Science Programs Face Major Budget Cuts in FY 2026
Leaked preliminary drafts of President Trump's upcoming budget request reveal plans for steep reductions in science funding in fiscal year (FY) 2026.
Washington Post reported that a leaked internal memo from the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposes a dramatic overhaul of the U.S. biomedical research and public health system by slashing the National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget by 44%, from $47 billion to $26.7 billion, and consolidating its 27 institutes and centers into just eight. The plan would eliminate institutes focused on nursing research, alternative medicine, minority health, and global health, while preserving those dedicated to cancer, aging, and infectious diseases. The remaining 15 institutes would be reorganized into 5 new institutes, organized around neuroscience, behavioral health, "body systems," general medical science, and disability.
Additionally, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences would move outside NIH to the HHS. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences would shift to a new HHS agency, the $19.8 billion Administration for a Healthy America. The plan assumes that part of the proposed cuts to NIH funding would come from the 15% cap on indirect research costs announced earlier that could potentially save $4 billion. That effort is currently blocked by a federal judge.
The proposal also includes a one-third (or $41 billion) reduction to the overall HHS budget. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would face a 43% cut, from $9.2 billion to $5.2 billion, eliminating many non-infectious disease programs, such as those addressing lead exposure, brain injuries, and firearm injury prevention, while preserving a new disease forecasting center.
Critics argue the plan would devastate the U.S. biomedical research enterprise and public health infrastructure. Despite historical bipartisan support for NIH and CDC funding, it's uncertain whether Congress will oppose the proposal, given narrow Republican majorities and alignment with the President's broader agenda.
Additionally, the White House is expected to propose eliminating the entire $307 million Ecosystems Mission Area of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in its FY 2026 budget. The program supports critical biological research on endangered species, climate change, disease, and wildlife conservation. An internal email from a USGS official revealed that OMB has directed the agency to plan a gradual shutdown of the program. About 1,200 USGS scientists and staff would be affected. USGS is appealing for partial funding restoration. The move aligns with recommendations from the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025, which advocates shifting biological research to universities via competitive grants.
Also facing large cuts are the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Science Mission Directorate, which could see its budget halved to $3.9 billion, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which may face a 27% cut and the elimination of its main research arm--the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR). According to a leaked document, OAR, which funds research in climate modelling, cloud monitoring and hurricane forecasting, would be slashed by 74%, to $171 million. "At this funding level, OAR is eliminated as a line office," the document states. Science programs at NASA face drastic cuts, including a more than 50 percent cut to Earth science, a two-thirds cut to astrophysics, and a 30 percent cut to Planetary science.
The President's budget request is yet to be publicly released and might differ from the leaked documents. Meanwhile, Congress has begun preparing its own budget proposals, with both the House and Senate initiating the appropriations process and planning hearings. Congress, which previously rejected similar cuts during Trump's first term, will make the final funding decisions.
NSF Slashes Graduate Research Fellowships by Half
The National Science Foundation (NSF) has halved the number of fellowships awarded through its prestigious Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP), marking the smallest cohort of recipients in 15 years and drawing criticism from across the scientific community.
Only 1,000 early-career researchers received the fellowship this year--down from 2,037 in 2024 and a peak of 2,555 in 2023. Despite the dramatic reduction, NSF has not publicly explained the cuts, though the agency is operating under a flat $9 billion budget approved by Congress last month. NSF might lose $234 million in construction funds from that total, resulting in an overall 2.6% cut, because the President disagrees with a decision by Congress to designate them as emergency spending. The agency is also facing additional staffing cuts and broader administrative constraints.
The GRFP provides a $37,000 annual stipend for three years, plus tuition support, and has supported over 70,000 researchers since its inception in 1952. It's widely viewed as a career-defining award for aspiring scientists. Applicants were notified in early April, many of whom instead received one of the record 3,018 "honorable mentions" -- a recognition that offers no funding.
