Science Policy News from AIBS

FY 2027 NSF Budget Request Slashes BIO Funding, Terminates SBE

President Trump's Fiscal Year (FY) 2027 budget request has once again proposed sweeping cuts to the National Science Foundation (NSF) that would significantly scale back the agency's capacity to support research, education, and workforce development. Similar to last year, the FY 2027 request would again cut NSF funding by more than half (-55%) relative to FY 2026 enacted levels, from $8.75 billion to just under $4 billion.

The number of competitive awards is projected to fall from about 7,400 in FY 2025 to just 2,900 in FY 2027--a decline of more than 60%. Funding rates for competitive awards is estimated to fall from 19% in FY 2025 to 8%. Further, the number of people participating in NSF-supported activities would drop by roughly 69%.

The FY 2027 request again targets NSF's Research and Related Activities (R&RA) account, which would be reduced by roughly 58%. Across the agency, nearly all directorates face steep cuts relative to FY 2025:

Biological Sciences (BIO): -72%
Engineering: -75%
Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS): -67%
Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE): -63%
Geosciences (GEO): -58%
Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP): -43%

Funding for BIO would go down from $795 million in FY 2025 to $225 million in FY 2027, significantly reducing support for fundamental biological research, ecosystem science, and biodiversity studies. With NSF undergoing a reorganization, the five BIO divisions are being replaced by three new thematic areas: Foundations of Life, Living Systems, and Bioinnovation & Infrastructure. However, the budget proposal does not provide any details or proposed funding allocations for these new areas. Priority areas for BIO in FY 2027 include biotechnology, research at the intersection of biology and artificial intelligence, research at the intersection of biology and quantum information science, and supporting development of the scientific workforce.

The Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE) Directorate would be eliminated entirely. Existing SBE grants that align with Administration priorities in behavioral and cognitive science would be transferred to other parts of the agency, and the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, which tracks data on U.S. science, technology, and innovation and publishes the Science and Engineering Indicators, would operate independently of the directorates.

The proposal again seeks to move STEM Education (EDU) into the Research and Related Activities account, which Congress rejected in the enacted FY 2026 appropriations legislation. Funding for EDU would be reduced by approximately 54%, to about $428 million. Cuts at this scale would significantly curtail investments in undergraduate and graduate training, K-12 STEM education, and efforts to broaden participation in the scientific workforce.

The FY 2027 request would again scale back key programs that support the development of the scientific workforce. The Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP), one of the nation's premier mechanisms for supporting early-career scientists, would be cut by approximately 43%, significantly reducing new fellowship awards from the recently announced 2,599 in FY 2026 to 1,500 in FY 2027. NSF estimates that the number of supported graduate students would fall from over 40,200 to about 13,000, and postdoctoral researchers from 4,500 to 1,000. The proposal does include $150 million for the CAREER program, which provides five-year awards to early-career faculty, and was proposed for termination last year.

The proposal would slash the Office of International Science and Engineering by 94% and the Office of Research Security Strategy and Policy by 26%.

Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) would be reduced by about 31%. Funding for mid-scale research infrastructure would be reduced by 56% compared to FY 2025. Total infrastructure funding at NSF would go down by about 30% relative to FY 2025. In particular, funding for both the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) would be slashed by roughly 40%.

Agency Operations and Award Management would see a small 1% boost. Cuts are proposed for both the Office of Inspector General (-25%) and the National Science Board (-40%).

Even areas identified as administration priorities would not be spared: Artificial intelligence (-32%); Quantum information science (-37%); Advanced manufacturing (-70%); and Biotechnology (-40%).

Overall, the request reflects a significant contraction in federal support for basic research across nearly all scientific disciplines. As in previous years, the President's request serves as a starting point for congressional negotiations. Congress will ultimately determine final funding levels, and past appropriations cycles suggest lawmakers may again seek to mitigate or reject the most severe reductions.

NIH's Budget Request for FY 2027

The President's fiscal year 2027 budget request would cut nearly $6 billion, or roughly 12%, from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the largest biomedical research agency in the world. The Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) is slated to receive a 37% funding cut to $945 million, separate from the $41.4 billion requested for NIH, to fund high-risk, transformative research that drives biomedical innovations.

Similar to last year's budget request, the new plan proposes reorganizing NIH, but not to the same extent. The proposal would eliminate three of the agency's institutes and centers, namely the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, and the Fogarty International Center. It would relocate the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the related Superfund program to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Further, it would consolidate the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism and the National Institute on Drug Abuse into a new National Institute of Substance Use and Addiction Research. Last year's budget had proposed a more dramatic overhaul of NIH by slashing its budget by 40% and consolidating its 27 institutes and centers into just eight.

