Tag: cuts

  • Not all campus cuts last month were driven by Trump

    Not all campus cuts last month were driven by Trump

    February was a tumultuous month for higher education as President Donald Trump’s agenda began to take shape. His barrage of executive actions threatened federal funding and created uncertainty for colleges, prompting some to freeze hiring and others to pause graduate school admissions.

    Even wealthy institutions like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford University enacted hiring freezes last month, while Northwestern University paused both hiring and compensation increases, in addition to other moves.

    Some institutions were more severely affected by the Trump cuts than others. Federally run tribal colleges like Haskell Indian Nations University and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute lost multiple staff members as the Office of Personnel Management laid off many probationary employees.

    But the cuts below are not tied to Trump—at least not directly.

    The latest installment of Inside Higher Ed’s monthly roundup of personnel and program cuts at colleges finds those changes largely propelled by financial issues tied to the usual suspects: declining enrollment and rising operational costs.

    Catholic University of America

    Facing a $30 million structural deficit, the Washington, D.C.-based institution has eliminated 16 positions in the Center for Academic and Career Success and is transitioning to a faculty advising model.

    The position of vice president for student affairs was also cut, and CUA has launched a voluntary faculty separation program for full-time faculty with 10 or more years of service, according to an email from President Peter Kilpatrick that was obtained by Inside Higher Ed.

    A reorganization of CUA’s colleges is also planned.

    “While the specific form of these changes continues to evolve through consultation, the need for substantive reorganization and consolidation is certain,” Kilpatrick wrote in an email to campus.

    One former employee, speaking on condition of anonymity, questioned the rationale behind cuts to advising. They told Inside Higher Ed that faculty are already overworked and underpaid and expressed concern about advising responsibilities, which they believe were better left to the ousted advisers.

    CUA confirmed 16 job cuts within the Center for Academic and Career Success to Inside Higher Ed but did not address other personnel reductions.

    Western Washington University

    Officials at the public four-year institution in Bellingham have expanded a plan to lay off employees.

    Initially, the university planned to cut 55 jobs, but that has now grown to 74, Cascadia Daily reported. Three dozen of those 74 positions targeted for elimination are currently vacant.

    The cuts are in response to an $18 million budget deficit. WWU has thus far shaved off $13 million, but the remaining $5 million means that even more cuts could be on the horizon.

    “At this time, we are still working to identify reductions for the remaining $5 million gap. While we are making significant reductions now, our financial position will continue to evolve based on state funding and enrollment trends. More changes may be necessary, and we will provide updates as soon as decisions are made,” officials wrote on a frequently asked questions page.

    Columbia-Greene Community College

    Grappling with financial challenges, the college in Hudson, N.Y., laid off 17 employees late last month as part of a sustainability plan, The Daily Gazette reported.

    Additionally, 11 tenured faculty members accepted retirement incentives.

    A college spokesperson declined to provide specifics, calling the layoffs a human resources matter, but told the newspaper that affected positions include faculty, staff and administrators.

    Spring Hill College

    Six majors and nine faculty members are on the way out at the private, Catholic college in Alabama, which dropped academic programs and cut jobs as part of budget cuts, WKRG reported.

    The TV station reported that enrollment dropped by almost 25 percent in recent years, from 1,200 before the coronavirus pandemic to 920 currently, though numbers are trending up for this fall.

    The majors cut were biochemistry, chemistry, history, philosophy, secondary education and studio art. A studio art minor was also eliminated.

    Tuskegee University

    An unspecified number of employees have been laid off at Tuskegee University, WSFA reported.

    The private, historically Black university in Alabama declined to specify the number of layoffs, but the TV station reported that employees told them the job cuts arrived abruptly—giving them little time to clean out their desks—and affected personnel in the university’s veterinary program.

    “Tuskegee University is always exploring opportunities to provide a stellar academic experience for our students,” university officials said in a statement. “Staffing adjustments are part of that process. These adjustments did not include academic leadership and are minimal in number.”

    Our Lady of the Lake University

    Amid a “realignment” process, the private, Catholic institution in San Antonio plans to cut academic programs and faculty jobs, though specific details have not been released, Texas Public Radio reported.

