One of the first signs of what would become an ongoing attack on scientific research came when the Trump administration ordered the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to radically reduce research funding for universities. These funds, termed indirect costs, are awarded when researchers at an institution receive a grant. They cover costs that aren’t directly associated with the research project, such as utilities, facilities for research animals, and building maintenance.
Previously, these costs had been the subject of negotiations and audits, with indirect cost rates for universities in more expensive locations exceeding half the value of the grants awarded. The Trump administration wanted to cut this to a flat rate of 15 percent for everyone, which would be crippling for many universities.
A number of states, later joined by organizations representing a broad array of universities and medical schools, immediately sued to block the policy change. A district court temporarily blocked the new policy from being implemented and later issued a permanent injunction. The government appealed that decision, but on Monday, an appeals court rejected the effort because the first Trump administration had attempted the same move before—and Congress passed a rule to block it. Indirect research funding will remain intact unless the Supreme Court intervenes.
This is an important development in the ongoing conversation about funding for scientific research. It’s great to see attention being drawn to the challenges faced in this field. Looking forward to more insights on this topic!