Q1: What makes the CAREER award different from other NSF proposals?

Maria Mayorga: The CAREER award stands out for requiring a true integration of education and research. The educational plan should go beyond students. It could involve industry training or practitioner outreach, but must be meaningfully tied to your research. Another key difference is that it’s a single-PI award, which may be a shift for those used to collaborative work. Finally, the proposal needs to align with your long-term goals and those of your department and institution. Reviewers want to know how this work will evolve over 20 years.

Scott Ferguson: Unlike standard NSF grants, CAREER supports a five-year vision. It’s less about specific deliverables and more about big-picture research directions. You’re encouraged to articulate where your work could go in 10 or 15 years. The structure is more flexible, emphasizing thrusts rather than defined tasks.

Doug Call: The CAREER proposal must be bold and transformative. On a recent panel, reviewers were quick to dismiss anything labeled “incremental.” The most compelling proposals made reviewers say, “Is this even possible?” This is your chance to pitch a truly innovative idea. Something that pushes boundaries and excites the community.

Q2: What are NSF panelists looking for in a CAREER proposal?

Helen Huang: The budget must align with the proposal’s educational focus. For instance, budgeting for a postdoc instead of a graduate student can raise concerns, as it may signal a lack of commitment to student mentoring. Reviewers expect to see direct investment in training students.

Maria Mayorga: Panelists look for cohesion. Your bold idea should be backed by your expertise and supported by a clear plan. It’s not enough to dream big—you need a viable strategy and contingency planning. Proposals without internal alignment across aims, education, and budget raise red flags.

Doug Call: Check with your program officer about expectations around hypothesis-driven research. In my experience, proposals with clear, testable hypotheses were rated more highly. Without that, reviewers often saw the work as merely descriptive or lacking scientific rigor.

Q3: What are panelists looking for in educational activities and broader impacts?

Adolfo Escobedo: NSF expects thoughtful and innovative educational plans. It’s not enough to say you’ll incorporate research into class modules. You need to demonstrate how your teaching activities support the research and how they reach beyond the classroom. I included a summer internship for students from minority-serving institutions based on my research themes. Reviewers want to see integration, not just parallel tracks.

Scott Ferguson: Activities must match the intended audience. If you’re reaching out to K–12 students, the content must be age-appropriate. Also, include an assessment plan. Vague ideas like “posting videos online” are not enough—explain how you’ll evaluate reach and impact.

Maria Mayorga: Your outreach must be realistic. If you’re working with a school, you need evidence of a partnership, like a letter of support. Otherwise, it won’t feel credible. Think of this section like your research background. You need to show you’ve laid the groundwork.

Dali Sun: Browse public abstracts from previously funded CAREER proposals to see what others have done. While many mention common formats like science days or seminars, it’s crucial to propose something distinctive. Start by understanding what’s already been done, then innovate from there.

Leah Bugg: Go beyond the expected. Hiring undergrads or developing a new course isn’t enough unless it’s clearly novel. Think about how your research outcomes will be communicated to the public, and how they’ll support national or societal needs. Effective communication is more important than ever.

Q4: How do you find collaborators for education and broader impacts and for research?

Maria Mayorga: Draw from past experiences. My outreach built on work I’d done through a Research Experience for Teachers (RET). Whatever you propose should feel authentic and connected to your research. Be cautious with activities involving minors—make sure you understand the requirements and permissions involved. Also, consider partners beyond schools: museums, campus-based camps, or other NC State programs like the Science House.

Dali Sun: The Science House and NC Science Olympiad are excellent partners. Jason at Science House frequently supports proposals with collaboration letters. Events like Olympiad already include structured assessment, making them easy to integrate into your broader impacts. You can even create a custom challenge tied to your research—kids are eager to engage with cutting-edge topics like quantum computing or robotics.

Adolfo Escobedo: Start early. If you’re proposing internships or outreach, reach out well in advance to secure letters of support and show feasibility. For research collaborators, I leveraged prior relationships and industry contacts. Even informal support letters from software vendors helped validate parts of my plan and reduced perceived risk.

Leah Bugg: Think beyond K-12. Consider policy impact, national security, or public outreach. At The Engineering Place, we work across these areas and can help you build meaningful, measurable broader impacts. ARIS is another great resource for support.