While the NSF left open the possibility of a second round of awards "subject to future resourcing considerations," observers remain skeptical.
NSF Terminates Research Awards on DEI, Misinformation
The National Science Foundation (NSF) announced last Friday that it is terminating research awards that do not align with its current priorities, including projects focused on "diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and misinformation/disinformation."
NSF's broadening participation activities "should not preference some groups at the expense of others, or directly/indirectly exclude individuals or groups," stated NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan. "Research projects with more narrow impact limited to subgroups of people based on protected class or characteristics do not effectuate NSF priorities. NSF will continue to support research with the goal of understanding or addressing participation in STEM, in accordance with all applicable statutes and mandates, with the core goal of creating opportunities for all Americans."
This move is part of the Trump Administration's broader effort to cut federal spending on programs it deems misaligned with its agenda. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) posted on its X account that 402 grants totaling $233 million were canceled on Friday.
In a related development, Science Insider reported that NSF has paused all new grant awards after staff from DOGE began reviewing the agency's operations last week. Approved grant proposals are being returned for a "secondary review" to ensure compliance with presidential directives, which restrict funding for topics like diversity and climate change. The move has caused confusion within the agency, and NSF has not clarified how long the freeze will last or how many grants are affected.
Judge Blocks DOE Plan to Cap Research Indirect Costs at 15%
On April 11, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced a 15% cap on indirect cost rates for university research grants, aiming to cut over $405 million annually and reduce what it calls "inefficient spending."
Indirect costs typically fund research infrastructure and essential services like facility maintenance, IT, and administrative support. "The purpose of Department of Energy funding to colleges and universities is to support scientific research - not foot the bill for administrative costs and facility upgrades," said U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. According to DOE, the current average rate of indirect costs incurred by its grant recipients at colleges and universities is more than 30%.
The move echoes a similar, now court-blocked, attempt by the National Institutes of Health, signaling a broader federal shift in how research overhead is funded. Critics argue the cap undermines U.S. competitiveness and places further strain on already burdened institutions.
Shortly after the policy was announced, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs temporarily blocked its implementation, citing the risk of "immediate and irreparable injury." Burroughs ordered DOE to maintain current funding rates while the case proceeds. The lawsuit, brought by nine universities and three higher-education groups, claims the cap would severely damage the nation's research infrastructure. A hearing on a possible longer-term injunction is scheduled for April 28.
In related news, a group of national organizations representing academic, medical, and independent research institutions have announced an effort to develop "a more efficient and transparent model" for funding indirect costs on federal research grants.
Trump Administration Moves to Narrow Endangered Species Protections
The Trump Administration has proposed a major reinterpretation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that would narrow the definition of "harm" to endangered and threatened species to exclude habitat modification, significantly limiting the scope of the law.
Under the proposal from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries, only direct actions against protected species would count as "harm," and not the modification of their habitats--a departure from decades of precedent upheld by a 1995 Supreme Court decision.
The ESA, enacted in 1973, prohibits the "take" of protected species, which includes actions that "harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect" such species. While the original Senate bill included habitat destruction in its definition of take, this language was removed from the final law. FWS later defined "harm" to include "significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering." NOAA Fisheries adopted a similar definition for species under its jurisdiction. In 1995, the Supreme Court rejected a challenge to the inclusion of habitat, upholding the agencies' definition of harm.
The new proposal argues that the longstanding interpretation of harm "runs contrary to the best meaning of the statutory term 'take'," signaling an intent to limit federal authority over habitat-based protections.
Conservation groups argue the move would severely weaken protections for endangered species by allowing more habitat destruction. The agencies claim the redefinition could reduce regulatory burdens and economic impact but acknowledge it may spark strong opposition.
This proposal comes amid broader efforts to weaken environmental regulations and follows the Supreme Court's recent rollback of the Chevron doctrine, which previously gave agencies leeway in interpreting ambiguous statutory language. The public has 30 days, until May 19, to comment on the proposed rule, which will then undergo White House review. Additional changes to ESA regulations are expected to follow.
