Each year, the National Institutes of Health provides billions of dollars to the University of California to pay for research on cancer, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, heart disease, diabetes and other diseases.
But the Trump administration’s NIH funding is set to take place on Monday, which has raised alarm from UC leaders and many medical researchers who say the move will “harm the extremes of research in the United States.”
UC medical researchers spoke on the era since the announcement of cuts Friday night, expressing concerns about the future of their labs and lifesaving efforts – as do other work at universities and academic medical centers nationwide.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) said Friday afternoon that it would cut over half of its so-called “indirect funding” (for research supplies, building maintenance, utilities, support staff and other expenses) that are medical research Part of the grant.
Starting Monday, NIH sponsored indirect funds will be limited to 15% grants, down from 57% received by many UCLA research projects, while UC San Francisco’s 64% awarded, the program has the highest interest rates in the UC system .
NIH shared a graph in the changed X post that compared the indirect funding rates of Harvard, Yale and Johns Hopkins with billions of dollars in donations. The highest among Harvard University is 69%.
The post said the NIH’s move will save about $4 billion in taxes per year. The agency said more than a quarter of its $35 billion research funding last year. By contrast, it cites private foundations, including the Chan Zuckerberg initiative and the Gates Foundation, saying their overhead costs are 15% or less.
“The United States should have the best medical research in the world,” NIH said in a guide published on its website. “So it is crucial to ensure as much money as possible towards direct scientific research costs rather than administrative overhead.”
University researchers say that while the money is marked as “indirect funding”, it is crucial to their work and to keep going for life-saving science – from ensuring proper biological samples are stored to keeping living animals Carry out medical trials. They also argue that private foundations don’t have to follow the same rules on how they categorize spending, saying it’s unfair to compare the expenses between the two.
Republicans believe the cost is superfluous, part of President Trump’s appointment of Elon Musk to cut taxpayer spending.
Scientists point out that universities have paid a larger share of research costs. Data from the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics show that since 1980, university research support has dropped by 12%, while university payments have increased by 11%.
Cuts may “harm” UC Medical Research
NIH is the largest funder of UC research, providing $2.6 billion in the last academic year, accounting for 62% of the university’s federal awards over $4.2 billion.
“The new administration guidance will jeopardize this crucial support and endanger research excellence in the United States,” the University of California said in a statement.
“These long-standing university partnerships have led to some of the most powerful and influential research findings in human history,” the statement said. “Life-saving treatments to save cancer, diabetes, heart attacks and strokes, including children as well as new technologies and Industry, these technologies and industries translate into thousands of highly paid jobs. The United States is the first in research, but it has not secured its dominance.”
On Saturday, UC officials are still analyzing the impact of NIH’s moves and approaching UC lawyers, researchers and administrators to respond.
“As with many announcements over the past few weeks, there is no doubt that this will undoubtedly cause significant anxiety. Please know, UCLA, the UCLA Dean said in an email to science faculty after the NIH announcement. And leaders across UC are working to understand this impact.”
White House Defence
“The NIH has not announced any cuts to actual research,” the White House defended its action and said in an email to the media on Saturday. It quoted Vinay, professor of epidemiology and biostatistics and medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco. Prasad, he praised NIH’s actions on the blog.
Cuts “may even mean more science. Less money spent on government is more money given to actual scientists,” Prasad wrote. “I was shocked to see researchers crying at how much money colleges get – which means more grants can be offered each cycle.”
Several other UC researchers, many who have just applied for a grant renewal after a recent application pause, or are in the midst of assembly grant proposals, were surprised.
“If I do this, all my research will be shut down. There is no other way to say it. It will be like this. “It’s not my salary.” I get paid from the state to teach. But that’s the cost of everything else. ”
What are being cut
Indirect costs cover items other than salary, travel, supplies and other direct costs. The indirect costs between the university and the federal government are negotiated between the UC campus, which is why the change surprised scientists.
Gina Poe, a professor of neurobiology at the University of California, Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine, said she fears decades of research on memory, sleep and post-traumatic stress syndrome are at risk.
Poe explains how her grant works. She receives $250,000 per year from NIH to cover five undergraduate and graduate research assistants, as well as other expenses, including rats and rats. This does not include her indirect funds.
At first glance, UCLA has an indirect cost rate of 57%, and it looks like POE will receive an additional $142,500 in funding. But she said math is more complicated and she is much smaller.
Poe said the federal government deducted a certain fee from the grant before calculating the level of indirect funding. Excluding major equipment costs, student tuition rewards, etc. Finally, her NIH indirect funding totaled $114,000, mainly from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and the University’s life sciences department to cover facility costs and other expenses.
In the budget project, the indirect funding is: workers who care about rats and rats, feed and clean cages. It also needs to be used for medical and veterinary visits.
Under the new NIH formula, the indirect funding allowance of POE will be minimal.
“The only way I make up for this money is to transfer my work to a private company for UCLA to raise tuition to pay for additional fees or apply for private foundations that will significantly increase the funding,” Poe said.
Vivek Shetty, a professor of oral and maxillofacial surgery and biomedical engineering and former academic Senate president, expressed concerns that the U.S. research capacity may be reduced.
“The U.S.’s global leadership in science and technology is not based solely on genius. It relies heavily on infrastructure and systems that enable universities to turn their minds into innovation. “The weakening of infrastructure and the next advancement in healthcare or AI will happen,” Shetty said. Elsewhere – not only to compare with work and reputation, but also to bring economic vitality and social progress brought by innovation. ”
Changes in funding have caused a special nerve in college since Trump took office. Many administrators felt under the microscope that he had objected to what he called “Marxist” universities and leftists occupied.
Last month, UC officials raised concerns after a temporary pause in research grant comments. Trump’s executive order also targets diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, including federal grants and programming. On Wednesday, he signed an executive order aimed at prohibiting trans athletes from participating in women’s or women’s sporting events.
