White House proposes new rules giving political appointees final say on research grants

Draft regulations would centralize Office of Management and Budget control over releases of federal funds across government agencies, including scientific research grants. The proposal would require political appointees at scientific agencies to sign off on research awards to ensure compliance with presidential priorities, including priorities related to race and gender. Senior appointees would conduct these reviews and apply specified principles when evaluating proposals. The proposal states that scientific peer review remains advisory and does not replace agency discretion. The Background section claims recent years show a need for meaningful reform in federal grants administration and criticizes a prior policy agenda that allegedly favored certain identity groups. The rules are scheduled for official publication in the Federal Register.

"The White House released long-anticipated draft regulations that, if enacted, would give political appointees the final word on federal research grants and other funding across government agencies. Scheduled to be officially published in the Federal Register on Friday, the 412-page proposal on federal spending rules would centralize Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control over releases of government funds, including for scientific research grants."

"The new rules would mandate political appointees at scientific agencies to sign off on all research awards for compliance with presidential priorities, including those on race and gender. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today."

"And at scientific agencies, the proposal states that senior appointees must conduct these reviews and apply specific principles when evaluating proposals, a departure from past practice whereby apolitical expert review committees approved research grants. Scientific peer review of research proposals, long the standard for approval of research grants at the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation and other governmental science agencies, remains advisory and does not replace agency discretion, the proposal states."

"Recent years have provided evidence of the need for meaningful reform in Federal grants administration, states the proposal's Background section, which goes on to criticize a woke' policy agenda that deliberately favored certain identity groups over others under the Biden administration. The OMB is headed by Russell Vought, lead architect of Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 plan for the Trump administration."

Read at www.scientificamerican.com