technology
OMB proposes rule change requiring political review of federal grants
A May 29 proposal from the Office of Management and Budget would require political appointees to review more than $1 trillion in federal grants across 42 agencies. The change would apply to research funding at NIH, NSF, and other agencies. Public comments remain open until July 13.
The VergeAudio version
Tap play to generate a narrated version.
Developing·Limited corroboration so far. This page will refresh as more sources emerge.
The Office of Management and Budget issued a 412-page proposal on May 29 to revise federal financial assistance rules. The document would require political appointees to review grants at 42 agencies to ensure alignment with presidential policy priorities.
Under the proposal, grants could not support work involving diversity, equity, and inclusion or gender ideology. Researchers would need preapproval for international collaborations and conference travel. Publication costs could no longer be covered by grant funds.
Current grant review process Federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation currently use peer review panels of scientists to score proposals. Institute directors can intervene, but the document states that political involvement in individual grants has been limited.
The proposed rule would change the existing guidance into formal regulation. Joanne Padrón Carney of the American Association for the Advancement of Science said this would require a new rulemaking process to reverse.
Scope of affected programs The rule covers grants from the departments of Education, Veterans Affairs, and Housing and Urban Development, as well as NASA and Health and Human Services. These grants fund mental health services, low-income housing, and early childhood education programs.
Colette Delawalla, founder and CEO of Stand Up for Science, said the change would end federal scientific research funding. Jeremy Berg, former director of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, said political direction of research has historically been limited to specific issues such as embryonic stem cell work.
