APS Responds to Proposed Federal Grant Rule Changes

The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed sweeping changes to how federal research grants are awarded and managed. These changes would affect every scientist who receives federal funding. The American Physiological Society (APS) is taking action, and your voice is needed before the July 13 comment deadline. 

What’s Being Proposed 

The OMB proposal would make significant changes to the federal grant-making process. Among the significant proposed changes: 

• Political appointees would have final authority over which grants get funded, overriding expert peer review. 
• Active grants could be terminated at any time if they are deemed out of alignment with agency priorities. 
• Researchers would lose the ability to recover publication costs through federal awards, despite being required to demonstrate grant progress through peer-reviewed work. 
• International collaboration would be limited by a prohibition on interactions with researchers from countries of concern.  
• Agencies would be encouraged to issue more multiyear awards, requiring them to reserve several years of funding up front, which reduces the number of grants awarded each year. 
• Institutions that conduct research on topics flagged as prohibited, including areas of reproductive and developmental biology, could face termination of federal awards, even if that work is funded by nonfederal sources. 

What APS Is Doing

APS is taking action on multiple fronts. The Society submitted a formal letter to OMB requesting an extension of the comment period and joined more than 300 organizations in signing a separate letter with the same request. APS has also submitted formal comments with input from member leaders, including the Science Policy Committee, to inform that response. 

APS is also working with coalition partners from across the scientific and publishing community to coordinate a broad response. These coalitions represent researchers across disciplines who share a common stake in protecting federal support for scientific research. Coordinated efforts may include joint letters and other activities that show the breadth of concern from the scientific community. 

How to Write Your Comment

OMB is required to review and respond to significant public comments before finalizing the rule. Substantive comments create an official public record, and individual comments carry significant weight. The deadline to submit is July 13. Here are key points to focus your message on:  

• Why does this matter to me? Include specific, first-person reflections. In plain, professional language, describe what you study, how you’re funded and what you stand to lose. Comments become part of the public record and will be published on regulations.gov. Comments can also be submitted anonymously. 
• What specifically is wrong with the proposal? Comments are more effective when they address the rule’s specific provisions. Include the relevant section numbers in brackets. See the list of relevant sections below.
• What are the real-world consequences? Include physiology-specific examples: delayed medical advancements, paused studies, trainees left without support. 
• What should OMB do instead? Propose an alternative or ask OMB to withdraw or revise the rule. 

Sections to Focus On

Submit your comment before the July 13 deadline.