medical education phd funding

Brief Graduate Medical Education Funding

Key takeaways.

More than half of residents who completed their training between 2010 and 2019 were still practicing in the state in which they trained. 

About half of GME training takes place in hospitals affiliated with a medical school, while the remainder of training occurs in community-based training sites.

Medicare and Medicaid are the largest funding sources for graduate medical education in the United States.

While  medical school enrollment has grown 33% since 2002 , the number of graduate medical education opportunities needed for those graduates to become licensed physicians has not kept pace. The United States is estimated to have a shortage of 81,180 full-time physicians by 2035 , with greater shortages in rural communities and for specialties like  primary care and psychiatry. States are rethinking graduate medical education, or GME, to better meet the needs of communities most impacted by physician workforce shortages. 

What Is Graduate Medical Education and Why Does It Matter? 

All medical school graduates must complete a period of graduate medical education, such as a residency or fellowship, to be licensed to practice in the U.S. Residents are more likely  to continue to practice in locations where they complete GME training, including rural areas, though rates vary by  specialty  and state.  More than half of residents who completed their training between 2010 and 2019 were still practicing in the state where they trained.  

Where Is Graduate Medical Education Training Offered? 

Most GME training is offered in a hospital setting. About half of the training takes place in hospitals affiliated with a medical school , while the remainder occurs in community-based sites including hospitals, clinics and health care offices. Other providers, like community health centers, can offer GME training, though funding can be limited for these settings.  

Any health care facility with a GME program must be accredited and is sometimes called a “sponsoring institution.” Accreditation criteria vary by specialty but generally include:  

• Faculty-to-resident ratios.  
• Sufficient patient volume to support training experiences. 
• Availability of specific clinical experiences, such as training in other specialties provided onsite or offsite at contracted training sites.  
• Leadership from an experienced GME director. 
• Financial resources for long-term sustainability of the program.  

Modal title

How is graduate medical education funded .

GME is primarily funded through Medicare and Medicaid. Additionally,  other funding sources  include private payers, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) which funds GME in  children’s hospitals  and  community health centers , the  Veterans Health Administration , and the  Department of Defense .  

Medicare Funding for GME 

Medicare has made GME payments to hospitals  since its inception in 1965 . Medicare is the largest funding source for graduate medical education, accounting for  $16.2 billion  in GME payments in 2020.  

There are two separate funding streams for Medicare GME payments: Direct GME and Indirect GME.  

• Direct GME  (DGME): Funding to cover the direct expenses associated with residency training, such as resident and faculty salaries and benefits, as well as administrative and overhead costs.  
• Indirect GME  (IME): Funding to cover the indirect costs of training incurred by the program, such as increased time to perform procedures, interpret results, or additional services ordered by residents. Both Direct GME and Indirect GME are calculated using complex formulas based on the volume of Medicare beneficiaries seen by the hospital or training facility. 

Congress caps the number of residency slots nationwide that Medicare pays for. When Congress establishes new residency slots,  hospitals starting their GME programs  are given five years before resident caps—the maximum number of residents that can receive GME funding—are set under Medicare. Once set, Medicare resident caps for hospitals are permanent unless changed by Congress or given up by the hospital.  

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found in 2021 that  Medicare GME funding is unevenly distributed between states , with most residents and GME training sites located in the Northeast. Rural and underserved communities tend to have fewer residents and GME programs than urban and suburban communities. Additionally, Medicare GME funding skews towards hospitals and specialties that serve Medicare beneficiaries—mostly adults aged 65 years and older. Medicare has historically played a small role or has not funded residencies for children’s hospitals, psychiatry and primary care.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a  final rule  in 2021 to implement several provisions of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, including 1,000 new Medicare-funded medical residency positions and a new funding opportunity allowing certain rural training hospitals to increase their GME cap. On April 10, 2023, CMS proposed a new rule to allow  Rural Emergency Hospitals  (REH), a Medicare new provider type, to serve as training sites for Medicare GME payment.   

According to the GAO, more than 70% of teaching hospitals  trained more residents than their Medicare GME caps funded in 2018. To fund positions above and beyond Medicare GME payments, hospitals used other federal programs, state funding, clinical revenue and philanthropic donations.  

The Health Resources and Services Administration’s (HRSA)  Teaching Health Center Graduate Medical Education program  funds training for primary care residents in community health centers, rural health clinics and tribal health centers. HRSA also funds a  Children’s Hospitals GME Payment program  to fund training for resident physicians and dentists caring for low-income children across the country.  

Medicaid Funding for GME 

Medicaid is the  second largest source of funding  for GME in the U.S. States can fund GME through Medicaid fee-for-service or managed care.  

Medicaid GME is unique from Medicare GME in that states can choose to make Medicaid GME payments to teaching entities other than hospitals and for health professions other than physicians.  New Mexico  permits federal qualified health centers, rural health clinics, and tribal health centers to receive GME payments as part of its Medicaid GME strategic plan.  Florida and Idaho  paid ambulatory care centers as teaching entities.  At least 10 states made Medicaid GME payments  for graduate nurses and eight states made Medicaid GME payments for other non-physician professions, such as laboratory personnel, emergency medical services students and dental students.  

States are not required to support GME. For example, New Hampshire  enacted legislation in 2023  requiring the department of health and human services to submit a Medicaid state plan amendment to suspend the provision of direct and indirect graduate medical education payments to hospitals as of June 30, 2025. 

Even so,  42 states and the District of Columbia  made GME payments under their Medicaid programs in 2018. Medicaid payments for GME  grew nearly 50%  between 2009 ($3.78 billion) and 2018 ($5.58 billion). State general revenue makes up the largest source of the state share of Medicaid GME payments (37 states), followed by local government contributions (16 states) and hospital or provider taxes (six states). 

States may  pay for Medicaid GME  as part of a hospital’s Medicaid base rate or offer a separate or supplemental payment for GME to hospitals and other teaching entities. Under managed care, states may distribute GME payments directly to eligible teaching entities or provide indirect payments in their capitated payment rates to managed care organizations (MCOs). States may reimburse hospitals and other teaching entities for direct GME costs, indirect GME costs or both.  

States fund Medicaid GME through a variety of approaches ranging from grant funding, models based on Medicare, or financing that gives special weight to certain specialties. For example:  

• Florida   appropriated $97.3 million  to its  GME Statewide Medicaid Residency Program  for participating hospitals and $100 million to its  GME Startup Bonus Program  for qualifying hospitals with newly approved residency positions in specialties to address statewide demand and shortages.  
• In 2019, the  New Mexico  legislature  created  a GME expansion grant program to establish and expand physician residency programs with the option to prioritize positions for specialties experiencing shortages and medically underserved areas within the state. The legislature also created a GME expansion review board charged with developing a  state strategic plan  for expanding GME programs in the state, which includes payments to community health centers.  
• Ohio  pays for  GME costs  associated with Medicaid services rendered to Medicaid recipients, including recipients enrolled in an MCO.  The state may deny Medicaid payment for DGME  if the hospital refuses without good cause to contract with a Medicaid MCO serving the same geographic area.  
• Oregon   makes GME payments  to any in-state public acute care hospital providing a teaching program with more than 200 residents or interns based on the hospital’s reported costs to Medicare, adjusted for Medicaid patient volume. Direct and indirect GME payments from the state are capped and cannot exceed the amount paid to the hospital by Medicare. 
• Under  Tennessee ’s  State Plan Amendment  in 2022, the state  makes GME payments to qualifying hospitals  based on the state’s managed care system utilization and number of residents, with weight given to primary care residents.  

State Appropriations and Private Funding for GME 

To address workforce shortages in specialties and subfields of the medical profession, states may appropriate funding directly to hospitals, universities or other health settings through general fund appropriations. 

• Iowa   appropriated state funding for nine additional residency positions  and up to two fellowships administered by the University of Iowa hospitals in 2023. Candidates for the fellowship must be residents of Iowa, attend and earn an undergraduate degree from an Iowa college or university and earn a medical degree from a medical school in Iowa.  
• Nevada  established a Graduate Medical Education Grant Program in 2023 , funded by state appropriations, to award grants to institutions seeking to create, expand or retain accredited programs for residency training and postdoctoral fellowships for physicians.  

GME is also supported by private sources.  Private insurers  may negotiate higher rates to teaching institutions, implicitly supporting GME, but this is not required in most states.  

• Maryland  is  the only state  that sets hospital rates for private payers as well as public payers under the state’s  all-payer hospital rate regulation model . Under this model,  Maryland  collects payment from private insurance plans for patients treated at hospitals to help finance GME.  
• NCSL on Expanded Medical Training Could Help Hospitals in Rural, Underserved Areas State Legislative News
• NCSL on Understanding Medicaid’s Role in Graduate Medical Education NCSL Webinar

Contact NCSL

For more information on this topic, use this form to reach NCSL staff.

• What is your role? Legislator Legislative Staff Other
• Is this a press or media inquiry? No Yes
• Admin Email

Related Resources

5 things to know about rare diseases, state cannabis policy enactment database, prescription drug legislation database.

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Graduate medical education funding mechanisms, challenges, and solutions: A narrative review

Katherine he.

a Department of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA

b Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

Edward Whang

Gentian kristo.

With increased attention on the federal budget deficit, graduate medical education (GME) funding has in particular been targeted as a potential source of cost reduction. Reduced GME funding can further deteriorate the compensation of physicians during their residency training.

In order to understand the GME funding mechanisms and current challenges, as well as the value of the work accomplished by residents, we searched peer-reviewed, English language studies published between 2000 and 2019.

Direct and indirect GME funding is intended to support resident reimbursement and the higher costs associated with supporting a teaching program. However, policy efforts have aimed to reduce federal funding for GME. Furthermore, evidence suggests that residents are inadequately compensated because their salaries do not reflect the number of hours worked and are not comparable to those of other medical staff.

Conclusions

Our review suggests that creative solutions are needed to diversify GME funding and improve resident compensation.

• • Funding for graduate medical education (GME) is facing increasing challenges.
• • Residents are inadequately and unfairly compensated for their work.
• • Interventions are needed to improve GME funding and resident compensation.

Introduction

With increased attention on the federal budget deficit, national efforts have been made to minimize spending. Graduate Medical Education (GME) funding, with over $15 billion annual investment from federal and state entities, has in particular been targeted as a potential source of cost reduction, despite representing 0.55% of the annual health care expenditure. 1 , 2 This review aims to describe the current sources of GME funding, current challenges and solutions, the cost of training a resident, and an evaluate resident indebtedness.

A diverse team of authors, including general surgery resident, attending surgeon, and residency program director, conducted a narrative review of the literature on GME funding mechanisms, current challenges, and solutions. We also reviewed the literature surrounding factors that determine the value of the work accomplished by surgery residents. We conducted a non-systematic search for peer-reviewed, English language studies published between 2000 and 2019. Reference lists of articles were reviewed to identify additional studies. The entire team of authors identified key findings in the literature related to the GME funding, and the final results are the key points presented in this review. According to the VA Boston Healthcare System policy, our study was exempt from Institutional Board Review.

Sources of graduate medical education (GME) funding

1940s–1970s: the move from apprenticeship to formal residency programs.

Before World War II, residency was an apprenticeship. Residents received room, board, clothing and a small stipend financed through hospital charges. Interns received a stipend of $0–10/month and residents received $10–50/month. 3 , 4 , 5 The GI bill marked the beginning of governmental subsidies for teaching hospitals. Stipends were increased and residency positions increased by six fold during 1940–1960, with increased insurance charges covering the increasing costs of technology, facilities, and educational expenses. 3 The Social Security Amendments of 1965 created the Medicare program, which endeavored to provide support for new physicians until “the community undertakes to bear such education costs in some other way”. 6 , 7 This funding was provided through cost-based reimbursement determined by the hospital’s historical and reasonable costs and was expected to cover resident stipends, faculty salaries, and other educational expenses with no determined limits. 4

1980s–1990s: The creation of IME and DME

The early 1980s saw increased regulation and oversight of federal dollars paying for GME. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) was created in 1981, which assured the quality of resident education through its resident review committees. In the 1980s, two congressional actions led to the separate mechanisms of indirect graduate medical education (IME) payments and direct graduate medical education (DME) payments. 8 This change occurred with the implementation of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) in the early 1980s. 1 DME continued to cover direct costs and was calculated as the average number of full-time equivalent (FTE) positions multiplied by the per resident amount multiplied by the hospital percentage of Medicare inpatient days ( Fig. 1 ). The 1985 Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) set the per resident amount and limited DME reimbursement to residents in their initial residency period or 5 years, whichever was shorter. Subsequent subspecialty training only counted as 0.5 FTE.4 IME was created with the understanding that teaching hospitals incur greater costs as compared to non-teaching hospitals due to increased testing, specialized infrastructure for patients and research, and a more complex patient mix. IME is calculated with a curvilinear formula that includes the ratio of interns/residents to beds and a national cost multiplier set by Medicare legislation. 3

Direct and Indirect graduate medical education payment formulas.

IME payments are adjustments to the operating and capital portions of the Medicare inpatient prospective payment system (IPPS) per-discharge payment. Adjusted rolling average FTE count, IRB, and RADC are subject to Medicare GME cap.

GME – Graduate Medical Education.

DME – Direct Graduate Medical Education.

IME – Indirect Graduate Medical Education.

FTE – Full Time Equivalent.

IRB = intern and resident-to-bed ratio.

RADC = resident-to-average daily census ratio.

Growing concerns about skyrocketing national healthcare costs led increased attention to federal GME funding. At that time, if a hospital were to add a resident, it would receive additional Medicare funding to support that resident. Additionally, the amount of per resident reimbursement through DME varied drastically between hospitals – in 1995 it ranged from $10,000 to $240,000 per resident with a median value of $65,000. 3 The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 established a “cap” on the number of residents eligible for Medicare GME reimbursement based on the hospital’s reported resident FTE in 1996. 4 This act was supported by six major medical organizations in the setting of a shared understanding that the United States was predicted to have a severe oversupply of physicians. 6 To address the wide variation between the per resident amount used to calculate DME, the Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999 established a floor and ceiling for the per resident amount, which was 70% and 140% of the national average per resident amount, respectively.

2000s-present day: Call for reform

With national efforts at deficit reduction and new evidence that the United States is facing a physician shortage rather than a surplus, GME funding reform has been targeted for reform by medical societies and governmental agencies. In 2006, the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) reversed its position regarding physician oversupply, and recommended increasing medical student enrollment by 30%. 6 The AAMC cited the failure of tightly organized managed-care plans becoming the primary delivery model of US healthcare as the cause of this change in opinion. Efforts to reduce the federal costs of GME funding continued with the bipartisan 2010 Simpson Bowles commission report, which recommended a 50% reduction in IME funding over a 10-year period and capping DME payments at 120% the 2010 national average. 1 This commission followed a 2010 Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) report stating that only 40–45% of IME payments were attributable to higher patient care costs of Medicare patients. In response, the ACGME surveyed designated institutional officials and estimated that these changes would cause 28% of all GME programs to close. 9

In efforts to reduce federal contributions to GME and reform convoluted reimbursement schemes, the National Academy of Medicine (NAM, previously the Institute of Medicine, IOM) commissioned a study to review GME funding. In their 2014 report, the NAM recommended maintaining aggregate Medicare IME/DME funding, but instead distributing the monies into two subsidiary funds – an Operational Fund for support of current residency training positions and a Transformation Fund for innovation through piloting alternative GME payment methods and funding new GME positions in “priority disciplines and geographic areas”. 10 This was met with criticism by the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine (AAIM) and the American College of Physicians (ACP), who asserted that the report did not recognize the impending physician shortage. The AAIM and ACP published a joint position paper recommending lifting GME caps, spreading the cost of GME among all payers, combining DME and IME, and increasing GME funding transparency. 11

GME funding reform was prioritized in President Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 Budget proposal, stating “current graduate medical education funding is outdated, overly broad, and not sustainable long term due to its fragmented nature across multiple funding streams and lack of transparency and accountability.” 12 Since FY 2019, the federal HHS budget has proposed to consolidate federal GME funding from Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Hospital GME (CHGME) program into one grant program that distributes payments to hospitals based on the number of residents and Medicare and Medicaid inpatient days. This grant program will be managed jointly by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA). These changes aim to save $48.1 billion over 10 years. 13 In the FY 2021 budget, legislative proposals aim to reduce GME payments to FY 2017 levels of Medicare, Medicaid, and Children’s Hospital GME program spending, with adjustments for inflation and plans for growth at 1% below inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) ( Fig. 2 ).

Timeline of policy milestones in Graduate Medical Education financing.

DRG – Diagnosis Related Group.

PRA – Per Resident Amount.

CHGME – Children’s Hospital Graduate Medical Education.

HHS – Department of Health and Human Services.

CMS – Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

HRSA – Health Resources and Services Administration.

FY – Fiscal Year.

CPI-U – Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers.

Non medicare contributions to GME

In 2013, Medicare provided $3.4 billion for DME and $7.9 billion for IME. Medicaid was the second largest source of GME funding, with an estimated $5.58 billion contribution in 2018. 14 This amount represented a 50% increase since 2009.

Four additional funding streams for GME include the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the HRSA, the Department of Defense (DoD), and private healthcare insurers. The VA, under affiliation agreements, pays for the salary, benefits and a portion of the indirect costs of trainees rotating at their facilities. The HRSA funds 3 federal programs that support residents – the CHGME payment program supporting pediatric residents, the Affordable Care Act’s Teaching Health Center GME program that supports primary care residents, and the Title VII Health Professions program that is directed at primary care residents in hopes that they ultimately practice in healthcare shortage areas. The DoD supports GME programs through the Army, Navy, and Air Force. It is estimated that the DoD supported 1816 FTE residents in 2015. 4 It is difficult to estimate the amount of support that private insurers contribute GME through contracts with teaching hospitals ( Fig. 3 ).

Graduate medical education funding mechanisms.

VHA – Veterans Health Administration.

DoD – Department of Defense.

Not depicted are teaching physicians, who receive salary support from DME, private payer payments, teaching hospitals, community-based training sites, and medical schools, and contribute faculty revenue to teaching hospitals, community-based training sites, and medical schools.

GME financing challenges and possible solutions

As discussed previously, the NAM and AAIM/ACP have released proposals for GME funding reform. This section discusses two of the most prominent issues with GME funding and proposed solutions ( Table 1 ).

