![](\"https:\/\/world.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/grantsfunding-1.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Most Americans don\u2019t read the rules that govern the federal grants funding science. Those rules, called the\u00a0Uniform Guidance<\/a>, shape how cancer research is funded, graduate students are trained, clinical trials are sustained, universities stock their labs and discoveries from those labs move into broader society.<\/p>\n When the Trump administration announced on May 29, 2026, its intentions to\u00a0revise these rules<\/a>, many researchers were alarmed.<\/p>\n The Office of Management and Budget \u2013 the White House agency tasked with implementing the president\u2019s policies across the executive branch \u2013 proposed requiring\u00a0political appointees to review grant decisions<\/a>\u00a0for whether research projects advance the president\u2019s policy priorities. These political officials would also have greater authority to override the decisions of the research agencies managing the grants.<\/p>\n The proposal was open for public comment until July 13, 2026, and received\u00a0nearly 500,000 comments<\/a>. Scientists have warned that these changes could allow\u00a0political considerations<\/a>\u00a0to displace objective assessments,\u00a0undermining merit-based<\/a>\u00a0federal research funding.<\/p>\n The OMB said these changes are intended to\u00a0improve transparency and oversight<\/a>\u00a0of federal funds. However,\u00a0scientists worry<\/a>\u00a0that several of these revisions could make research less predictable, harder to share and more expensive to do.<\/p>\n Beyond concerns about\u00a0political influence<\/a>\u00a0over funding decisions, there are also more practical issues: What happens when the federal grant system becomes less stable for the people involved in the work of research?<\/p>\n The first issue is\u00a0peer review<\/a>. Federal science agencies already use peer-review systems to assess which research projects will receive federal funding.<\/p>\n These systems generally involve scientists and other specialists with expertise relevant to the proposed work. Grant proposals typically undergo several rounds of review, one involving external experts and one involving agency officials.\u00a0I am a scientist<\/a>\u00a0who has served for many years on federal grant review panels, including within the\u00a0National Institutes of Health<\/a>.<\/p>\nDeprioritizing scientific merit<\/strong><\/h4>\n