Blog Viewer

The month of May brought more alarming news from Washington, D.C., impacting federal scientific and statistical research agencies. Below are excerpts from the most recent newsletter issued by the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), of which PAA is a governing member, regarding some of the major issues we are following. 

Please be assured that PAA is working independently and in collaboration with its coalition partners both publicly and behind-the-scenes to address these developments. 

What can you do to help?  

• Respond to PAA Action Alerts—Building upon the success of PAA’s 2025 Advocacy Day in April, we will continue to urge PAA members to communicate with their congressional delegations about challenges facing the field. Please respond when you receive PAA action alerts.
• Share your story—PAA has updated the form to collect details from members who have been adversely affected by actions taken by the Administration, including federal grant terminations and data restrictions. The revised form provides guidance and encourages affected PAA members to share their stories, which will be used by PAA to help educate policymakers and the public regarding the consequences of these federal actions. Share Your Story
  
  

Trump Administration Releases Preliminary Details on FY 2026 Budget

On May 3, the Trump Administration released preliminary, high-level details of its fiscal year (FY) 2026 budget request, referred to as a “skinny budget,” and accompanying fact sheets. In the preliminary request, the Trump Administration reiterates its commitment to “reducing waste” and “improving efficiency” through targeting programs that support diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, climate change, green energy, and other topics that have been deemed “woke” by the Administration. Full budget details are expected in the upcoming weeks.

As reported in the leaked Health and Human Services (HHS) passback, the budget proposes $27 billion for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a 40 percent decrease from FY 2025. The proposal also includes a reorganization of the institutes and centers (ICs) into five new focus areas: the National Institute on Body Systems Research; National Institute on Neuroscience and Brain Research; National Institute of General Medical Sciences; National Institute of Disability Related Research; and the National Institute on Behavioral Health. Some ICs would be eliminated under the proposal, including the National Institute on Minority and Health Disparities. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was proposed to receive $4 billion in funding for FY 2026, a 44 percent cut from the FY 2025 level.

In a fact sheet titled “Cuts to Woke Programs,” President Trump targeted the National Science Foundation (NSF) with a 57 percent or $5.2 billion cut to their budget, proposing only $3.9 billion for FY 2026. This comes after NSF terminated hundreds of grants and the resignation of NSF Director, Sethuraman Panchanathan (see previous COSSA coverage). The budget also takes aim at “woke social, behavioral, and economic sciences”, targeting specific grants from various institutions, and proposes eliminating “all DEI-related programs” at the agency, which the Administration has already taken steps to do in recent weeks (see related article). 

On May 3, a group of former NSF Directors and former Chairs of the National Science Board sent a letter to Congressional Appropriators criticizing the President’s FY 2026 budget request for NSF, especially in light of the scientific priorities laid out in a memo the President sent to his Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Michael Kratsios. In it they state: 

“We believe these challenges can be met, but not with the draconian budget plan and staffing reductions just released by OMB…. Achieving the President's vision requires a major enhancement of the NSF budget, ideally a doubling of the FY25 level over the next few years and sufficient staff to execute this vision. In the current political climate, we know this is a bold request. We make it, nonetheless, to say -- if we truly wish to realize this vision, we must commit to a historic investment in fundamental research and education in a manner that leaves no doubt about the United States' intentions with our international competitors.” 

Congressional oversight hearings will begin in the weeks ahead featuring Trump Administration officials defending the President’s budget request. 

The Dismantling of NSF Continues  

As previously reported, the President’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) arrived at the National Science Foundation (NSF) in April, leading to the termination of more funded projects, elimination of directorate advisory committees, and the resignation of the NSF Director. Last week, as reported by Science, the agency was further upended with the announcement that NSF will be eliminating 37 divisions across all eight directorates and drastically reducing the number of programs offered. According to an internal memo, current division directors and deputy directors will lose their titles and, if they are not terminated, may be reassigned to other positions in or outside of NSF.
 
The dismantling does not stop there. Science has also reported that the latest Reduction in Force (RIF) order has targeted the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM (EES) within the STEM Education Directorate (EDU) for elimination. NSF has already removed the EES Division from the EDU Directorate’s website with the following note:

“At the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), our mission is to foster scientific progress, improve national health and prosperity, and safeguard our nation’s security. This means making decisions to ensure our efforts align with our priorities. Today, we initiated the reduction in force of the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM. NSF is mindful of its statutory program obligations and plans to take steps to ensure those continue.”

