2.
Characteristics of PFF Program
To set the context for examination of Fellow accomplishments,
it is useful to understand the characteristics of both the
postsecondary institutions and the young tenure-track faculty
who benefited from the PFF program.
The potential scope of the PFF program was very
wide. NSF sought nominations from all institutions in the
United States that offered a baccalaureate, master's, or doctoral
degree in fields supported by the Foundation. Institutions
were allowed to submit two nominations per year. When nominating
individuals, institutions were encouraged to be "sensitive
to diversity issues and inclusive across departments and campuses."
Over the four years from 1992 through 1995, 338
institutions nominated faculty members for the PFF award.
Almost two-fifths of these institutions only nominated one
faculty member over the life of the program. The remaining
colleges and universities nominated between two and eight
faculty members over the life of the program. A small sample,
57 (17 percent), nominated two individuals in each of the
years that PFF was active. Only 4 of the nominations came
from institutions that were classified as historically black
colleges or universities (HBCUs). Furthermore, 65 percent
of the nominations during this period came from public institutions,
with the remaining 35 percent coming from private institutions.
Table 2-1 shows the total number of institutions
that nominated faculty for the program. Data in the table
also show that nominations declined over time.
Table 2-1. Number of nominating/awardee
institutions: 1992-95
Institution
|
Award year
|
FY 1992
|
FY 1993
|
FY 1994
|
FY 1995
|
FY 1992-95
|
Nominating institutions
|
204
|
206
|
174
|
174
|
338
|
Awardee institutions
|
30
|
29
|
28
|
30
|
82
|
SOURCE: PFF program
documentation.
By the end of the program, PFF grants had been
awarded to 120 individuals at 82 institutions. While 67 percent
of these universities and colleges received only one PFF award,
19 institutions (23 percent) received two awards: between
1992 and 1995, the University of California-Berkeley received
four PFF awards; Johns Hopkins University, four awards; Georgia
Institute of Technology, three awards; Purdue University,
three awards; and University of Chicago, three awards.
Of the 120 awards, 62 percent were made to public
institutions and 38 percent were awarded to private institutions
(the balance between public and private institutions was similar
for nominee and awardee institutions). One award went to an
institution in Puerto Rico, while none went to an HBCU.
PFF
Nominees and Awardees
As shown in Table 2-2, 80 percent of the 1,183
nominations were submitted to three NSF Directorates: Mathematical
and Physical Sciences (28 percent), Engineering (27 percent),
and Biological Sciences (25 percent).
Table 2-2. PFF nominations, by Directorate:
1992-95
Directorate
|
Award cohort
|
FY 1992
|
FY 1993
|
FY 1994
|
FY 1995
|
FY 1992-95
|
Total number
|
323
|
314
|
272
|
274
|
1,183
|
Biological Sciences
|
22.8%
|
24.6%
|
25.5%
|
25.7%
|
24.6%
|
Computer
Science and Engineering |
10.2
|
11.2
|
8.1
|
9.5
|
9.8
|
Education and Human
Resources
|
0.9
|
1.3
|
0.0
|
1.5
|
0.9
|
Engineering
|
29.9
|
27.2
|
26.3
|
25.7
|
27.4
|
Geosciences
|
4.3
|
4.5
|
4.8
|
3.7
|
4.3
|
Mathematical and
Physical Sciences
|
28.4
|
27.5
|
28.9
|
26.8
|
27.9
|
Social, Behavioral
and Economic Sciences
|
3.4
|
3.8
|
6.3
|
7.0
|
5.0
|
NOTE: Percents may not
add to 100 because of rounding.
SOURCE: PFF program documentation.
Most (79 percent) of the nominees were male, although
the percentage of female nominees increased slightly over
the life of the program (Table 2-3). In addition:
- The vast majority of nominees
(79 percent) were white, although the percentage of white
nominees decreased over the life of the program. In addition,
14 percent were Asian, while blacks and Hispanics composed
only 2 and 4 percent of nominees, respectively.
- Seventy-six percent were
U.S. citizens. Most of the remaining nominees (23 percent)
were permanent residents.10
- The two largest regional
distributions of nominations were 31 percent received
from colleges and universities in the northeast, and
28 percent from institutions in the west.
10
While grant recipients wer required to be U.S. citizens or
permanent residents, a few applicants may not have met this
cirteria or may have been residents of U.S. territories who,
at this time, would not have been reported as U.S. citizens
or permanent residents.
