The National Science Foundation (NSF) has reopened its website dedicated to distributing research grant funds to scientists, amid a complex and controversial review process. Approximately 10,000 research grants have been flagged for review, distributed to various program directors. However, the NSF has not publicly shared details on how it continues to examine these grants in accordance with former President Donald Trump’s executive orders. Despite this silence, NSF employees have provided documents to Nature, shedding light on the criteria used during the review process.
These documents reveal that the NSF is examining grants for language related to "broadening participation," foreign assistance, climate science, domestic energy, and "discriminatory programs, including illegal DEI." Despite this insight, researchers remain largely in the dark about the vetting process, with communication from the NSF described as cryptic. A team of five to eight NSF staff members will review any revised grants before they proceed to the Office of the Director for final approval.
The NSF's decision to continue reviewing grants worth billions of dollars aims to comply with directives from the Trump administration. In an unexpected move, the NSF froze its funds and canceled a week's worth of grant reviews, crucial for determining which projects receive funding. However, two federal judges have temporarily blocked this funding freeze, suggesting it might be an overreach lacking proper authority. The US government has since rescinded a memo dated January 28 that temporarily upheld the funding freeze.
In reaction to the funding freeze and subsequent confusion, 22 states along with the District of Columbia have filed lawsuits against the federal government and its agencies to more permanently halt the freeze. Amid these legal battles and administrative uncertainty, NSF employees have expressed feelings of frustration and confusion. One employee remarked, "People are trying to understand what’s going on," encapsulating the general sentiment within the organization.
“People are trying to understand what’s going on,” – One NSF employee
Despite lifting the funding freeze, the NSF has continued its review of grants. This ongoing scrutiny has caused tension within the agency. Employees have noted the repetitive appearance of terms like 'women,' 'woman,' and 'people of color' in spreadsheets as particularly concerning.
“To see ‘women’ and ‘woman’ and ‘people of colour’ showing up on a spreadsheet over and over and over and over — that was a gut punch,” – One NSF employee
The statutory framework governing the NSF is under question, with Deborah Pearlstein from Princeton University asserting that it is being violated under current practices. This sentiment echoes among employees who feel that despite their efforts, there remains a lack of clarity in the process.
“The statutory framework of NSF is being violated.” – One NSF employee
Some researchers are actively seeking alternative funding sources as uncertainty looms. Jasmin Graham, a researcher affected by these developments, stated:
“We are currently operating on the assumption we will not get the remaining funds…and are strategizing to find alternative funding sources.” – Jasmin Graham
Despite these challenges, some employees maintain that the NSF is making an earnest effort. One employee noted:
“NSF is doing an honest job, as painful as it can be.” – One NSF employee
The focus on "broadening participation" in STEM fields is a key aspect of many research grants. Julia Barnes highlighted the NSF's requirement for impactful projects designed to reach the largest audience possible.
“NSF requires us to design these projects to be impactful to the highest number of people possible,” – Julia Barnes
Suzanne Barbour elaborated on the importance of inclusivity in STEM initiatives:
“Broadening participation in STEM goes beyond racial, ethnic, gender identity — it goes to ensuring all the talented minds out there have the opportunity to contribute to our STEM workforce” – Suzanne Barbour
Leave a Reply