Latest efforts also target Senior Executive Service (SES) positions at NSF, including “rotators,” who are scientists that take a leave of absence from their academic positions to serve for a few years at the Foundation. An internal memo from NSF Chief Management Officer Micah Cheatham to NSF staff states that of the 143 SES positions available at NSF, only 59 will be required going forward, a reduction of 60 percent. In addition, officials serving in rotator positions will be removed from SES positions over the next 30 days and into “new, executive-level positions where they will retain program responsibility and authority but will no longer supervise federal employees.” The number of temporary workers will be reduced from 368 to 70 and positions will focus on "presidential priorities in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, nuclear energy, quantum science, and translational science."
 
This latest RIF, which took effect immediately on May 9, is said to be completed by July 12.
 
The “restructuring” is meant to reflect NSF’s “new organizational structure and proposed future budgets,” alluding to the President’s proposals to reduce the NSF budget from $9 billion to $3.9 billion in FY 2026 (see related article). However, as COSSA has been reporting, Congress enacted an FY 2025 budget of $9 billion for NSF; the Administration is proceeding with cuts that are not in-line with what Congress has approved, raising serious questions about the legality of these actions.
 
A day before the restructuring announcement, Democrats on the House Science Committee sent a letter to the new acting NSF Director Brian Stone demanding answers to their questions about the process for identifying terminated grants. Few of the Committee’s past requests have been answered by the agency.
 
This is a developing story.

National Science Board Remains Silent

On May 2, the NSF employee’s union AFGE Local 3403 sent a letter to the National Science Board (NSB) calling on them to push back against Administration efforts. The letter states, “As this crisis has built over the last 100 days, the NSB has been largely silent. We do not believe that you agree with what is happening. We urge you to speak up.”
 
However, during the latest NSB meeting on May 7, there was little acknowledgement of recent efforts in the open sessions, including grant terminations, except for a brief thanking of NSF employees who “are retiring or leaving the agency.”
 
NSB Member and former OSTP Director under the Biden Administration Alondra Nelson announced her resignation from the Board, to which she was appointed last year. In the Time piece announcing her resignation, Nelson notes that following last week’s meeting, which was “observed” by a DOGE representative, “The message I received was that the National Science Board had a role to play in name only.”
 

Save NSF Coalition

In response to Administration actions, a new Save NSF coalition has formed with the purpose of providing the scientific community with resources they can use to advocate for NSF funding and the science it supports. The website includes an action center with letter templates, phone scripts, and social posts with helpful data points about the importance of NSF.
 
The website also includes an open letter from the NSF employees union to the scientific community with additional resources.
 

Foundations Step Up to Help Impacted Researchers 

In response to grant terminations at NSF, the Spencer Foundation, in collaboration with the Kapor Foundation, the William T. Grant Foundation, and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, are offering “rapid response bridge grants” to impacted scholars. Grants in the amount of $25,000 are available for researchers working on research on STEM and education and who have recently had their grant terminated or cancelled by NSF. Deadlines are May 30, 2025, and June 13, 2025.

DOGE Targets Federal Surveys 

In a May 20 post on X, officials from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), announced that it was in the process of reviewing more than 100 surveys conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau and had already proposed eliminating five. At press time, it was not clear which surveys had been targeted by DOGE’s initial review. NPR subsequently reported that DOGE had sent federal agencies a “2025 Survey of Surveys” asking not only for basic information about surveys (methodology, costs, authorization), but also specific justifications for sustaining a survey and the consequences if it were “discontinued.” 

PAA is working with its partners in the statistical agency stakeholder community to raise awareness about this disturbing news. PAA members may be asked to take specific action once more details are available. 

To stay abreast of these developments and other news affecting the federal statistical system, PAA members are encouraged to join the Federal Data Forum. The Forum is a new platform, established by the Population Reference Bureau, with support from the Massive Data Institute at Georgetown University, where data users and stakeholders can share messages, materials, and announcements related to the federal statistical system and data products.