doctoral/postdoctoral fellowships for neurofibromatosis research.

Posted by hagansa2 on Wednesday, May 8, 2024 in Announcements .

Deadline: November 30, 2024

URL:  Funding Opportunities – Children’s Tumor Foundation (ctf.org)

Description:

The Children’s Tumor Foundation (CTF) seeks to support early-career scientists pursuing neurofibromatosis (NF) research. Research topics may include: manifestations of all types of NF1, NF2, schwannomatosis, including neurofibromas, schwannomas, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors, and other brain and nervous system tumors; bone abnormalities; cardiovascular abnormalities; learning disorders; and pain. Fellows will be assigned an external mentor by CTF. The mentor, an expert in the NF field, will interact at least twice a year with the fellow and their research sponsor, to provide guidance on research and career development as needed. One of those interactions may be at the annual NF Conference. Predoctoral fellowships provide support for 2 years. Postdoctoral fellowships provide support for 2-3 years.

Eligibility: Applicant:

• May be a graduate student pursuing an MD, Ph.D., or equivalent degree.
• May be a postdoctoral fellow (MD, Ph.D., or equivalent) with no more than seven years past completion of their first doctoral degree at the start of the award.
• Must be affiliated with the laboratory of a senior researcher who is the applicant’s research sponsor. The sponsor must offer a training environment that is conducive to the growth and education of an early-career NF researcher. As part of the application, the mentor will be asked to describe the intended training plan. In a given year, more than one member from a laboratory can apply for a YIA. However, only one application per laboratory per year will be funded.
• May NOT hold an independent faculty position.
• May be of any nationality.

Award amount:

• Predoctoral Fellow: $27,144 annual salary.
• Postdoctoral Fellow: Up to $58,000 annual salary.

If this information is out of date, please email [email protected] to let us know. 

Share this post:

Tags: Postdoctoral Funding Opportunity

Comments are closed

VIEW MORE EVENTS >

Beyond the Lab: Data Science