More than a year after sweeping policy changes disrupted the US research funding landscape, uncertainty surrounding federal science funding continues to ripple through laboratories across the country.
Early in 2025, a series of measures affecting federal science agencies – including restrictions on travel, changes to grant structures, and funding freezes at the National Science Foundation – prompted universities to reassess budgets, hiring plans, and research priorities. For analytical scientists, whose work often depends on expensive instrumentation, long-term grants, and stable support for students, the potential consequences were immediately apparent.
Recent developments suggest that the disruption may be far from over. Although Congress approved a $47.2 billion budget for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for fiscal year 2026, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has yet to release the apportionments required for the agency to spend much of that funding. As a result, grant activity has slowed dramatically. By late February, the NIH had issued only around 30 percent as many new grants and competing renewals as it had at the same point in previous years, while the number of newly posted funding opportunities has dropped sharply.
Abrupt announcements
The effects of the slowdown are already being felt within universities. “We’re already seeing the short-term effects of fewer funding opportunities being posted as agencies redefine their goals in response to the executive orders,” says Scott Whittenburg, Vice President for Research and Creative Scholarship at the University of Montana. “At our university, that has meant a sharp drop – roughly 30 percent – in the number of research proposals submitted to federal agencies, and a corresponding decline in new awards this year.”
For Callie Cole, Associate Professor of Chemistry at Fort Lewis College, the initial shock came not from the loss of her own funding, but from watching the consequences ripple through her institution. “In January 2025, I was conducting my research using internal Fort Lewis College research grant funding for faculty and students, so luckily my research progress was not immediately impacted by the cuts,” she says. “However, I witnessed the fallout as each of my colleagues, one by one, received email messages cancelling their federal research grants with minimal notice.”
The consequences for students were immediate. “Undergraduate students were let go from laboratory research positions, forcing them to apply for other jobs around town to make their rent payments; they had no choice.”
Cole adds that the atmosphere across the college quickly became tense as colleagues grappled with the sudden losses. “It was an incredibly stressful time, watching promising young scientists be forced out of their research laboratory training,” she says. “Fort Lewis College lost $2.27 million in federal funding because many of our grants were focused on our mission as a minority-serving institution.”
For Tony Ward, Professor in the School of Public and Community Health Sciences at the University of Montana, the disruption arrived directly in his inbox. “I received an email and memo from NIH on May 28, 2025 that said my NIH grant was terminated – effectively immediately – as the project ‘no longer effectuates agency priorities’ and was ‘not consistent with HHS/NIH priorities,’ particularly in the area of health effects of climate change.”
The decision came just before the second year of a five-year grant was due to begin. “Given that funding was terminated immediately, I had no choice but to lay off two employees, and reassign a third to another project that luckily had just started up and needed support.”
The termination also abruptly ended a long-running outreach program connecting researchers with schools across the western United States. “Our team has been working on this education and outreach project for over 20 years, and yet the program was terminated in just a single email.”
Early careers on hold
However, the most troubling consequences relate to students and early-career researchers. “I have begun compensating more students with one credit of independent study rather than payment for their research time, due to the sparsity of federal grant payments,” Cole says. “Unfortunately, a single credit of independent study doesn’t cover rent, or put food on the table.”
“What we’re currently witnessing is not just these federal cuts having an impact on future scientists’ research training; they’re affecting their ability to afford basic needs. Housing and food insecurity are a huge problem among students, staff, and faculty alike.”
Opportunities that often help students launch scientific careers are also becoming harder to access. “My research group and I are hoping to attend national conferences in the coming years, but our current concern is that – in the complete absence of federal support – we won’t be able to secure adequate funding to travel,” Cole says.
“These funding cuts not only impact a student’s ability to train in the laboratory; they impact their ability to attend conferences, make connections, and effectively begin their scientific careers.”
A changing research landscape
“More broadly, we’re seeing several shifts in how federal research funding is being directed,” says Whittenburg. “Agencies are placing greater emphasis on societal impact, larger collaborative teams, and programs that translate university research into real-world applications involving industry and nonprofit partners.”
Cole also expressed concern about the changing political landscape surrounding certain areas of research. “My research focuses on women’s health, and this administration has made it abundantly clear that any science involving women will not be funded by our federal government,” she says.
Ward echoes similar concerns about restrictions on certain research themes. “On a broader scale, I’m worried about the censorship of researchers who study areas such as climate change, DEI, gender care, and vaccines,” he says. “This lack of funding to support science and education will relate to more health issues in the future – health issues that, with investment in projects today, could be prevented.”
Ward has also experienced how shifting priorities can reshape funded projects directly. “In an abrupt reversal, we received an email from NIH on January 14, 2026, explaining that our funding had been reinstated,” he says. But the reinstatement came with conditions. “We had to remove anything in our grant related to climate change. We had to revise the title of our project, the abstract and aims page to align ourselves with NIH priorities and reflect our new focus on wildfire smoke and associated health effects.”
The road ahead
Looking ahead, Ward says the effects of the past year’s upheaval are likely to be felt for some time. “The termination of our grant back in May essentially set us back an entire academic year,” Ward says. “The damage can be repaired, but it will take time.”
Whittenburg believes there is still reason for optimism. “The longer-term outlook is still positive,” he says, addng: “Now that federal agencies are posting funding opportunities and congressional support for research remains favorable, the impact of the prior reductions should be short-term.”
Cole argues that meaningful recovery will ultimately depend on how federal funding policy evolves in the coming years. “For the sake of scientific research in America,” she says, “a reversal of the 2025 federal funding cuts is the only way to begin to repair the situation. Under the current and ongoing federal policies, I simply don’t see a way forward for scientific research.”
However, in spite of all of the trials and tribulations, Ward says the experience has reinforced his commitment to science education. “My job as a teacher and researcher is to present the facts and let others draw their own conclusions based on scientific data,” he says. “If anything, this situation only makes me more passionate about educating students about science.”
Newsletters
Receive the latest analytical science news, personalities, education, and career development – weekly to your inbox.
