AAO Responds to Proposed Cuts to NIH Research Payments
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced Friday that it is cutting grants that support research and academic institutions by limiting the amount of indirect funding for research projects to just 15%. Currently, the average indirect costs rate for organizations receiving NIH grants is between 27% and 28%.
‘Indirect costs’ cover expenses such as equipment, operations, maintenance, accounting and personnel. According to an NBC News article[1], the NIH’s Office of Policy for Extramural Research Administration (OPERA) wrote that $9 billion of the $35 billion total spent on research grants in fiscal year 2023 was allocated from the agency for indirect costs.
“The United States should have the best medical research in the world. It is accordingly vital to ensure that as many funds as possible go towards direct scientific research costs rather than administrative overhead,” OPERA wrote in its guidance.
However, the proposal led by the Trump administration has received fierce criticism from scientific and medical research organizations, lawmakers, as well as higher education, which argue the funding being cut is essential for medical research.
In a statement to Eyewire+, Stephen McLeod, MD, CEO of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, said the proposed cuts would have a profound impact on research related to vision threatening disease.
“NIH-funded vision research has an incredible track record of productivity producing diagnostics and therapeutics that have protected and restored vision for countless individuals,” Dr. McLeod said. “The impact, both economic and human, has been profound, and as we confront ever-increasing prevalence of vision-threatening disease, it is of the utmost importance that we continue to invest in the NIH and the research it supports across the nation.”
On Monday, attorneys general representing 22 states sued the Trump administration, asking a federal judge to temporarily block the policy change by the NIH. According to Stat,2 in the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, the attorneys general argued that NIH’s abrupt decision to set a 15% cap on payments for indirect costs would cause major harm to institution budgets, jeopardizing basic operations and medical research.
“The effects of the Rate Change Notice will be immediate and devastating,” the plaintiffs said in the lawsuit, as reported in the Stat article. “This agency action will result in layoffs, suspension of clinical trials, disruption of ongoing research programs, and laboratory programs.”
On Tuesday, a federal judge in Boston ordered a nationwide temporary pause on the NIH proposal. According to an article in The Hill[3], Judge Angel Kelley of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued the temporary restraining order late Monday night in response to a lawsuit filed that afternoon by associations representing the nation’s medical, pharmacy, and public health schools, as well as Boston and New York-area hospitals. The suit names the NIH, Department of Health and Human Services, and the acting heads of both agencies as defendants. The restraining order was extended to the rest of the country on Tuesday. The pause will remain in place until lifted by the court.
References
- NIH announces it's slashing funding for indirect research costs. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/nih-announces-slashing-funding-indirect-research-costs-rcna191337. February 8, 2025.
- Federal judge halts Trump administration cuts to NIH research payments in 22 states. https://www.statnews.com/2025/02/10/nih-indirect-costs-lawsuit-state-attorneys-general-sue-to-block-research-spending-cuts/. February 10, 2025.
- Federal judge pauses NIH research cuts nationwide. https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/5138712-nih-research-funding-pause-trump/. February 11, 2025.