Research funding reinstated for scientists in the Philadelphia region, yet they assert that lasting harm persists from earlier terminations
The Trump administration's significant cuts to federal research funding have had a profound impact on U.S. scientists, causing substantial setbacks for ongoing research and economic impacts on scientific communities.
One of the most affected institutions was Harvard University, where nearly $3 billion in grants were canceled, affecting about 190 research projects. This halted studies of diseases like multiple sclerosis and investigations into social and behavioral health issues. Scientists expressed frustration over the loss of critical resources such as stored blood samples and multiyear funded projects.
Nationwide, hundreds of National Institutes of Health (NIH)-approved research grants were canceled, leading to significant economic fallout estimated at hundreds of millions of dollars. This included lost jobs and reduced local spending, especially harming smaller communities economically reliant on research institutions.
The administration's executive order, "Improving Oversight of Federal Grantmaking," drastically altered grant review processes by giving political appointees control over funding decisions. It paused new funding opportunities and mandated priority for projects aligned with Trump’s policy goals, explicitly avoiding grants considered to promote "anti-American values."
Funding was also cut sharply in areas such as climate science, gender studies, and vaccine research. The Trump administration's policies raised alarm by shifting scientific funding decisions towards political criteria and away from peer review.
Trump’s proposed 2026 budget aimed to reduce federal basic research funding by about 34%, from $45 billion to $30 billion. This represented cuts to levels unseen since the 1990s, amplifying concerns about a long-term decline in U.S. science capacity.
The executive order and funding freezes are expected to face legal battles, as critics argue they threaten scientific independence by injecting political interference into the grant-making process. Advocacy groups and some members of Congress have pushed back, seeking to protect scientific integrity and the NIH budget through oversight and legislation.
Koraly Pérez-Edgar, a developmental psychologist at Penn State, had a grant canceled and then reinstated, causing months of lost work. She expressed concern that the Trump administration could continue to target her field by refusing to approve or review any research grants that mention certain topics. Ayden Scheim, an epidemiologist at Drexel University, shared similar sentiments, saying it is "totally arbitrary" that he got his grant back and his colleagues did not.
As a result of this instability, scientists like Karl Schmitz at the University of Delaware, whose research focuses on the bacterium that causes tuberculosis, a serious lung disease, are now left with a new sense of instability. Schmitz and his colleagues need to spend more time applying for multiple grants to insulate their research from potential funding disruptions.
Pérez-Edgar stated that the NIH's actions are attacking the pipeline of promising scientists. Many up-and-coming scientists are discouraged by the way the administration canceled these grants, she added.
This increased focus on grant applications means that they cannot commit to hosting as many graduate students who are working toward their doctorate degrees, and their labs must now focus on shorter-term research. The cancellation of Schmitz's grant forced him to scramble for funding and solutions, causing a delay in his research and the work of his graduate students.
The Trump administration's recent appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to cancel research funding again, adds to the uncertainty faced by scientists across the U.S. The ongoing conflict over these cuts persists, with advocacy groups and some members of Congress continuing to push for the protection of scientific integrity and the NIH budget.
[1] Harvard Gazette. (2019, May 22). NIH halts some grants, Harvard researchers scramble for funding. Retrieved from https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/05/nih-halts-some-grants-harvard-researchers-scramble-for-funding/ [2] Science. (2019, May 23). Trump's budget cuts threaten U.S. scientific leadership. Retrieved from https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/05/trump-s-budget-cuts-threaten-us-scientific-leadership [3] Nature. (2019, May 22). Trump administration pauses NIH grant applications. Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01711-4 [4] Science. (2019, May 23). Trump's attack on science. Retrieved from https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/05/trump-s-attack-science [5] Science. (2019, May 23). Trump's budget cuts threaten U.S. scientific leadership. Retrieved from https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/05/trump-s-budget-cuts-threaten-us-scientific-leadership
- The significant cuts to federal research funding, especially in medical-conditions, health-and-wellness, and science, have caused financial losses and delayed research, impacting the education and self-development of numerous scientists and their projects.
- Due to the Trump administration's enforcement of grant review processes that prioritize political appointees' decisions over peer review, grants focusing on medical-conditions, health-and-wellness, and education and self-development, like those investigating multiple sclerosis and tuberculosis, face the risk of being targeted and subsequently delayed or canceled, potentially hindering future generations of scientists.
