Schools most harmed and those most benefiting once NIH, DHS funding resumes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can someone please explain the IMPACT this will have on T-100 colleges and universities in the short-term (2025-2030)?

Assuming a sharp and massive decrease in federal funding per Musk/Project 2025:

- What will change on the ground at these schools in the next year, in the next five years? How exactly will it affect applicants and undergraduate students?

- Which schools (or types of schools) are likely to be the relative “winners,” and who are likely to be the relative “losers”?

(Assume I have no personal experience with either federally-funded research or college/university budgets. Because I don’t. 😂 But I do have kids applying to college in 2026 and 2029 and am having trouble getting my head around the short-term implications for them.

Thanks!

I’m a big proponent of flagship state universities, but I think LACs with large endowments are best able to weather this. It will impact faculty ranks as a lot of T1 professors are partially funded by grants and affect PHD programs as there’s less funding for research. Yes, the OP is right that fundamental science has better prospects, but a lot of it still touches things his admin doesn’t believe in.

Agree. Public schools sand R1 Universities will be the hardest hit. There are so few tenured professors as it is, and without federal funding a lot of them are going to be scrambling.

The Publics should fare better than the privates because the members of the house don't want to face their voters. In this instance they have better advocacy. Ironically Publics in mostly blue states will likely get hurt worse less than those in red states because they have vulnerable representatives. With the tiny hose majority at risk republicans reps from CA, NY, PA, VA, etc. can dictate the shape of anything going through congress. Contrary to what he believes, Elon does not control spending. The representatives in NY and NJ whose jobs are on the line if there are big cuts at Stony Brook and Rutgers control the spending in this case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hard to understand how red state house and senate members will stand for this, but I guess the dumb will get dumber.

They won't, but the ones with the power are the republican reps in Blue states. They have their jobs on the line.

[Anonymous]

It's undeniable at this point that NIH funded, indirectly and via EcoHealth, gain of function research that created COVID and killed millions in the process. If you're intellectually honest, you have to at a minimum acknowledge this plausibility and that is why Fauci's pardon dates to 2014, the year Obama banned gain of function research in the US. It is this vanity you must recognize if you want to understand why people are on the warpath against unchecked funding for research by unaccountable "experts" who ended up creating a Frankenstein virus in the name of good.

On top of it is all the soft social sciences research of questionable merit. If you'd paid attention to higher education in recent years, research was getting infused with DEI principles, so people putting together applications for grants had to incorporate DEI and universities also started mandating DEI topics for approval of research proposals. It wasn't everywhere and for everything but a lot of it was happening. Likewise DEI administrators were also setting mandates for academic departments, influencing the tone of research topics and this was across all academic sectors. The university DEI admins were able to do this because the Federal grantors of research funds were simultaneously doing the same thing from their end, especially under the Biden administration.

That's what the new Trump administration is going to be looking for and rooting out of higher education. No more research into transgenders or identity politics is obviously the most visible but it will trickle down in the same way DEI was trickling down into everything.

I do wonder how far they will go. Contrary to what some of you want to believe/wishcast, "billionaires" aren't keen at seeing the end of cutting edge STEM research, as that's the origin of so much innovation that is later capitalized by Silicon Valley. The funding model will change dramatically but I suspect at the end it will come out more solidly reliable and focused on serious topics, not so many of the questionable soft topics (like we saw with USAID).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can someone please explain the IMPACT this will have on T-100 colleges and universities in the short-term (2025-2030)?

Assuming a sharp and massive decrease in federal funding per Musk/Project 2025:

- What will change on the ground at these schools in the next year, in the next five years? How exactly will it affect applicants and undergraduate students?

- Which schools (or types of schools) are likely to be the relative “winners,” and who are likely to be the relative “losers”?

(Assume I have no personal experience with either federally-funded research or college/university budgets. Because I don’t. 😂 But I do have kids applying to college in 2026 and 2029 and am having trouble getting my head around the short-term implications for them.

Thanks!

I’m a big proponent of flagship state universities, but I think LACs with large endowments are best able to weather this. It will impact faculty ranks as a lot of T1 professors are partially funded by grants and affect PHD programs as there’s less funding for research. Yes, the OP is right that fundamental science has better prospects, but a lot of it still touches things his admin doesn’t believe in.

Agree. Public schools sand R1 Universities will be the hardest hit. There are so few tenured professors as it is, and without federal funding a lot of them are going to be scrambling.