Table 1

Graduate medical education funding challenges and solutions.

NAM = National Academy of Medicine.

AAIM = Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine.

ACP = American College of Physicians.

GME = Graduate Medical Education.

UME = Undergraduate Medical Education (i.e. medical school).

Geographic and specialty maldistribution

In its 2019 report, the AAMC continued to project a physician shortage, estimating a shortfall of 46,900 to 121,900 physicians by 2032. 15 This estimate comprised 21,100 to 55,200 primary care physicians (PCP) and 14,300 to 23,400 specialty surgeons. The wide range in estimated PCP shortfall represents the unknown impact of the projected rapid growth in supply of advanced practice registered nurses (APRN) and physician assistants (PAs). Maldistribution of physicians has been well described in the primary care as well as surgical specialties. 16 , 17 The uneven geographic distribution of general surgeons has been found to be mirrored by the regional distribution of categorical general surgery PGY1 positions. 17 Additionally, the Medicare per resident amount exhibits striking state level variation with payments ranging from $63,000-$155,000 per person in Louisiana and Connecticut, respectively ( Fig. 4 ). 18 This state level variation cannot be fully explained by payment formulas and characteristics of each state’s health system. Historically, the development of GME in the first half of the 20th century occurred in the northeast. Expansion of federally funding residency positions was subsequently frozen by the 1997 Medicare GME cap. 18 Subsequent westward and southward expansion resulted patient population growth that was not accompanied by increased federal subsidies for GME positions.

Graduate Medical Education average per resident payment, 2010.

Data from Mullan et al.. 18

The National Academy of Medicine (NAM) proposal for GME funding reform addresses the issue of physician maldistribution by recommending establishing a new GME policy and financing infrastructure within the Office of the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). This group would research and develop policies regarding the sufficiency, geographic distribution, and specialty configuration of the physician workforce. The NAM report recommended that GME remain funded at the previous DME/IME levels but instead be split into two new funds within a separate GME Center within the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services – the “Transformation Fund” and the “Operational Fund.” The new GME “Transformation Fund” would finance initiatives that award new Medicare funded GME training positions in priority geographic areas and specialties. The GME Operational fund would continue to distribute per resident amount payments for Medicare-eligible training slots. 10 The AAIM and ACP likewise recommend additional research into the supply, specialty mix, and distribution of physicians, but recommend that this instead be done through the National Health Care Workforce Commission, rather than allocating pre-existing GME funding to creating a new office within HHS. They also call for relaxation of the GME caps on Medicare-funding residency positions to permit training additional physicians in key shortage areas such as primary care and geriatrics. 11 The NAM report does comment that the resident cap on Medicare-funded slots contributes to substantial geographic imbalance of GME payments and training slots, but does not advocate for increasing the number of Medicare-funded slots.

Need to find alternative funding sources for GME

When Medicare was created in 1965, the expectation was that it would provide funding for new physicians until the community would be able to fund GME in another way. Currently, Medicare is the largest funder of GME, but policy efforts have aimed to reduce federal funding for GME. The AAIM and ACP report recommend that all payers of the health care system – public and private - should be required to contribute to a financing pool supporting residencies. 11 Gold et al. suggested creating an all-payer system for GME and undergraduate medical education (UME) with a “tuition-for-service” program to eliminate medical student debt for those who work in underserved areas and specialties following completion of GME training. 19 Others have proposed billing private insurance for unsupervised minor procedures performed by trainees. 20 Given concerns that current residency graduates are poorly trained in skills needed in the current practice environment such as quality improvement and care coordination, there has been interest in performance-based GME payments on metrics such as value of care, access, and physician wellbeing. The AAIM and ACP remain cautious that these changes should not occur without rigorous research and input from multiple stakeholders, including physicians in training. 11 , 21

Resident Salary and debt

New physicians graduate medical school at a time when their peers in other fields may have already been working and accruing wealth for four years. In contrast, 73% of medical students in 2019 graduated with debt, with a median educational debt of $200,000. Median 4-year cost of attendance for the Class of 2020 was $255,517 in public institutions and $337,583 in private institutions. 22 The Medscape 2019 Resident Salary & Debt Report surveyed 2272 US Medscape medical members on income, perceived fairness, and relationships with hospital staff. It estimated the average medical resident makes $61,200 yearly, with average post graduate year 1 (PGY-1) salary $55,200. 23 Over 50% of residents did not feel like they were fairly compensated, with over 50% stating they were dissatisfied with compensation because it does not reflect the number of hours worked (86%), is not comparable to that of other medical staff (72%), or does not reflect the required skill level (69%). 44% of surveyed residents felt compensation does not meet the cost of living. Over 60% said they feel they should make at least 25% more in compensation, with 41% of residents stating that potential earnings were extremely or very influential in specialty choice. Interestingly, these data showed more men than women reported that potential earnings have a very strong influence on specialty choice (47% vs. 31%, respectively). 23 A gender disparity in salary expectations was also found in a recent study by Gray et al. which found that female general surgery residents had lower expectations compared with men in minimum starting salary ($249,502 vs. $267,700) and viewed salary negotiation less favorably. 24

The cost associated with training a resident

Estimates find the cost of training a resident to be greater than DME funding provided by Medicare. However, studies have demonstrated that if residents are able to bill for their procedures, they can earn a substantial portion of their salary. In 2014, Ben-Ari and colleagues estimated the cost of training an internal medicine resident to be $181,737 to $209,999 annually, with higher costs associated with outpatient intensive programs that have a smaller resident-to-faculty ratio. 25 A report by the RAND corporation estimated the median DME cost per FTE resident to be $134,803 yearly. 26 General surgery-specific costs have not yet been published, although Lauer’s study of 8 surgical GME programs (including general surgery, otolaryngology, ophthalmology, oral-maxillofacial surgery, urology, pediatric dentistry, and vascular surgery) found an average per trainee cost to be $84,171 per trainee. 27 A study of one academic anesthesia program estimated the annual direct cost of their anesthesia residency (salaries and fringe benefits) to be $1,300,000 and the payments collected to be $2,802,969, with total direct revenue attributable to anesthesiology residents $1,500,000. 28 An estimation of one orthopedic resident’s call shifts found that the value of on-call consults performed (not including first assist duties) was twice the amount of DME funds paid to the hospital and 60% of the amount of combined DME and IME payments. 29 And a United Kingdom study found that a general surgery resident clinic generated revenue equal to 95% of a resident’s salary. 30 A study of surgical resident revenues, if they were compensated at the level of supervised “junior associates,” found financial contributions to be $94,872 annually, more than 75% of direct educational costs. 31

Unsurprisingly, it has been well documented that involving a surgery resident will increase operative time and cost. A study of 29,134 cases performed at Greenville Memorial Hospital in South Carolina showed that 45 out of 246 procedures took significantly longer with a resident present in the room. Procedure time increased on average by 4.8 min and was estimated to cost $9.57 per minute. 32 This difference was replicated when residents were incorporated into a community hospital where attending surgeons had previously been operating without a resident. 33 Increased operative time was found to be associated with level of experience. In a study of 1063 cases, mastectomies took significantly longer when PGY1-3 residents were involved, but the difference disappeared by PGY4-5. 34

Conversely, studies have uniformly found significant costs associated with replacing residents with faculty and advanced practice practitioners (APPs) like Nurse Practitioners (NPs) and physicians assistants (PAs). 27 , 35 , 36 , 37 Pisetsky et al. found that replacing an anesthesiology resident with certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs), NPs, and PAs would cost approximately $153,000 over the 3-year training period. 35 A financial value analysis of replacing a 30-position general surgery residency program with APPs would cost $4.5 million, based on a 1:3 senior staff to APP replacement ratio. Replacement with senior staff would approach $9 million. 36 In the aforementioned study by Lauer et al., replacing surgery residents with APPs or hospitalists would cost the health system an additional $16,651,281 or $26,119,281 annually, respectively. 27

Our findings in this review demonstrate that the history of GME funding is convoluted with the majority of funding stemming from Medicare. Medicare GME funding was established

with the assumption that it would be a temporary funding measure until other sustainable funding streams could be created. However, ongoing concerns about rising national healthcare costs have increased attention to federal GME funding. Currently, hospitals receive Direct and Indirect GME funding that is intended to support per resident reimbursement and the higher costs associated with supporting a teaching program, respectively. Recent calls for reform have been aimed at reducing geographic and specialty maldistribution and distributing the costs of GME through public and private stakeholders.

Our review also highlights the inadequate resident reimbursement for their intense work. At a time when residents graduate with on average $200,000 educational debt, they expect and deserve better compensation because their salaries do not reflect the number of hours worked and are not comparable to those of other medical staff.

Our findings suggest that GME funding and resident compensation remain interconnected. Some of the strategies proposed to improve both GME funding and resident compensation include creation of an all-payer system for graduate and undergraduate medical education; institution of a “tuition-for-service” program to eliminate medical student debt for those who work in underserved areas and specialties following residency training 19 ; billing private insurance for unsupervised minor procedures performed by trainees 20 ; and institution of performance-based GME payments on metrics such as value of care, access, and physician wellbeing. 11 , 21 Importantly, these changes should not occur without rigorous research and input from multiple stakeholders, including physicians in training. Therefore, future research should address the impact of these proposed interventions and develop other innovative solutions to improve both GME funding and resident compensation.

Our view is that the current GME funding paradigm is unsustainable, and without significant reform in the next 5–10 years, vulnerable GME programs will be forced to close and geographic and specialty maldistribution will continue to exacerbate national health care disparities. 9 , 18 Initially, the allotment of GME funds from Medicare was intended as a stopgap measure until a better funding mechanism could be created. 7 Currently, there is a severe misalignment between the public institutions that fund GME and those that benefit from well-trained physicians, such as private insurance. 11 The current funding structure, with the majority of funding through Medicare and Medicaid, does not allow for the innovation necessary to address geographic and specialty maldistribution. Medicare resident caps limit the creation of new GME positions in underserved areas. 18 Additionally, GME funding has been specifically targeted by the current administration as a source of deficit reduction. Restructuring of GME funding has already begun on the federal level to consolidate funding streams and limit future funding growth to 1% less than the rate of inflation. 12 The current coronavirus-2019 pandemic has necessitated a national economic reprioritization of funding with the passing of the $2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which will have profound impacts on all levels of governmental funding for healthcare. 38 If we do not pursue aggressive GME funding reform, we may fail to provide our nation with well-trained physicians in the specialties that it requires.

Our review has some important limitations. First, we did not conduct a systematic review, and relevant literature may have been excluded. Second, we used an unblinded review process and consensus to determine inclusion. We attempted to mitigate this limitation by requiring three independent reviews of each article and using both a quantitative and qualitative assessment of each reviewed article. A third limitation of this review is the small number of original studies available in the literature.

These limitations notwithstanding, this review brings awareness to the complex challenges of GME funding and resident compensation. We encourage readers to consider how these findings could be used to promote future research in these critical areas.

We reviewed the literature on the GME funding mechanisms, its challenges, and proposed solutions. Innovative and comprehensive interventions are needed to diversify GME funding and improve resident compensation.

• Faculty & Staff Resources
• Master’s and Professional Education
• PhD Education
• International Student Experience
• PhD Program Profiles
• Find Your Program
• Graduate Admission
• Financial Aid

PhD Funding

• Living in Boston
• Health & Wellness
• Student Groups & Associations
• Kids & Family
• Master’s and Professional Students
• PhD Students
• Events and Programs
• Offices and Initiatives

PhD Funding and Benefit Packages

Charles river campus.

Boston University’s PhD programs on the Charles River Campus subscribe to a full funding model. This system guarantees all PhD students in good standing five years of stipend support, 100% tuition scholarship, and a health insurance credit. This approach reflects BU’s commitment to nurturing the next generation of researchers across the humanities, social sciences, sciences, and engineering. Stipend level minimums vary by PhD program, but for the 2024-25 academic year, minimums will range from $27,318 for 8 months to $40,977 for 12 months. Students receive health insurance (the SHIP basic plan) through Aetna Student Health. Full tuition and student services fees are also covered for PhD students on the Charles River campus.

Medical Campus

PhD students in Graduate Medical Sciences (GMS) at Boston University’s School of Medicine and the School of Public Health (SPH) also enjoy a full-funding model. GMS and SPH PhD students receive a full tuition scholarship, are exempt from paying student fees, receive health insurance coverage as part of their support, and are entitled to an annual stipend. For more specific information, please visit the PhD funding sections of GMS and SPH .

PhD Stipend Extensions for Students Impacted by the COVID Pandemic

Boston University believes it is crucial to ensure that current PhD students who have had their progress impeded by the pandemic are able to complete their degrees. While individual PhD programs and the schools/colleges in which they are housed are the primary source of academic and financial support for PhD students, in rare circumstances, programs and schools/colleges may not have adequate resources to support all students whose progress has been hindered by the pandemic. For this reason, the Office of the Provost has established a fund to support PhD stipend extensions necessitated by this circumstance. Learn more about this funding opportunity and how to apply .

Please note that this program will end after the 2023-2024 academic year, concluding in early spring 2024 for logistical and operational purposes.

PhD Funding by School/College

You can learn more about specific funding packages through the school or college to which you are applying or in which you are enrolled:

• Graduate School of Arts & Sciences
• Wheelock School of Education and Human Development
• College of Engineering
• College of Communication
• College of Fine Arts
• PhD Human Physiology
• PhD in Rehabilitation Sciences
• PhD in Speech, Language and Hearing Science
• Faculty of Computing and Data Sciences
• School of Medicine (Graduate Medical Sciences)
• PhD in Biostatistics
• PhD in Environmental Health
• PhD in Epidemiology
• PhD in Health Services Research
• School of Social Work
• School of Theology
• Questrom School of Business

• EMResident Archives
• Publications
• Submit an Article

• Critical Care
• Health Policy Journal Club
• Program Director Interviews

Making Sense of Graduate Medical Education Funding

Graduate medical education (gme) funding does not get the same news coverage as other topics in health care, but that doesn’t make it any less important..

GME has a long and storied history in our country and has consistently been a top priority of many physician representation groups including the American Medical Association, American Osteopathic Association, American Academy of Medical Colleges, and many more. As young physicians, we should not only strive to learn about GME but also be its main advocates.

What Is GME and How Is It Funded? GME encompasses all the training medical students receive after graduation in order to be a practicing physician. In simple terms, GME means residency and fellowship. This is an easy distinction for us to make but, to the general public, this is often a point of confusion.

GME is funded by multiple mechanisms, including federal, state, and private entities, with the federal government being by far the largest contributor to GME funding. The mechanism by which federal funds flow is through Direct GME (DGME) and Indirect Medical Education (IME). Both DGME and IME payments are controlled by Medicare, which means the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) essentially controls GME funding.

DGME helps to pay for direct teaching costs (eg, resident salaries and benefits, faculty). IME funds are more nuanced. This funding covers teaching hospital compensation, additional residency support staff, updated technology, and handling a population that tends to be sicker and of lower socioeconomic status. For example, a typical teaching hospital will have a trauma unit and/or Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. These units generally lose money for the hospital since they are so specialized. However, these serve a vulnerable population and are valuable learning experiences during residency training, so CMS supports these specialty units with IME payments. 1,2 The amount of IME paid out is tied to the hospital’s Medicare population served and to the size of a residency program. The amount of IME has been more than double the cost of DGME in recent years. 3

The History of GME Funding GME funding has a long history that goes back to the early 1900s. Back then, training institutions and hospitals paid their own money to train residents. In 1965 when Congress created Medicare, they knew that an increase in health coverage would require a concordant increase in physicians that could not be solely supported by private hospitals. Medicare funds were allocated to help pay for GME until other sources of funding could be identified. A better model was never agreed upon and Medicare has continued to provide GME funding since.

For the next three decades, CMS did their best to fund GME without any strict rules or structure in place. CMS had no spending limits for GME spending, until the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. With that act, Congress capped the number of residents that would be paid for under DGME funding. 4 Multiple presidential budgets have come out since then, some asking for increasing GME funding and some asking to limit GME funding. However, no changes have been made to this cap set in 1997. 1,2 Medical schools, who do not rely on a limited funding stream, have since increased their matriculation rates which has created a bottle-neck effect that worsens each year.

Why Increased GME Funding Is Needed The Match becomes more competitive each year, which can be attributed in large part to the limited number of residency positions available. Since the 1970s, the number of students in The Match has surpassed the number PGY-1 positions, a trend that shows no signs of slowing down. 5 By increasing funding for GME, we are effectively increasing this PGY-1 position total and ensuring that medical students have the opportunity to continue their training.

GME funding also helps to support teaching hospitals which provide almost half of all charity care in our country. They also provide highly specialized care for rare diseases (eg, Neonatal ICUs, Pediatric ICUs, Burn Units, Trauma ICUs, AIDS services). 5

Finally, when talking about GME funding it is impossible not to talk about the big looming issue of physician workforce. The United States has a predicted physician shortage of nearly 122,000 by the year 2032, a prediction that has only worsened in past years. This physician shortage is predicted to be exacerbated by our nation's rapidly aging population, both on the supply and demand side. The U.S. Census Bureau predicts the population will grow by more than 10% by 2032, with those over age 65 increasing by 48%, which will greatly increase demand for health care professionals. The supply side of the physician workforce is also expected to worsen, with nearly one-third of practicing doctors turning 65 in the upcoming 10 years. 6 Having this physician group retirement coincide with a large increase in health care usage of an aging population is going to be a significant stressor to our already overloaded system. Funding GME means we can produce more doctors and help to solve this problem before it begins.

The Potential Solutions There have been many bills proposed ever since the 1997 Balanced Budget Act, but most have found it hard to gain traction in Congress. However, many believe we are coming to a tipping point and change is poised to happen soon.

The “Resident Physician Shortage Reduction Act of 2019” (S.348) is a bill that has been discussed among Congressional leadership for multiple years but has recently found new life. This bill, sponsored by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), would increase GME slots by 15,000 over a 5-year period. This increase is less than what is needed to adequately address the physician shortage but could be a catalyst for increasing residency spots, which have been stagnant for more than two decades.

