Public Comment Period for the OMB’s New Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance Ends This Month

In late May, the US Office of Management and Budget (OMB) published a proposed new Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance. Among the changes proposed to current rules is that approval for federal funding would fall to political appointees. Also under the new guidelines, grant funding can be terminated at any time if a project is no longer deemed aligned with the government’s priorities. The potential implications for research funding are considerable: according to its website, the NIH alone dedicates the better part of $48 billion to medical research grants. 

The scientific community reacted swiftly to the proposed regulations, with many, including publishers and scholarly societies, expressing concerns that the new regulations would curtail research funding and compromise academic freedom, making the awarding of funds dependent on politics rather than on a study or project’s merit. There are also concerns that the proposal could lead to dramatic decreases in research funding and output. In her June 15 post for the Scholarly Kitchen, Darla P. Henderson, CEO and Executive Director of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, further outlined what the regulations could mean for scholarly societies and associations and the communities they serve. 

Henderson and others, including Elizabeth Ginexi,  a former NIH program officer, have also emphasized that the proposal bears implications for far more than academic research. All federal funding would fall under the new rules, and that includes grants to states for health and education as well as to nonprofit organizations in general. 

The proposal is currently open to both individuals and organizations for public comment. (Comments can also be left anonymously.) Both Henderson and Ginexi also offer tips for writing an effective comment.