Postdoc Fellowships Guide

Know that if you’re thinking of applying for a postdoc fellowship, you’re a Rockstar. Heck, you’re a Rockstar even if you don’t get one. Academia is a career rollercoaster, and staying grounded on the ride requires believing in yourself and being open to new opportunities.

While support groups for PhD and Faculty applications are plentiful, applying to postdoc fellowships may have been the loneliest time of my career. I am passionate about academia being a positive community, so I write this guide in the hopes that it may shine a light for others exploring alternative postdoc opportunities.

Alongside this guide, I maintain a fellowship list that includes programs I applied to or researched thoroughly. You’ll find application dates, decision timelines, and salary details, with an additional sheet of fellowships I’ve found or received from others after my application cycle. Please reach out if you know of fellowships to add, or if you can share missing information on salaries and interview/decision dates (confidentiality guaranteed!).

Inspired by friend Lucy Lai’s PhD Guide, I have broken up this post into short, digestible, FAQ-like sections:

Table of Contents

General Application Tips

Application Components

Navigating the Process

General Application Tips

Should I apply for a fellowship?

After landing my first offer, I thought a lot about whether the journey had been worth it. I love how empowering the Broad Institute’s Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fellowship is, but I put my research in a holding pattern for a year while I prepped, interviewed, and pondered my offers. Considering the current postdoc shortage, applying for a traditional role and saving months on the application process could easily be the more strategic move.

From my experience, and that of friends who landed similar positions, postdoc fellowships are best suited for those who highly value their independence, and are successful working either alone, or in collaboration with a broad range of people. This is generally easiest for those in computational fields, as most fellowships do not cover the astronomical material costs of experiments. Yet, securing your own salary can give you significant flexibility in your research interests to pursue your own research ideas, even in more resource-intensive fields, so do read on!

back to top

What kind of fellowships are there?

  1. Mini Labs are the most generous fellowships, funding a 2-3 person lab for 3-5 years. These positions offer accelerated independence straight out of graduate school, allowing you to establish a unique research direction while gaining project management and mentoring experience. Additionally, they’re a stepping stone toward early independence grants. Some institutes even aim to transition successful “Mini Labs” into full assistant professor roles, saving you the challenge of moving personnel and equipment. With the large financial commitment behind a “Mini Lab” offer, generally only 1 or 2 positions are available at each institute per year.

  2. Independent Postdocs provide salary, travel and research funds, and office space without a formal expectation to work with a specific lab. This setup is ideal for those with their own project ideas who are looking for an environment that encourages both independence and collaboration. Typically, each program will recruit a “cohort,” consisting of anywhere from 2 to 8 new hires a year, thereby providing a more collegial interview process and a community upon arrival.

  3. Traditional Postdocs fund a more typical mentored position, often including travel and research funds, thereby providing intellectual freedom—along with, in some cases, a higher salary. Eligibility requirements vary: some programs, such as the HFSP LTP, UC Berkeley Miller Fellowship, and EMBO, expect little to no prior work with your intended postdoc lab, while others allow for a few years of postdoc experience. Although these programs fund multiple positions per year, the positions may span diverse fields and locations, meaning you may still be competing for a spot within your area of interest.

back to top

When should I start applying?

Getting a fellowship may take over a year of applying. The most egregious in this regard is the HFSP, which requires a letter of intent in May, a full application in September, and recipients do not begin the award until the following APRIL! Even for a shorter cycle, you should expect at least a 6-month turnaround between applying for and starting your new position.

If you’re aiming to apply to a broad range of fellowships, I would recommend having at least a year left in your current position. For example, I wanted to start a position in the Summer or Fall of 2024, and began reaching out to mentors and outlining my research plan as early as Spring of 2023. If you are only applying for “Independent Postdoc” or “Traditional Postdoc” opportunities, you may have more flexibility and could start later in the summer or early fall, with an eye toward starting the following spring or summer.

back to top

How many programs should I apply to?

I went overboard and applied for 20 programs, and got rejected from over half. I didn’t even get an interview for the first six months! Along the way, I learned a lot about which fellowships I was a good fit for: as a theorist, I matched the profile of “Independent Postdoc” or “Traditional Postdoc” positions. By contrast, I found that “Mini Lab” opportunities are generally set up for applicants ready to start an experimental lab, so although they often interview computational candidates, the final placements tend to go to experimentalists, who more naturally match the available resources and funding structure. At the end of the day, the right number of applications depends on fit and timeline. If you are an experimentalist aiming to launch an independent research program, it might make sense to apply broadly, whether your goal is to start your own lab or support your work within an existing one. If you’re mainly seeking additional freedom or stability within your current postdoc lab through a grant, there may be fewer opportunities, so it’s worth focusing your applications and tailoring your materials to those specific roles.

back to top

Should I reach out to PIs before applying?