The “Community and Public Health Programs Extension Act of 2019” (S.192) coming from Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) is another important bill gaining traction. The bill funds five important programs centered around public health, one of them being the Teaching Health Center Graduate Medical Education (THCGME) Program. This is one of the few opportunities to increase GME funding outside of direct Medicare-supported positions. The THCGME Program currently supports 728 residents and has the added benefit of prioritizing underserved populations 7 . The bill also further funds the National Health Service Corps (NHSC) which is an important program that allows physician’s unique help with loan repayment if they practice in a physician shortage area.

The pushback that these bills, and many bills proposed in previous cycles, receive is largely due to their high fiscal note. There is an argument that GME funding is currently not proportioned correctly. In 2016, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) found that IME payments may be overestimating the indirect costs of residency training. By their estimates, IME expenditures should only be approximately 1/3 of their current amounts. 8 A solution that has been proposed several times is that funds may be spent more responsibly if DGME and IME were merged into one entity. However, this plan disincentivizes hospitals to invest in primary care and may reduce resident compensation.

Lastly, the ACGME has begun to recognize the crucial role that industry funded residency programs may play in the coming years, as continued Medicare funding is not a guarantee. Industries that have become “influential” sources of funding in the past 10 years include pharmaceuticals, medical device, and biotechnology companies. Although the ACGME promotes standards that require training institutions to monitor interactions between corporations and trainees, they cannot guarantee that industry funded programs will not affect clinical decision-making by residents funded under such programs. 9  EMRA recently passed a resolution to examine the effects that corporate-sponsored EM residency programs may have on physicians in training. 10   

How to Help GME funding is a highly specific topic and is therefore not addressed by many other lobbying organizations. Residents and medical students, as the future of medicine, are some of the few advocates for this issue. Congress and multiple Presidential budgets have put GME on the chopping block in the past and medical advocacy offices across many specialties have had to fight hard to just maintain the current funding that is available. We are a small group advocating on a specific topic so persistence is key.

Fighting for GME funding consistently over a long period of time is the only way. Sending in letters and making phone calls to your representatives, setting up meetings with your members of Congress, and participating in or organizing a GME advocacy event are some ways you can have a strong impact. Sending in letters is a staple of advocacy efforts and has become easier with the use of the internet. By visiting http://savegme.org/content/medical-professionals  you can find your representatives and send them prewritten messages on behalf of the AMA. 11 The AAMC also has multiple resources on GME funding, 12 specifically if you are looking to expand your knowledge on the details of funding, at https://www.aamc.org/advocacy/gme/ . Setting up meetings with your representatives and attending national and state advocacy events can make a huge impact on a representative’s decision-making.

GME advocates cannot afford to take the foot off the gas even for a single Congressional cycle. If physicians and students fail to show up and fight for GME funding, then Congress will rightfully assume the issue is not important and can be sacrificed when the next budget season rolls around. Actively advocating for GME funding is the responsibility of all physicians, regardless of where they are in training, so the future of health care and safety of patients is protected.

References 1.  Graduate Medical Education Primers - Part 1 . Association American Medical Colleges. 2.  Federal Support for Graduate Medical Education: An Overview . Congressional Research Service.  3. Butkus R, Lane S, Steinmann AF, et al. Financing U.S. Graduate Medical Education: A Policy Position Paper of the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine and the American College of Physicians . Ann Intern Med . 2016;165:134–137. 4.  Consolidate and Reduce Federal Payments for Graduate Medical Education at Teaching Hospitals . Congressional Budget Office. 5.  Results and Data: 2019 Main Residency Match® . National Resident Matching Program. 6.  Issue Brief: Graduate Medical Education . American Medical Association. 7.  New Findings Confirm Predictions on Physician Shortage . AAMCNews . 23 Apr. 2019. 8.  Report to Congress: Medicare Payment Policy . Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. 9.  Principles to Guide the Relationship between Graduate Medical Education, Industry, and Other Funding Sources for Programs and Sponsoring Institutions Accredited by the ACGME (2011). ACGME.  10. Slotnick R. Resolution S’19-02: Corporate-Sponsored EM Residency Programs . EMRA Representative Council. 11.  About GME . American Medical Association. 12.  Graduate Medical Education (GME) . AAMC.

Related Articles

Health policy journal club: a study of firearms safety education in the pediatric emergency department, health policy journal club: bounce-backs, all articles.

• Administration and Operations Committee 2
• Critical Care Committee 4
• Education Committee 10
• Government Services 4
• Health Policy Committee 8
• Informatics Committee 3
• Medical Student Council 7
• Pediatrics Committee 4
• Research Committee 6
• Simulation Committee 3
• Social EM Committee 7
• Wilderness Committee 5
• International Committee 8
• Prehospital and Disaster Medicine Committee 5
• Simulation Division 2
• Sports Medicine Committee 5
• Advancement of EM 108
• Administration & Operations 55
• Admin Ops Literature Review 8
• Diversity and Inclusion 18
• Research 31
• Rapid Research Review 9
• Attending 2
• Award Winners 20
• Educational Courses 2
• Residency Leadership 2
• Travel Scholarships 3
• ACEP Member Benefits 2
• Career Planning 78
• Board Certification 7
• Interviewing 5
• Job Search 3
• Practice Environments 25
• Community 2
• International 10
• Locum Tenens 2
• Clinical 969
• Addiction Medicine 4
• Surgical Airway 1
• Behavioral Health 5
• Cardiology 150
• ECG Challenge 46
• Consult Corner 5
• Critical Care 225
• Critical Care Alert 102
• Critical Care Devices 10
• Critical Care Roadblock 3
• Critical Care Ultrasound 14
• Deep Dive in CritCare 9
• Ventilator Management 6
• Dermatology 8
• Disaster Medicine 12
• Prehospital Care 21
• Endocrinology 11
• Event Medicine 2
• Gastroenterology 15
• Geriatrics 4
• Hematology 18
• Immunology 1
• Infectious Disease 131
• COVID-19 80
• Informatics 18
• Telemedicine 3
• International EM 25
• Nephrology 13
• Neurology 50
• Ophthalmology 15
• Orthopedics 26
• Osteopathic 3
• Pain Management 24
• Palliative Care 13
• Patient Interactions 16
• Pediatric EM 99
• Psychiatry 8
• Mental Health 3
• Pulmonary 17
• Radiology 7
• Rheumatology 1
• Simulation 13
• Social EM 52
• Space Medicine 3
• Sports Medicine 11
• Toxicology 96
• Medications 11
• Recreational Drugs 10
• Penetrating 1
• Traumatic Brain Injury 2
• Ultrasound 84
• Guided Procedures 5
• POCUS For the Win 7
• Undersea and Hyperbaric 2
• Visual Diagnosis 20
• Wilderness Medicine 25
• Editorial 127
• Editor's Forum 52
• Heart of EM 12
• Opinion-Editorial 13
• Leadership Reports 77
• ACEP Representative 2
• ACGME RC-EM 11
• President's Message 48
• Speaker Report 8
• Treasurer's Report 3
• Membership 3
• Events & Activities 21
• ACEP Scientific Assembly 6
• CORD Academic Assembly 2
• EM Wellness Week 1
• EMRA MedWAR 3
• Leadership and Advocacy Conference 6
• Fellowships 12
• Education Fellowships 2
• Global EM Fellowships 2
• Health Policy Fellowships 1
• Pediatric Fellowships 2
• Health Equity 3
• Health Policy 144
• Advocacy 45
• Affordable Care Act 7
• Health Policy Journal Club 76
• Legislation 9
• Regulatory 2
• Leadership 181
• Committees and Divisions 4
• EMRA Board of Directors 40
• EMRA Spotlight 127
• Representative Council 9
• Medical Education 79
• Board Review 2
• Questions 1
• Med Ed Fellowship Director Interview Series 10
• Medical Students 197
• Advising 60
• Away Rotations 8
• Dual Degree Programs 1
• ERAS & Residency Application 3
• Military Advising 2
• Program Director Interviews 81
• Rank List 1
• Residents Program Interviews 4
• Medical Student Council 29
• Mentorship 4
• Non Clinical 64
• Health Care Administration 35
• Otolaryngology 5
• Resuscitation 4
• Wellness 130
• Compassion Fatigue 9
• Financial 10
• Insurance 2
• Loan Refinancing 2
• Personal Finance 4
• Medico Legal 32
• Medical Liability 2
• Risk Management Pitfalls 23
• Personal 14
• Workplace 21
• Med Student 46
• Advertise with us
• Submit an article
• Connect with us

© 2021 Emergency Medicine Residents' Association | Privacy Policy | Website Links Policy | Social Media Policy

• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

• Virtual Tour
• Staff Directory
• En Español

You are here

Grants & funding.

The National Institutes of Health is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world. In fiscal year 2022, NIH invested most of its $45 billion appropriations in research seeking to enhance life, and to reduce illness and disability. NIH-funded research has led to breakthroughs and new treatments helping people live longer, healthier lives, and building the research foundation that drives discovery.

three-scientists-goggles-test-tube.jpg

Grants Home Page

NIH’s central resource for grants and funding information.

lab-glassware-with-colorful-liquid-square.jpg

Find Funding

NIH offers funding for many types of grants, contracts, and even programs that help repay loans for researchers.

calendar-page-square.jpg

Grant applications and associated documents (e.g., reference letters) are due by 5:00 PM local time of application organization on the specified due date.

submit-key-red-square.jpg

How to Apply

Instructions for submitting a grant application to NIH and other Public Health Service agencies.

female-researcher-in-lab-square.jpg

About Grants

An orientation to NIH funding, grant programs, how the grants process works, and how to apply.

binder-with-papers-on-office-desk-square.jpg

Policy & Compliance

By accepting a grant award, recipients agree to comply with the requirements in the NIH Grants Policy Statement unless the notice of award states otherwise.

blog-key-blue-square.jpg

Grants News/Blog

News, updates, and blog posts on NIH extramural grant policies, processes, events, and resources.

scientist-flipping-through-report-square.jpg

Explore opportunities at NIH for research and development contract funding.

smiling-female-researcher-square.jpg

Loan Repayment

The NIH Loan Repayment Programs repay up to $50,000 annually of a researcher’s qualified educational debt in return for a commitment to engage in NIH mission-relevant research.

Connect with Us

• More Social Media from NIH

Your browser is unsupported

We recommend using the latest version of IE11, Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari.

Department of Medical Education

Phd in health professions education.

The Department of Medical Education (DME) is thrilled to announce the establishment of a new online PhD program in Health Professions Education (HPE). The PhD in HPE evolved from our successful former collaboration with the UIC College of Education’s Department of Curriculum and Instruction. The PhD in HPE also builds upon the success and strong reputation of DME’s Master of Health Professions Education (MHPE), as well as upon the department’s broader expertise in HPE research and teaching excellence.

Program Overview Heading link Copy link

What is the phd in hpe.

The PhD in HPE program will produce exemplary scholars who advance the field of health professions education by developing innovative research agendas that shape educational policy, standards, and practices, with the ultimate goal of improving healthcare. While the PhD in HPE will share course offerings with DME’s renowned MHPE program, it will include a greater emphasis on research design, data collection, and original scholarship for students who aim to serve as principal investigators in HPE studies in the future.

Who is this program for?

Typical students in the program may include students from a wide range of professional backgrounds, including MDs, other clinicians, and non-clinical educators, aiming to deepen their methodological training and increase their knowledge of the health professions education canon. The student body is also likely to be heterogenous in terms of career stage, and thus may include students ranging from trainees (e.g., residents and fellows) to administrators and leaders (e.g., program directors and deans).

The program is designed for students to have the option to pursue the program on a part-time basis, in conjunction with their regular employment or full-time.

What should students expect to gain?

After completion of the PhD in HPE, students will be able to:

• Integrate theories in the social sciences and health professions to define and understand challenges in health professions education, research, and practice
• Employ a range of relevant research designs, research methodologies, and other scholarly practices to advance the field of health professions education as an independent investigator and eventual leader of a research team
• Situate education and education science within the sociopolitical context of health care and health professions education, and translate educational science into practice
• Additionally, students will have the opportunity to make numerous connections with experts in HPE in order to grow their professional networks.

Program format and cost

What is the program format.

The PhD in Health Professions Education is an online program, though some courses included in the curriculum have short-term, in-person requirements.

What is the cost of the program?

The online tuition is currently $925 per credit plus fees (information about fees can be found on the UIC Registrar’s website. The program/department (DME) does not offer any funding at this time. Graduate funding at UIC is primarily provided to students who attend their programs on a full-time basis; as such, the majority of PhD in HPE students are not eligible for the most common ways that PhD students at UIC fund their graduate degrees. PhD students may be able to seek funding through their employers. Also, all full-time students who are eligible to apply for financial support (e.g., scholarships, fellowships, or assistantships) through the Graduate College will be supported in their applications by departmental and PhD program administration.

Degree Requirements Heading link Copy link

Students must achieve the following requirements to graduate with a PhD in Health Professions Education.

Details on hours

The PhD in HPE degree requires 96 credit hours past the baccalaureate. However, we anticipate that the majority of admitted students will be eligible to receive 32 hours of advanced standing credit for a previously earned relevant master’s degree or advanced clinical degree (e.g., MDs), thus leaving 64 credit hours to complete the degree. (For more details, see FAQs.)

The program consists of several different categories of coursework: Foundational courses, Methodological courses, and HPE Area of Study courses. Many of these courses are shared with the MHPE program; however, students are also welcome to take other UIC courses with DGS and advisor approval.

To accommodate the heterogeneity of the expected student body, the curriculum aims to be quite flexible. Rather than being prescriptive about specific courses, the program focuses on the specific domains and competencies that were determined by program faculty to be fitting for rigorous, doctoral-level training in HPE. Specifically, students will work with their advisors and the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) to develop programs of study based upon their scholarly and methodological needs.

• View course descriptions

Details of mentorship

Students must complete a mentored, Applied Health Professions Education Experience in order to better facilitate integration of coursework and their understanding of HPE concepts within applied settings. These experiences might include working on DME faculty members’ research projects, engaging in HPE journal editorial work, helping to teach a course taught by a DME faculty member, or something comparable.

There are 3 exams

• Departmental Qualifying Examination: This comprehensive exam will evaluate students’ knowledge of foundational readings within health professions education and their ability to synthesize and critique these readings.
• Graduate College Preliminary Examination: Students are required to draft a dissertation prospectus and defend this prospectus at a virtual hearing in front of their Preliminary Examination committee (and future dissertation committee).
• Dissertation Defense: Students are required to complete a written dissertation with a public, virtual oral defense before their dissertation committee and other members of the academic community.

Dissertation details

PhD in HPE students must complete a Dissertation research project. Dissertation research must include original data collection (i.e., the research needs to include the development of a dataset, identification of sample/analytic subject, etc.). The project can include one large project with multiple components or serial linked studies/experiments. The most common format for the dissertation is the multiple-article model (three publishable articles, plus an introduction and conclusion), though a single monograph is also acceptable.

How to Apply Heading link Copy link

The application deadline for Fall 2025 is December 1 st , 2024. Only two applicants are accepted each year.

All applicants submit materials via Online Application . The Department of Medical Education Admissions Committee will then develop a ranked short list for subsequent interviews with potential PhD advisors. Short-listed applicants will interview (via Zoom) with the DGS and two potential advisors, all of whom will submit reviews for the applicants, which will then be used to develop the final ranked list for admissions.

Please review the admission and application requirements before applying.

Applicants will be informed of admissions decisions in the spring. Please note that all admitted students will be required to attend the 1-week in-person introductory course (MHPE 506), which takes place at the end of July in Chicago.

Application requirements Heading link Copy link

Details on prior degree requirements.

Applicants must have earned a baccalaureate degree.

A combination of a master’s degree in education, social science, or related fields and significant experience in a health professions setting or  A master’s degree in health professions education and/or an advanced professional degree in a health professions discipline.

Applying as a graduate of the Department of Medical Education MHPE program

Graduates of DME’s MHPE are eligible to apply to this program. However, since many of the courses are shared between the two programs, students in this group will need to take a larger proportion of their coursework outside of DME. If you have additional questions about how this works, please contact us for more information.

Transfer credits

Advanced standing credit determinations will be considered for applicants with master’s degrees in health professions education; master’s degrees in education, social science, or related fields; and advanced professional degrees in a health professions discipline. Admitted students may be eligible to receive 32 hours of advanced standing credit for a previously earned relevant master’s degree (or its equivalent; or an advanced clinical degree) toward the minimum 96 semester hours of credit requirement for the doctoral degree.

Transfer of graduate credits from other institutions will be handled on a case-by-case and course-by-course basis, pursuant to the transfer process described on the Graduate College website.

Read more on the policies around transfer of credit on the Graduate College website .

GPA details

Applicant’s previous grade point average must be above 3.75 on a 5-point scale or 3.0 on a 4-point scale.

Which tests to take

The GRE is not required for this program; however, applicants may submit their scores if they wish.

Applicants whose native language is not English must take either the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), the exam of the International English Language Testing System (IELTS), or the Pearson’s PTE Academic. The test score cannot be more than two years old. For English proficiency test score minimums, reporting requirements, and exemptions, see the UIC Admissions International Requirements page for more details.

• UIC Admissions International Requirements

Review for submitting

To be considered for the PhD in HPE, students must demonstrate either credentials or experience in health professions education. Additionally, applicants must be actively engaged in, or preparing for, health professions educations scholarship. Applicants should demonstrate this engagement through their application materials. Applicants must submit:

• UIC online graduate application  (All application materials must be submitted through the UIC online graduate application.)
• Registrar-issued transcripts from each college and professional school attended
• Letters of Recommendation (3)
• Recommendation letters should address the applicant’s academic qualifications, research ability/experience, and ability to carry out advanced degree studies (including institutional/financial support, if available)
• Your background and/or experiences (past or present) that are relevant to the field of health professions education (these may include research, teaching, curricular development, administration, etc.).
• Future potential research agenda – please include at least one future project idea.
• Fit with program and why the applicant is pursuing the PhD in HPE at DME
• Applicant characteristics or experience likely to contribute to applicant success in the PhD program, including experience with online/virtual learning, prior graduate programs, institutional support, local mentorship, etc.
• If applicants are planning to pursue the degree in connection with their employment (i.e., part-time), they also must include a statement of how the doctoral program of study will fit in with their professional schedules and commitments.
• A Curriculum Vitae (CV) highlighting research, teaching, and service experience, particularly in HPE

Read if you are applying from outside the United States

International applicants must follow all UIC Admissions International Requirements for graduate admission. Please visit the UIC Admissions website for more details.