NSF Disbands Most Advisory Panels Amid Federal Downsizing
In line with President Trump's push to shrink the federal government, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has eliminated 11 of its external advisory committees, cutting off a key source of scientific community input.
These panels, which advised the agency on everything from biology to geology, engineering, and international programs, were disbanded to comply with a February Executive Order aimed at reducing the federal bureaucracy. While these committees didn't make funding decisions, they helped shape NSF priorities and offered researchers a voice in agency planning.
Only a handful of congressionally mandated programmatic advisory committees now remain, including one on ensuring equal opportunity in science and engineering and the Advisory Committee for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships. Critics warn the move weakens NSF's ability to stay innovative and responsive to the research community.
Trump Targets Scientific Journals
The Trump Administration is targeting scientific and medical journals through both legal and budgetary measures. A federal prosecutor has sent letters to multiple journal editors, accusing them of partisan bias and requesting explanations about their funding and editorial practices. Critics see this as part of a broader campaign to intimidate and politicize science.
Simultaneously, a leaked draft of the FY 2026 budget proposal for the Department of Health and Human Services includes plans to cut funding for two open-access, peer-reviewed journals published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)--Emerging Infectious Diseases and Preventing Chronic Disease. The proposed cuts are part of a broader restructuring of the CDC. Researchers warn that eliminating these journals would harm public health communication and reduce access to critical global health research.
Interior Launches Major Reorganization
The U.S. Interior Department is launching a major reorganization effort aimed at consolidating administrative functions like HR, IT, finance, training, communications, international affairs, and contracting under the Office of the Secretary.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum formalized the plan in a secretarial order, though it lacks details on timeline, execution, or the number of employees affected. The effort aligns with President Trump's government-wide push for cost-cutting and workforce reduction and will be overseen by Tyler Hassen, Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget at Interior and a former member of Elon Musk's DOGE team.
The move has raised concerns about impending layoffs and employee competition for remaining roles, particularly as over 1,000 staffers have already accepted buyouts.
Funding Cut for National Climate Assessment
The Trump Administration has cut funding and staffing for the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), jeopardizing the production of the National Climate Assessment (NCA)--a congressionally mandated report on how climate change impacts the U.S. economy, health, and infrastructure.
NASA issued stop-work orders on contracts with ICF International, the firm that had been providing much of the NCA's technical support. Without ICF's staff, the next assessment, due in 2027 or 2028, will likely be delayed. The USGCRP, which coordinates efforts across 14 federal agencies and relies on hundreds of volunteer scientists, plays a key role in producing the report. The last NCA was released in 2023 and is widely used by governments and businesses to plan for climate change.
While the Administration claims it is streamlining operations, experts fear the real goal is to undermine the integrity of the NCA--potentially replacing it with documents promoting climate denial. Scientists say this could strip the report of its legitimacy and even open the door to misinformation being used in legal battles over environmental regulations.
AIBS Submits Testimony in Support of FY 2026 Funding for NIH
AIBS has provided testimony to the House Appropriations Committee regarding fiscal year (FY) 2026 funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
AIBS urged Congress to provide NIH with a base budget of at least $51.3 billion in FY 2026, arguing that this level of funding is needed to "grow and sustain the U.S. bioeconomy and enable NIH to accelerate work on important initiatives at the frontiers of science and medicine." The testimony emphasized that the requested funding "will enable the agency to support research in a number of important priority areas, including fighting cancer, advancing nutrition science, improving neurological health, tackling the opioid epidemic, eradicating HIV, expanding mental health research, addressing health disparities and inequities, and investigating the human health impacts of climate change."
AIBS further requested that any additional funding to support the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) should supplement, not supplant, the $51.3 billion recommendation for NIH.
Read the testimony.