Yes — many of these positions sound similar, and having an inside opinion will be crucial for understanding the specifics of the role. For Traditional Postdoc applications, having a planned mentor is often essential, as they may be asked for a letter of support. Even for Mini-Lab positions, which are fully independent, it’s helpful to connect with PIs who may be interested in your work, as they can offer insights into the application process and may serve as advocates towards the decision committee.

That being said, I did apply to a number of positions without previous contact, and had success. At the other extreme, don’t limit yourself to the first set of scientists you talk to — in my applications I usually highlighted a few researchers with mutual interests, but during interviews I often met with a broader group of PIs, and left with exciting possibilities for collaborations I hadn’t initially considered.

back to top

Application Components

The Checklist

Virtually all applications will require:

Some programs may also require:

back to top

Research Statement

The Research Statement is the cornerstone of your application, where you:

  1. Present your scientific vision,
  2. Outline your preparation for an independent role,
  3. Show why you and your goals are a good fit for this institution.

In some cases you may be asked for additional essays covering points (2) and (3). However, the total number of pages over all essays was usually consistent between applications, so I would just split the main 3-page essay into two or three shorter ones, where necessary.

I used a “layered hourglass” structure: I had an introduction that utilized my research experiences to transition from the broad questions of the field to the specific problems I hoped to address. I then proposed 2-3 research aims, each beginning with broader motivations, narrowing to specific methods, and ending with potential impacts. I concluded with a summary of “softer” qualifications like teaching and mentorship, my long-term vision, and how these align with the program’s goals. Throughout, I used boldface (1-2 sentences per paragraph) to emphasize the takeaways, allowing my message to come through even with a skim read.

Here’s a breakdown of each part of the Research Statement and how I approached them:

Introduction

I began my introduction with a broad paragraph outlining the research problem. In my case, this was neurodevelopment, and I described why the topic is exciting generally, what the gaps are, and why current technologies, datasets, and concepts make this a timely and tractable question.

Next, I described my research experience related to the problem. When I had 3 pages, or a separate essay for this, I would describe each of my PhD projects in detail, painting a picture of how they built upon each other and led me to my current research interests. For shorter essays, I condensed this down to a single paragraph which still highlighted research independence, the diversity of my research toolkit, and the expertise I would bring to the institute and outlined problems.

In the final paragraph of the introduction I transitioned to my specific research goals, connecting my high-level interests to the aims I was proposing.

Research Aims

I split the main body of the Research Statement into a series of “Aims,” each with its own Background, Goal, Approach, and Outlook sections. This followed the hourglass structure: starting broad with the Background and Goal, narrowing to the specific Approach, and broadening again to discuss the potential impact in the Outlook.

When writing these Aims, it’s important to remember that your evaluators may not be in your field, so your writing should be accessible to a broader scientific audience. I personally only dove deep in the “Approach” section, in order to show to someone in-field that I still know what I am doing, but friends, especially experimentalists, have also had success being more techinical throughout.

I found that the space constraints would only allow 2 or 3 Aims to fit into the essay. However, I prepared 3-4 Aims in total to have a “pool” to draw from depending on whether the position was more biologically or computationally focused. As I assembled Aims into an application, I outlined how I would independently approach it (e.g. through publicly available datasets or outside collaborators), but also identified potential collaborators at the institute who might enhance the work. Having these related, but independent, Aims proved useful during interviews, as different professors would engage with different Aims, thereby providing multiple inroads for a fruitful discussion.

Figures were sometimes allowed, sometimes not, but often no guidance was given. I defaulted to not including them, unless explicitly requested. This significantly reduced edits, a godsend in periods when due dates piled up, and helped avoid any situation where I would be “disqualified” from the application due to missing a formatting requirement.

Conclusions

The last section of the Research Statement is an opportunity to show your alignment with the advertised position. I usually began with a sentence connecting my Aims to a broader scientific vision, signaling a transition away from the more technical sections. I then highlighted my “softer” qualifications, which in my case was outreach and organizing workshops and speaker series, but this section would also be a good place to discuss teaching and mentorship, if that is your focus. This helped frame what I would bring to the institute, including specific contributions like chalk talks or seminars I’d be excited to lead.