    “As part of the realignment process, some academic programs will be discontinued and we will modify some academic programs,” university officials wrote on a frequently asked questions page about the coming changes. “We will also reduce some full-time and part-time faculty positions. Some programs have had dwindling interest from students, to the point where they are no longer viable as stand-alone degree plans. Others are trending in that direction.”

    The university cited the need to boost enrollment, following recent declines. Though not mentioned on the FAQ page, OLLU has also faced significant legal expenses in recent years due to a 2022 data breach that affected nearly 42,000 employees and resulted in a settlement.

    Franklin & Marshall College

    Cuts are coming this spring to the private liberal arts college in Pennsylvania, LancasterOnline reported.

    Franklin & Marshall president Barbara Altmann wrote in a message to employees that the move was “one piece of a strategic financial sustainability plan.” She added that the college has already made various efforts to trim expenses, including by eliminating vacant positions.

    Job cuts are expected in April, though an exact number has not been specified publicly.

    “Although the plan is not yet finalized, we are evaluating potential cuts to provide more stability for the entire community going forward. This plan will need to include a reduction in workforce, meaning the strategic elimination of some employee positions, rather than relying on attrition,” Altmann wrote in an email published by LancasterOnline.

    Southern Illinois University–Edwardsville

    Due to a budget deficit of more than $10 million, cuts are expected to both academic programs and jobs at Southern Illinois University–Edwardsville, The St. Louis-Post Dispatch reported.

    In an email to campus, Chancellor James Minor wrote that the university “is not in a financial crisis” but has “long-standing structural imbalances in our budget that must be addressed.”

    That plan will include possible changes to academic programs, early retirement incentives and the “consolidation, reduction or elimination of some positions,” according to Minor’s email. Early retirement incentives will be rolled out this spring.

    Minor did not specify a timeline for job and program cuts or a target number of reductions.

    Source link

  • Statement on President Trump’s Truth Social post threatening funding cuts for ‘illegal protests’

    Statement on President Trump’s Truth Social post threatening funding cuts for ‘illegal protests’

    President Trump posted a message on Truth Social this morning that put social media and college campuses on high alert. He wrote:

    Colleges can and should respond to unlawful conduct, but the president does not have unilateral authority to revoke federal funds, even for colleges that allow “illegal” protests. 

    If a college runs afoul of anti-discrimination laws like Title VI or Title IX, the government may ultimately deny the institution federal funding by taking it to federal court, or via notice to Congress and an administrative hearing. It is not simply a discretionary decision that the president can make.  

    President Trump also lacks the authority to expel individual students, who are entitled to due process on public college campuses and, almost universally, on private campuses as well.

    Today’s message will cast an impermissible chill on student protests about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Paired with President Trump’s 2019 executive order adopting an unconstitutional definition of anti-Semitism, and his January order threatening to deport international students for engaging in protected expression, students will rationally fear punishment for wholly protected political speech.

    As FIRE knows too well from our work defending student and faculty rights under the Obama and Biden administrations, threatening schools with the loss of federal funding will result in a crackdown on lawful speech. Schools will censor first and ask questions later. 

    Even the most controversial political speech is protected by the First Amendment. As the  Supreme Court reminds us, in America, we don’t use the law to punish those with whom we disagree. Instead, “[a]s a Nation we have chosen a different course—to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate.” 

    Misconduct or criminality — like true threats, vandalism, or discriminatory harassment, properly defined — is not protected by the First Amendment. In fact, discouraging and punishing such behavior is often vital to ensuring that others are able to peacefully make their voices heard. 

    However, students who engage in misconduct must still receive due process — whether through a campus or criminal tribunal. This requires fair, consistent application of existing law or policy, in a manner that respects students’ rights.

    President Trump needs to stand by his past promise to be a champion for free expression. That means doing so for all views — including those his administration dislikes.

     

    Source link

  • Q&A: Bill Shorten talks VC pay cuts, student happiness, and giving UC staff hope

    Q&A: Bill Shorten talks VC pay cuts, student happiness, and giving UC staff hope




    By: Erin Morley

    in Features, Top Stories, VC’s corner


    March 3, 2025

    The new vice-chancellor of the University of Canberra (UC) Bill Shorten said universities will never make everybody happy, but they should do their best to try.

    Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

    Membership Login

    Source link

  • Innovative K-12 staffing strategies are feeling the brunt of federal funding cuts

    Innovative K-12 staffing strategies are feeling the brunt of federal funding cuts

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Many schools and higher education partnerships that support the teacher pipeline are starting to feel the brunt of a $600 million cut in “divisive” teacher training grants announced Feb. 17 by the U.S. Department of Education.

    The cost-cutting measures by the Education Department are part of a broader effort throughout the federal government initiated by the Trump administration. The initiative led by the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, reported this week that the Education Department is leading among other federal agencies for the most savings in total funding cuts. 

    Two of the most common federal grant programs impacted so far are the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Grant, said Cheryl Holcomb-McCoy, president and CEO of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. AACTE has been surveying its members to gauge the grant slashing effort’s reach.

    Though the Education Department did not specify which teacher training grants programs were being cut, the agency said in its announcement that the reductions are targeting funds to institutions and nonprofits that were using training materials on topics such as critical race theory and diversity, equity and inclusion. The department added that “many of these grants included teacher and staff recruiting strategies implicitly and explicitly based on race.”

    At American University in Washington, D.C., for instance, a Teacher Quality Partnership Program grant allowed the university to help paraprofessionals at Friendship Charter Public Schools earn a master’s degree in early childhood or special education, “which there is a real need for,” said Holcomb-McCoy, who previously served as dean of American University’s School of Education. 

    The multiyear federal grant — which covered the private university’s tuition for about 15 teacher candidates to get credentialed, Holcomb-McCoy said — was written to benefit Friendship Charter Public Schools, as well as to address special educator shortages throughout the city.. That funding was “essentially cut.” 

    “We talk about teacher shortages of special education, teacher shortages in subjects such as science and math and technology,” Holcomb-McCoy said. “Cutting these grants essentially is cutting off the pipeline for many aspiring educators to get into the profession, and it’s not helping us. It’s hurting K-12 districts in many ways.”

    The grant also noted that it’s important to have a diverse representation of special education teachers trained in inclusive practices in Washington, D.C., schools, Holcomb-McCoy said. “The impact that that has on students with special needs is huge, and to stop that pipeline of people who aspire to work in that space is devastating to school districts and to communities and families.”

    AACTE estimates that about 31 Supporting Effective Educator Development grants and as many as 75 Teacher Quality Partnership Program grants were recently canceled nationwide. The association is providing support to its members and plans to help them first appeal their cases to the Education Department. 

    AACTE is also exploring potential litigation options, Holcomb-McCoy said.

    A hit to diversifying the teacher workforce

    Many of the applications for federal grants that were cut were written to align with priorities related to diversity set by former presidential administrations. As a result, Holcomb-McCoy said, a lot of those grant programs intentionally sought to address issues over diversity, equity and inclusion.

    Still, diversity in the teacher workforce has been a longstanding issue, she said. As the student population becomes more diverse, the hope has been to hire and keep teachers who are representative of their students. 

    Source link

  • How cuts at U.S. aid agency hinder university research

    How cuts at U.S. aid agency hinder university research

    Peter Goldsmith knows there’s a lot to love about soybeans. Although the crop is perhaps best known in America for its part in the stereotypically bougie soy milk latte, it plays an entirely different role on the global stage. Inexpensive to grow and chock-full of nutrients, it’s considered a potential solution to hunger and malnutrition.

    For the past 12 years, Goldsmith has worked toward that end. In 2013, he founded the Soybean Innovation Lab at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and every day since then, the lab’s scientists have worked to help farmers and businesses solve problems related to soybeans, from how to speed up threshing—the arduous process of separating the bean from the pod—to addressing a lack of available soybean seeds and varieties.

    The SIL, which now encompasses a network of 17 laboratories, has completed work across 31 countries, mostly in sub-Saharan Africa. But now, all that work is on hold, and Goldsmith is preparing to shut down the Soybean Innovation Lab in April, thanks to massive cuts to the federal foreign aid funds that support the labs.

    A week into the current presidential administration, Goldsmith received notice that the Soybean Innovation Lab, which is headquartered at the University of Illinois, had to pause operations, cease external communications and minimize costs, pending a federal government review.

