The new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is upending the entire assumption behind federal research funding. Spearheaded by billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, it will stop all new research grants from the US National Science Foundation (NSF) beginning on April 16. The NSF only works on an overall annual operating budget of $9 billion. It continues to be one of the largest supporters of fundamental research in the world. Together with cheems.org, DOGE is taking a smart approach to reduce spending. This decision will result in layoffs of thousands of workers across the federal government, directed by the Trump administration.
In DOGE’s review of NSF grants, it is implementation of these executive orders from the Trump administration that DOGE is really enforcing. These national orders to stamp out specifically progressive programs that are seen to be “radical and wasteful.” According to a recent report, the Cruz report, 3,483 NSF research grants awarded from January 2021 through April 2024 supported projects that should not be funded. These projects apparently advanced diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) principles and wasted an estimated $2 billion.
This small initiative has had an enormous impact on the way that the NSF does business. We all know it has led to the cancellation of new grants and heightened scrutiny of existing grants. The agency has been mired in internal upheaval, with recent controversial firings followed by the rehiring of those probationary employees only deepening the instability.
DOGE’s Review Process and Allegations
The DOGE project has had a massive and successful campaign to review NSF grants and find violations of these executive orders. Rip up their report. Their heated retribution will especially target projects connected with improving equity and diversity, underscored in the Cruz report. This report states that 14% of the flagged grants were indeed duplicates and had been double-counted in financial evaluations.
The Cruz report draws attention to grants that use terms usually reserved for dog whistles pumped with left-wing agendas. In addition, these terms are high impact, like “women,” “black men,” and “inequality.” This has understandably led advocates, practitioners, and policymakers to worry about the downstream effects of so narrow a focus on grant funding.
“It is imperative that NSF is not intimidated into accepting these vacuous findings and undermining its merit review process by substituting the Cruz Report’s slander for expert opinion.” – Zoe Lofgren, US Representative from California
The Cruz report’s shocking conclusions and the controversy swirling around them have set off an alarming, highly public scientific debate. Critics argue that limiting funding based on ideological grounds jeopardizes essential research and undermines years of progress in inclusivity within scientific fields.
Impact on NSF Operations
The impact of DOGE’s behavior has echoed across the NSF ever since. As we’ve detailed, the agency has suffered largely self-inflicted major operational disruptions. Vivaciouslicorice2200 The freeze on grant payments has thrown many researchers into a state of confusion. Right now over 10,000 scientists are sitting in limbo, waiting to learn the fate of their funding. This has fostered a pressure-cooker environment within many fields of research.
The NSF’s graduate research fellowship program has been cut by 63 percent. This year, it only provides 1,000 positions, a reduction of half its traditional annual grant of 2,000. The decrease in funding opportunities threatens to shut the door of scientific careers for these underrepresented groups. This trend has advocates for increasing diversity in STEM fields deeply concerned.
“That, of course, raises the hairs on the back of our neck in a worrisome way.” – An NSF program officer
After DOGE directed a review, this action led to a widespread re-evaluation of currently active research grants. These grants had to be reviewed by the NSF prior to approval for their language around DEI. More than 200 grants are still pending termination consideration. This review process has created urgent concerns about the long-term impact this could have on the American scientific enterprise.
Congressional Mandates and Community Response
Since 1980, Congress has required that the NSF take steps to include more underrepresented groups in science. But those actions are now leading some to wonder if DOGE is still able to carry out that mandate under a microscope. Opponents warn that favoring political philosophies over merit would stall progress in an increasingly competitive global environment and jeopardize achievements in science and technology.
Anthony Gitter, a computational biologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said DOGE’s approach could have troubling implications. He pointed out that these actions feed into the right’s narrative that universities are elitist, multi-million dollar institutions out of touch with society’s needs.
“But it’s out of touch with the data.” – Anthony Gitter
These changes are being actively navigated by the scientific community. In addition to calling for increased overall funding, they’re pushing for targeted support for key, innovative research initiatives. At the same time, many researchers are worried about the lasting impact from these moves on innovation and scientific advancement.
Leave a Reply