Finally, I concluded by linking my goals to the program’s mission, often quoting directly from the job posting. My closing paragraph typically followed this structure:

In summary, I believe that this intersection of neuroscience, data science, and development presents a frontier for understanding the evolutionary discovery of biological intelligence. My aims align with the [Position]’s vision to [Quote from Website]. I believe that understanding neurodevelopmental processes will prove instructive to clinical, genomics, systems neuroscience, and machine learning communities in the future, and would cherish the opportunity to develop collaborations and dialogues on this viewpoint as a [Position Title].

This concluding paragraph allowed me to end on a concrete takeaway that illustrated that I had taken the time to research the program. While I generally hate canned language, having this section, as well as a few similar sentences in the Aims, would allow me to rapidly, but specifically, tailor my application to the advertised position.

back to top

Rec Letters

Recommendation letters are the second most important component of your application, as they serve to reinforce the narrative of your Research Statement. While letters may feel like they are out of your control, communicating clearly with your writers about the programs you are applying to can significantly elevate your application. Remind your writers that these fellowships value independence, so examples of how you led projects, initiated collaborations, or mentored students can make a strong impact.

Most programs ask for 3 letters, although I’ve seen as low as two, and as many as 6. The core letter should be from your PhD advisor, who should paint a picture of your research trajectory — if you were dual advised, or already have a first PostDoc, you’re already a letter ahead. The remaining letters should come from people who can credibly support your narrative. You may consider a collaborator, a researcher you worked with for an internship, or someone who can reinforce your mentoring, teaching or outreach experiences. Recommenders may ask you to draft the letter yourself, and it can be helpful to send a brief outline of what you hope the letter will cover when you first reach out.

I contacted my letter writers 6-8 weeks before my first deadline, attaching a rough draft of my research proposal and communicating my general vision for my next career step. Then, about 4-6 weeks before each subsequent deadline, I sent my recommenders the letter submission portal, and a short summary of the position and its unique focus, if relevant. Keeping your writers on track can be the most challenging part of your application — setting recurring reminders and keeping spreadsheets of who has submitted already can help ensure that your letters get uploaded. Watch out for applications that require all letters to be uploaded before submitting; for these, and more generally, it may not hurt to give your letter writers the date you want to submit by, and not the last possible submission time, in order to allow for some leeway.

back to top

Other Materials

CV/Publication List

Other than slight organization tricks, there is not much you can change about your CV and Publication List by the time you are applying. I found it helpful to keep my CV long, as I had great chats with interviewers about a random early-career experience. I organized my CV with sections on Education, Research (providing a single bullet point of context), Papers (with my name in bold), Conferences Organized, Art Exhibits, Talks (noting invited speakerships), Posters, and Honors and Awards. If asked for exemplary papers, choose ones that best fit the profile of the opportunity, ideally focusing on first-author pubs.

Cover Letter

Most programs don’t ask for a cover letter, and when they do, it was often unclear whether they were read. That said, a Cover Letter allows you to set the narrative for the rest of your application. I typically opened with a brief statement about the program’s strengths, followed by a paragraph summarizing my PhD experience and an outline of the aims I would pursue if accepted. In the rest of the letter I would highlight the extra-scientific goals I have with the fellowship, from outreach to scientific workshop organizations, and then I would end on a final paragraph on how great the opportunity is, and how I believe my experiences dovetail well with it. To be honest, the hardest part of the Cover Letter was making sure I had the right date and position each time, and I doubt it carried much more weight than this.

Letter of Support

For “Traditional Postdoc” fellowships like the EMBO, HFSP, and the UC Berkeley Miller Research Fellowship, you may need a Letter of Support from your intended mentor, detailing your joint research plan and institutional fit. If you’re already in a postdoc lab or have one lined up, this should be straightforward—your advisor simply outlines what you plan to accomplish together. However, if you’re applying to a wide range of programs and would only join a particular lab if awarded the fellowship, you may need to secure multiple Letters of Support for work you may never do. Nevertheless, I found many professors supportive, and willing to meet to come up with a joint submission for such fellowships, especially when I helped draft the letter. Overall, programs that require Letters of Support are all still great opportunities, but do come with a tinge of awkwardness as they make the application, and potential rejection, more personal.