    Goldsmith told his team—about 30 individuals on UIUC’s campus that he described as being like family to one another—that, though they were ordered to stop work, they could continue working on internal projects, like refining their software. But days later, he learned the university could no longer access the lab’s funds in Washington, meaning there was no way to continue paying employees.

    After talking with university administrators, he set a date for the Illinois lab to close: April 15, unless the freeze ended after the government review. But no review materialized; on Feb. 26, the SIL received notice its grant had been terminated, along with about 90 percent of the U.S. Agency for International Development’s programs.

    “The University of Illinois is a very kind, caring sort of culture; [they] wanted to give employees—because it was completely an act of God, out of the blue—give them time to find jobs,” he said. “I mean, up until [Jan. 27], we were full throttle, we were very successful, phones ringing off the hook.”

    The other 16 labs will likely also close, though some are currently scrambling to try to secure other funding.

    Federal funding made up 99 percent of the Illinois lab’s funding, according to Goldsmith. In 2022, the lab received a $10 million grant intended to last through 2027.

    Dismantling an Agency

    The SIL is among the numerous university laboratories impacted by the federal freeze on U.S. Agency for International Development funds—an initial step in what’s become President Donald Trump’s crusade to curtail supposedly wasteful government spending—and the subsequent termination of thousands of grants.

    Trump and Elon Musk, the richest man on Earth and a senior aide to the president, have baselessly claimed that USAID is run by left-wing extremists and say they hope to shutter the agency entirely. USAID’s advocates, meanwhile, have countered that the agency instead is responsible for vital, lifesaving work abroad and that the funding freeze is sure to lead to disease, famine and death.

    A federal judge, Amir H. Ali, seemed to agree, ruling earlier this month that the funding freeze is doing irreparable harm to humanitarian organizations that have had to cut staff and halt projects, NPR and other outlets reported. On Tuesday, Ali reiterated his order that the administration resume funding USAID, giving them until the end of the day Wednesday to do so.

    But the administration appealed the ruling, and the Supreme Court subsequently paused the deadline until the justices can weigh in. Now, officials appear to be moving forward with plans to fire all but a small number of the agency’s employees, directing employees to empty their offices and giving them only 15 minutes each to gather their things.

    About $350 million of the agency’s funds were appropriated to universities, according to the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, including $72 million for the Feed the Future Innovation Labs, which are aimed at researching solutions to end hunger and food insecurity worldwide. (The SIL is funded primarily by Feed the Future.)

    It’s a small amount compared to the funding universities receive from other agencies, like the National Institutes of Health, also the subject of deep cuts by Trump and Musk. But USAID-funded research is a long-standing and important part of the nation’s foreign policy, as well as a resource for the international community, advocates say. The work also has broad, bipartisan support; in fiscal year 2024, Congress increased funding for the Feed the Future Initiative labs by 16 percent, according to Craig Lindwarm, senior vice president for government affairs at the APLU, even in what he characterized as an extremely challenging budgetary environment.

    Potential Long-Term Harms

    Universities “have long been a partner with USAID … to help accomplish foreign policy and diplomatic goals of the United States,” said Lindwarm. “This can often but not exclusively come in the form of extending assistance as it relates to our agricultural institutions, and land-grant institutions have a long history of advancing science in agriculture that boosts yields and productivity in the United States and also partner countries, and we’ve found that this is a great benefit not just to our country, but also partner nations. Stable food systems lead to stable regions and greater market access for producers in the United States and furthers diplomatic objectives in establishing stronger connections with partner countries.”

    Stopping that research has negatively impacted “critical relationships and productivity,” with the potential for long-term harms, Lindwarm said.

    At the SIL, numerous projects have now been canceled, including a planned trip to Africa to beta test a pull-behind combine, a technology that is not commonly used anymore in the U.S.—most combines are now self-propelled rather than pulled by tractor—but that would be useful to farmers in Africa. A U.S. company was slated to license the technology to farmers in Africa, Goldsmith said, but now, “that’s dead. The agribusiness firm, the U.S. firm, won’t be licensing in Africa,” he said. “A good example of market entry just completely shut off.”

