What you must understand
- The NIH and NSF are federal agencies that fund scientific research through grants
- Budget cuts would threaten the current model of university-based research.
- These cuts could impact the future of innovation in the U.S.
Michael Guy, the director of Northern Kentucky University’s Pre-Medical Pathways Program and an associate professor of chemistry, wrote this.
You may have heard recent news reports about budget cuts, layoffs, and even indirect costs at the NSF or NIH.
What are these organizations, how do they affect your life, and why do they exist?
What do the NSF and NIH stand for?
The National Science Foundation is known as NSF, and the National Institutes of Health is known as NIH.
Since the U.S. government recognized the importance of scientific advancement on a national level due to the importance of technology during World War II, both of these institutions have existed in their current incarnations.
The NIH’s mission is to understand the functioning of living systems and then apply that understanding to improve people’s health and longevity. The NSF seeks to secure national defense, increase health and prosperity, and advance scientific advancement.
These agencies provided financing to scientists, which resulted in the majority of scientific breakthroughs that led to modern medical treatments and many of the life-changing technology that we take for granted today.
What are the actual functions of these agencies?
They provide national funding for fundamental scientific research.
Early on, U.S. authorities made the decision to allocate the majority of the funds to institutions around the nation that have the manpower, resources, and experience to more efficiently collaborate and spur discoveries, rather than investing in a small number of huge, centralized government research institutes.
The additional advantage of funding universities is that it gives college students, graduate students, and others pursuing scientific careers the means to receive the training they need to continuously supply skilled scientists for positions in government, business, and academia.
What are these agencies’ budgets?
The cost of conducting scientific research at the national level is high.
The 2024 budgets for the NSF and NIH were roughly $9.06 billion and $47.35 billion, respectively.
To put that in perspective, the top three pharmaceutical corporations in the United States—Pfizer, Merck, and Johnson & Johnson—each made more than $50 billion in revenue, which is a significant amount of money. The U.S. Department of Defense budget was $841.4 billion, while the combined earnings of Amazon ($638 billion) and Walmart ($648.1 billion) were more than ten times the NIH budget.
So, is spending this kind of money worthwhile?
An estimated $2.46 in economic activity is produced for every dollar of NIH investment. Both Democrats and Republicans have historically supported supporting these agencies, and since around 2000, the annual inflation-adjusted NIH budget has stayed relatively constant.
This fiscal year, the Trump administration has proposed cutting funding to the NIH by 40% to $27 billion and the NSF by 56% to $3.9 billion. These kinds of cuts are unprecedented; the biggest in recent memory was a 5% cut to the NIH budget in 2013.
What is the purpose of the funds?
The majority of the funds are utilized to pay the workers and purchase supplies and scientific equipment. We call these funds “direct costs.”
A tiny portion is also used to send scientists to conferences where they may exchange ideas and learn about the most recent advancements in science, as well as to publish the study in scientific publications for the public and other scientists to read about.
The use of funds is subject to stringent regulations, and infractions may result in fines, civil penalties, or even jail time.
What are indirect costs, as I’ve heard?
In addition to the funds mentioned above, colleges receive funding from the NIH and NSF to cover various expenses related to conducting research, such as buildings, upkeep, and grant administrators who make sure the work is conducted safely and ethically.
This sum of money is expressed as a proportion of the direct costs and is referred to as indirect costs. Although it varies by university, the NIH average is between 27 and 28 percent of direct costs.
For instance, 40% of indirect costs are paid to NKU. To guarantee that these monies promote or advance scientific research, regulations are in place. “The college uses this money to maintain, repair, and purchase research equipment, update and renovate research spaces, and help pay people working on the projects,” said Dr. Bethany Bowling, dean of NKU’s College of Arts & Sciences.
Most colleges’ models for funding and conducting research would be drastically altered by the Trump administration’s proposal to cap indirect costs at 15%.
How do the NIH and NSF provide funding to scientists?
The competition for NIH and NSF funding is fierce.
Prior to being independently examined by a team of experts from different universities, scientists must submit an application for a grant. Although there are various components to these applications, the majority of a professor’s effort is often devoted to developing the research plan. A 12-page, single-spaced, fully referenced document outlining the proposed research and its significance is the research strategy for an R15.
Additional important components include a public health statement and an abstract summarizing the research, which are available for all NIH programs that have been funded at this website: https://report.nih.gov/. Historically, the NIH funds only 20–30% of grant proposals, depending on a number of conditions, chief among them the amount of available NIH funding.
Which academic institutions qualify for funding?
For many years, the NIH primarily provided funds to large, research-focused universities, including the University of Cincinnati.
Majorly undergraduate institutions (PUIs) like NKU have been the focus of initiatives like the Academic Research Enhancement Award (AREA) for Undergraduate-Focused Institutions (R15 awards) since the 1980s. Being in the lab and conducting research is essential to college students’ training and growth as they pursue degrees in the sciences. In addition to advancing our fundamental understanding of science, initiatives like the R15 assist guarantee that PUI students obtain practical research experience, which increases their competitiveness for further education (think medical school or PhD programs) and employment prospects.
For instance, my research lab has been supported by an R15 funding since 2018 to investigate how cells produce proteins in order to gain a better understanding of the diseases that arise when this process goes awry. This research has involved more than 50 NKU students, primarily from northern Kentucky, before they pursued PhDs, attended medical, dental, or pharmacy school, or entered the local biotechnology field.
Why is all of this currently making headlines?
It is universally acknowledged that our existing funding mechanism has flaws.
It remains to be seen if a radical reduction in NIH and NSF budgets and a fundamental shift in the way science is supported in the United States would lead to a better system.
In any case, the impact on science in our nation will last for many generations if these reforms are implemented.
Send Meghan Goth an email at [email protected] with your suggestions for a Community Voices column.
Click here to read more
Community Voices columns.
Did you enjoy this story? Contribute to the next one.
Without community backing, independent local reporting would not be possible. We are able to continue covering the people, places, and issues that define Northern Kentucky thanks to your monthly donation.When you donate, you’re investing in all the stories that lie ahead, not just one.
AID IN LOCAL NEWS