AIBS Joins Letter in Support NIAID Appropriations for FY 2026
AIBS joined 55 other organizations in sending a letter to appropriators requesting at least $7.29 billion for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and at least $51.303 billion for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) overall for fiscal year (FY) 2026, representing a 9% increase over FY 2025 levels.
The letter reads, in part: "NIAID plays an essential role in addressing influenza, asthma, cancer, HIV/AIDS, sepsis, deadly allergic reactions, immunodeficiencies, autoimmune disorders, tuberculosis, malaria and other vector-borne diseases, neglected diseases, lupus and so much more. With a unique mandate to better understand, treat, and prevent infectious, immunologic, and allergic diseases, NIAID has consistently forged paths to improve health and save lives. NIAID's cutting-edge research and network of scientists are eliminating some of the world's most serious health threats, as well as addressing risks to national security and public health, including antimicrobial resistance (AMR). NIAID researchers also uncover the links between infectious diseases and chronic conditions, which can be triggered by an infection; these discoveries lead to the development of countermeasures to protect individuals with chronic illnesses, who are more susceptible to infections. By staying at the forefront of research, NIAID-funded scientists and clinicians protect American lives and prevent instability that could impact U.S. economic and national interests."
Read the letter.
Enter the 15th 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 showcases, in a personal way, biological research in its many forms and settings. The images help the public and policymakers better understand the value of biological research and education. The competition is sponsored by the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology in addition to the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS).
"The Faces of Biology Photo Contest is more than just a competition; it's an opportunity to capture science through photography, to celebrate creativity, and to connect society with the beauty in biology," said Scott Glisson, AIBS Chief Executive Officer. "It reminds us that every moment in science is worth preserving, and every scientist has a story to tell."
The theme of the contest is "Faces of Biology." Photographs entered into the competition must depict a person, such as a scientist, 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.
The winning photos from the 2024 contest will be featured in the April 2025 issue of BioScience.
Submissions must be received by 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time on September 30, 2025. For more information or to enter the contest, visit our website.
Short Takes
-
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is removing questions about sexual orientation and nonbinary gender identities from its Survey of Earned Doctorates, reversing a 2024 decision to include them. The rollback, approved by the White House Office of Management and Budget, follows Executive Orders from President Trump banning recognition of genders beyond male and female and rescinding a prior order directing agencies to address disparities for LGBTQ individuals.
-
To help inform the biological sciences community about NSF-supported cyberinfrastructure and artificial intelligence(AI) resources, the Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) will host a BIO-Wide Virtual Office Hour on Wednesday April 30, 2025 from 12:00-1:00 pm ET with guests from NSF's Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure. Register here.
-
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has refired hundreds of probationary employees who were initially dismissed in February, briefly reinstated, and placed on administrative leave in March. The move follows a recent court decision that paused a previous ruling preventing federal agencies from firing probationary employees in some states. Similar legal developments have also halted reinstatements at other federal departments, including Agriculture, Interior, and Energy.
-
A coalition of data organizations has launched the Data Rescue Project to safeguard public federal datasets at risk of disappearing. Originally a simple Google Doc, the initiative has grown into a centralized, crowd-sourced hub that tracks ongoing data preservation efforts and provides access to vulnerable datasets. It functions as both a resource directory and a coordination point for rescuing and maintaining public access to critical federal data.
-
Kathleen Sgamma, President Trump's nominee to lead the Bureau of Land Management Director, abruptly withdrew just before her confirmation hearing. Though Sgamma didn't give a reason, a recently surfaced memo she wrote criticizing Trump's post-2020 election actions may have influenced her decision. A staunch advocate for fossil fuel development, her nomination was backed by GOP lawmakers aiming to expand energy production on public lands. With Sgamma out, Republicans must now find a new nominee to lead the agency overseeing over 240 million acres of federal land.
From the Federal Register
The following items appeared in the Federal Register from April 7 to 18, 2025.
Commerce
Health and Human Services
Interior
National Science Foundation