    He also noted that the lab closures won’t just impact clients abroad and U.S. companies; they will also be detrimental to UIUC, which did not respond to a request for comment.

    “In our space, we’re well-known. We’re really relevant. It makes the university extremely relevant,” he said. “We’re not an ivory tower. We’re in the dirt, literally, with our partners, with our clients, making a difference, and [that] makes the university an active contributor to solving real problems.”

    Source link

  • A surge of DEI cuts hits colleges across the US

    A surge of DEI cuts hits colleges across the US

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Recent attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion have rocked the higher education sector, with the Trump administration ratcheting up the conservative-led fight against those efforts.

    President Donald Trump has signed multiple executive orders aimed at eliminating DEI across higher education and other sectors.

    More recently, the U.S. Department of Education issued guidance barring colleges from weighing race in any decision-making or promoting diversity efforts. The letter — which used broad language and stirred confusion among colleges — triggered immediate backlash from free speech and faculty groups.

    The department gave colleges until Friday to comply or risk losing their federal funding.

    Higher education groups have challenged the legality of the directives from both the White House and the Education Department. 

    A federal judge temporarily blocked major portions of Trump’s anti-DEI executive orders last week. And the American Federation of Teachers, one of the largest unions in the higher education sector, sued the Education Department over its guidance.

    But with no clear outcome, the following colleges are stripping down their diversity efforts to avoid endangering their funding.

    Ohio State University

    Ohio State University said Thursday it will eliminate its DEI offices and programming effective Friday. The state flagship plans to close its Office of Diversity and Inclusion and discontinue services at its Center for Belonging and Social Change less than 24 hours after announcing the change.

    The move will result in job cuts, though Ohio State did not specify how many.

    “The federal government has signaled its intent to enforce guidance invalidating the use of race in a broad range of educational activities, including by withdrawing federal dollars that are so important to our student, academic and operational success,” Ohio State President Ted Carter wrote in a letter to students and employees.

    In addition to federal forces, the university faces anti-DEI efforts from the Ohio Legislature. The Republican-controlled body is weighing a massive higher education bill that would, among other things, ban the state’s public colleges from having DEI offices or taking positions on “controversial” topics, such as climate or immigration policies, DEI, or abortion.

    “Here in Ohio, a bill barring DEI is also making its way through the legislature, and the Attorney General of Ohio – our statutory counsel – has advised us that his office concurs with the federal government’s position regarding the use of race in educational activities,” Carter said.

    The university’s Office of Academic Affairs will continue to offer the Young Scholars Program and the Morrill Scholarship Program with modified eligibility. The former is currently open to low-income, first generation students, while the latter is open to students “actively engaged in diversity-based leadership, service, and social justice activities,” according to their web pages. 

    The university will also rename its Office of Institutional Equity as the Office of Civil Rights Compliance “to more accurately reflect its work,” according to Carter.

    “Our goal is to ensure that Ohio State continues to be a place where all are welcomed and treated with respect, while following the letter and spirit of the laws and regulations that govern us,” he said.

    Ohio State leaders announced earlier this month they were evaluating the university’s roles and DEI work so they could “make changes if state or federal law requires it or if we decide a different approach is in the university’s best interests.”  

    The cuts to DEI will not reduce current student scholarships or financial aid, Carter said Thursday. Ohio State will offer alternative jobs to affected student employees.

    The University of Cincinnati

    The University of Cincinnati is stuck in limbo — its president announced a complete dissolution of the public institution’s DEI efforts before appearing to walk back the announcement just days later.

    On Feb. 21, President Neville Pinto said the university would eliminate all DEI initiatives to comply with one of Trump’s executive orders and the Education Department’s guidance. 

    Source link

  • Jon Stewart Reworks Trump & Elon’s Sweeping DOGE Budget Cuts (The Daily Show)

    Jon Stewart Reworks Trump & Elon’s Sweeping DOGE Budget Cuts (The Daily Show)







    Higher Education Inquirer : Jon Stewart Reworks Trump & Elon’s Sweeping DOGE Budget Cuts (The Daily Show)




    Source link

  • Facing NIH cuts, colleges restrict grad student admissions

    Facing NIH cuts, colleges restrict grad student admissions

    Several colleges and universities are pausing admissions to some graduate programs, reducing class sizes or rescinding offers to students in an effort to cut costs amid uncertainty in federal funding.