The Office of International Services is working to obtain authorization to allow international students to be admitted to this new academic program. In the event that the authorization is not in place in time prior to the start of the term of admission, admitted international students may defer their admission until the following year.

Contact for more program info Heading link Copy link

Laura e. hirshfield, laura schaaf, thank you to the uic college of education heading link copy link.

In 2010, the Department of Medical Education, in collaboration with faculty in the College of Education, developed an area of emphasis within the PhD in Curriculum and Instruction for students interested in Health Professions Education and Curriculum. This concentration in Curriculum Studies/Critical Pedagogies and Urban Teacher Education (Health Professions Education Area of Emphasis) focused on the exploration of curriculum across multiple educational contexts. The program has successfully graduated a diverse set of students from a variety of social identities, professional backgrounds, and ranks within their profession.

The Department of Medical Education is extremely grateful for the long-term collaborative relationship it has had with the College of Education, especially with the CS/CPUTE program. The department will continue to support students who are currently enrolled in the Collaborative PhD program; however, DME will no longer admit new students into the HPE Area of Emphasis. Instead, the PhD in HPE will effectively replace this offering.

FAQs Heading link Copy link

Q: what is the difference between the mhpe and phd in hpe.

A: The PhD in HPE is similar in content to the MHPE, except that it focuses on developing in students a deeper methodological training, with increased independence and greater knowledge of the HPE canon. The goal of the PhD program is to shift students away from the more applied focus of the MHPE to a broader scholarly, theoretical approach. Specifically, the PhD in HPE shares course offerings with the MHPE program, but the program has a greater emphasis on research design, data collection, and original scholarship for students who wish to serve as principal investigators in HPE studies.

Q: Why should someone pursue a PhD in HPE at DME?

A:  DME’s PhD in HPE is focused on training our students to become independent researchers and scholars in health professions education. Graduates of the HPE PhD program would be particularly well poised to be hired by health professions scholarship units (or organizations and institutions that  “share a commitment to the production and dissemination of rigorous educational practices and research” ). Clinical faculty who are heavily involved in health professions education research that guides educational policy or practice may also find the degree valuable for deepening their research expertise.

Q: What are you looking for in applicants?

A: To be considered for the PhD in HPE, students must demonstrate either credentials or experience in health professions education. Typical students may include MDs, other clinicians (e.g., nurses and physical therapists), and non-clinical educators (e.g., student services or curricular affairs) aiming to deepen their methodological training and increase their knowledge of the health professions education canon. We welcome applicants from a variety of career stages. That said, all applicants must be actively engaged in, or preparing for, health professions educations scholarship. Applicants should demonstrate this engagement through their application materials.

Q: Is the program entirely online?

A:  No, not entirely.  Students are required to come to Chicago for the 1-week on-campus orientation course (MHPE 506), in which they are introduced to core course content and faculty and begin to develop the peer relationships that will form the basis of a lasting community of practice. For students who are not able to attend (e.g., international students unable to attain short-term visas) alternative opportunities for participation will be negotiated with course faculty members. Some MHPE courses may also have additional on-site components.

Q: How long does it take to complete the program?

A:  It’s hard to say, as it really varies based on a lot of different factors (i.e., if the student must complete 64 or 96 credit hours; how many credit hours a student takes each semester; when courses are offered and the availability in them; how long it takes the student to complete the exams and the dissertation; etc.).  The program will adhere to UIC Graduate College timelines for student completion of the program ( https://grad.uic.edu/doctoral-degrees/ ).

Q: How many courses/credits should I take each semester?

A:  It depends on your workload outside of the PhD in HPE. Most of our students will take the program part-time while they are working full-time; these students generally will take 4-6 credits per semester. Students should work with their advisor and PhD Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) to develop a plan that works best for them.

Q: What is advanced standing credit?

A:  Admitted students may be eligible to receive 32 hours of advanced standing credit for a previously earned relevant master’s degree (or its equivalent; or an advanced clinical degree) toward the minimum 96 semester hours of credit requirement for the doctoral degree, thus making it 64 credit hours to complete the doctoral degree.  For consideration, the degree must be posted as completed on a transcript from an accredited institution, and, if international, equivalent to a U.S. master’s degree (as determined by the Graduate Admissions Office and the Graduate College).  Students who are not granted advanced standing credit will be required to complete 32 additional credit hours of 400-level and 500-level coursework in related areas.  A minimum of 16 of these credit hours must be letter-graded courses (A to F), rather than project or thesis credits. For more information on advancing standing credit, please see the UIC Graduate College website :

Q: Where can I learn more about the coursework taken in the program?

A:  The program consists of several different categories of coursework: Foundational courses, Methodological courses, and HPE Area of Study courses. Many of these courses are shared with the MHPE program; however, students are also welcome to take other UIC courses with DGS and advisor approval.

For more information about the above mentioned MHPE courses, please go to the MHPE brochure  https://chicago.medicine.uic.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/MHPE-Information-Brochure.pdf

Q: Can graduates of the DME MHPE program apply?

A: Yes, graduates of DME’s MHPE are eligible to apply to this program. However, since many of the courses are shared between the two programs, students in this group will need to take a larger proportion of their coursework outside of DME. If you have additional questions about how this works, please contact us for more information.

Q: How much does the program cost?

A:  The cost of the program varies depending on how many credits you need to complete.  The program requires at least 96 credits from the baccalaureate or at least 64 credits from the master’s degree.  Doctoral students who have previously earned a relevant master’s degree (or its equivalent) from UIC or another accredited institution or health professionals with advanced degrees (e.g., MD, DO, DDS, PA, DPT, etc) may possibly be granted 32 semester hours of credit toward the doctoral degree if approved by the program and the Graduate College at the time of admission. The 32 hours are subtracted from the total hours required for the degree.  Degree equivalency from foreign institutions is determined by the Office of Admissions. To calculate online tuition please see the UIC Registrar’s Graduate Tuition and Fees website:   https://registrar.uic.edu/financial-matters/graduate-tuition-and-fees/ .

Q: Is there funding available?

A: The program/department (DME) does not offer any funding at this time. The majority of PhD in HPE students are not eligible for the most common ways that UIC PhD students fund their graduate degrees; specifically, funding is most often made available only to full-time graduate students. That said, full-time students who are eligible to apply for financial support (e.g., scholarships, fellowships, or assistantships) through the Graduate College https://grad.uic.edu/funding-awards/ will be supported in their applications by departmental and PhD program administration. PhD students may also be able to seek funding through their employers.

Q: How many students are accepted each year?

A: At this time, we are only able to accept up to two students per year.

We have 85 medical education PhD Projects, Programmes & Scholarships

All disciplines

All locations

Institution

All Institutions

All PhD Types

All Funding

medical education PhD Projects, Programmes & Scholarships

Quantitative research methods in medical education, phd research project.

PhD Research Projects are advertised opportunities to examine a pre-defined topic or answer a stated research question. Some projects may also provide scope for you to propose your own ideas and approaches.

Self-Funded PhD Students Only

This project does not have funding attached. You will need to have your own means of paying fees and living costs and / or seek separate funding from student finance, charities or trusts.

Exploring the influence of individual cultural background on seeking, interpreting, and utilizing feedback among medical undergraduate students.

Developing new methods of assessing non-clinical topics in medical education, evidence-based empathy education and training, your phd in medicine with brighton and sussex medical school.

The PhD opportunities on this programme do not have funding attached. You will need to have your own means of paying fees and living costs and / or seek separate funding from student finance, charities or trusts.

PhD Research Programme

PhD Research Programmes present a range of research opportunities shaped by a university’s particular expertise, facilities and resources. You will usually identify a suitable topic for your PhD and propose your own project. Additional training and development opportunities may also be offered as part of your programme.

Exploring innovative clinical teaching strategies and their implementation through the use of technology enhanced leaning: A case study of two medical schools, in Dundee and Iraq

Visualising the longitudinal themes in a medical degree, research postgraduate studies @hkumed 2024/25, funded phd programme (students worldwide).

Some or all of the PhD opportunities in this programme have funding attached. Applications for this programme are welcome from suitably qualified candidates worldwide. Funding may only be available to a limited set of nationalities and you should read the full programme details for further information.

Hong Kong PhD Programme

A Hong Kong PhD usually takes 3-4 years; the exact length may depend on whether or not a student holds a Masters degree. Longer programmes begin with a probation period involving taught classes and assessments. Eventually all students produce an original thesis and submit it for examination in an oral ‘viva voce’ format. Most programmes are delivered in English, but some universities also teach in Mandarin Chinese.

Postgraduate Research Opportunities at the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry

Phd opportunities.

PhD Opportunities highlight some of the specific PhD projects, programmes or other information currently available from a university.

Interdisciplinary project

Belongingness in faculty: what does it mean and how is it experienced by sessional tutors, how does parental education increase risk to adhd in the offspring, phd in machine learning: unlocking the future of cardiovascular medical diagnostics, competition funded phd project (students worldwide).

This project is in competition for funding with other projects. Usually the project which receives the best applicant will be successful. Unsuccessful projects may still go ahead as self-funded opportunities. Applications for the project are welcome from all suitably qualified candidates, but potential funding may be restricted to a limited set of nationalities. You should check the project and department details for more information.

Optical wavefront shaping for powering subcutaneous medical implants

Funded phd project (uk students only).

This research project has funding attached. It is only available to UK citizens or those who have been resident in the UK for a period of 3 years or more. Some projects, which are funded by charities or by the universities themselves may have more stringent restrictions.

PhD Fellow in Marine Ecology and Biogeochemistry

Funded phd project (students worldwide).

This project has funding attached, subject to eligibility criteria. Applications for the project are welcome from all suitably qualified candidates, but its funding may be restricted to a limited set of nationalities. You should check the project and department details for more information.

FindAPhD. Copyright 2005-2024 All rights reserved.

Unknown    ( change )

Have you got time to answer some quick questions about PhD study?

Select your nearest city

You haven’t completed your profile yet. To get the most out of FindAPhD, finish your profile and receive these benefits:

• Monthly chance to win one of ten £10 Amazon vouchers ; winners will be notified every month.*
• The latest PhD projects delivered straight to your inbox
• Access to our £6,000 scholarship competition
• Weekly newsletter with funding opportunities, research proposal tips and much more
• Early access to our physical and virtual postgraduate study fairs

Or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

*Offer only available for the duration of your active subscription, and subject to change. You MUST claim your prize within 72 hours, if not we will redraw.

Do you want hassle-free information and advice?

Create your FindAPhD account and sign up to our newsletter:

• Find out about funding opportunities and application tips
• Receive weekly advice, student stories and the latest PhD news
• Hear about our upcoming study fairs
• Save your favourite projects, track enquiries and get personalised subject updates

Create your account

Looking to list your PhD opportunities? Log in here .

Filtering Results

• See us on facebook

Contact for Application Review Prior to Submission

GME Program Manager

Please click here to find out your program's GME Program Manager.

Program Expansion/Funding

Applicable for both ACGME and non-ACGME programs

Current Cycle Results

Previous Years Archive

2017-2018 Results

2016-2017 Results

Application & Process

Please consult your program's GME Program Manager prior to submitting an application.

Permanent Request

Military residents.

• Temporary Request
• Fill out the Expansion and Funding Form by visiting the Qualtrics link at https://stanfordmedicine.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3CWWnLtRi8AV069 .
• Click here for a preview of the application form. 
• A current and proposed rotation schedule ( View sample )
• Competency based goals and objectives for your program (if new) or rotations (if new)
• Documentation of case logs and the RRC/Board requirements for case numbers.
• After online submission of the application is completed, emails will be sent automatically to the Program Director of your Core Residency Program and the Department Chair requesting their approval on the application.”

*Programs may not apply for funding for 2 years after a denial

• Military Residents , if fully funded by the Armed Forces, can be also approved by the DIO. 
• Please send the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to Ann Dohn’s attention (subject: Military Expansion: PROGRAM NAME).

Temporary Expansion

• Temporary Expansion can be approved by the Designated Institutional Officer (DIO), Ann Dohn.
• Please send her an e-mail outlining the reason for temporary expansion to [email protected] (subject: Temporary Expansion: PROGRAM NAME).
• Temporary funding = 1 FTE for less than a year.

Program's Next Actions

Committee Members & Protocol

The Program Expansion/Funding Committee, a GMEC subcommittee, is comprised of:

• President & CEO, Stanford Health Care
• Chief Medical Officer, Stanford Health Care
• Chief Financial Officer, Stanford Health Care
• Chief Operating Officer, Stanford Health Care
• Designated Institutional Officer (DIO)
• Associate Dean of Graduate Medical Education

Stanford Children's Health (SCH) has a separate committee for Pediatric programs.

Program Expansion Subcommittee Description and Protocol

Change from GMEC

Recommendation criteria: program level, recommendation criteria: accreditation status.

To review and recommend to the full GMEC action on all requests for new programs both ACGME and Non ACGME and all requests for expansion of current programs. The subcommittee will not have oversight of any funding matters or be able to grant/approve funding of any training positions.

Moving forward, programs cannot apply for expansion/funding for 2 years after a denial.*

*Effective January 2020

The subcommittee members base their recommendations on the following:

• Clinical and research components
• Trainees supervisory and patient care responsibilities
• Procedure/case volume requirements
• Didactic components (attach sample conference schedule).
• If a program is more than 12 months in duration, describe the progression in responsibilities by PGY level
• Criteria for successful completion of program
• Indicate Board Eligible or Certificate of Advanced Qualifications (CAQ) at complete of training
• A typical calendar year schedule, including training sites
• Program director has adequate training/board certification and evidence of experience in medical education
• Adequate qualified teaching faculty
• Adequate administrative support
• Support from departmental leadership
• Potential impact on other programs (e.g. potential competition for surgical cases)
• Potential impact on existing program/trainees
• Clinical programmatic need – Does the proposed new program or program expansion address an important clinical care delivery need in SHC/LPCH?
• National/Regional need – Does the proposed new program or program expansion address a national or regional physician supply need?

To increase the number of trainees in your ACGME-accredited residency/fellowship, you must be in good standing with the Residency Review Committee and complete the following steps:

• Submit a completed  Request to Expand an ACGME Residency/Fellowship Form  to the GME Office.
• The Graduate Medical Education Committee (GMEC) Subcommittee on Residency Expansion will review your request and forward its recommendations to the entire GMEC for discussion and voting. Discussion is solely based on educational merit. Funding issues are not considered.
• If your request is approved by the GMEC, you can petition the ACGME to increase the number of residents/fellows in your program using  WEBADS . It is important that you email  Ann Dohn  in the GME Office after entering the WEBADS request. Ann must approve the request as the institutional official.
• After you've obtained both GMEC and ACGME approval, you can request funding from SHC for Stanford-based trainees. The funding committee meets once each year in the fall. Complete and submit the  Request for Funding Form  to the GME Office.

Scholarships for Medical School

How to find funding for medical school.

It is well worth your time to search for scholarships both before and after you enroll for medical school. There are many opportunities to receive special funding support. Eligibility requirements vary from scholarship to scholarship. For example, some rewards may be based on premedical status or your year in medical school, specialty choice, academic achievement, service obligation, or affiliation with a specific organization.

These opportunities can be applied toward a range of costs, from tuition to travel for special activities like conferences. Many family medicine conferences and meetings give students money to help them attend and broaden their professional experience.

Although not everyone qualifies for a large enough scholarship to cover the costs of medical school, there are likely several sources of funding that are available to support your interests. Smaller scholarships that offer a couple hundred dollars can especially add up over time if you apply to several. Anything that helps reduce your final student debt is very valuable because of the impact of interest capitalization.

Start your search online

Know where to search online. Websites such as  FastWeb and the  U.S. Department of Education contain scholarship databases that can help you find opportunities. The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) maintains a  loan repayment and scholarship database organized by state, and students are eligible for many of the opportunities listed.

Several scholarship apps are also available, some of which include features that will match you with potential funding opportunities based on your needs and background.

Avoid companies or organizations that require a fee or make guarantees to help you identify a specific amount of money in scholarship aid.

Find medical school scholarships locally

Your university’s counselors, and state and local governmental agencies can help get you started when connecting with scholarship opportunities in your state or community.

Contact local hospitals and ask to speak to a staff member in the human resources department about scholarship opportunities. Some hospitals and their foundations offer scholarships to medical students or financial aid in the form of tuition assistance in exchange for a specific number of years of employment after completion of residency.

Many religious institutions, through personal endowments, have funds available for members to further their education. Contact your religious institution's business office to inquire about such resources and any eligibility requirements.

Local businesses, clubs, and nonprofit organizations often provide scholarships support to students from their communities. Navigating these can take some extra work, as you may have to do some targeted online searching, directly call businesses, or ask area mentors for help identifying these opportunities.

Ask your medical school

Check with the medical schools that you are applying to or are already attending, including the school’s office of minority affairs, for scholarship opportunities. Request a financial aid packet from the medical school’s financial aid office and ask about scholarship opportunities that are unique to that school. Many medical schools offer financial assistance to academically-competitive medical students who demonstrate severe financial hardship. Arrange for you and your family to speak directly to one of the school's financial aid officers about your situation and the options available to you.

Research scholarships for minority students

Many organizations are committed to the important work of ensuring the development of a diverse physician workforce. Through scholarships, they support minority and underrepresented students working toward their medical degrees.

Some notable sources of scholarships for minority students are:

• National Medical Fellowships
• Herbert W. Nickens Medical Student Scholarships
• National Medical Association

Explore scholarships in primary care

If you are interested in a career in family medicine, there are many scholarship opportunities for future primary care physicians. In fact, many of these scholarship programs will help you pay a significant portion (if not all) of your educational costs.

When exploring medical schools, consider those with primary care tracks. If you know you want to specialize in a primary care specialty, these programs often include tuition waivers or scholarships. Although limited in number, there are several three-year medical school programs for future primary care physicians. These programs reduce the overall costs of attending medical school, and some provide extra scholarship funding that eliminate most costs.

As a student committed to primary care, you can apply for the  National Health Service Corps Scholarship Program , which pays for tuition, fees, and other costs. Another program they have is the  Students to Service Program , a loan repayment program.

The  Pisacano Leadership Foundation provides up to five third-year medical students who are strongly committed to family medicine as much as $28,000 in financial support. Scholarships are available each year. This foundation also provides a  helpful list of scholarship programs for students seeking scholarship opportunities.

Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Family Physicians. All Rights Reserved.

Financial Aid

Md/mdphd scholarships, the warren alpert medical school scholarship funds.

The Warren Alpert Medical School is deeply grateful to the thousands of donors who offer generous scholarship support to our medical students. Through a combination of endowment income, annual gifts, a percentage of tuition revenue, and grants from the federal government, AMS was able to offer over $6 million dollars in institutional scholarship funds to 50% of all aid recipients. The average scholarship award in 2018-19 year was approximately $33,730.

Institutional Need-Based Scholarships

The financial aid office awards scholarships from the institution to students on the basis of financial need. A student may be considered for this type of scholarship by applying as an institutional aid applicant. Please review the application page for details about applying for institutional need-based scholarship funding.

Institutional Merit-Based Scholarships

Tuition scholarships are awarded to AMS MD/PhD students that are not based on need. In addition, the Office of Admission offers merit scholarships based on criteria other than need. All other financial aid at The Warren Alpert Medical School is awarded on the basis of financial need.

Only financial aid applicants who qualify for institutional funding are considered for the following scholarships:

Abernathy Family Medical Scholarship Established in 2004 by James L. Abernathy '63 and Kevin Kearns Abernathy P'04.

Vivian B. Allen Foundation Scholarship Established in 1964 by the Vivian B. Allen Foundation, Inc.

Warren Alpert Scholars Program Established in 2007 by The Warren Alpert Foundation.

Charles A. Baldwin II Medical Scholarship Fund Established in 2006 by friends of the late Rev. Charles A. Baldwin.

Bank of America Medical Scholarship Established in 1985 by the Rhode Island Hospital Trust.

Irving A. Beck, MD Scholarship Fund Established in 1998 by Aaron T. Beck, MD '42+ and the Honorable Phyllis W. Beck '49, P'74+.

Everett F. Boyden Trust Medical Scholarship Established in 1979 by The Everett F. Boyden Trust.

The Bready Biotechnology Scholarship Fund Established in 2003 by Richard L. Bready P'99MD'03 in honor of Barrett Bready '99 MD'03.

The Brodsky Family Medical Scholarship Established in 1981 by David L. Brodsky '59, Elliott J. Brodsky '64 and family.

Hermon C. Bumpus and John H. Morrissey Fund Established in 1965 by Dr. Moses Swick.

Gordon E. and May R. Cadwgan Medical School Scholarship Established in 1999 by Gordon E. Cadwgan '36 LLD'66+.

The Leonard H. Campbell Medical Scholarship Established in 1973 by Lois Campbell Bigelow '24+.

The Joseph E. Cannon Endowed Fellowship Established in 1989 by family, friends and colleagues of the late Joseph E. Cannon, PhD. '32.

Frank V. Carollo 1950 Medical Scholarship Established in 2006 by Frank V. Carollo '50.

Champlin Foundations Medical Scholarship Established in 1982 by The Champlin Foundations.

The Scott E. Chanchien Memorial Scholarship Established in 1992 by Dr. and Mrs. Tsunie Chanchien P'90, '92.

Diana Kane Cohen '55 Medical Scholarship Established in 2005 by Diana Kane Cohen '55.

The Charles and Ellen Collis Medical Scholarship Established in 1983 by Mr. Charles A. Collis+ and Mrs. Elfriede A. Collis.

The Julie and Albert Cornsweet Medical Scholarship Established in 1984 by Albert C. Cornsweet, PhD '29+.

The Julie Cornsweet Endowed Fellowship Established in 1994 through the Estate of Albert C. Cornsweet, PhD '29.

The Crumley-Shaw Medical Scholarship Established in 1986 by the Estate of Janet M. Shaw '39.

  The CVS Medical Scholarship Established in 2001 by The CVS Charitable Trust.

The M. Myer Cyker Medical Scholarship Established in 1978 by M. Myer Cyker P'80, '82 .

The H. Corbin Day 1959 Medical Scholarship Established in 1985 by H. Corbin Day '59.

The Philip J. DiSaia, MD Medical Scholarship Established in 1997 by Philip J. DiSaia, MD '59, John P. Keats '75 MD'78, P'04, and friends contributing in honor of Dr. DiSaia.

Dresdale Family Medical Scholarship Established in 2006 by Richard C. Dresdale ’78+ and Marcella L. Dresdale in honor of Frank C. Dresdale '45+ and Doris Dresdale.

Brown Medical School Early Leaders Scholarship

Established in 2004 by  Marie J. Langlois '64 in honor of the early leaders of Brown's medical school - Stanley M. Aronson, MD, Pierre Galletti, MD PhD+, and David S. Greer, MD.

The Adelbert C. Eastburn Medical Scholarship Established in 1983 by bequest of Lt. Col. Adelbert C. Eastburn '12.

The Stephen R. Ehrlich Family Medical Scholarship Established in 2000 by Stephen R. Ehrlich '55 and Mary Ann Ehrlich P'85.

D. C. and Irene Ellwood Foundation Medical Scholarship and Loan Fund Established by the Ellwood Foundation.

Ata K. Erdogan Memorial Scholarship Established in 2013 in memory of Ata K. Erdogan '98 MD'02 by friends, classmates, and colleagues.

Brown Medical School Faculty Scholarship Established in 2001 by Brown's medical school faculty, alumni, and parents honoring the educational partnership that faculty share with the students. 

Irving Jay Fain Medical Scholarship Established in 1979 by E. Macie Silver P'67+.

The Dr. William Fain Medical Scholarship Established in 1979 by William Fain, MD '28+.

The FM Global Medical Scholarship Established in 2000 by FM Global Foundation.

The Samuel J. Fogelson Medical Scholarship Established in 1979 by Mid America Burn Institute, as directed by Richard Fogelson '56.

The Ira S. and Anna Galkin Medical Scholarship Established in 1976 by  Mr.+ and Mrs. Norman M. Fain and The Ira and Anna Galkin Charitable Trusts.

The Yvonne Galletti-Chamorel Medical Scholarship Established in 1985 by Dr.+ and Mrs. Pierre Galletti.

The George H. Gildersleeve Medical Scholarship Established in 1982 by bequest of George H. Gildersleeve, PhD '19.

Dr. Leon Goldstein and Family Medical Scholarship Established in 2013 by Barbara J. Goldstein, P'82MD'86, P'88MD'92 and family to honor the late Leon Goldstein PhD, ADE'68 hon., P'82MD'86, P'85MD'92.

The Grabel Foundation Medical Scholarship Established in 1982 by The Grabel Foundation, as directed by Jordan Grabel MD'85.

Grimshaw-Gudewicz Charitable Foundation Scholarship Established by the Grimshaw-Gudewicz Charitable Foundation.

The Mary H. and George E. Grimshaw Medical Student Scholarship Established in 1995 by bequest of Mary H. Grimshaw in honor of her son George E. Grimshaw.

Lucille B. Hacking Scholarship Fund Established in 2007 by the Estate of Lucille B. Hacking '43.

Dr. Herbert E. & Lilian W. Harris Presidential Scholarship Fund Established in 2005 by Herbert E. Harris Jr., Ruth W. Harris '41+ and Walter D. Harris '35+.

Alexes Hazen, MD and Alex Ettl Medical Scholarship Established in 2003 by  Alexes Hazen '87 MD'96.

Charles Hill, MD Memorial Scholarship Established in 1989 by Henry E. Kates.

Andrew M. and Carol Hunt Scholarship for Medical Education Established in 1979 by Andrew M. Hunt '51+ and Carol Hunt P'74, '75, and family and friends.

The Helen Humphrey Wood Hurlin Medical Fellowship Established in 1971 by Dr. Ralph G. Hurlin '12  AM'13 PHD'15, P'39, P'41+.

Donald Jordan 1930 Scholarship Fund for Medical Students Established in 2012 by the Estate of Mary Elizabeth Jordan.

The Sidney A. Kane Medical Fellowship Established in 1971 by the Kane-Barrengos Foundation, as directed by Edythe Kane Winslow '31+ and Diana Kane Cohen '55.

Kott/Blumenkranz Family Scholarship Established in 2005 by Recia Kott Blumenkranz, MD '76 and Mark S. Blumenkranz '72 MD'75 MMS'76, P'05, '08.

The David and Esther Lecht Memorial Fund Established in 1985 by the Estate of Esther Lecht.

The Paul Levinger Medical Scholarship Established in 1988 by Paul Levinger.

David C. Lewis, MD & Eleanor L. Lewis Medical Scholarship Fund Established in 2004 by David C. Lewis, MD '57, Eleanor L. Lewis '59, P'84, '87.

The Donald J. Marsh MD Medical Scholarship Established in 2006 by friends and colleagues of former Dean Donald J. Marsh, MD.

The Merck Company Foundation Scholarship Established in 1964 by The Merck Company Foundation.

The Gregory J. Miller, '77 MD'81 Medical Scholarship Established in 2004 by Gregory J. Miller '77 MD'81.

The Mitchell Pediatric Fellowship Established in 1985 by Michael W. Mitchell '59 and Brooke A. Mitchell '59, P'88, '90.

  Dr. Mohammed Mohiuddin P'97MD'01 Medical Scholarship Established in 2010 by Majid M. Mohiuddin '97 MD'01 and Dr. Mohammed Mohiuddin P'97MD'01.

The Samuel and Sona Morein Medical Fellowship Established in 1980 by Sona Morein.

The Seymour B. Muney Medical Scholarship Established in 2005 by Alan M. Muney '75 MD'78, P’04 and family in memory of Seymour Muney.

Hiroko and Noboru Murakami Scholarship Established in 1997 by  Hiroko and Noboru Murakami P'95, '96, '98MD'02.

The Kenneth L. Nash Medical Scholarship Fund Established in 1978 by the Estate of Kenneth L. Nash '12.

The Dr. Louis J. Novak Medical Scholarship Established in 1989 by Louis J. Novak, MD '36+.

The Calvin and Alice Cinader Oyer Medical Scholarship Established in 2003 by Calvin E. Oyer, MD, and Alice C. Oyer.

The Ruth Cooke Peterson Scholarship Established in 1992 through a bequest from Ruth E. C. Peterson '14.

The Albert G. and Evelyn S. Pierce Medical Scholarship Established in 1982 by bequests from Albert G. and Evelyn S. Pierce.

The Pilavin Medical Scholarship Established in 1978 by Selma Pilavin-Robinson+.

Clarence Manger and Audrey Cordero Plitt/K. Brooke Anderson Loan Fund Established in 2000 by the trustees of The Clarence Manger and Audrey Cordero Plitt Trust.

The Poch Family Medical Scholarship Established in 2000 by Kathryn C. and Gerald A. Poch P'98MD'02, '01MD'05.

George Ade Poll and Devara Abramson Poll Scholarship Fund Established in 2013 by bequest of Devara Abramson Poll '42.

The Isabelle Reynolds Medical Scholarship Established in 1998 by the Estate of Isabelle Reynolds.

The Dr. and Mrs. Frederic W. Ripley Jr. Fund Established in 1988 by the Estate of Dr. Frederick W. Ripley, Jr. 32.

The Fred M. Roddy Memorial Medical Scholarship Established in 1973 by the Fred M. Roddy Foundation, Inc.

The May Sherman Rosen, MD and Samuel H. Rosen, MD Scholarship Established in 1992 by the Estate of Dr. May Sherman Rosen '31 AM'33.

Rosenhirsch Foundation Medical Scholarship Fund Established in 2011 by the Rosenhirsch Foundation in memory of the parents of Gertrude Rosenhirsch Zisson '30, P'61, P'63, GP'91.

The Grace B. Ross Medical Scholarship Established in 1984 by the Estate of Grace B. Ross.

The Philip Sacknoff 1939 Medical Scholarship Established in 1972 by Philip Sacknoff '39+ and Evelyn Sacknoff PMD'76.

Terry M. Sanderson Medical Scholarship Established in 2004 by Terry M. Sanderson.

The Henry and Marieanna Saphier Graduate Medical Program Scholarship Established in 1989 by Dr. and Mrs. Henry Saphier P'88MD'92, '92, '97.

Sarles Scholarship Fund for Medical Education Established in 2006 by Marilyn Dawson Sarles MD'76 PAM'07 and H. Jay Sarles PAM'07.

Fred J. Schiffman, MD, Medical Scholarship Established in 2014 by Artemis A. W. Joukowsky '55 LLD'85 hon., and Martha Sharp Joukowsky PhD '58 PHB'82 hon. LHD'85 hon. P'87, GP'13, '14, '16, '17.

Brigadier General Ravindra Fulchand Shah, MD and Manjula Ravindra Shah, MD Medical Scholarship Established in 1989 by the Tarandi Foundation, as directed by Shah Family.

The Peter Rabe Shank, PhD Medical Scholarship Established in 2004 by Susan E. Shank.

The Dr. Richard Jay Smith Medical Scholarship Established in 1990 by family members and classmates of Richard J. Smith, MD '51, P'78, '80, '85+, and the Brown Medical Alumni Association.

Brown Medical Society Scholarships Established by alumni, parents and friends who contribute to the Brown Medical Annual Fund (BMAF).

The Dr. Samuel Starr Medical Fellowship Established in 1974 by Benton+ and Beverly Starr Rosen '43+, Robert '40+ and Rhoda Starr.

The Nancy K. Starr Medical Fellowship Established in 1972 by Benton+ and Beverly Starr Rosen '43+, Robert '40+ and Rhoda Starr.

The Herbert E. and Daisy A. Stride Medical Scholarship Established by the Herbert E. and Daisy A. Stride Memorial Foundation.

The Albert B. Tabor Medical Scholarship Established in 1995 by the Estate of Albert Brown Tabor '36.

The J.T. Tai Scholarship Established by J.T. Tai & Co. Foundation Inc., as directed by Mrs. Y.C. Chen.

Charles and Lisette Tillinghast Medical Scholarship Established in 2004 by Marie J. Langlois '64.

Sanford W. Udis MD 1941 and Beverly T. Udis Medical Scholarship Established in 2003 by Sanford W. Udis, MD '41+, P'73, '75, Gloria I. Udis with additional contributions from Andrew H. Udis '72 MAT'73 and Jonathan Udis '75.

Madelyn D. Wedlock '30 Medical School Scholarship Established in 1999 by Madelyn D. Wedlock '30+.

The Manfred and Jeanne Weil Medical Scholarship Established in 1972 by Manfred and Jeanne Weil.

Edward J. Wing, MD, Medical Scholarship Established in 2013 by G. Nicholas Beckwith III '67 and Dorothy Beckwith PMD'99RES'02, Marie J. Langlois '64, and Thomas J. Tisch '76 and Alice M. Tisch to recognize former Dean Edward J. Wing, MD ADE'99 hon.

The Edythe Kane Winslow '31 Medical Scholarship Established in 2004 by Diana Kane Cohen, '55.

The Zisson Medical Scholarship Established in 1966 by the late Gertrude Rosenhirsch Zisson '30 and the late Max Zisson P'61, '63, GP'91, Harry Zisson '61, and William J. Zisson '63, P'91.

Thomas and Cynthia Davis Sculco Medical Scholarship Established in 2016 by Thomas P. Sculco, M.D. '65 

Lei Ding, MD, and Jean H. Chen, MD, Medical Scholarship Established in 2015 by Lei Ding, MD PMD'17 and Jean H. Chen, MD PMD'17

Preston C. Calvert and Margaret E. Gurin-Calvert Current-Use Medical Scholarship  Established in 2017 by Preston C. Calvert '76 MD'79 and Margaret E. Guerin-Calvert '76 

• About the Hub
• Announcements
• Faculty Experts Guide
• Subscribe to the newsletter

Explore by Topic

• Arts+Culture
• Politics+Society
• Science+Technology
• Student Life
• University News
• Voices+Opinion
• About Hub at Work
• Gazette Archive
• Benefits+Perks
• Health+Well-Being
• Current Issue
• About the Magazine
• Past Issues
• Support Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Subscribe to the Magazine

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Credit: Will Kirk / Johns Hopkins University

Johns Hopkins receives transformative Bloomberg Philanthropies investment in financial aid for future generations of doctors, nurses, and research pioneers

Thanks to new $1 billion financial aid gift, most medical students will now attend johns hopkins tuition-free, and many will receive additional support to cover living expenses. financial aid for nursing, public health, and other graduate programs will ensure access for top talent from middle-class and low-income backgrounds..

By Hub staff report

Johns Hopkins University celebrated today's announcement by Bloomberg Philanthropies of a new gift of $1 billion to make Hopkins free for most medical students and expand financial aid for future nurses and public health pioneers, infusing these critical professions with top talent from all socioeconomic and geographic backgrounds and communities. For most students seeking an MD at Hopkins, the gift will cover the full cost of attendance, including tuition and living expenses such as rent.

The new gift to Hopkins furthers Bloomberg's commitment to addressing complex American health challenges by removing the economic barriers that stand between America's most promising students from low-income and middle-class families and their dreams of saving lives and making an impact on their communities. This dramatic expansion of financial aid support for graduate and medical students also builds on the transformative impact of Bloomberg's 2018 gift for undergraduate aid at Johns Hopkins University .

Beginning in fall 2024, Hopkins will offer free tuition for students pursuing an MD who come from families earning under $300,000, a figure that represents 95% of all Americans. Additionally, Hopkins will cover living expenses on top of tuition and fees for medical students from families that earn up to $175,000, a threshold inclusive of the vast majority of families in the U.S. Nearly two-thirds of current and entering medical students at Johns Hopkins will immediately qualify for either free tuition or free tuition plus living expenses. Eligible new and returning medical students will receive updated financial aid packages this summer that reflect the gift's impact.

This new scholarship formula will ensure the most talented aspiring doctors representing the broadest and deepest range of socioeconomic and geographic backgrounds have the opportunity to graduate debt-free from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine , and students from the vast majority of American families will pay nothing at all.

"As the U.S. struggles to recover from a disturbing decline in life expectancy, our country faces a serious shortage of doctors, nurses, and public health professionals—and yet, the high cost of medical, nursing, and graduate school too often bars students from enrolling," said Michael R. Bloomberg , founder of Bloomberg Philanthropies and Bloomberg L.P. "By reducing the financial barriers to these essential fields, we can free more students to pursue careers they're passionate about—and enable them to serve more of the families and communities who need them the most."