Table 2-3. Characteristics of PFF nominees:
1992-95
Characteristic
|
Nominee cohort
|
FY 1992
|
FY 1993
|
FY 1994
|
FY 1995
|
FY 1992-95
|
Total |
323
|
314
|
272
|
274
|
1,183
|
Male |
260
(80.5%)
|
255
(81.2%)
|
217
(79.8%)
|
207
(75.5%)
|
939
(79.4%)
|
Female |
61
(18.9%)
|
58
(18.5%)
|
55
(20.2%)
|
63
(23.0%)
|
237
(20.0%)
|
Not reported |
2
(0.6%)
|
1
(0.3%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
4
(1.5%)
|
7
(0.6%)
|
White |
268
(83.0%)
|
256
(81.5%)
|
199
(73.2%)
|
212
(77.4%)
|
935
(79.0%)
|
Black or
African American |
7
(2.2%)
|
5
(1.6%)
|
8
(2.9%)
|
3
(1.1%)
|
23
(1.9%)
|
Hispanic
or Latino |
11
(3.4%)
|
9
(2.9%)
|
11
(4.0%)
|
12
(4.4%)
|
43
(3.6%)
|
Asian |
35
(10.8%)
|
42
(13.4%)
|
52
(19.1%)
|
40
(14.5%)
|
169
(14.3%)
|
Pacific
Islander |
0
(0.0%
|
0
(0.0%)
|
2
(0.7%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
2
(0.2%)
|
American
Indian/Alaska Native |
0
(0.0%)
|
1
(0.3%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
2
(0.7%)
|
3
(0.2%)
|
Not reported |
2
(0.6%)
|
1
(0.3%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
5
(1.8%)
|
8
(0.8%)
|
Underrepresented
minority1 |
5.6%
|
4.8%
|
7.7%
|
6.3%
|
5.9%
|
Non-underrepresented
minority2 |
93.8%
|
94.9%
|
92.3%
|
91.9%
|
93.3%
|
Not reported |
0.6%
|
0.3%
|
0.0%
|
1.8%
|
0.8%
|
U.S. citizen
|
262
(81.1%)
|
246
(78.3%)
|
197
(72.4%)
|
194
(70.8%)
|
899
(76.0%)
|
Permanent resident
|
56
(17.3%)
|
67
(21.3%)
|
73
(26.8%)
|
73
(26.6%)
|
269
(22.7%)
|
Temporary resident3
|
2
(0.6%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
2
(0.7%)
|
1
(0.4%)
|
5
(0.4%)
|
Not reported
|
3
(0.9%)
|
1
(0.3%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
0
(2.2%)
|
4
(0.8%)
|
Northeast |
100
(30.9%)
|
86
(27.4%)
|
89
(32.7%)
|
92
(33.6%)
|
367
(31.0%)
|
Southeast |
49
(15.2%)
|
62
(19.7%)
|
60
(22.1%)
|
49
(17.9%)
|
220
(18.6%)
|
Central |
74
(22.9%)
|
69
(22.0%)
|
53
(19.5%)
|
61
(22.2%)
|
257
(21.7%)
|
West |
99
(30.7%)
|
95
(30.3%)
|
70
(25.7%)
|
71
(25.9%)
|
335
(28.3%)
|
Territories |
1
(0.3%)
|
2
(0.6%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
1
(0.4%)
|
4
(0.3%)
|
1 Includes
black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Pacific Islander,
American Indian, and Alaska Native.
2 Includes white and Asian.
3 While grant recipients were required to be U.S.
citizens or permanent residents, a few applicants may not
have met this criteria or may have been residents of U.S.
territories who, at this time, would not have been reported
as U.S. citizens or permanent residents.
NOTE: Percents may not add to 100 because of rounding.
SOURCE: EHR Impact Database and PFF program documentation.
It should be noted that in publicizing PFF, NSF
mailed program announcements to HBCUs and other eligible institutions.
Nonetheless, the relatively low percentage of females (20
percent) and underrepresented minorities (6 percent) who were
nominated for PFF suggests that the program may have had difficulty
finding or selecting candidates from these groups to nominate
for PFF. Further, as discussed previously, only 4 of the 1,183
nominations came from HBCUs. Additionally, since disability
status is self-reported, the program does not have complete
data on participation of persons with disabilities.