    The disruption to graduate school admissions is the latest cost-cutting move for colleges. After the National Institutes of Health proposed cutting reimbursements for costs related to research, several colleges and universities said they would pause hiring and cut spending, Inside Higher Ed previously reported. (A federal judge has blocked the NIH plan from taking effect for now.)

    In recent days, the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Pennsylvania and several other institutions have stopped doctoral admissions, at least temporarily. Some colleges are pausing admissions to some programs such as in the biomedical sciences, Stat News reported. At others, the pause is universitywide. The University of Southern California and Vanderbilt University temporarily paused graduate student admissions, though both universities later said that they’d ended the pause.

    A University of Pittsburgh spokesperson told WESA, a local NPR station, that the university “temporarily paused additional Ph.D. offers of admission until the impacts of that [NIH] cap were better understood … the University is in the process of completing that analysis and expects to be in a position to resume offers soon.”

    Meanwhile, the University of Pennsylvania is planning to cut graduate admissions rates, The Daily Pennsylvanian reported, citing an email from the interim dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, Jeffrey Kallberg, who wrote that the cuts were a “necessary cost-saving measure” to adjust to the NIH proposal.

    “This is not a step any of us wanted to take,” Kallberg wrote, according to the Daily Penn. “We recognize that graduate students are central to the intellectual life of our school—as researchers, teachers, collaborators, and future scholars. However, we must ensure that we can continue to provide strong support for those students currently in our programs and sustain the school’s core teaching and research activities.”

    Tom Kimbis, executive director of the National Postdoctoral Association, wrote in an email to Inside Higher Ed that academic institutions reliant on federal funding “are being forced to make tough decisions to support these researchers in a difficult environment.”

    “The decisions in Washington to pause or cease funding for science and research is impacting early-career researchers across a wide range of disciplines,” Kimbis added. “Slowing or stopping their work, on topics from cancer and Alzheimer’s research to social science issues, hurts Americans in all 50 states.”

    In the last week, some faculty began tracking the reductions in the biomedical sciences via a shared spreadsheet that includes verified cuts and unverified decisions based on word of mouth and internal emails. Faculty on social media said the cuts will have long-term ramifications for sciences as fewer students enter the field. On TikTok, several students who had applied to grad school shared their dismay at how the funding cuts meant they might have to say goodbye to their career plans and research.

    Accepting graduate students, particularly for Ph.D. programs and in the biomedical sciences, requires universities to make a long-term financial commitment, which is more difficult now that the NIH has stopped making new grant awards and is aiming to cut funds. Colleges receive billions from the NIH to support research. If the proposed rate cuts move forward, institutions say they would have to shut down some labs and lay off employees.

    “University research and scholarship operate on a time scale of years and decades,” the Rutgers AAUP-AFT chapter wrote in a letter to New Jersey senators Cory Booker and Andy Kim. “Higher education would become impossible in the face of capricious and arbitrary withholding of funding, elimination of entire areas of grant support for critical scientific research, and cancellation of long-held contracts.”

    They went on to warn that the threat to funding would diminish the country’s strength as a research superpower. “The best scientists, the best scholars, and the best students will make the rational decision to take their talents elsewhere. Once lost, the historic excellence of United States universities, including world-leading institutions in New Jersey, both public and private, will not be easily regained.”



    Source link

  • Judge extends block on controversial NIH cuts

    Judge extends block on controversial NIH cuts

    A federal judge Friday extended a temporary block on the National Institutes of Health’s plan to slash funding for universities’ indirect research costs amid a legal battle over the policy change.

    The nationwide block, which U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley put in place Feb. 10 soon after a coalition of state attorneys general, research advocates and individual universities sued the agency, was set to expire Monday. But it will now remain in place until Kelley has time to consider the arguments the plaintiffs and NIH presented at a hearing Friday morning.

    It’s unclear when Kelley will rule. But after the two-hour hearing, she said she certainly “has a lot of work to do” to before making a decision.