$1 billion gift to make Johns Hopkins medical school free for most

The donation from Bloomberg Philanthropies will also expand financial aid for the school’s other graduate programs, including nursing and public health

For nearly 150 years, graduates of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine have pioneered lifesaving treatments and revolutionary clinical care, improving and extending countless lives around the world. Addressing the complex challenges driving recent declines in American life expectancy—including chronic diseases and entrenched health inequities—requires institutions like Hopkins to bring new perspectives to the field and to seek out untapped talent and brilliant ideas in every corner of the country. But the high cost of a medical education today discourages some of the brightest students from low-income and middle-class families from even applying to medical school.

"Extraordinary talent exists in every community across America, a fact borne out by the transformative impact of Mike Bloomberg's historic gift for financial aid to Hopkins undergraduates six years ago that dramatically expanded the breadth of experience and accomplishment of our student body," said Ron Daniels , president of Johns Hopkins University. "Removing financial barriers to individual opportunity fuels excellence, innovation, and discoveries that redound to the benefit of society."

This new gift from Bloomberg Philanthropies builds on the School of Medicine's student debt–reduction initiative launched in 2020 with generous gifts from Joanne and Bill Conway and from Kim and Jim Davis, as well as numerous alumni and other donors. Through those prior scholarships, Hopkins was able to begin expanding access and reducing medical student debt. (In the 2023–24 academic year, the average total student loan debt for School of Medicine graduates had declined to approximately $105,000.)

In addition to investing in future generations of doctors, this $1 billion endowment from Bloomberg Philanthropies will support leaders in other critical health-related fields through increased graduate financial aid in the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and School of Nursing , and it will expand aid for graduate degrees offered by the Johns Hopkins schools of Education , Engineering , Business , Arts and Sciences , and Advanced International Studies ; the Peabody Institute ; and the newly announced School of Government and Policy . The gift also will support the development of a new program to draw impact-focused interdisciplinary leaders into the worlds of research, industry, and government through innovations in PhD education and training.

This new philanthropic contribution is Bloomberg's latest effort to remove economic barriers to opportunity for top American students. Bloomberg's record 2018 contribution of $1.8 billion to undergraduate financial aid had a transformative impact on the Hopkins student body. By dramatically expanding scholarship support, Hopkins was able to simultaneously attract the world's most academically qualified undergraduates and transform the makeup of their undergraduate programs. The number of undergraduate students entering Hopkins from low-income backgrounds and/or who are the first in their families to attend college (FLI) has grown by 43% since the Bloomberg gift went into effect. Today, FLI students make up nearly a third of the Hopkins undergraduate population, surpassing most other Ivy League and Ivy League–adjacent institutions.

In 2021, Johns Hopkins University and Bloomberg Philanthropies also announced the launch of the Vivien Thomas Scholars Initiative , devoted to addressing historical underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields, particularly in leadership roles across universities, government, and industry. The $150 million endowment creates additional pathways for students from historically Black colleges and universities and minority-serving institutions to pursue and receive PhDs in STEM fields at Johns Hopkins.

Bloomberg is a 1964 graduate of Johns Hopkins, the founder of Bloomberg L.P. and Bloomberg Philanthropies, and the 108th mayor of New York City. He also served as the chairman of the Johns Hopkins University board of trustees from 1996 to 2002.

Posted in University News

Tagged philanthropy , michael bloomberg , financial aid , bloomberg philanthropies , graduate education

You might also like

News network.

• Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Get Email Updates
• Submit an Announcement
• Submit an Event
• Privacy Statement
• Accessibility

Discover JHU

• About the University
• Schools & Divisions
• Academic Programs
• Plan a Visit
• my.JohnsHopkins.edu
• © 2024 Johns Hopkins University . All rights reserved.
• University Communications
• 3910 Keswick Rd., Suite N2600, Baltimore, MD
• X Facebook LinkedIn YouTube Instagram

• Quick Takes

A $1B Donation to Johns Hopkins Makes Med School Free for Most

By  Jessica Blake

You have / 5 articles left. Sign up for a free account or log in.

Johns Hopkins University has received a new gift of $1 billion from Bloomberg Philanthropies, which will allow the majority of the university’s medical students to attend tuition-free, the university announced Monday . 

The historic donation will also help many medical students cover living expenses and provide some financial aid for students from middle- and low-income backgrounds enrolled in nursing and other health care–related graduate programs.

“As the U.S. struggles to recover from a disturbing decline in life expectancy, our country faces a serious shortage of doctors, nurses, and public health professionals—and yet, the high cost of medical, nursing, and graduate school too often bars students from enrolling,” Michael R. Bloomberg, founder of Bloomberg Philanthropies, said in a press release. “By reducing the financial barriers to these essential fields, we can free more students to pursue careers they’re passionate about—and enable them to serve more of the families and communities who need them the most.”  

Beginning this fall, Hopkins will offer free tuition for any student pursuing a medical degree who comes from a family earning less than $300,000, a figure that applies to 95 percent of all Americans and nearly 66 percent of current and entering medical students at the university. Students with a family income of up to $175,000 will also receive cost-of-living aid.

This is the second major financial aid gift Bloomberg has made to his alma mater over the past six years; in 2018, he donated $1.8 billion , which allowed undergraduate admissions to become 100 percent need blind.  

“Extraordinary talent exists in every community across America, a fact borne out by the transformative impact of Mike Bloomberg’s historic gift for financial aid to Hopkins undergraduates six years ago that dramatically expanded the breadth of experience and accomplishment of our student body,” said Hopkins president Ron Daniels. “Removing financial barriers to individual opportunity fuels excellence, innovation, and discoveries that redound to the benefit of society.” 

Columbia’s President Denounced Her Before Congress. Firing Could Be Next.

Law professor Katherine Franke has long been outspoken in her support of Palestinians.

Share This Article

More from quick takes.

‘Satanic’ Sculpture Beheaded at University of Houston

GOP Platform: ‘Make Our College Campuses Safe and Patriotic Again’

Qatar Foundation Pushes Back on House Republicans’ Accusations

• Become a Member
• Sign up for Newsletters
• Learning & Assessment
• Diversity & Equity
• Career Development
• Labor & Unionization
• Shared Governance
• Academic Freedom
• Books & Publishing
• Financial Aid
• Residential Life
• Free Speech
• Physical & Mental Health
• Race & Ethnicity
• Sex & Gender
• Socioeconomics
• Traditional-Age
• Adult & Post-Traditional
• Teaching & Learning
• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Publishing
• Data Analytics
• Administrative Tech
• Alternative Credentials
• Financial Health
• Cost-Cutting
• Revenue Strategies
• Academic Programs
• Physical Campuses
• Mergers & Collaboration
• Fundraising
• Research Universities
• Regional Public Universities
• Community Colleges
• Private Nonprofit Colleges
• Minority-Serving Institutions
• Religious Colleges
• Women's Colleges
• Specialized Colleges
• For-Profit Colleges
• Executive Leadership
• Trustees & Regents
• State Oversight
• Accreditation
• Politics & Elections
• Supreme Court
• Student Aid Policy
• Science & Research Policy
• State Policy
• Colleges & Localities
• Employee Satisfaction
• Remote & Flexible Work
• Staff Issues
• Study Abroad
• International Students in U.S.
• U.S. Colleges in the World
• Intellectual Affairs
• Seeking a Faculty Job
• Advancing in the Faculty
• Seeking an Administrative Job
• Advancing as an Administrator
• Beyond Transfer
• Call to Action
• Confessions of a Community College Dean
• Higher Ed Gamma
• Higher Ed Policy
• Just Explain It to Me!
• Just Visiting
• Law, Policy—and IT?
• Leadership & StratEDgy
• Leadership in Higher Education
• Learning Innovation
• Online: Trending Now
• Resident Scholar
• University of Venus
• Student Voice
• Academic Life
• Health & Wellness
• The College Experience
• Life After College
• Academic Minute
• Weekly Wisdom
• Reports & Data
• Advertising & Marketing
• Consulting Services
• Data & Insights
• Hiring & Jobs
• Event Partnerships

4 /5 Articles remaining this month.

Sign up for a free account or log in.

• Sign Up, It’s FREE

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Active funding opportunity

Nsf 24-588: nsf epscor graduate fellowship program (egfp), program solicitation, document information, document history.

• Posted: July 3, 2024

Program Solicitation NSF 24-588

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization's local time):

October 02, 2024

June 02, 2025

June 01, 2026

Important Information And Revision Notes

The NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellowship Program (EGFP) is a new three-year pilot program that responds directly to input from recent studies and legislation, including the Envisioning the Future of NSF EPSCoR report and the CHIPS and Science Act (Public Law 117-167) . The EGFP is intended to advance graduate talent recruitment, development, and retention at graduate institutions in the eligible EPSCoR states and territories , hereafter referred to as EPSCoR jurisdictions. Through the EGFP's investments, NSF intends to help build additional capacity for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) research and in turn promote innovation and economic growth in EPSCoR jurisdictions and across the Nation.

EGFP is designed to enhance the STEM research capacity and competitiveness of EPSCoR jurisdictions by providing funding to graduate degree-awarding institutions that will allow them to recruit NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellows. Awardee institutions will select fellowship recipients, the NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellows, from the pool of exceptional talent who received Honorable Mention from the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) no more than three years prior to the proposal due date. NSF will provide the mechanism for awardee institutions to connect with GRFP Honorable Mention recipients through the NSF Education and Training Application (ETAP) system .

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is regularly revised and it is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements specified in this solicitation and the applicable version of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General information.

Program Title:

NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellowship Program (EGFP)

The NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellowship Program (EGFP) provides an opportunity for applicants who received the distinction of GRFP Honorable Mention no more than three years before the proposal due date to be named NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellows and obtain financial support for their graduate education at an institution in an EPSCoR jurisdiction. EGFP aims to enhance the capacity and competitiveness of EPSCoR jurisdictions by providing funding to graduate degree-awarding institutions to support NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellows as they pursue graduate degrees in the disciplines specified by the NSF Directorates and Office that are participating in the EGFP funding program. Fellows may pursue degrees in field that differ from the field or sub-field of study that the GRFP Honorable Mention recipients previously listed in their GRFP application. EGFP awards will be made to institutions in EPSCoR jurisdictions. Awards will provide three years of stipend and associated cost-of-education allowance for each NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellow. Stipends must be budgeted at the level of $37,000 per year per Fellow and cost-of-education allowances must be budgeted at the level of $16,000 per year per Fellow. A total of three years of support must be budgeted per Fellow. Each Fellow must be given up to five years to utilize the support. Awardees will administer the awards such that the Fellows receive the full stipend amount and the institution retains the full cost-of-education allowance during the three years that each Fellow receives support. All submissions must request support for a minimum of three Fellows.

Broadening Participation In Stem:

NSF recognizes the unique lived experiences of individuals from communities that are underrepresented and/or under-served in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and the barriers to inclusion and access to STEM education and careers. NSF highly encourages the leadership, partnership, and contributions in all NSF opportunities of individuals who are members of such communities supported by NSF. This includes leading and designing STEM research and education proposals for funding; serving as peer reviewers, advisory committee members, and/or committee of visitor members; and serving as NSF leadership, program, and/or administrative staff. NSF also highly encourages demographically diverse institutions of higher education (IHEs) to lead, partner, and contribute to NSF opportunities on behalf of their research and education communities. NSF expects that all individuals, including those who are members of groups that are underrepresented and/or under-served in STEM, are treated equitably and inclusively in the Foundation's proposal and award process.

NSF encourages IHEs that enroll, educate, graduate, and employ individuals who are members of groups underrepresented and/or under-served in STEM education programs and careers to lead, partner, and contribute to NSF opportunities, including leading and designing STEM research and education proposals for funding. Such IHEs include, but may not be limited to, community colleges and two-year institutions, mission-based institutions such as Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), women's colleges, and institutions that primarily serve persons with disabilities, as well as institutions defined by enrollment such as Predominantly Undergraduate Institutions (PUIs), Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs), and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs).

"Broadening participation in STEM" is the comprehensive phrase used by NSF to refer to the Foundation's goal of increasing the representation and diversity of individuals, organizations, and geographic regions that contribute to STEM teaching, research, and innovation. To broaden participation in STEM, it is necessary to address issues of equity, inclusion, and access in STEM education, training, and careers. Whereas all NSF programs might support broadening participation components, some programs primarily focus on supporting broadening participation research and projects. Examples can be found on the NSF Broadening Participation in STEM website.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

• EGFP: Program Contact, telephone: (703) 292-2440, email: [email protected]
• Narcrisha S. Norman, telephone: (703) 292-7965, email: [email protected]
• Rebecca Shearman, telephone: (703) 292-7403, email: [email protected]
• Jeanne R. Small, telephone: (703) 292-8623, email: [email protected]
• 47.041 --- Engineering
• 47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
• 47.050 --- Geosciences
• 47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
• 47.074 --- Biological Sciences
• 47.075 --- Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences
• 47.076 --- STEM Education
• 47.083 --- Office of Integrative Activities (OIA)
• 47.084 --- NSF Technology, Innovation and Partnerships

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Continuing Grant

Estimated Number of Awards: 5 to 35

Anticipated Funding Amount: $17,000,000

Proposals must request at least the amount of funding required to support three Fellows over three years ($477,000 total). It is anticipated that no proposals will request support for more than 20 Fellows over three years ($3,180,000 total). It is also anticipated that the average award size will allow five Fellows to be supported for three years ($795,000 total).

Number of awards and award sizes are subject to the availability of funds and quality of proposals submitted.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) that are accredited, have a campus located in an eligible EPSCoR jurisdiction at the time of proposal submission, and offer at least one master's and/or doctoral degree in a STEM discipline aligned with the topical focus area(s) described in this solicitation.

Who May Serve as PI:

As of the submission deadline, PIs, co-PIs, or other Senior/Key personnel must hold primary, full-time, paid, and continuing appointments at an institution that is eligible to submit in response to this solicitation (see above), with exceptions granted for family or medical leave, as determined by the submitting institution. Individuals holding term-limited appointments are not eligible.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 1

Each submitting organization is limited to one proposal per annual competition. Potential PIs are advised to contact their institutional office of research (or equivalent) regarding processes used to select proposals for submission. Institutions interested in supporting Fellows in multiple topical focus areas must submit a single proposal that addresses all topical areas of interest.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 1

An individual must not participate as PI, Co-PI, or Senior/Key Personnel on more than one proposal submitted for the same deadline.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. proposal preparation instructions.

• Letters of Intent: Not required
• Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required
• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply. The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .
• Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ).

B. Budgetary Information

C. due dates, proposal review information criteria.

Merit Review Criteria:

National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review criteria apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

Standard NSF award conditions apply.

Reporting Requirements:

Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

I. Introduction

In 1950, Congress established NSF, five years after Vannevar Bush sent a report titled Science – the Endless Frontier to President Harry S. Truman outlining a plan to create a new agency that would contribute to the development of the Nation's scientific talent ( https://www.nsf.gov/about/history/EndlessFrontier_w.pdf ). Bush's report created a blueprint for U.S. scientific research. He made the point that" There are talented individuals in every segment of the population ". Bush further wrote that " ... it is recommended that provision be made for... graduate fellowships... ". These words are reminders that investments in transformative science and people with high potential are key for keeping the U.S. strong and competitive.

The NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) acted on Bush's report and became NSF's first program. Since its inception, GRFP has received applications each year from exceptionally talented individuals who have the potential to make strong positive contributions to the U.S. STEM enterprise. Only a small subset of applicants are offered an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship every year. An additional elite group of applicants receive the distinction of being named an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Honorable Mention in recognition of their outstanding achievements and potential for future contributions in STEM. GRFP Awardees and Honorable Mentions together represent some of the nation's most promising STEM talent. Unfortunately, due to funding limitations, NSF has been unable to provide GRFP Honorable Mentions with financial support for graduate school.

The EPSCoR Graduate Fellowship Program (EGFP) aims to enhance the STEM capacity and competitiveness of EPSCoR jurisdictions by providing graduate degree-granting institutions with funding that can be used to provide fellowships to students who received a GRFP Honorable Mention. The EGFP program specifically seeks to empower IHEs from EPSCoR jurisdictions to attract and retain extremely high-quality graduate students.

This program is an opportunity for GRFP applicants who received the distinction of GRFP Honorable Mention to obtain financial support for their graduate education in STEM disciplines, including the discipline of STEM education research, at an institution in an EPSCoR jurisdiction. Eligible students must have received a GRFP Honorable Mention no more than three years prior to the deadline date for submission of proposals to the EGFP. Students who receive support through this program are known as NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellows, and are referred to as Fellows for the remainder of this solicitation.

EGFP awards are made to institutions to support graduate students in specific fields of study. Institutions that receive funding through this program will be eligible to recruit and support meritorious GRFP Honorable Mentions to attend their institutions and pursue a graduate degree. Support from the EGFP program is only available for those fields specified by the NSF Directorates and Office participating in the EGFP. Students must be recruited for and pursue degrees in the field(s) addressed in each EGFP proposal.

As authorized in the CHIPS and Science Act (Sections 10325, 10387, 10383, and 10393), the EGFP program will help NSF to increase its investments in EPSCoR jurisdictions, while growing STEM talent and providing an opportunity to support the development of a ready workforce in critical and emerging technologies. EGFP investments in the future STEM workforce are intended to build capacity for STEM research in EPSCoR jurisdictions, which in turn is intended to promote innovation and economic growth in EPSCoR jurisdictions and across the Nation.

II. Program Description

STEM Topics and Areas Eligible for Consideration

The following NSF Directorates and Office are participating in this solicitation:

• Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO)
• Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE)
• Directorate for Engineering (ENG)
• Directorate for Geosciences (GEO)
• Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS)
• Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE)
• Directorate for STEM Education (EDU)
• Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP)
• Office of Integrative Activities (OIA)

Each participating Directorate and Office has identified specific topics or areas that align with their unique goals and the programs they support. These topics or areas may differ from the field or sub-field the Honorable Mention recipients previously listed in their GRFP applications.

The topics and area that will be considered for funding by each of the participating Directorates and Office are described below.

Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) : BIO will consider proposals that engage Fellows with research on any topic normally supported by the Directorate for Biological Sciences with an emphasis on proposals that combine biology and artificial intelligence, that advance the bioeconomy, and/or create solutions for a resilient planet. More information about BIO is available on the NSF.gov website. https://www.nsf.gov/dir/index.jsp?org=BIO .

Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) : CISE will consider proposals that engage Fellows with research on any topic normally supported by the Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering. More information about CISE is available on the NSF.gov website. https://new.nsf.gov/cise .

Directorate for Engineering (ENG) : ENG will consider proposals that engage Fellows with research on any topic normally supported by the Directorate for Engineering. More information about ENG is available on the NSF.gov website. https://www.nsf.gov/dir/index.jsp?org=ENG .

Directorate for Geosciences (GEO) : GEO will consider proposals that engage Fellows with research on any topic normally supported by the Directorate for Geosciences. More information about GEO is available on the NSF.gov website. https://new.nsf.gov/about/directorates-offices#geo .

Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS) : MPS will consider proposals that engage Fellows with research on any topic normally supported by the Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences. More information about MPS is available on the NSF.gov website. https://www.nsf.gov/dir/index.jsp?org=MPS .

Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE) : SBE will consider proposals that engage Fellows in any field or fields of study supported by the Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences. More information about SBE is available on the NSF.gov website. https://new.nsf.gov/sbe .

Directorate for STEM Education (EDU) : EDU will consider proposals that provide support for graduate students pursuing a master's or doctoral degree in STEM education. This includes degrees offered within STEM disciplines that involve discipline-based education research. More information about EDU is available on the NSF.gov website. https://new.nsf.gov/edu .

Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP) : TIP will consider proposals that engage Fellows in graduate curricula designed in collaboration with non-academic employers to address skills gaps in the ten key technology areas that are described in Sec. 10387 of the CHIPS and Science Act and correspondingly the focus of the Directorate. NSF recognizes that each of these key technology areas spans multiple fields of study and expects graduate program offerings to demonstrate such multi-disciplinary training. Graduate programs eligible for support must incorporate experiential learning and problem-solving components beyond traditional research activities typically expected of graduate programs in STEM fields. Industry- and policy-based experiential learning opportunities are strongly preferred. Proposals considered for funding by TIP must indicate how specific non-academic employers have been engaged in the development or modification of relevant graduate curricula. More information about TIP is available on the NSF.gov website. https://new.nsf.gov/tip/latest .

Office of Integrative Activities (OIA) : The Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) in OIA will consider proposals that provide support for graduate students pursuing a master's or doctoral degree in a STEM discipline aligned with an EPSCoR Research Infrastructure Improvement (RII) award within the jurisdiction. These submissions should focus on leveraging existing NSF EPSCoR RII investments to improve research, education, broadening participation, and economic development in the jurisdiction. Proposals should identify graduate student experiences that synergize with the currently funded RII project(s) in ways that engage in academic, government, and private sector partners, as appropriate. Currently funded RII projects may be found on NSF's website at this link , by exploring the websites of EPSCoR jurisdictions , or by contacting an NSF EPSCoR RII Program Director .

Institutional Responsibilities

Proposing institutions must be prepared to provide NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellows with a high-quality graduate experience in the discipline(s) in which each Fellow will pursue a graduate degree. Institutions must provide clear evidence of an existing graduate program in the discipline(s) relevant to the proposal. Only proposals focusing on one or more of the topics or areas described above will be considered for funding. Other proposals will be returned without review. See the Full Proposal Preparation Instructions section for more information about the expected contents of a proposal.

Institutions receiving awards through this solicitation will be required to use the NSF Education and Training Application (ETAP) system to recruit prospective Fellows. Institutions may recruit potential Fellows from the pool of highly qualified individuals who received Honorable Mention recognition from the NSF GRFP no more than three years prior to the proposal submission deadline.

NSF conducts ongoing program monitoring and evaluation to determine how effective its programs are at achieving their goals. Proposing institutions must present a plan for ensuring that all project participants, including employees of the proposing institution, as well as supported Fellows, will comply with NSF's requests for information related to program-level evaluation, including requests to participate in surveys, interviews, and other methods for collecting evaluation data. Prospective Fellows offered funding through this program must be informed of and agree to this obligation prior to receiving support.

Proposing institutions should note that for this solicitation, a graduate student Mentoring Plan, prepared in accordance with the guidance contained in the PAPPG, must be included in the Other Supplementary Documents section of the proposal. In submission of each annual and final annual project report, the PI or co-PI is certifying that every graduate student receiving substantial support through this program had an Individual Development Plan (IDP) during the reporting period. NSF defines "substantial support" as support provided to an individual that is equal to one person month or more during the annual reporting period for the NSF award. Other requirements in the PAPPG that apply to all NSF research proposals and awards apply to EGFP proposals and awards.

Fellow Responsibilities

Prospective Fellows will connect with institutions offering fellowships via the NSF Education and Training Application (ETAP) system. In addition to completing an ETAP application, Fellows will also be required to submit any additional documentation required by the institution(s) offering fellowships to be considered for support. Prospective Fellows must have received the distinction of Honorable Mention from the NSF GRFP program no more than three years prior to the deadline date for the institution's proposal to the EGFP program. Fellows can apply to graduate programs that differ from those listed as field or sub-field in their previous GRFP application. To be eligible for ongoing support, fellowship recipients must be enrolled full-time in an eligible master's or doctoral degree-granting program and make ongoing satisfactory progress toward completion of their graduate degree. Fellows must remain enrolled in a degree program in the same discipline as when they were admitted by institution. Full-time enrollment must be certified by the awardee institution's registrar (or equivalent). Fellowships are granted by the institution and not portable to another institution. If a Fellow transfers to another institution, the Fellow will forfeit continued access to the fellowship.

III. Award Information

$17,000,000 available annually. Number of awards is approximate and subject to the availability of funds and quality of the proposals submitted.

IV. Eligibility Information

Additional Eligibility Info:

A proposing institution must provide clear evidence of an existing graduate program in the discipline(s) relevant to the proposal. All proposals must include a Letter of Collaboration from the submitting institution's Graduate School Dean, or from a person with similar responsibility and authority for the graduate programs that are relevant to the proposal.

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions

Full Proposal Preparation Instructions : Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Research.gov or Grants.gov.

• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg . Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] . The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.
• Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov . The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: ( https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

The following instructions are specific to proposals submitted to the EPSCoR Graduate Fellowship Program and supplement the NSF PAPPG.

• Separately submitted collaborative proposals will not be accepted and will be returned without review.
• Proposals that do not contain all items described below will be returned without review.

The following information is in addition to the guidance provided by the NSF PAPPG, which applies to all proposals submitted to NSF.

Cover Sheet: For planning purposes, use March 15 of the upcoming year as the award start date.

Project Summary: (1-page limit): The first sentence of the Project Summary should clearly identify the NSF Directorate(s) or Office that provides funding for research in the disciplinary area and topic that are the focus of the proposal and the number of graduate students for whom Fellowships will be provided. In the case that the proposal focuses on areas that are associated with more than one NSF Directorate or Office, the number of graduate students should be disaggregated by Directorate or Office. The remainder of the Project Summary should describe the proposed project. See the NSF PAPPG for additional instructions. The summary should be written in a manner that will be informative to STEM professionals working in related fields and understandable to a scientifically literate lay reader.

Project Description: The Project Description may not exceed 15 pages, including tables and illustrations.

Each proposal should provide an overview of the educational ecosystem represented by the proposing institution. This may include topics such as size, setting, areas of emphasis, number of undergraduate and graduate degree programs, collaborations with other educational institutions, connections to businesses and industry, or other topics that the proposal authors feel are relevant.

Each proposal must explicitly identify the STEM or STEM education research area(s) for which Fellows are sought, and the number of students for whom Fellowships will be provided (disaggregated by research area as appropriate).

For each relevant discipline, the proposal must provide credible evidence that the institution has the capacity to serve the number of students for whom support is requested. In addition, the institution must demonstrate in the proposal that they have the capability to provide students with a high-quality graduate experience. This means that, at a minimum, the graduate program(s) for which students are sought:

• already exists;
• is supported by a sufficient number of faculty who are willing to advise the students;
• possesses or has access to the facilities and tools necessary to support high-quality research and mentoring in the relevant disciplines;
• is within an institution that has a track record of effectively recruiting, retaining, and graduating STEM or STEM education graduate students and supporting them in finding employment after graduation;
• is within an institution that has demonstrable experience on-boarding new STEM or STEM education research graduate students and promoting their sense of belonging by providing an introduction to the local community, ensuring awareness and access to resources available at the school, and facilitating peer mentoring and support among graduate students; and
• is within an institution that has experience providing professional development for STEM or STEM education graduate students and mentoring them to successful completion of the graduate degrees.

Most of the project description portion of the proposal should focus on providing a complete description of the characteristics of the graduate program that selected Fellows will experience, from matriculation through graduation. Alignment of the graduate program with one or more of those specified by the Directorates/Office collaborating to issue this solicitation must be clearly articulated. Discussion of the topics shown as bullet points in the preceding paragraph must be included. Additionally, each proposal should describe compelling characteristics of the relevant graduate degree program that can be highlighted as evidence of quality. Each proposal should also summarize what constitutes "satisfactory progress" toward completion of a STEM or STEM education research graduate degree in the relevant discipline(s) and describe how students are guided to make continuous satisfactory progress throughout their graduate program. The process by which students who are not making satisfactory progress are notified, given opportunities to improve, and, if no improvement occurs, are dismissed from the program(s) should be addressed.

Additional information may also be included as deemed appropriate in judging the overall potential of the institution to provide Fellows with a high-quality graduate experience. For example, proposals may include information about services and other resources offered to graduate students by relevant departments and/or colleges (or equivalent) and the institution. Proposal authors are encouraged to review the information in Section VI of this Solicitation (NSF Proposal Processing and Review Criteria), including the additional solicitation-specific review criteria.

The proposal must include a commitment to collaborate with NSF to prepare and disseminate institutional graduate admission resources via the NSF Education and Training Application (ETAP) system. A description of the process by which prospective Fellows' information submitted via ETAP will be reviewed, the additional application materials that will be requested from the prospective Fellows, and the process for making final decisions regarding which applicants will be offered fellowships, must be included. Proposing institutions are strongly encouraged to make the application process as simple and straightforward as possible for prospective Fellows because these individuals have already been pre-screened and received an Honorable Mention as a result of the NSF GRFP application and review process.

Other Supplementary Documents: All proposals must include the following two items, which must be uploaded into the Other Supplementary Documents section of the proposal:

• a Letter of Collaboration from the submitting institution's Graduate School Dean, or from a person with similar responsibility and authority for the graduate programs that are relevant to the proposal; and
• a graduate student Mentoring Plan applicable to all Fellows at the proposing institution. Proposers should follow the instruction for preparing and submitting a Mentoring Plan contained within the PAPPG.

Cost Sharing:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Other Budgetary Limitations:

Awards will support up to three years of stipends and associated cost-of-education allowances for Fellows. Stipends should be budgeted at the level of $37,000 per student per year and cost-of-education allowances should be budgeted at the level of $16,000 per student per fellowship year. The cost-of-education allowance provides payment in lieu of tuition and mandatory fees to the institution. A total of three years of support must be budgeted per student. Each student must be given up to five years to utilize the support. Both stipends and cost-of-education allowances must be listed as Participant Support Costs in the NSF proposal budget.

During the years in which students are receiving fellowship support, the institution is required to exempt Fellows from paying tuition and fees normally charged to students of similar academic standing, unless such charges are optional or are refundable (i.e., the institution is responsible for tuition and required fees in excess of the cost-of-education allowance). Acceptance of fellowship funds by the awardee institution indicates acceptance of and adherence to these and other terms and conditions as specified in this solicitation and the PAPPG. The cost-of-education allowance is provided to institutions in lieu of tuition and mandatory fees and it can be used for any purpose that the institution would normally use the revenue it collects via tuition and fees.

Each proposal should develop a three-year budget for the project in which all the funds requested are evenly distributed across the three project years. If the project is on track, the funding requested will be provided to each awardee institution as continuing grant increments during the three project years. The institution can use all the funding for Fellows during those years, or, if one or more Fellows chooses to defer their fellowship, the institution may request one or more no-cost extensions, as necessary, to allow each Fellow up to five years to utilize their three years of fellowship funding. All Fellows' requests for deferral must be approved by the institution. Awardee institutions' requests for no-cost extensions must be documented and approved as described in the PAPPG.

To reiterate, each Fellow will receive up to three years of support and that support may be utilized at any time during a five-year period. A Fellow's cost-of-education allowance, which is to be used at the discretion of the institution, can only be charged to the award during the same year that the Fellow receives a stipend.

Fellows receiving fellowship support must have full access to all resources and other benefits available at the institution to other graduate students supported at the "full-time" support level (normally 20 hours per week average expected commitment) as research or teaching assistants. Once a Fellow matriculates at an institution in a discipline supported by the institution's EGFP award, the Fellow cannot change their field of study to pursue a degree for which the institution has not received EGFP support.

If, for any reason, a supported Fellow leaves an institution, the institution should contact the cognizant NSF program officer. The potential next steps are: (1) the awardee institution recruits a new Fellow; or (2) NSF reduces the value of any upcoming continuing grant increments to reflect the reduction in number of Fellows supported by the institution and/or arranges for the return of some portion of the funds previously provided to the institution by NSF. If the institution receives permission from NSF to recruit a new Fellow and does not have sufficient funds remaining to provide a full three years of support to the incoming Fellow, they may request a supplement to their award. The availability of supplements is dependent upon the availability of funds at NSF. No commitments of NSF-provided funding should be made to incoming replacement Fellows beyond what the host institution is able to provide with the funds remaining in the project budget (including awarded supplements) at the time the commitment is being made. New Fellows must have received Honorable Mention from the NSF GRFP no more than three years prior to the date of submission of the institution's EGFP proposal. New Fellows must connect with the institution via NSF's ETAP system.

Support for no fewer than three Fellows can be requested in any proposal. This requirement does not apply to supplement requests.

D. Research.gov/Grants.gov Requirements

For Proposals Submitted Via Research.gov:

To prepare and submit a proposal via Research.gov, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.research.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html . For Research.gov user support, call the Research.gov Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected] . The Research.gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the Research.gov system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:

Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: https://www.grants.gov/applicants . In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: [email protected] . The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation. Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to Research.gov for further processing. The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov informational page provides submission guidance to applicants and links to helpful resources including the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide , Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov how-to guide , and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Frequently Asked Questions . Grants.gov proposals must pass all NSF pre-check and post-check validations in order to be accepted by Research.gov at NSF. When submitting via Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends applicants initiate proposal submission at least five business days in advance of a deadline to allow adequate time to address NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting organization's local time on the deadline. Please note that some errors cannot be corrected in Grants.gov. Once a proposal passes pre-checks but fails any post-check, an applicant can only correct and submit the in-progress proposal in Research.gov.

Proposers that submitted via Research.gov may use Research.gov to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.

VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures

Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ .

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Leading the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Talent Development and the Delivery of Benefits from Research - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 - 2026 . These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.

1. Merit Review Principles

These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

• All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
• NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.
• Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project.

With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.

These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

2. Merit Review Criteria

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal.

When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

• Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and
• Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

• Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
• Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
• To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
• Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
• How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?
• Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and other underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management and Sharing Plan and the Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

In addition to the standard NSF Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts Criteria, reviewers will be required to carefully consider the extent to which the following aspects are addressed in proposals:

• The capacity and exemplary characteristics of existing graduate education and research programs in the discipline(s) relevant to the proposed project at the proposing institution.
• The effectiveness of graduate education and mentoring programs in the relevant discipline(s) at the proposing institution in retaining students to degree completion and preparing them for success in their future careers.
• The extent to which the proposed project will enhance the capacity for research and/or contribute to innovation in the EPSCoR jurisdiction.

B. Review and Selection Process

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.

Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new recipients may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

VII. Award Administration Information

A. notification of the award.

Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)

B. Award Conditions

An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF . Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

Administrative and National Policy Requirements

Build America, Buy America

As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America's Workers (86 FR 7475), it is the policy of the executive branch to use terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards to maximize, consistent with law, the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.

Consistent with the requirements of the Build America, Buy America Act (Pub. L. 117-58, Division G, Title IX, Subtitle A, November 15, 2021), no funding made available through this funding opportunity may be obligated for infrastructure projects under an award unless all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States. For additional information, visit NSF's Build America, Buy America webpage.

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final annual project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.

Failure to provide the required annual or final annual project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final annual project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

VIII. Agency Contacts

Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:

• NSF Help Desk: 1-800-381-1532
• Research.gov Help Desk e-mail: [email protected]

For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

• Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: [email protected] .

IX. Other Information

The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences . Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website .

Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at https://www.grants.gov .