Most NIH institutes and centers would receive funding cuts:

National Cancer Institute: +0.1 %
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: -7.4%
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke: -10%
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: -27.4%
National Institute of General Medical Sciences: -0.7%
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences: -35%
National Institute of Mental Health: -12%
National Human Genome Research Institute: -6%
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering: -7%
National Library of Medicine: -6%

The proposal would shrink the Office of the Director's budget by 8%. The buildings and facilities account for NIH would remain flat at $350 million, to address pressing campus-wide infrastructure needs.

The Administration has renewed its proposal to cap indirect costs at 15% in the FY 2027 budget request, despite repeated rejection by Congress, most recently in FY 2026 appropriations legislation. The Administration recently skipped the deadline to appeal a court ruling blocking the 15% cap at NIH, leaving the decision in place. However, NIH's FY 2027 budget request continues to reference the policy.

The FY 2027 budget also proposes shifting to fully funding new research project grants upfront--called multiyear or forward funding--rather than distributing funds year by year. NIH says this change would give the agency more flexibility and eventually free up more funding each year for new research as older grants phase out.

Trump Nominates New CDC Director

President Donald Trump has nominated Dr. Erica Schwartz to serve as the next Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), filling a leadership vacancy that has persisted for much of his second term.

Dr. Schwartz, a physician who previously served in the U.S. military and as Deputy Surgeon General during the first Trump Administration, brings a background in military and public health leadership. A retired rear admiral in the Commissioned Corps of the United States Public Health Service, she previously served as Chief Medical Officer of the U.S. Coast Guard and played a role in the federal government's COVID-19 response. Dr. Schwartz holds degrees in biomedical engineering, medicine, public health, and law.

Her nomination comes after a period of significant instability at the CDC, which has cycled through multiple interim leaders and experienced internal upheaval tied to broader debates over vaccine policy and public health guidance. The previous director, Dr. Susan Monarez, was removed following disagreements with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over vaccine policy. Soon after, Jim O'Neill, who had no experience in public health, took over as Acting Director. Then, earlier this year, the White House named NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya as Acting CDC Director.

Schwartz is widely viewed as a more traditional public health pick, with supporters highlighting her experience in preventive medicine and federal health systems. Her confirmation process is expected to draw scrutiny over how she would navigate ongoing political tensions surrounding vaccine recommendations and the CDC's scientific independence.

Senate Agriculture Chair Pushes Back on Forest Service Move

Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman (R-AR) has voiced opposition to proposals to move the U.S. Forest Service out of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), signaling a significant hurdle for long-discussed restructuring efforts. While leaving open the possibility of transferring wildfire management responsibilities, Boozman made clear he does not support relocating the entire agency to the Department of the Interior.

"It's a pretty noncontroversial agency," said Boozman. He emphasized that the Forest Service has been housed within USDA for more than a century and benefits from the department's relative political stability, according to E&E News. In contrast, he noted that Interior tends to experience sharper ideological swings between administrations, which could create instability for forest management programs.

The debate comes as the Trump Administration moves forward with a major reorganization of the U.S. Forest Service. Planned changes include replacing the agency's nine regional offices with 15 state-level offices and relocating its headquarters and much of its Washington staff to Salt Lake City. Boozman has said he's not opposed to latter move. Administration officials argue the restructuring will streamline decision-making by giving more authority to field-level staff.

The Forest Service manages approximately 193 million acres of national forests and grasslands and plays a key role in wildfire response and community forestry programs. However, the Administration has signaled a shift away from certain state and local forestry initiatives.

Some lawmakers, including Mike Lee (R-UT), have supported more sweeping changes, such as transferring the agency to Interior and making the Forest Service chief a Senate-confirmed political appointee. Those proposals have not advanced in Congress.

Meanwhile, Democrats have raised concerns about the broader USDA reorganization. Senate Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) warned that restructuring could exacerbate existing staffing shortages and complicate wildfire preparedness, particularly amid forecasts of a severe fire season in the West.

Given recent precedent, Congress is unlikely to block the reorganization outright, but lawmakers could still shape or constrain the changes through upcoming legislation, including the next farm bill, which Boozman aims to advance in the coming weeks.

CNSF Issues Statement on FY 2027 Budget Request for NSF

The Coalition for National Science Funding (CNSF), of which AIBS is a member, is calling on Congress to reject the proposed deep cuts to the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the President's FY 2027 budget request. The proposal would slash the agency's funding by 55%.

"These cuts would threaten U.S. innovation, hinder potentially game-changing discoveries, and greatly weaken our research ecosystem and future STEM workforce nationwide at a time when our international competitors are bolstering their own investments," the statement from CNSF reads.

CNSF also expresses concern about the proposed elimination of the Social, Behavioral and Economic sciences (SBE) Directorate. "Research funded by this directorate makes essential contributions to national needs by playing a central role in developing artificial intelligence, addressing national security, and supporting economic health. SBE has been critical in responding to congressional priorities by supporting research to treat dyslexia and opioid addiction, further suicide prevention, and promote technology transfer and economic growth."