    “This case is not about whether as a policy matter the administration can target waste, fraud and abuse,” Katherine Dirks, an attorney for the Massachusetts attorney general’s office, told the judge during the hearing. “It’s contrary to the regulations which govern how these costs are determined and how these payments are disbursed. If there were an intention on the administration’s part to change the mechanism by which those occur, there’s a process for it—a statutory process and a regulatory process. Neither of those were followed here.”

    But the NIH’s legal team said the agency has the right to unilaterally cap reimbursements for costs related to research—such as hazardous waste removal, facilities costs and patient safety—at 15 percent. 

    “This is not cutting down on grant funding,” said Brian Lea, a lawyer for the NIH, said at Friday’s hearing. “This is about changing the slices of the pie, which falls squarely within the executive’s discretion.”

    Counsel for the plaintiffs, however, argued that the policy is unlawful and, if it’s allowed to move forward during a protracted litigation process, will cause “irreparable harm” to university budgets, medical breakthroughs and the patients who may not be able to enroll in clinical trials as a result. 

    “A clinical trial is for a lot of people a last hope when there’s not an FDA–approved medicine that will treat their condition. Any minute that they’re not enrolled in that trial brings the risk of irreparable harm,” said Adam Unikowsky, an attorney for the plaintiffs. “Part of these institutions’ mission is serving these patients, and this cut will irreparably harm their ability to fulfill that mission.” 

    Since 1965, institutions have been able to periodically negotiate their reimbursement rates directly with the federal government; university rates average about  28 percent. However, rates can vary widely depending on factors such as geographic cost differences and the type of research, and some institutions receive indirect reimbursement rates of more than 50 percent of their direct grants. 

    Although the NIH argued in court that indirect costs are “difficult to oversee” as a justification for cutting them, the plaintiffs refuted that claim, pointing to a complex negotiation process and regular audit schedule that’s long been in place to ensure the funds are being used to support NIH research. 

    In fiscal year 2024, the NIH sent about $26 billion to more than 500 grant recipients connected to colleges—$7 billion of which went to indirect costs. 

    Saving or Reallocating $4B?

    This isn’t Trump’s first attempt to cap indirect costs, which Elon Musk—the unelected billionaire bureaucrat overseeing the newly created Department of Government Efficiency—recently characterized as a “rip-off” on X, the social media site he owns.  

    In 2017, Congress rebuked President Trump’s attempt to cap indirect costs, and it has written language into every appropriations bill since specifically prohibiting  “deviations” from negotiated rates. Given that, Kelley asked the Trump Administration’s legal team, how in his second term, Trump “can unilaterally slash these previously negotiated indirect cost rates which Congress prevented him from doing previously?” 

    “The money that is saved—it’s not being saved, it’s being reallocated—will be taken from indirect costs and filed into new grants that will be using the same funding formula,” said Lea, who told the judge he was using air quotes around the word saved. “The money is not being pocketed or being shipped somewhere else. It’s being applied back into other research in a way that best fits NIH and what will best serve the public’s health.”

    But Lea’s claims that the money will simply be reallocated contradicted the NIH’s own social media post from Feb. 7, which said the plan “will save more than $4B a year effective immediately,” and Kelley asked for an explanation.  

    In response, Lea said the NIH’s “tweet was at best sort of a misunderstanding of what the guidance does.” 

    The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the NIH, did not immediately respond to Inside Higher Ed’s request for comment on whether it plans to issue a widespread public correction on social media and its other platforms to clarify its policy and inform taxpayers that their plan to cap indirect costs is not intended to save them any money. As of Friday afternoon, the post was still up on X.

    Layoffs, Canceled Clinical Trials

    But Unikowsky, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said that funneling money away from indirect costs would still harm the nation’s esteemed scientific enterprise, which is grounded in university research. 

    “Indirect costs are real costs associated with doing research,” said Unikowsky, pointing to the California Institute of Technology as an example. The institute spent $200 million to build a state-of-the-art laboratory and is counting on indirect cost reimbursements from the NIH to help pay off the debt it incurred to construct it. 

    “There’s going to be a hole in Cal Tech’s research budget” and the “money is going to have to come from somewhere else,” Unikowsky added.