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.F.7 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at . 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314 (NSF Information Center) (703) 292-5111 (703) 292-5090 Send an e-mail to: or telephone: (703) 292-8134 (703) 292-5111 Privacy Act And Public Burden Statements The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by proposers will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding proposers or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See System of Record Notices , NSF-50 , "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," and NSF-51 , "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records." Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne H. Plimpton Reports Clearance Officer Policy Office, Division of Institution and Award Support Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management National Science Foundation Alexandria, VA 22314 Annual Report Past Annual Reports Environment Government Innovation Public Health Founder’s Projects Bloomberg Associates Corporate Philanthropy Look for Unmet Needs Engage Strong Partners Utilize Advocacy Focus on Cities Remain Flexible Rely on Data Press Releases Newsletters Publications Search Search Submit Search Quick links: All Programs Podcasts Videos Leadership Newsletter Sign-Up Careers Translate English French German Spanish Portuguese Italian Korean Russian Hindi Japanese Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Traditional) Bloomberg Philanthropies Makes Medical School Free at Johns Hopkins University for Majority of Students New $1 Billion Gift Addresses Decline in U.S. Life Expectancy by Covering Costs for All Medical School Students with Limited Means and Increasing Financial Aid at Schools of Nursing, Public Health, and Other Graduate Schools 100 Percent of Tuition Will be Covered for Medical Students from Families Earning Under $300,000 – Representing 95 Percent of All Americans – With Living Expenses and Fees Covered for Students From Families Who Earn Up to $175,000 Gift Will Help More of the Nation’s Brightest Minds Pursue Fields That Inspire Them, Not Necessarily Ones That Best Enable Them to Repay Loans New York, NY – Bloomberg Philanthropies today announced a new $1 billion gift to make medical school free at Johns Hopkins University for a majority of students, while also increasing financial aid for students at its schools of nursing, public health, and other graduate schools. The high cost of medical and nursing school has kept many talented lower-income students from enrolling, graduating, or working in the fields and communities most in need, exacerbating the decline in U.S. life expectancy that began before, and deteriorated during, the COVID-19 pandemic, from which we are only just starting to recover. The announcement was made in Michael R. Bloomberg’s (JHU ’64) annual letter on philanthropy in the Bloomberg Philanthropies 2023-2024 Annual Report released today. “As the U.S. struggles to recover from a disturbing decline in life expectancy, our country faces a serious shortage of doctors, nurses, and public health professionals – and yet, the high cost of medical, nursing, and graduate school too often bars students from enrolling,” said Michael R. Bloomberg, founder of Bloomberg Philanthropies and Bloomberg L.P. “By reducing the financial barriers to these essential fields, we can free more students to pursue careers they’re passionate about – and enable them to serve more of the families and communities who need them the most.” Currently, nearly two-thirds of all students seeking an M.D. from Johns Hopkins qualify for financial aid, and future doctors graduate from Hopkins with an average total student loan debt of approximately $104,000. Beginning in the fall of 2024, Johns Hopkins will offer free tuition for medical students from families earning under $300,000 a year – representing 95 percent of all Americans. Additionally, Johns Hopkins will cover living expenses and fees on top of tuition for students from families who earn up to $175,000. This will bring the average student loan debt for the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine down to $60,279 by 2029 while students from the vast majority of American families will pay nothing at all.  This new gift ensures the most talented aspiring doctors representing the broadest range of socio-economic backgrounds will have the opportunity to graduate debt-free from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. And to further address recent declines in U.S. health, the gift will increase financial aid for students at its School of Nursing and the Bloomberg School of Public Health. The gift will also increase financial aid for low and middle-income students pursuing graduate degrees at Johns Hopkins’ School of Education, Whiting School of Engineering, Carey School of Business, School of Advanced International Studies, Krieger School of Arts and Sciences, Peabody Institute, and the upcoming School of Government and Policy. This generous aid will help Johns Hopkins attract more of the nation’s brightest students to pursue the fields that most inspire them, rather than ones that will best enable them to repay graduate school loans. Recent experience shows that investments aimed at knocking down barriers to a Johns Hopkins education not only reduce student debt and increase socioeconomic diversity on campus, but they also increase the caliber of students who apply and matriculate. In 2018, Bloomberg Philanthropies contributed a historic $1.8 billion to Johns Hopkins to ensure that undergraduate students are accepted regardless of their family’s income, permanently establishing need-blind admissions. That gift lowered the net cost of attendance – the actual cost that most families pay – by 40 percent and had a transformative impact on the makeup of the Johns Hopkins student body. Students with the greatest financial need now represent 21 percent of the Johns Hopkins student body, compared with 9 percent a decade ago – a higher percentage of high-need students than there is at Harvard, Princeton, MIT, and nearly every other Ivy League and Ivy League-adjacent institution. As Johns Hopkins has become more economically diverse, it has also become more selective, attracting and enrolling more of the nation’s top students, including many from lower-income families who might not have applied before. In 2021, Bloomberg Philanthropies and Johns Hopkins University announced the launch of the Vivien Thomas Scholars Initiative , devoted to addressing historic underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields — particularly in leadership roles across universities, government, and industry. The $150 million endowment creates additional pathways for students from Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Serving Institutions to pursue and receive PhDs in STEM fields at Johns Hopkins. Bloomberg Philanthropies has worked to address life expectancy and the disparities in health care access in multiple ways. Among its key initiatives are The Bloomberg American Health Initiative , based out of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, has worked since 2016 to comprehensively address five major causes of declining life expectancy: diet and lack of access to healthy food; environmental hazards like air and water pollution; adolescent health; violence, especially gun violence; and the devastating epidemic of opioid addiction and overdoses. Bloomberg Philanthropies’ support for cities that are committed to protecting public health has also continued to grow through the expansion of Partnership for Healthy Cities , which has helped the mayors of more than 70 cities take action to confront the causes of noncommunicable diseases like cancer and heart disease. In 2022, Bloomberg Philanthropies launched Beyond Petrochemicals , an initiative that is working to block the construction of new, polluting petrochemical plants in the U.S., which pose serious health threats to surrounding communities. To date, Beyond Petrochemicals has prevented the construction of seven new facilities and delayed the opening of 17 more, preventing emissions the equivalent of over 10 coal plants. About Bloomberg Philanthropies: Bloomberg Philanthropies invests in 700 cities and 150 countries around the world to ensure better, longer lives for the greatest number of people. The organization focuses on creating lasting change in five key areas: the Arts, Education, Environment, Government Innovation, and Public Health. Bloomberg Philanthropies encompasses all of Michael R. Bloomberg’s giving, including his foundation, corporate, and personal philanthropy as well as Bloomberg Associates, a philanthropic consultancy that advises cities around the world. In 2023, Bloomberg Philanthropies distributed $3 billion. For more information, please visit  bloomberg.org, sign up for our newsletter , or follow us on Instagram , LinkedIn , YouTube , Threads , Facebook , and X . Media Contact: Rachel Nagler, [email protected] Election 2024 Entertainment Photography AP Buyline Personal Finance AP Buyline Shopping Press Releases Israel-Hamas War Russia-Ukraine War Global elections Asia Pacific Latin America Middle East Election Results Delegate Tracker AP & Elections Auto Racing 2024 Paris Olympic Games Movie reviews Book reviews Financial Markets Business Highlights Financial wellness Artificial Intelligence Social Media Thanks to a $1 billion gift, most Johns Hopkins medical students will no longer pay tuition A sign stands in front of part of the Johns Hopkins Hospital complex, July 8, 2014, in Baltimore. Most medical students at Johns Hopkins University will no longer pay tuition thanks to a $1 billion gift from Bloomberg Philanthropies. Starting in the fall, the gift announced Monday, July 8, 2024 will cover full tuition for medical students from families earning less than $300,000. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky, file) FILE - Former mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg speaks during the Earthshot Prize Innovation Summit in New York, Sept. 19, 2023. Most medical students at Johns Hopkins University will no longer pay tuition thanks to a $1 billion gift from Bloomberg Philanthropies. Starting in the fall, the gift announced Monday, July 8, 2024 will cover full tuition for medical students from families earning less than $300,000. (Shannon Stapleton via AP, Pool, File) Copy Link copied Most medical students at Johns Hopkins University will no longer pay tuition thanks to a $1 billion gift from Bloomberg Philanthropies announced Monday. Starting in the fall, the donation will cover full tuition for medical students from families earning less than $300,000. Living expenses and fees will be covered for students from families who earn up to $175,000. Bloomberg Philanthropies said that currently almost two-thirds of all students seeking a doctor of medicine degree from Johns Hopkins qualify for financial aid, and 45% of the current class will also receive living expenses. The school estimates that graduates’ average total loans will decrease from $104,000 currently to $60,279 by 2029. The gift will also increase financial aid for students at the university’s schools of nursing, public health, and other graduate schools. “By reducing the financial barriers to these essential fields, we can free more students to pursue careers they’re passionate about – and enable them to serve more of the families and communities who need them the most,” Michael Bloomberg, founder of Bloomberg Philanthropies and Bloomberg LP, said in a statement on Monday. Bloomberg received a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from Johns Hopkins University in 1964. The gift will go to John Hopkins’ endowment and every penny will go directly to students, said Ron Daniels, president of Johns Hopkins University. “Mike has really been moved by the challenges that the professions confronted during the course of the pandemic and the heroic efforts they’ve made to protecting and providing care to American citizens during the pandemic,” Daniels said in an interview. “I think he simply wanted to recognize the importance of these fields and provide this support to ensure that the best and brightest could attend medical school and the school of nursing and public health.” Bloomberg Philanthropies previously gifted $1.8 billion to Johns Hopkins in 2018 to ensure that undergraduate students are accepted regardless of their family’s income. Johns Hopkins will be the latest medical school to offer free tuition to most or all of their medical students. In February Ruth Gottesman , a former professor at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the widow of a Wall Street investor, announced that she was donating $1 billion to the school. The gift meant that four-year students immediately received free tuition and all other students will be offered free tuition in the fall. In 2018, Kenneth and Elaine Langone gave $100 million to the NYU Grossman School of Medicine to make tuition free for all current and future medical students through an endowment fund. The couple gave a second gift of $200 million in 2023 to the NYU Grossman Long Island School of Medicine to guarantee free tuition for all medical students. Kenneth Langone is a co-founder of Home Depot. Other medical schools, like UCLA’s David Geffen School of Medicine, offer merit-based scholarships thanks to some $146 million in donations from the recording industry mogul, David Geffen. The Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine has also offered tuition-free education for medical students since 2008. Candice Chen, associate professor, Milken Institute School of Public Health at The George Washington University, has researched the social missions of medical schools and had a strong reaction to the recent major gifts to John Hopkins, NYU and Albert Einstein. “Collectively the medical schools right now, I hate to say this, but they’re failing in terms of producing primary care, mental health specialists as well as the doctors who will work in and serve in rural and underserved communities,” Chen said. She would have loved to see this gift go to Meharry Medical College in Tennessee, for example, which is a historically Black school that has produced many primary care doctors who work in communities that have shortages. Bloomberg granted Meharry Medical College $34 million in 2020 as part of a $100 million gift he made to four Black medical schools to help reduce the debt of their medical students for four years. There have been only a handful of previous $1 billion donations to universities in the U.S., most coming in the past several years. In 2022, the venture capitalist John Doerr and his wife, Ann, gave $1.1 billion to Stanford University for a new school focusing on climate change. The small liberal arts school McPherson College has received two matching pledges since 2022 from an anonymous donor totaling $1 billion. The school, which has around 800 enrolled students, has a program for automotive restoration and is located 57 miles north of Wichita, Kansas. Bloomberg, the former New York mayor, gave $3 billion to charities in 2023 , making him one of the largest donors, according to research by the Chronicle of Philanthropy. 117 IMAGES PPT A Simple Introduction to PhD Funding How to Find PhD Funding in the UK How to Pay for Medical School: 5 Must-Know Tips PhD Scholarships: A Guide to Funding Your Doctoral Journey Medicine scholarships: Medical scholarships for medical students VIDEO FINDING & FUNDING a PhD! UK University Lecturer tips and suggestions Funding an Ultrasound Program: Navigating the Financial Waters of Academia PhD Funding Available 🚨 🚨 #phd #agricultureinusa Common Mistakes That Get PhD Applicants Rejected MD Scholarships Help EVMS Deliver on the Promise to Train Future Physicians International PhD student, Funding COMMENTS PDF 2023 Compendium of Graduate Medical Education Initiatives report 2023 Compendium of Graduate Medical Education Initiatives Report 1 Table of Contents Introduction An overview of GME A brief summary of current GME funding Medicare GME caps Medicaid GME funding The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and the U.S. Department of Defense Private or alternative funding for GME Why reform GME? Current GME initiatives Graduate Medical Education (GME) Funding News & Info Funding for Graduate Medical Education helps ensure enough residents learn to provide the care patients need, when they need it. Brief Graduate Medical Education Funding This brief highlights how states are leveraging graduate medical education, or clinical training requirements, to address health workforce shortages. Graduate Medical Education Furthermore, Stanford University Medical Center commits itself to providing adequate funding of graduate medical education to ensure support of its faculty, residents, ancillary staff, facilities, and educational resources to achieve this important mission. Types of Funding Harvard Medical School Scholarships. Financial need is the only criterion used to determine the amount of HMS scholarship a student receives. This program is funded from endowed funds, current fundraising, and unrestricted income. For a full-need student, the HMS scholarship funding covers both tuition and mandatory fees. Graduate medical education funding mechanisms, challenges, and With increased attention on the federal budget deficit, graduate medical education (GME) funding has in particular been targeted as a potential source of cost reduction. Reduced GME funding can further deteriorate the compensation of physicians during ... Doctoral Program in Health Professions Education This collaboration makes possible a rigorous program for scholarly advancement for medical education researchers. Successful candidates graduate with a PhD in Health Professions Education from UMC Utrecht. Well-regarded medical education researchers serve as mentors. MD-PhD The Harvard/MIT MD-PhD Program at Harvard Medical School (HMS), sponsored primarily by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) through its Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) since 1974, provides fellowship support for selected and highly qualified students who have elected to pursue both the MD and PhD degrees. The overall mission is to train the next generation of premier and diverse ... PDF Funding for Graduate Medical Education Funding for Graduate Medical Education (GME) is derived from both public and private sources. The federal government is by far the largest contributor to GME. Federal investments in GME occur through various programs that support physician workforce development. These programs are managed by agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Veterans Affairs, and ... Harvard/MIT MDPhD Program Funding. The Harvard/MIT MD-PhD Program at Harvard Medical School (HMS) has been sponsored in part by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) through its Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) since 1974. All MD-PhD student applicants to our program compete on equal footing for MSTP support, regardless of scientific interest. PhD Funding PhD students in Graduate Medical Sciences (GMS) at Boston University's School of Medicine and the School of Public Health (SPH) also enjoy a full-funding model. GMS and SPH PhD students receive a full tuition scholarship, are exempt from paying student fees, receive health insurance coverage as part of their support, and are entitled to an annual stipend. For more specific information ... Making Sense of Graduate Medical Education Funding The bill funds five important programs centered around public health, one of them being the Teaching Health Center Graduate Medical Education (THCGME) Program. This is one of the few opportunities to increase GME funding outside of direct Medicare-supported positions. The THCGME Program currently supports 728 residents and has the added benefit ... Grants & Funding Grants & Funding. The National Institutes of Health is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world. In fiscal year 2022, NIH invested most of its $45 billion appropriations in research seeking to enhance life, and to reduce illness and disability. PhD in Health Professions Education The PhD in HPE program will produce exemplary scholars who advance the field of health professions education by developing innovative research agendas that shape educational policy, standards, and practices, with the ultimate goal of improving healthcare. While the PhD in HPE will share course offerings with DME's renowned MHPE program, it will include a greater emphasis on research design ... External Funding for Student Research External Funding Opportunities. Students are encouraged to apply for funding from external sources for research or travel. In most cases, students apply directly to the funding sources. Fellowships. The Office of Scholarly Engagement (OSE) provides information about external funding fellowship opportunities. Students are encouraged to apply for ... medical education PhD Projects, Programmes & Scholarships University of Dundee School of Medicine. Medical education, as a relatively new field of scientific study, has understandably been dominated by qualitative research efforts. Read more. Supervisor: Dr B Kumwenda. 31 October 2024 PhD Research Project Self-Funded PhD Students Only. More Details. Program Expansion/Funding The Graduate Medical Education Committee (GMEC) Subcommittee on Residency Expansion will review your request and forward its recommendations to the entire GMEC for discussion and voting. Discussion is solely based on educational merit. Funding issues are not considered. Medical School Scholarships It's possible to graduate medical school for less with a proactive scholarship strategy. Understand the types of scholarships available and how to find them. MD/MDPhD Scholarships Tuition scholarships are awarded to AMS MD/PhD students that are not based on need. In addition, the Office of Admission offers merit scholarships based on criteria other than need. All other financial aid at The Warren Alpert Medical School is awarded on the basis of financial need. Notice of Funding Opportunity: Children's Hospitals Graduate Medical The Children's Hospitals Graduate Medical Education (CHGME) Payment Program - HRSA-25-079, provides funding to freestanding children's hospitals to train pediatric and other residents in graduate medical education programs and aims to provide balance in the level of federal graduate medical education funding. PDF Children's Hospitals Graduate Medical Education (CHGME) Payment Program In 1999, Congress addressed the disparity of graduate medical education (GME) funding between freestanding children's teaching hospitals and other teaching hospitals by passing the Healthcare Research and Quality Act, which established the Children's Hospitals Graduate Medical Education (CHGME) Payment Program. The act was signed on Johns Hopkins receives transformative Bloomberg Philanthropies Johns Hopkins University celebrated today's announcement by Bloomberg Philanthropies of a new gift of $1 billion to make Hopkins free for most medical students and expand financial aid for future nurses and public health pioneers, infusing these critical professions with top talent from all ... Johns Hopkins gets $1B, making med school tuition-free Johns Hopkins University has received a new gift of $1 billion from Bloomberg Philanthropies, which will allow the majority of the university's medical students to attend tuition-free, the university announced Monday. NSF 24-588: NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellowship Program (EGFP) The NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellowship Program (EGFP) provides an opportunity for applicants who received the distinction of GRFP Honorable Mention no more than three years before the proposal due date to be named NSF EPSCoR Graduate Fellows and obtain financial support for their graduate education at an institution in an EPSCoR jurisdiction. Bloomberg Philanthropies Makes Medical School Free at Johns Hopkins New York, NY - Bloomberg Philanthropies today announced a new $1 billion gift to make medical school free at Johns Hopkins University for a majority of students, while also increasing financial aid for students at its schools of nursing, public health, and other graduate schools. The high cost of medical and nursing school has kept many ... Mike Bloomberg gives $1 billion to Johns Hopkins for free medical A $1 billion gift to Johns Hopkins University from billionaire Mike Bloomberg will make medical school free for most students and increase financial aid for those enrolled in nursing, public ... Johns Hopkins: Medical school now free for most students after ... Bloomberg Philanthropies is gifting $1 billion to make medical school free for the majority of students at Johns Hopkins University, joining other high-profile donors who have contributed to ... Advice for Premed Students With a Criminal Record For a medical school applicant with a criminal record, calling the issue complex is an understatement. The Association of American Medical Colleges offers a criminal background check on all ... Most Johns Hopkins medical students will no longer pay tuition thanks Most medical students at Johns Hopkins University will no longer pay tuition thanks to a $1 billion gift from Bloomberg Philanthropies. About the Residency About the Residency Chestnut Hill Hospital Podiatric Residency offers a 3-year PMSR/RRA Podiatric Medicine Residency program, fully accredited by the Council of Podiatric Medical Education. The residency program is directed by Dr. Albert Mosheyev with the assistant director Dr. Terrence Dunn. Residents work with both podiatric and orthopedic surgeons at Chestnut Hill Hospital. assignment essay homework paper phd report resume review speech thesis