The program annually supported a small number of
highly selected young faculty. Approximately 10 percent of
those nominated received an award. The actual number of awardees
in any given year was 30. Of this number, 15 came from science-related
NSF Directorates (i.e., Biology; Education and Human Resources;
Geosciences; Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences; and
Mathematical and Physical Sciences) and 15 came from engineering-related
NSF Directorates (i.e., Engineering and Computer Science and
Engineering). As shown in Table 2-4, four NSF Directorates
accounted for 90 percent of the awards: Engineering (37 percent),
Mathematical and Physical Sciences (23 percent), Biological
Sciences (17 percent), and Computer Science and Engineering
(13 percent).
Table 2-4. PFF awards, by Directorate:
1992-95
Directorate
|
Award cohort
|
FY 1992
|
FY 1993
|
FY 1994
|
FY 1995
|
FY 1992-95
|
Total number
|
30
|
30
|
30
|
30
|
120
|
Biological Sciences
|
16.7%
|
16.7%
|
16.7%
|
16.7%
|
16.7%
|
Computer Science and Engineering
|
13.3
|
13.3
|
13.3
|
13.3
|
13.3
|
Education and Human Resources
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
3.3
|
0.8
|
Engineering
|
40.0
|
33.3
|
36.7
|
36.7
|
36.7
|
Geosciences
|
3.3
|
6.7
|
3.3
|
3.3
|
4.2
|
Mathematical and Physical Sciences
|
23.3
|
23.3
|
23.3
|
20.0
|
22.5
|
Office of the Director
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
3.3
|
0.8
|
Social, Behavioral and Economic
Sciences
|
3.3
|
6.7
|
6.7
|
3.3
|
5.0
|
NOTE: Percents may not
add to 100 because of rounding.
SOURCE: PFF program documentation.
Seventy percent of awardees were male and 30 percent
were female although in the last year that PFF grants
were made, females accounted for 43 percent of all awards
(Table 2-5). In addition:
- Seventy-three percent
of awardees were white and 17 percent were Asian. Blacks
and Hispanics comprised only 4 and 5 percent of awardees,
respectively. In 1992, however, 10 percent of the awardees
were Hispanic and in FY 1994, 10 percent were black.
- Seventy-three percent
were U.S. citizens. The percentage of awardees who were
U.S. citizens declined over time (from 90 percent in
FY 1992 to 63 percent in FY 1994). Most of the remaining
awardees (26 percent) were permanent residents.
- Thirty-three percent were
from colleges and universities in the northeastern United
States, while 31 percent were from institutions in the
west.
- The average PFF awardee
was 34 years old at the time of his/her nomination.
- Twenty-three percent of
PFF awardees were PYI or NYI recipients.
Table 2-5. Characteristics of PFF awardees:
1992-95
Characteristic
|
Award cohort
|
FY 1992
|
FY 1993
|
FY 1994
|
FY 1995
|
FY 1992-95
|
Total |
30
|
30
|
30
|
30
|
120
|
Male |
23
(76.7%)
|
20
(66.7%)
|
24
(80.0%)
|
17
(56.7%)
|
84
(70.0%)
|
Female |
7
(23.3%)
|
10
(33.3%)
|
6
(20.0%)
|
13
(43.3%)
|
36
(30.0%)
|
White |
22
(73.3%)
|
23
(76.7%)
|
19
(63.3%)
|
23
(76.7%)
|
87
(72.5%)
|
Black or
African American |
0
(0.0%)
|
1
(3.3%)
|
3
(10.0%)
|
1
(3.3%)
|
5
(4.2%)
|
Hispanic
or Latino |
3
(10.0%)
|
1
(3.3%)
|
1
(3.3%)
|
1
(3.3%)
|
6
(5.0%)
|
Asian |
5
(16.7%)
|
4
(13.3%)
|
7
(23.3%)
|
4
(13.3%)
|
20
(16.7%)
|
Pacific
Islander |
0
(0.0%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
American
Indian/Alaska Native |
0
(0.0%)
|
1
(3.3%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
1
(3.3%)
|
2
(1.7%)
|