The statement calls on Congress to reject the President's proposal and instead sustain and grow investments in NSF. It also urges lawmakers to continue their oversight of the allocation of FY 2026 funding to NSF to certify that these funds are fully obligated and spent as directed.

USGS Coalition Issues Statement Urging Congress to Reject Proposed Budget Cuts

The USGS Coalition, of which AIBS is a member, has released a statement responding to the President's fiscal year (FY) 2027 budget proposal for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The proposal would cut USGS funding by $527.8 million, a 37% reduction from FY 2026 enacted levels and the largest proposed single-year cut in the agency's 147-year history. It would completely eliminate the Ecosystems Mission Area and cut deeply across every other mission area.

"These proposed cuts are not routine budget adjustments; they would dismantle core

components of the Nation's scientific infrastructure, weakening programs that underpin

public safety, economic decision making, and national security," the statement reads. "The proposed elimination of the Ecosystems Mission Area alone would end federal wildlife monitoring, fisheries science, water quality assessment, disease surveillance for threats like H5N1 avian influenza, and the Cooperative Research Unit program embedded at universities in all 50 states. These are not duplicative or peripheral functions. They are foundational scientific capabilities with no equivalent replacement in universities, states, or the private sector."

The coalition urged Congress to reject the proposal in its entirely and ensure that USGS emerges from the FY 2027 appropriations process with its mission areas intact, its scientific capacity preserved, and its independence protected.

Comments Sought on Nature Record National Assessment

The Nature Record is the first comprehensive, independent, evidence-based assessment of how nature is doing in the United States and how changes in nature are shaping our lives, communities, and economy.

The public comment period for The Nature Record Assessment is now open. From March 2 through May 31, anyone can review the draft Assessment and share input through a public comment portal, or at virtual or in-person engagement events listed on the website.

The Nature Record examines the status, trends and future of nature in the United States, and how changes in nature are shaping our lives, communities, and economy. Nature influences the air we breathe, the water we drink, the homes we build, the stability of our climate, the health of our brains and bodies, and the strength of our local economies. Even for those who don't focus on environmental issues every day, these connections are constant and deeply woven into daily life.

The Nature Record is an independent team of nearly 200 leading scientists, researchers, experts, and practitioners. Their work is rooted in science, guided by communities, and enriched by public participation. The Nature Record is creating a clear, accessible picture of nature across the nation and the role it plays in everything from local economies to public health and community resilience.

Read the Assessment, share your thoughts, find an event, and join the conversation at naturerecord.org.

Enter the 16th Annual Faces of Biology Photo Contest

Enter the Faces of Biology Photo Contest for a chance to win $250 and to have your photo appear on the cover of the journal BioScience.

The competition recognizes scientists who use imagery to communicate aspects of biological research to the public and policymakers. This year the competition is sponsored by the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology in addition to the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS).

The theme of the contest is "Faces of Biology." Photographs entered into the contest must depict a person, such as a scientist, researcher, collections curator, technician, or student, engaging in biological research. The depicted research may occur outside, in a lab, with a natural history collection, on a computer, in a classroom, or elsewhere. Help communicate science through imagery.

The First, Second and Third Place Winners will:

have their photos printed inside BioScience,
receive a one year online subscription to BioScience, and
receive the AIBS Member Society or Organization (MSO) discounted rate for one professional development workshop registration within 365 days of the announcement for the winning photos.

The First Place Winner will also have their photo featured on the cover of BioScience and will receive $250.

Submissions must be received by 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time on September 30, 2026. Enter today.

Short Takes

Join the National Science Foundation (NSF) Biological Sciences (BIO) Directorate for a virtual office hour on April 22, 2026 at 1:00-2:00 PM ET for a discussion of the merit review process and how it governs the evaluation of proposals. Register now.
On April 13, President Trump signed into law the Small Business Innovation and Economic Security Act (S. 3971), reauthorizing the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs through September 30, 2031. Known as "America's Seed Fund," the programs had lapsed in 2025 and have provided more than $81 billion to over 34,000 small businesses since 1982, helping spur company formation and attract substantial private-sector investment.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced that it is ending its continuous submission policy, which allowed grant reviewers to submit applications after the submission deadline had passed. Starting later this year, NIH will no longer accept late applications for Fellowships, Small Business (SBIR/STTR) grants, or International Collaborations under any circumstances. For other grant types, late applications will only be considered if submitted within two weeks of the deadline, and recent service on an NIH review committee is now an officially recognized reason to request this brief extension.
NSF has agreed to launch a study on compensation for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers, following recent recommendations from the Government Accountability Office. The study, which Congress directed NSF to complete by August 2023, will assess funding models, cost of living, and workforce retention, while addressing major data gaps--including the lack of centralized information on graduate researcher compensation. Findings are expected to inform future federal support for early-career scientists.