Please comment! Anyone who cares about scientific integrity or efficient use of taxes!

Specific anecdotes from researchers whose accomplishments would have been hindered by these rule changes are especially welcome.

Please comment and cite the relevant draft section (listed next to the summary points below).

This impacts so much research both domestically and abroad, please take the time to comment!

International scholars who benefited from research, a workshop, or a conference in the US, let the US government know why you being left out would have hurt research and US scientists! US grad students who would have missed out! Cutting edge research that would have been slowed or stopped had these rules been in effect in the past!

Summary from Elizabeth Ginex’s substack blog.

1. Political Appointees Take Control of Grant Awards (§200.205)
2. Peer Review Is No Longer Binding (§200.205(d))
3. “Gold Standard Science” as an Undefined Political Test (§200.205)

• All grants must include benchmarks for compliance with “Gold Standard Science”

• Agencies must prioritize institutions that have “demonstrated success in implementing Gold Standard Science”

• Institutional prestige and historical reputation are explicitly deprioritized in favor of compliance with this undefined standard

1. Active Grants Can Be Terminated at Any Time, for Any Reason (§200.340)
2. DEI, Gender Research, and Related Topics Banned as Grant Conditions (§200.300)
3. Broad Prohibition on International Scientific Collaboration (§200.220)
4. “Domestic-First” Framework for Research Awards (§200.202(e))
5. Applicants Can Be Denied Based on Organizational “Affiliations” (§200.206)
6. E-Verify Mandated for All Grant Recipients (§200.303)

• This adds significant administrative burden to universities and research institutions and could jeopardize grants at institutions employing researchers from abroad.

1. OMB Claims Direct Binding Authority Over All Agencies

2. Conference Attendance Now Requires Express Agency Pre-Approval (§200.432)

3. Professional Memberships Require Prior Approval and Must Be “Necessary” (§200.454)

4. Publication Costs and Open Access Fees Presumptively Unallowable (§200.461)

5. Public Communications and Outreach Severely Restricted (§200.421)

6. New “Issue Advocacy” Prohibition (§200.450)

7. Program Goals Must “Align with Administration Policies and Priorities” (§200.202)

8. Agency Heads Can Exempt Grant Competitions from Public Notice (§200.204)

9. Agencies Can Restrict Eligibility to Specific Nonprofit Categories (§200.202(d))

10. OMB Gains Direct Oversight of Which Institutions Receive Grants