Proposed Caps to NIH Funding Could Hamper Research at Princeton

A directive from the Trump administration sharply limiting the overhead costs that will be reimbursed for research grants funded by the National Institutes of Health could have far-reaching effects at Princeton and other American universities.

The cap, which was scheduled to take effect on Feb. 10, would limit indirect research costs to 15%. Princeton’s indirect costs for NIH grants were 64% as of July 2024, a figure that is comparable to other large national research universities, including Harvard and Yale. However, at the request of 22 state attorneys general, a federal district court judge immediately enjoined the NIH from implementing the cap, pending a hearing scheduled for Feb. 21. Three groups representing colleges and universities, as well as several individual universities, also sued to stop the reduced cap.

Princeton received $58 million in research funding from NIH in fiscal year 2023, not including grants to the Princeton Plasma Physics Lab, which would be cut sharply if the cap were implemented. That figure has risen by $12 million over the last seven years, much of it during the first Trump administration. Many University departments receive NIH funding, including biochemistry, chemistry, and neuroscience. At the end of last fiscal year, Princeton had 254 active NIH-funded grants, many for multiple years, according to a declaration in support of the suit opposing the cap submitted by Provost Jennifer Rexford ’91. 

 NIH research grants typically cover not only the cost of the research itself, but many indirect costs for facilities and administration, such as heat, electricity, and ventilation; high speed computing; security; legal and regulatory compliance; and equipment maintenance. They also pay salaries for clerical and support staff, including postdoctoral research fellows.

The NIH stated that the caps would save more than $4 billion a year. According to The New York Times, NIH research grants already are about $1 billion below their level last year.

However, faculty and administrators at Princeton warned that the cuts could hamper research and innovation. 

“It is going to undermine not only research by students and young researchers, but ultimately impact America’s research leadership in the world,” said Yiguang Ju, a professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering. 

“Federal funding is the lifeblood of scientific research,” professor Joshua Akey, at the Lewis-Sigler Institute of Integrative Genomics, wrote in a Feb. 10 statement to The Daily Princetonian.

In the declaration Rexford wrote that NIH grants at Princeton fund numerous areas of research, including cancer treatment, mental health, child well-being, antibiotics, machine learning, and genetic engineering. In many cases, the University also collaborates with other universities. Rexford stated that at Princeton, the cost of research typically exceeds the amount received from the NIH, even at current funding levels.

“The drastic reduction in indirect cost recovery proposed by NIH may hinder the development of certain research projects, or impede the progress of a broad swath of research efforts,” Rexford wrote.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new secretary of Health and Human Services, which administers the NIH, had also promised to eliminate 600 NIH jobs. On Feb. 11, the day after the announced cuts were to take effect, the second ranking official at the NIH resigned without explanation.

Princeton administrators have tried to inform and reassure the University community while acknowledging that the situation is evolving quickly and much is not yet known. The Office of the Dean for Research has posted new pages on its website attempting to provide information about recent federal funding changes and asking researchers to pass along any stop-work orders they may receive from the government.

Related coverage

Features

Is the Proposed Endowment Tax Another Cash Grab?

A ‘meteor is about to hit’ higher education as Republicans look to increase the tax on endowments

In a letter to the Princeton community on Jan. 29, President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 wrote, “We are proceeding carefully to ensure that the steps we take are sensitive to the needs of our community, consistent across the University, and in compliance with applicable laws. As part of this process, we are also exploring measures to ensure continuity of operations and programs should temporary interruptions to funding occur.”

At a meeting of the Council of the Princeton University Community on Feb. 10, Eisgruber also expressed concerns about the consequences of cutting research funding. “The risk to universities from that capping and the risk to the pact that has made America a leader in research and contributing to the prosperity and security of this country, all that is put at risk,” Eisgruber said.

The NIH reimbursement caps are only one of several actions taken in the first weeks of the Trump administration that have University officials concerned. In response to administration efforts to root out efforts at promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), the Office for the Dean for Research posted a notice on its website stating that the University Office of Science was immediately ending its requirement that “Promoting Inclusive and Equitable Research” plans be included with all research proposals. Concerns have also been expressed about changes in U.S. immigration policy that could affect some students and faculty, as well as proposals to increase the tax on the endowment.