Underrepresented
minority1 |
10.0%
|
10.0%
|
13.3%
|
10.0%
|
10.8%
|
Non-underrepresented
minority2 |
90.0%
|
90.0%
|
86.7%
|
90.0%
|
89.2%
|
U.S. citizen |
27
(90.0%)
|
22
(73.3%)
|
19
(63.3%)
|
20
(66.7%)
|
88
(73.3%)
|
Permanent
resident |
3
(10.0%)
|
8
(26.7%)
|
11
(36.7%)
|
9
(30.0%)
|
31
(25.8%)
|
Temporary
resident3 |
0
(0.0%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
1
(3.3%)
|
1
(0.8%)
|
Northeast |
10
(33.3%)
|
7
(23.3%)
|
11
(36.7%)
|
12
(40.0%)
|
40
(33.3%)
|
Southeast |
5
(16.7%)
|
5
(16.7%)
|
5
(16.7%)
|
3
(10.0%)
|
18
(15.0%)
|
Central |
6
(20.0%)
|
8
(26.7%)
|
6
(20.0%)
|
4
(13.3%)
|
24
(20.0%)
|
West |
8
(26.7%)
|
10
(33.3%)
|
8
(26.7%)
|
11
(36.7%)
|
37
(30.8)
|
Territories3 |
1
(3.3%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
0
(0.0%)
|
1
(0.8%)
|
Average
age at PFF nomination |
33.3
|
33.8
|
33.9
|
35.4
|
34.4
|
Percent
who were PYI/NYI recipients |
16.7%
|
23.3%
|
23.3%
|
26.7%
|
22.5%
|
1 Includes
black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Pacific Islander,
American Indian, and Alaska Native.
2 Includes white and Asian.
3 At this time, residents of U.S. territories,
though eligible for the program, would not have been reported
as U.S. citizens or permanent residents.
NOTE: Percents may not add to 100 because of rounding.
SOURCE: EHR Impact Database and PFF program documentation.
Table 2-6 shows the similarities and differences
between nominees and awardees. Comparing nominees and awardees,
we find that the review process resulted in slight increases
in the proportion of females, Asians, and underrepresented
minorities compared to the nominee population. Appendix A
presents the names of the PFF Fellows, the institutions nominating
them, and their disciplines.
Table 2-6. Characteristics of PFF nominees
and awardees: 1992-95
Characteristic
|
Percent (FY 1992-95)
|
Nominees (n=1,183)
|
Awardees (n=120)
|
NSF Directorate
|
Biological Sciences
|
24.6
|
16.7
|
Computer Science and Engineering
|
9.8
|
13.3
|
Education and Human Resources
|
0.9
|
0.8
|
Engineering
|
27.4
|
36.7
|
Geosciences
|
4.3
|
4.2
|
Mathematical and Physical Sciences
|
27.9
|
22.5
|
Office of the Director
|
0.0
|
0.8
|
Social, Behavioral and Economic
Sciences
|
5.0
|
5.0
|
Gender
|
Male
|
79.4
|
70.0
|
Female
|
20.0
|
30.0
|
Not reported
|
0.6
|
0.0
|
Race/ethnicity
|
White
|
79.0
|
72.5
|
Black or African American
|
1.9
|
4.2
|
Hispanic or Latino
|
3.6
|
5.0
|
Asian
|
14.3
|
16.7
|
Pacific Islander
|
0.2
|
0.0
|
American Indian/Alaska Native
|
0.2
|
1.7
|
Not reported
|
0.8
|
0.0
|
Minority status
|
Underrepresented minority1
|
5.9
|
10.8
|
Non-underrepresented minority2
|
93.3
|
89.2
|
Not reported
|
0.8
|
0.0
|
Citizenship status
|
U.S. citizen
|
76.0
|
73.3
|
Permanent resident
|
22.7
|
25.8
|
Temporary resident3
|
0.4
|
0.8
|
Not reported
|
0.8
|
0.0
|
Region
|
Northeast
|
31.0
|
33.0
|
Southeast
|
18.6
|
15.0
|
Central
|
21.7
|
20.0
|
West
|
28.3
|
30.8
|
Territories3
|
0.3
|
0.8
|
1 Includes
black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Pacific Islander,
American Indian, and Alaska Native.
2 Includes white and Asian.
3 At this time, residents of U.S. territories would
have been eligible for the program, though not reported as
U.S. citizens or permanent residents.
NOTE: Percents may not add to 100 because of rounding.
SOURCE: EHR Impact Database and PFF program documentation.
Previous
| Home | Next
|