White House plan to take over federal grantmaking draws criticism from science groups

Editor's note: APS believes the White House’s proposed rule represents a grave risk to American science and innovation. As APS President Brad Marston and APS CEO Jonathan Bagger wrote in a June 4 letter, “These proposals would let political preference override expert peer review, restrict travel, limit collaboration, impede the sharing of results, and affect programs that train the next generation of scientists.”

But the scientific community can speak up and push back. To that end, APS has created a guided letter-writing portal, so that you can tell the White House directly what its proposed rule would mean for science and scientists. To submit a public comment before the July 13 deadline, visit the portal and send your message today.

Organizations representing scientists and research institutions reacted with alarm to the publication last week of a proposed rule that would give the Trump administration unprecedented control over the federal grantmaking process. The rule would give political appointees the power to review grant proposals and determine whether they should be funded, as well as terminate existing grants if they do not align with political priorities, among other restrictions. The proposal, titled “Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance,” was published on May 29 by the Office of Management and Budget.

Some groups are still determining their next steps — drafting guidance on the impact of the proposed rule, hosting member-only discussions, and pushing for an extension to the 45-day comment period. Others have launched campaigns seeking a large-scale response from the public. The deadline for submitting comments on the proposed rule is July 13, and over 23,000 comments have already been posted to the Federal Register.

What does the proposed rule do?

The proposed rule would change how the government manages federal grants by revising Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations. If enacted, the changes would apply to all grants awarded by the federal government, not just science funding. Comments on the proposed rule are due by July 13, and OMB wants to issue a final rule that will be in effect by Oct. 1 “to ensure that only a single set of government-wide requirements apply to Federal awards made during fiscal year 2027.”

OMB says the changes are necessary to improve federal oversight of awards, clarify the status of Title 2 of the CFR as OMB regulation rather than guidance, and lessen the administrative burden on grant recipients.

One of the major changes outlined in the proposed rule is the introduction of a new layer of approval in the federal grantmaking process known as “pre-issuance review” that would allow political appointees at federal agencies to block funding for grants that do not meet administrative priorities. The rule would additionally give the Trump administration expanded authority to terminate federal awards that “no longer effectuate program goals, federal agency priorities, or the national interest.”

Other key changes proposed by the Trump administration include:

• New prohibitions on using federal awards to “fund, promote, encourage, subsidize, or facilitate” diversity, equity, and inclusion.
• Expanded limitations on international collaboration, for example, extending the Wolf Amendment restrictions that limit NASA from collaborating with China to apply to all agencies.
• New restrictions on allowable costs, such as prohibiting the use of funding toward research publishing costs, conference attendance, and public relations services.
• Fixed-amount awards would be eliminated, and there would be a greater emphasis on multi-year awards to reduce the frequency of applications and awards.
• All funding opportunities will be posted on Grants.gov with a strict word limit and increased use of “statements of interest” by grant applicants.