Connect with us

Science

Uncertainty Surrounds US Science Funding as 2026 Approaches

editorial

Published

on

As the administration of Donald J. Trump and the 119th Congress enter their second year, the outlook for science funding in the United States remains uncertain for fiscal year 2026. Congress is under pressure to finalize appropriations bills, including crucial funding for federal science agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The deadline for these bills is January 30, 2026, but analysts express skepticism about whether this timeline can be met.

Alessandra Zimmermann, project director of research and development (R&D) policy at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, highlights the ongoing negotiations between the House and Senate regarding their funding proposals for the NSF. While both versions of the bill do not cut NSF funding by the 57% suggested in the president’s May budget request, stability in funding does not guarantee ease in securing federal grants.

The process for obtaining NIH funding is likely to become more challenging. In 2025, the NIH implemented a strategy of forward funding for many grants, providing researchers with a lump sum rather than distributing payments over time. Robert “Bob” Cook-Deegan, a professor at Arizona State University, notes that while this method could yield benefits in the future, it will likely result in fewer new projects being funded in the interim. The NIH’s congressional budget justification indicates that the administration plans to allocate 50% of appropriated funds to forward fund grants, potentially reducing the total number of grants awarded from approximately 10,000 to around 6,200, according to an analysis by Jeremy M. Berg, a former director of the US National Institute of General Medical Sciences.

Impact of Administration Priorities on Research Funding

The administration’s funding priorities focus on areas such as artificial intelligence, quantum science, and nuclear energy. As a result, fields that do not align with these priorities are likely to experience cuts in funding, according to Zimmermann. In December, both the NIH and the NSF announced changes to their grant review processes aimed at expediting the approval of research in these designated priority areas. This formalization of procedures addresses previous criticisms of arbitrary grant cuts made by the administration, as noted by Berg.

“The problem last year is they were making it up as they went along,” Berg said. “They’re correcting that so they can now do what they were doing but do it in a way that’s much more explicit and transparent and legally protected.”

Researchers in fields not favored by the current administration may increasingly seek funding from private sources. Cook-Deegan suggests that this shift toward privately funded research and development could become more pronounced as federal support wanes.

Ongoing Debates Over Indirect Costs in Grants

Another contentious issue involves indirect costs provided alongside research grants to cover administrative and infrastructure expenses. The administration has proposed capping these costs at 15% of the total grant amount, a plan that has faced legal challenges from federal judges. In response, the Association of American Universities is presenting an alternative model to Congress, as indicated by Tobin Smith, senior vice president for government relations and public policy at the association.

The US Office of Management and Budget is expected to release guidance on indirect costs by the end of January 2026. The outcome of these discussions and the overall funding landscape will significantly impact the future of scientific research in the United States, further underscoring the importance of government support in this field.

With the deadline approaching, the decisions made in the coming weeks will likely have lasting implications for researchers and institutions nationwide. The uncertainty surrounding fiscal year 2026 funding raises important questions about the future of scientific progress in the United States.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © All rights reserved. This website offers general news and educational content for informational purposes only. While we strive for accuracy, we do not guarantee the completeness or reliability of the information provided. The content should not be considered professional advice of any kind. Readers are encouraged to verify facts and consult relevant experts when necessary. We are not responsible for any loss or inconvenience resulting from the use of the information on this site.