NEW: Starting May 5, NSF will implement an across-the-board 15% indirect cost rate (mirroring policies at DOE, NIH) Also, NSF staff expect 341 additional terminations today, bringing the total number of terminations to ~1,380. - ThreadSky

dangaristo.bsky.social • 2 days ago

NEW: Starting May 5, NSF will implement an across-the-board 15% indirect cost rate (mirroring policies at DOE, NIH)

Also, NSF staff expect 341 additional terminations today, bringing the total number of terminations to ~1,380.

Comments

chavera.bsky.social•2 days ago

I don’t understand what this means. Can someone explain and forgive my ignorance?

dangaristo.bsky.social•2 days ago

When science agencies like the NSF and NIH provide grants to universities, they also provide some money to keep the lights on—essentially, overhead for the lab. That rate is usually around 50%. Reducing it that aid to 15% would cause funding shortfalls everywhere, and financially harm universities.

cbf.bsky.social•1 day ago

This is quite insane, but what is missing is the impact this will have. Most people don’t appreciate how important scientific research is.

This is like Reverse Enlightenment Age.

merz.bsky.social•2 days ago

Almost certainly illegal, just as the NIH F&A rate cut was.

kimoco.bsky.social•2 days ago

I have yet to get a single good reason to destroy every institution in this nation. The only one is this is a coup and these people do not plan to ever relinquish power.

thommurphy.bsky.social•2 days ago

Am I wrong that the indirect cost rate is fixed by congressional statue? And this could be legally challenged?

mkfeeney.bsky.social•2 days ago

This would require the U.S. congress to participate in governing - which they have opted not to do thus far in 2025.

thommurphy.bsky.social•2 days ago

New statues would (And they should!!!), but if the appropriation has statutory authority then we could presumably obtain a court order protecting the old rate

mkfeeney.bsky.social•2 days ago

Sure, but the legislature, with the power of the purse, who already appropriated funds for these purposes can demand that the spending be done as appropriated & continue to appropriate these funds in the future. It is not only up to the courts, we have THREE branches of govn't!

thommurphy.bsky.social•2 days ago

I understand. As an organizer I’m concerned with what can do *now* to exert pressure on responsive institutions rather than on what we wish more powerful, but unresponsive, institutions would do.

mkfeeney.bsky.social•2 days ago

For sure. in addition to protests, individual scientists need to be pushing their prof associations, university leaders & congressional reps + public speaking, media interviews, writing op eds, educating the public.

merz.bsky.social•2 days ago

Which is exactly what happened in the NIH case, which led to a permanent injunction against the government.

dangaristo.bsky.social•2 days ago

There's a specific appropriations rider which has blocked changes for NIH, which is what led to successful lawsuits. Unsure about NSF—trying to find out.

mattprorok.bsky.social•2 days ago

Here's hoping they lose yet again.

dangaristo.bsky.social•2 days ago

Unclear, but here's the reasoning of the judge that blocked the DOE's attempt at a 15% across-the-board rate as well. Either way, I would expect a lawsuit imminently. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.283318/gov.uscourts.mad.283318.1.0.pdf

drymeadow.bsky.social•2 days ago

Thanks for posting this! As this ridiculous administration continues, I'm increasingly worried about OMB doing something nefarious with NICRA, as that would throw so many things into chaos. Good to see that the courts are still able to lean on it.

thommurphy.bsky.social•2 days ago

What is NICRA?

drymeadow.bsky.social•2 days ago

Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement. It allows groups doing business with the government to recoup costs like utility bills, office supplies, etc., by negotiating a single IDC rate with OMB instead of a new IDC rate for every new agreement.

keith-85.bsky.social•2 days ago

If Trump isn’t making money from it, it’s getting shut down.

khagolnomy.space•2 days ago

This is just madness 🤬

dangaristo.bsky.social•2 days ago

To be clear, the staff expect 341 _grant_ terminations from the education directorate. Apologies about any confusion

khurzad.bsky.social•2 days ago

Community Colleges in Washington State report that their existing grants from the Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP) have been cancelled.

huprice.bsky.social•2 days ago

Just terrible- the LSAMP grant at my community college was terminated today. What a loss for our students and for the future of STEM

khurzad.bsky.social•2 days ago

Yeah, Green River got their notice as well. It’s incredibly frustrating!

joanna9094.bsky.social•2 days ago

Virginia too

kwittman.bsky.social•2 days ago

And Kansas.

dangaristo.bsky.social•2 days ago

Now on the NSF website. Note that the policy does not apply retroactively. https://www.nsf.gov/policies/document/indirect-cost-rate

omearabrian.bsky.social•2 days ago

Also the new NSF indirect seemingly applies to institutions of higher education only. I wonder what the indirect is for the contract for Antarctica support, which was held (at one point, not sure if it still is) by a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin: https://www.usap.gov/news/4158/

dangaristo.bsky.social•2 days ago

*correction: That is 341 for EDU _alone_—other directorates also likely to have terminations.

nanoscaleviews.bsky.social•2 days ago

Do those numbers work? I mean, I thought we were down to less than 1200 total NSF staff at this point, and I didn't think EDU was that high a fraction of the agency.

dangaristo.bsky.social•2 days ago

Sorry, these are _grant terminations_. NSF staff is about ~1500, so I can see the confusion.