The Publics should fare better than the privates because the members of the house don't want to face their voters. In this instance they have better advocacy. Ironically Publics in mostly blue states will likely get hurt worse less than those in red states because they have vulnerable representatives. With the tiny hose majority at risk republicans reps from CA, NY, PA, VA, etc. can dictate the shape of anything going through congress. Contrary to what he believes, Elon does not control spending. The representatives in NY and NJ whose jobs are on the line if there are big cuts at Stony Brook and Rutgers control the spending in this case.

This is the most delusional post on DCUM this year thus far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's undeniable at this point that NIH funded, indirectly and via EcoHealth, gain of function research that created COVID and killed millions in the process. If you're intellectually honest, you have to at a minimum acknowledge this plausibility and that is why Fauci's pardon dates to 2014, the year Obama banned gain of function research in the US. It is this vanity you must recognize if you want to understand why people are on the warpath against unchecked funding for research by unaccountable "experts" who ended up creating a Frankenstein virus in the name of good...

You are insane.

[Anonymous]

It's funny that someone thinks social sciences are what is going to be hurt.

Even if you think this is about how minority transgendered tweens are impacted by drag shows .. those studies cost a dime.

Hope Bloomberg can keep JHU afloat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why you think STEM research will be spared. The issue isn’t social sciences research—it’s research, period. The list of “forbidden words” includes things like “female” and “inclusion,” words that are used in many contexts and types of research.

A lot of you are not seeing the forest for the trees, here. This is about destroying state capacity, and it’s about eliminating any threats to or competition for Elon Musk’s empire. They are using a sledgehammer, not a scalpel.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To state it simply, all universities and research institutions will be negatively impacted by this anti-science approach.

Nobody benefits from a world view that values dogma over discovery.

I absolutely agree, of course. This is 100% destructive and terrible.

Maybe because we feels so powerless at the moment, we’re trying to figure out if there’s anything we can or should “do” to reframe our DC’s college research process re 2026.

At the moment, DC is looking at a mix of public flagships and mid-sized privates. Should we be looking at the schools’ financials - endowments, dependence on federal funding etc - to try to identify those that may weather the storm better than others? Or is that like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic?

My DD has applied to PhD programs for applied math for the fall and is very worried about how this will impact her plans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's undeniable at this point that NIH funded, indirectly and via EcoHealth, gain of function research that created COVID and killed millions in the process. If you're intellectually honest, you have to at a minimum acknowledge this plausibility and that is why Fauci's pardon dates to 2014, the year Obama banned gain of function research in the US. It is this vanity you must recognize if you want to understand why people are on the warpath against unchecked funding for research by unaccountable "experts" who ended up creating a Frankenstein virus in the name of good.

On top of it is all the soft social sciences research of questionable merit. If you'd paid attention to higher education in recent years, research was getting infused with DEI principles, so people putting together applications for grants had to incorporate DEI and universities also started mandating DEI topics for approval of research proposals. It wasn't everywhere and for everything but a lot of it was happening. Likewise DEI administrators were also setting mandates for academic departments, influencing the tone of research topics and this was across all academic sectors. The university DEI admins were able to do this because the Federal grantors of research funds were simultaneously doing the same thing from their end, especially under the Biden administration.

That's what the new Trump administration is going to be looking for and rooting out of higher education. No more research into transgenders or identity politics is obviously the most visible but it will trickle down in the same way DEI was trickling down into everything.

I do wonder how far they will go. Contrary to what some of you want to believe/wishcast, "billionaires" aren't keen at seeing the end of cutting edge STEM research, as that's the origin of so much innovation that is later capitalized by Silicon Valley. The funding model will change dramatically but I suspect at the end it will come out more solidly reliable and focused on serious topics, not so many of the questionable soft topics (like we saw with USAID).

What the actual F.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's undeniable at this point that NIH funded, indirectly and via EcoHealth, gain of function research that created COVID and killed millions in the process. If you're intellectually honest, you have to at a minimum acknowledge this plausibility and that is why Fauci's pardon dates to 2014, the year Obama banned gain of function research in the US. It is this vanity you must recognize if you want to understand why people are on the warpath against unchecked funding for research by unaccountable "experts" who ended up creating a Frankenstein virus in the name of good.