Additional Essays

As noted in the Research Statement section, applications obeyed the “Law of Page Conservation”: even when additional essays were requested, the total page count was still around 2-3. When asked for a Personal History Statement, I would use the graduate school and “extracurricular” section from the Research Statement, into which I could then slot an additional Aim. For the one Diversity Statement essay I submitted, I expanded on the outreach, conference organization, and mentorship sections of my Research Statement, focusing on how these initiatives could benefit the host institute’s community. Here, having discussions with a professor at the university proved invaluable, as it allowed me align my proposals with ongoing initiatives and community programs. Overall, while having extra requirements seemed daunting, they often boiled down to slight tweaks on existing materials.

back to top

From Applying to Deciding

Preparing materials, corralling letter writers, and submitting application after application can feel like a full-time job. Thankfully, once interviews start, the pace picks up, and things move quickly as you (hopefully) balance offers and revisits before making a final decision.

Interviews

Your interview visit will likely take place on a weekday and usually starts with a talk, which may be a standalone seminar (1+ hours) or a shorter 15-20 minute presentation if you’re visiting with other candidates. The rest of the day involves meetings with faculty who will decide on your application, as well as students and postdocs who can provide insight into the institute and position. Typically, this turns into a 2-3 day trip: you arrive in the evening, complete your visit the next day (often concluding with dinner), and then fly out the following morning.

Some programs had zoom interviews before the in-person visit. Here, you would give a brief (10-15 min) talk, answer a few questions, and then be thanked for your time. I found these more stressful than in-person interviews, as they felt rushed and impersonal. The Zoom calls were clearly set up to be screeners, where the committee would sit through a full day of lightning talks, so my best advice is have a clear, succinct presentation that won’t throw any red flags. If possible, also try to book a later interview, so the committee has time to “practice” on others, allowing you to shine at the end (recency bias is real!).

For both grad school and postdoc fellowships, interviews were my favorite part of the application process. Being flown out, wined, and dined is a significant investment on the program’s part and usually signals a genuine interest in extending an offer. Rather than focusing on how you’re evaluated, consider that you are also interviewing the program: are these the colleagues you would like to have? Will they provide the support that you’d expect from your next career step? In cases where the interview was my only in-person visit, I also asked open-ended questions about the program’s vision, tenure-track transition opportunities, as well as more sensitive questions about hiring loads and decision deadlines. Having this curious mentality, both about the environment and the people, will show your genuine interest, a component nearly equal to your science for landing the position.

back to top

Offers and Decisions

The top advice I heard during my fellowship search was wait until you have an offer on paper. It seems tautological, but your decision will have to be between places that also want you, so cast a wide net, and be patient.

In practicality, the process goes something like this: a few weeks after an interview, you may get a call with a verbal offer. On the phone, they will likely give broad details related to your compensation, and ask you when you can decide. Be appreciative, ask about their timeline, and then say that you will aim to give a decision soon after you receive a written offer (which can take up to four weeks!).

Having a verbal offer means it is time to vet your options and the opportunity.

Begin by reaching out to other positions that you may consider over the current one, share that you have an offer in hand, and ask them about their decision timeline. In certain cases, this got me on an accelerated interview track, meaning that I received a competing offer while the window was still open on my previous one.

During this time, also follow up with the researchers and opportunities that drew you to the position that gave you an offer in the first place. Are your intended collaborators still enthusiastic? Ensure that the support you expect—mentorship, personnel, equipment—is solid.

Once you have a written offer, review it in detail. There’s usually limited flexibility on salary, although they may be able to match a competing offer. Focus instead on the “soft” aspects like office space, mentoring arrangements, grant eligibility, and travel budget. Make sure to get everything in writing, especially if it relates to finances or the structure of your role (e.g. teaching, grant submission, and hiring). Remember, that the scientists who made you an offer are on your side and can help with anything, from “two-body” problems to housing questions.

Finally, while undergrad, grad school, and faculty applications have a “season,” the postdoc fellowship hunt introduces a lot of awkwardness with its staggered deadlines. My main advice here is to communicate clearly. You may reach a point where you have a great offer in hand, but are still waiting to hear back from your dream job. In a case like this, I shared my situation with trusted contacts at the places where I had offers, explaining that I’d love to work there but had an outstanding opportunity I was seriously considering.

A more challenging scenario is if you’ve already accepted an offer but later receive a more attractive one. Two major considerations arise here. First, while it may sting in the short term to back out of your current position, it’s worse for everyone involved if you spend the next 3-5 years wistful about another opportunity. On the other hand, remember that your future faculty job search may involve these same colleagues, so try to maintain professionalism and transparency. The solution is heavily situation dependent, but generally people are understanding if you can be mindful in your communication of why you are suddenly changing course.

back to top

And… that’s it! If you’ve made it this far, congratulations—this process has been a long journey, and I hope these reflections help! If there’s something I haven’t covered or a topic you’d like more detail on, feel free to reach outI will constantly be updating 🙂

Dániel