Washington, DC, United States · 18 November 2025 — The American scientific research enterprise underwent its most significant disruption in decades during 2025, as the Trump administration froze or terminated approximately 5,300 research grants across the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), totaling over $5 billion in unspent funds. A data-driven analysis published by Science News on 18 November 2025 quantifies the scale of the cuts for the first time, revealing a reshaping of the US research landscape that scientists warn will have consequences for years to come.
The analysis, based on data from Grant Witness — a project tracking NIH and NSF grant terminations via government databases and researcher submissions — finds that as of November 2025, NIH had seen about $2.3 billion in unspent funds across nearly 2,500 grants frozen or terminated. At NSF, over 1,300 grants had about $700 million in unspent funds cut. Together, the cuts total approximately $3 billion in remaining funds, with additional grants affected by administrative reviews and returned-without-review decisions.
Workforce Contraction at the NSF
The grant terminations occurred alongside a dramatic contraction of the NSF workforce. Between September 2024 and October 2025, the agency lost approximately 18.3% of its total staff. In May 2025, the NSF initiated a Reduction in Force (RIF) that targeted executive positions, drastically reducing the number of Senior Executive Service (SES) roles. The agency sought to reduce bureaucratic layers, with officials reporting that the number of management tiers was reduced for many employees.
For fiscal year 2025, the NSF received $8.826 billion in appropriations, following a period of intense pressure during which the administration proposed much deeper cuts — at one point suggesting a 55% reduction to the agency's $9 billion budget. The constrained budget environment led to a sharp slowdown in the release of research funds and the cancellation or freezing of various existing grants.
The Targeting of Specific Research Areas
The cuts have not been evenly distributed across scientific disciplines. According to the Science News analysis, the terminated grants disproportionately targeted initiatives related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); environmental protection; vaccine hesitancy; and public health. Specific examples include:
- Cancer research hub: The largest hit to any NIH grant ($77 million in remaining funds) froze support for Northwestern University's Lurie Cancer Center, a national hub for cancer research, care, and community outreach.
- STEM diversity initiative: Within NSF, the largest terminated grant ($9 million in remaining funds) supported the coordination hub of the agency's INCLUDES initiative, which aims to make the STEM workforce more diverse by supporting large-scale efforts to remove systemic barriers. The hub connects hundreds of researchers, organizations, and community groups.
- Vaccine uptake research: One terminated grant ($200,000 in unspent funds) aimed to understand and reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among young Black adults in three Southern states.
- Immune cell research: A grant to investigate how neurons regulate specialised immune cells in the retina lost its $490,000 of remaining funding. While the reason for its termination is unclear, the grant mentions that these cells exhibit remarkable "diversity," a term the administration has flagged as problematic.
- Education disparities: A grant to study the impact of University System of Maryland programs aimed at increasing underrepresented college students in STEM was terminated, with $1.7 million still to be spent.
Political Interference in the Review Process
A Guardian investigation published in July 2025 documented unprecedented political interference in the NSF's gold-standard peer-review process. According to multiple current and former NSF employees who spoke with the Guardian, personnel from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) can veto any study without explanation.
"Before Trump, the review process was based on merit and impact. Now, it's like rolling the dice, because a DOGE person has the final say. There has never in the history of NSF been anything like this."
— Current NSF program officer, quoted in The Guardian, July 2025
Program officers reported being under pressure to only fund proposals that fit the administration's narrow priorities — artificial intelligence, quantum information science, nuclear energy, biotechnology, and translational research — even when those proposals did not review as well as others. The NSF's gold standard review process, sources told The Guardian, had been "100% compromised."
At least 1,653 active NSF research grants authorised on their merits were abruptly cancelled, abandoned midway through projects, according to Grant Watch, a non-profit tracker. Almost 60% of the projects abandoned were in states which voted for Joe Biden in 2024. More than one in nine cancelled grants — 12% of the total — were at Harvard University, which the administration has particularly targeted.
The Ripple Effects on Universities and Researchers
The cumulative effect of the 2025 disruptions has significantly altered the landscape for scientists and universities across the United States. Researchers face high levels of uncertainty as existing grants are scrutinised, with some being terminated. Programs related to environmental protection, public health, and STEM diversity — including the NSF INCLUDES initiative hub — have been cancelled.
Universities have been forced to adapt. UC Davis, for example, published guidance for faculty on the implications of the federal research grant slowdown, advising researchers on actions to take in response to delayed or frozen funding. Across the country, scientists are reporting that they are not accepting new graduate students due to funding uncertainty — a decision that, as the Guardian investigation noted, affects "a whole generation of young scientists who see no pathway into the field for them."
| NIH and NSF Grant Cuts in 2025 | |
|---|---|
| Total grants frozen or terminated | ~5,300 |
| Total unspent funds affected | Over $5 billion |
| NIH grants affected | ~2,500 |
| NIH unspent funds | ~$2.3 billion |
| NSF grants affected | ~1,300+ |
| NSF unspent funds | ~$700 million |
| NSF workforce reduction (Sep 2024 – Oct 2025) | ~18.3% |
| Proposed 2026 graduate student funding reduction | 75% |
The Return on Investment Argument
The Federal Reserve has estimated that government-supported research from the NSF and other agencies has had a return on investment of 150% to 300% over the past 75 years, meaning US taxpayers have gotten back between $1.50 and $3 for every dollar invested. This figure underscores what many economists and science policy experts consider the counterproductive nature of the cuts: the long-term economic returns of fundamental research far exceed the short-term budget savings achieved by terminating grants.
The NSF, founded in 1950, is the only federal agency that funds fundamental research across all fields of science and engineering. Over its 75-year history, it has contributed to major breakthroughs in organ transplants, gene technology, artificial intelligence, smartphones, the internet, extreme weather warning systems, American Sign Language, cybersecurity, and even the language app Duolingo.
Looking Ahead: Signs of Partial Recovery
By February 2026, the NSF signalled an intent to begin hiring again to replenish staff levels deemed "too low" following the previous year's cuts. As of August 2026, the agency has continued to announce new funding opportunities totalling over $1.5 billion, focused on foundational research and a "portfolio-based approach" designed to offer more flexibility in award periods and reduce administrative burdens.
However, the broader research community has noted that the cumulative effect of the 2025–2026 disruptions — including staff departures, grant volatility, and the erosion of trust in the peer-review process — has significantly altered the landscape for scientists and universities. Rebuilding that trust, and the institutional knowledge lost through workforce reductions, will likely take far longer than the budget cycle that created the disruption.
For the global research community, the 2025 US funding crisis serves as a cautionary tale about the vulnerability of science to political priorities — and a reminder of why institutions like the European Research Council, with its constitutionally protected independence, were designed to insulate fundamental research from short-term political pressures.
Sources:
- Science News, See the alarming extent of NIH and NSF funding cuts in 2025, 18 November 2025 —
- The Guardian, Scientists warn US will lose a generation of talent because of Trump cuts, 3 July 2025 —
- Eos, After restructuring, NSF wants to hire more staff but reduce solicitations —
- UC Davis Office of Research, Federal Research Grant Slowdown: Implications and Actions for UC Davis Faculty —
- GovExec, NSF slashes most career executive roles after shedding one-third of staff, July 2025 —
- Ithaka S+R, Federal Funding Cuts and Research Universities —
FIRAT Editorial Board
Institutional Research Desk · Foresight Institute of Research and Translation
The collective editorial and research translation board of FIRAT, synthesising peer-reviewed evidence, policy briefs, and division milestones across our seven foundational research pillars.