    Unikowsky also listed nine different institutions, including the Universities of Florida, Kansas and Oregon, that have said they will have to lay off skilled workers who support medical research, including nurses and technicians, if the cap goes into effect. 

    Lea, the lawyer for the Trump Administration, countered that destabilizing university budgets doesn’t amount to immediate and permanent harm warranting injunctive relief on the rate caps. 

    “That’s not an irreparable thing, or else every business that’s in a money pinch could just come in and get an injunction,” he said. “I understand that many institutions would prefer to use endowments and tuition for other purposes, but unless they’re barred from doing so—and the inability to do so would cause some non-monetary harm—that’s not irreparable harm.”

    Although Kelley gave no indication on when or how she plans to rule, some university leaders who listened to the hearing came away optimistic that she’ll favor the plaintiff’s arguments. 

    “We look forward to the judge’s ruling,” said Katherine Newman, provost at the University of California which is one of the universities suing the NIH. “[We] maintain our position that the Administration’s misguided attempt to cut vital NIH funding is not only arbitrary and capricious but will stifle lifesaving biomedical research, hobble U.S. economic competitiveness and ultimately jeopardize the health of Americans who depend on cutting-edge medical science and innovation.”

    Source link

  • NIH cuts remain on hold as judge extends temporary pause

    NIH cuts remain on hold as judge extends temporary pause

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    A federal judge extended an emergency restraining order Friday against the National Institutes of Health, temporarily preventing the agency from making massive cuts to indirect research funding. 

    The restraining order bars NIH from implementing a 15% cap on indirect cost reimbursement and requires the agency to file regular status reports confirming disbursement of funds. U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley, a Biden appointee, is considering a more permanent injunction against NIH’s plan after nearly two hours of oral arguments Friday. 

    NIH unveiled the new policy earlier in February. Historically, institutions negotiate their own indirect cost reimbursement rates with the agency, with an average of 27% to 28%. The change was met swiftly with multiple lawsuits, including by higher education groups and 22 state attorneys general. The cases were considered together at the hearing Friday.

    Several universities have already frozen hiring and taken other budgetary measures amid the NIH funding uncertainty, despite Kelley’s initial pause on the funding cap. 

    The funding for indirect costs — also known as facilities and administrative, or F&A, costs — covers a wide array of staffing and infrastructure for research activity.

    “Indirect costs are the backbone of IHEs [institutions of higher education] research programs and cover everything from utilities to facilities and equipment maintenance to payroll for faculty and staff to compliance programs, hazardous waste disposal, and more,” 22 state attorneys general said in their original request for a temporary restraining order on NIH. “They quite literally keep the lights on.”

    Brian Lea, an attorney for NIH, said at Friday’s hearing that money saved by cutting and capping F&A funding would be “ploughed into” funding for research costs. However, in a Feb. 7 post from the agency on the social media site X, NIH said the funding cap “will save more than $4B a year effective immediately.” 

    Asked by Kelley about the post, Lea said that it was “at best a misunderstanding” of NIH’s guidance.

    Plaintiffs attorneys argued that the F&A cap violates federal laws and regulations, pointing out that Congress passed an appropriations bill during President Donald Trump’s first term that prohibits modifications to NIH’s indirect cost funding. 

    Lea maintained that NIH’s guidance was compliant with regulations and statutes and within the “broad discretionary power of the executive branch” to allocate funding. 

    Attorneys for the plaintiffs further argued that an injunction was necessary to prevent “immediate and irreparable” harm, pointing to numerous universities that have detailed how their research, budgets and infrastructure would suffer from the cap. An official at Yale University, for example, said in court papers that the NIH rate cap could threaten the viability of many of its ongoing clinical trials for medical research.

    “It is not hyperbole to say that, absent immediate injunctive relief, Plaintiff States’ IHEs will face catastrophic financial consequences, which could result in layoffs and furloughs, research program closures, financial defaults, and disruptions to clinical trials, potentially jeopardizing people’s lives and health,” the attorneys general said in their motion, filed earlier in February. 

    Lea questioned whether harms such as funding losses were irreparable, suggesting that they could be undone later through private funding or operational adjustments.

    As the case winds on, NIH has laid off more than 1,000 employees, according to press reports.

    Source link