At the National Science Foundation, the recent rescinding of Title VI disparate-impact regulations, termination of equity-focused STEM education programs and broadening-participation grants, and the deliberate weakening of basic civil-rights compliance requirements is a significant backsliding in decades worth of progress to create a more diverse and equitable scientific enterprise. 

Like many of the the Trump Administration’s previous science and technology policy papers, “Science, a New Golden Age”, is a confused document disconnected from the Administration’s actions around science and science policy. 

It regurgitates maxims that no one actually believed in. It doubles down on merit review and accountability while the Administration develops regulations that undermine those systems

On June 24, 2026, less than one month after the Office of Management and Budget released its proposed revisions to the Uniform Guidance on federal financial assistance—the National Science Foundation updated its Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG), now being rebranded or supplemented as the Guidance on Financial Assistance (GFA). The GFA is a direct outcome of OMB’s proposed rule and the contents should alarm all grantees but specifically higher education institutions that are NSF grant recipients.

The proposed NSF GFA goes far beyond a routine grant administration update, effectively creating a major regulation that expands federal control over colleges and universities without clear authorization from Congress. It also removes or conflicts with existing legal protections and statutes, including provisions related to disability rights, Title IX, and international scientific collaboration. The proposal lacks a clear legal foundation, required economic analysis, and practical implementation guidance, and should therefore be withdrawn.

OMB’s proposed rule on federal financial assistance poses a sweeping threat to federal grantmaking and the responsible stewardship of American taxpayer dollars. It would dramatically expand executive authority to terminate, suspend, or redirect any discretionary federal grant at any time, for virtually any reason. This represents a deliberate weakening of Congress’s constitutional power of the purse and a dangerous disregard for the statutes Congress has passed to authorize critical services for Americans. While the scientific community has quickly responded with pushback, the implications of the proposed rule reach far beyond science and research. 

Cole Donovan, Director of Policy at the SUFS Foundation, breaks down how OMB’s grant rule will undermine U.S. research, weaken international collaboration, and threaten American scientific leadership.

The SUFS Foundation response to Rep. Jake Auchincloss’ request for comments on a plan to accelerate international collaboration in biomedical research.

Our Policy team reviewed the new OMB proposal so you don’t have to read the 412 pages.

The SUFS Foundation response to NIH’s Strategic Framework