What is the selection criteria for the Fellowships & Grants?

The 30-Second Version: Are You This Person?

Before you spend hours on your application, ask yourself:

Can you raise the bar?
Is what you're working on clear and unique?
What is the outcome going to be?
Are you working on something you can't stop thinking about?
What are your 'How the hell did they do that' moments?
Do you align with OSV?

If you answered "yes" to most of these, keep reading. If not, this probably isn't the right fit for now.

The 3-minute Version

Can you raise the bar?

We fund people who will redefine what's possible in their field, not just incrementally improve it. Your idea should make conventional wisdom look outdated.

What we're hunting for:

Projects that experts would call "too risky" or "impossible"
Approaches that break fundamental assumptions in your field
Ideas that make us slightly uncomfortable because they're so ambitious or out there
Work that could only come from a true renegade thinker

What reduces your chances:

"We're the Uber for X" ideas
Projects with obvious typos or sloppy thinking (details matter when you're asking us to bet on you)
Safe, incremental improvements that any competent person could do

Example that wins: "I'm building a new programming language that eliminates entire classes of bugs by rethinking how we represent state, and yes, I know everyone says you shouldn't build new languages."

Is what you're working on clear and unique?

If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. And if it sounds like something we've read before, you're not thinking boldly enough.

What gets you to the top of the pile:

A one-sentence description that makes us lean forward
Language so clear we can explain your project to our colleagues without notes
An idea that sounds slightly outlandish or "out there"
Evidence you're taking real intellectual risks, not just academic ones

What lands you in the reject pile:

Buzzword soup ("leveraging synergistic blockchain AI paradigms")
Vague, hand-wavy explanations
Ideas that feel like they came from a corporate innovation lab

Example that wins: "I'm creating a new class of antibiotics by studying how bacteria communicate in sewer systems"

What is the outcome going to be?

We need to believe you'll actually produce something concrete. Ideas are cheap, execution is everything.

What convinces us:

A clear, specific outcome you'll deliver but the end of the year (with a longer term vision)
Evidence you've shipped real projects before
A timeline that shows you've thought through the hard parts
Resources and plan that match the scope

What makes us skeptical:

"I'll explore..." or "I'll investigate..." (sounds like you don't know)
No track record of finishing what you start

Example that wins: "At the end of 12 months, I'll have a working device that can detect malaria in 30 seconds using breath analysis, and I'll have tested it on 500 patients in Nigeria."

Are you working on something you can't stop thinking about?

We want people who are genuinely, maybe slightly unhealthily, obsessed with their project. This isn't a normal job, it's the thing you were put on earth to do.

What obsession looks like:

You've already spent 1,000+ hours on this without funding
Your GitHub/commit/Youtube/Newsletter history shows consistent work for months or years
You've turned down easier, higher-paying opportunities to pursue this
You plan to work 60+ hours a week on this, not because we ask you to, but because you can't help it

What lack of obsession looks like:

"I just got interested in this last month"
"This is a side project I'll do on weekends"
You treat this like a 9-to-5 obligation

Example that wins: "I spent my entire life savings buying broken electron microscopes on eBay and fixing them in my kitchen because I needed to see the structure of this specific polymer to prove my theory."

What are your "How did they do that?" moments

We're looking for evidence you've done things that set you apart from the crowd

Examples of what catches our attention:

Building something significant from nothing (especially if you had no resources)
Overcoming massive adversity (disability, poverty, systemic barriers) and still winning
Creating work that experts in your field respect and reference
A social media presence that shows real influence, not just followers

What doesn't make a significant difference:

"I worked at Google/Facebook/McKinsey"
"I have a 4.0 GPA from an Ivy League"
Awards that don't mean anything outside your institution

Example that wins: "Built a functioning nuclear fusion reactor in my garage after dropping out of high school to support my family."

Do you align with OSV?

We are ambitious, optimistic, prolific, tech-forward and driven. We like ideas that sound "crazy" to the establishment. If you are looking for a safe, traditional grant, this isn't it.

What aligns with us:

Optimism: You believe the future can be better than the past, and you're building it.
Prolific Output: You produce a lot of work. You don't just think; you do.
Renegade Spirit: You are comfortable being the only person in the room who believes in your idea.
Risk-Taking: You are willing to fail publicly if it means a chance at a massive breakthrough.

What misaligns with us:

Cynicism or pessimism about technology and the future
Seeking permission or waiting for "consensus" before acting
Slow, bureaucratic thinking
Fear of being wrong

Example that wins: "The entire academic field says this approach is a dead end. I think they stopped looking too early. I'm willing to risk my reputation to prove that this 'dead' technology is actually the key to clean energy."