Skip to main content

Reviewer Guidelines



  • Strong preference is given to recent PhDs (PhD within 3 years).  If life circumstances have forced applicant to take a break (family and/or parental needs, health issues, etc.), applicants are encouraged to state it in the cover letter.
  • Applicants cannot be currently affiliated with Chinese institutions (prior affiliation is fine).
  • It is expected that applicants and hosts will be establishing a new collaboration.  Prior collaborations with host should be clarified in the cover letter.
  • Applicants should apply only if they anticipate finishing their PhD by the first Monday in December of the award year.
  • Applicants must change institutions (need a compelling reason not to do so).


  • Hosting institutions must be in the U.S.
  • Host cannot be the applicant’s PhD adviser or postdoc mentor.
  • Host cannot be part of the Jack Eddy Steering Committee.

The following institutional departments currently host first-year C&GC Fellows and are ineligible to serve as hosts this year because they are currently hosting Jack Eddy Fellows:

  • Goddard Space Flight Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)

  • National Center for Atmospheric Research, High Altitude Observatory

  • New Jersey Institute of Technology, Physics Department

  • The Johns Hopkins University,  Applied Physics Laboratory

  • University of California, Berkeley,  Space Sciences Laboratory

Primary Qualifications

With the aim of identifying applicants with potential for Scientific leadership, applications will be evaluated according to three main criteria (weighted equally):


  • Project needs to address directly the objectives of the NASA LWS program.
  • The statement of relevance needs to stand on its own and contain sufficient information to address relevance without the rest of the proposal.
  • A competitive proposal in the spirit of the Jack Eddy Fellowship will cross rigid boundaries between subdisciplines within heliophysics. Proposals that address too narrowly a niche, or are a mere continuation of prior PhD or postdoctoral research, are not considered competitive. A proposed interdisciplinary approach is encouraged.

Academic Excellence and Leadership

  • Publication record.
  • Activities that show potential for scientific leadership, such as: invited and/or public lectures, awards received, scientific program committees, conference or workshop organization, mentoring others, participation in public outreach, involvement in policy-related committees, professional society activities, special (e.g., international interagency, intergovernmental, or private-public) partnerships.

Proposal Quality

  • Applicants are strongly encouraged to communicate the scientific impact and context of their proposal at a basic level that does not require detailed domain knowledge.
  • Proposals should outline clearly the scientific question(s) and/or objective(s) that will be addressed and how the project will give them closure.
  • The proposal should contain a clear methodology for addressing the science questions and a feasible work plan.

Secondary Considerations

Quantity of Postdocs per Institution

  • Committee will strive for balance in distribution of postdocs placed at various institutions.
  • Higher preference will be given to applicants that seek to establish new collaborations.


  • Hosts are expected to guide and mentor the Fellow, according to their plan outlined in their Letter of Intent to Host without inhibiting the ability for the Fellow to become an independent researcher.
  • One or two page letter of interest from host indicating areas of focus, as well as a clear plan for mentoring the postdoc.  A curriculum vitae is required.
  • Hosts are not expected to compete for postdocs.
  • Hosts are expected to provide office space, internet, and a workstation for the fellow.

Steering Committee Member Hosting Postdoc

  • A Postdoctoral Fellow may go to a Committee Member's institution and work in member's group, but a Committee Member should disassociate themselves from the fellow.

Applicant from a Steering Committee Member's Institution

  • Members who are from the same administrative unit as applicant should not take part in:
    • Voting
    • Advocacy (which could lead to promoting a candidate unfairly over another)
    • Committee Member should leave room for deliberations and vote
    • Questions of fact are acceptable