On top of it is all the soft social sciences research of questionable merit. If you'd paid attention to higher education in recent years, research was getting infused with DEI principles, so people putting together applications for grants had to incorporate DEI and universities also started mandating DEI topics for approval of research proposals. It wasn't everywhere and for everything but a lot of it was happening. Likewise DEI administrators were also setting mandates for academic departments, influencing the tone of research topics and this was across all academic sectors. The university DEI admins were able to do this because the Federal grantors of research funds were simultaneously doing the same thing from their end, especially under the Biden administration.

That's what the new Trump administration is going to be looking for and rooting out of higher education. No more research into transgenders or identity politics is obviously the most visible but it will trickle down in the same way DEI was trickling down into everything.

I do wonder how far they will go. Contrary to what some of you want to believe/wishcast, "billionaires" aren't keen at seeing the end of cutting edge STEM research, as that's the origin of so much innovation that is later capitalized by Silicon Valley. The funding model will change dramatically but I suspect at the end it will come out more solidly reliable and focused on serious topics, not so many of the questionable soft topics (like we saw with USAID).

What the actual F.

I truly hope this word salad was “written” by AI and not an actual person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To state it simply, all universities and research institutions will be negatively impacted by this anti-science approach.

Nobody benefits from a world view that values dogma over discovery.

I absolutely agree, of course. This is 100% destructive and terrible.

Maybe because we feels so powerless at the moment, we’re trying to figure out if there’s anything we can or should “do” to reframe our DC’s college research process re 2026.

At the moment, DC is looking at a mix of public flagships and mid-sized privates. Should we be looking at the schools’ financials - endowments, dependence on federal funding etc - to try to identify those that may weather the storm better than others? Or is that like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic?

Absolutely. Forbes has a list of the financial ratings of each college. Cross reference that with NSF, NIH, and other departments. For example, NIH is here:

https://report.nih.gov/funding/categorical-spending#/

Each school will list their total federal funding through research, through all modalities. Some competitive grants, others non-competitive.

This is an earthquake followed by a Tsunami.

If we want to have a shot at a return to normalcy, we need the Senate and House out of Trump's control as soon as possible. The 2026 mid-terms will be critical to have Dems win. But Trump, Musk, Vance and Bannon will do so much damage to our children's education before then. Look how active they've been in just days/weeks.

Also, it doesn't matter if you are a lifelong GOP or Dem, if you voted for Trump or not, everyone must organize fast and work together now against Trump's crew to save this country for our kids. Otherwise, we are launching our kids into a permanent dystopia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why you think STEM research will be spared. The issue isn’t social sciences research—it’s research, period. The list of “forbidden words” includes things like “female” and “inclusion,” words that are used in many contexts and types of research.

A lot of you are not seeing the forest for the trees, here. This is about destroying state capacity, and it’s about eliminating any threats to or competition for Elon Musk’s empire. They are using a sledgehammer, not a scalpel.

Elon plays in luxury goods. Good luck to him when he destroys 30K+ high paying jobs and causes wide spread panic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To state it simply, all universities and research institutions will be negatively impacted by this anti-science approach.

Nobody benefits from a world view that values dogma over discovery.

I absolutely agree, of course. This is 100% destructive and terrible.

Maybe because we feels so powerless at the moment, we’re trying to figure out if there’s anything we can or should “do” to reframe our DC’s college research process re 2026.

At the moment, DC is looking at a mix of public flagships and mid-sized privates. Should we be looking at the schools’ financials - endowments, dependence on federal funding etc - to try to identify those that may weather the storm better than others? Or is that like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic?

Absolutely. Forbes has a list of the financial ratings of each college. Cross reference that with NSF, NIH, and other departments. For example, NIH is here:

https://report.nih.gov/funding/categorical-spending#/

Each school will list their total federal funding through research, through all modalities. Some competitive grants, others non-competitive.

This is an earthquake followed by a Tsunami.

If we want to have a shot at a return to normalcy, we need the Senate and House out of Trump's control as soon as possible. The 2026 mid-terms will be critical to have Dems win. But Trump, Musk, Vance and Bannon will do so much damage to our children's education before then. Look how active they've been in just days/weeks.

Also, it doesn't matter if you are a lifelong GOP or Dem, if you voted for Trump or not, everyone must organize fast and work together now against Trump's crew to save this country for our kids. Otherwise, we are launching our kids into a permanent dystopia.

+1 million

1) Call all your reps in Congress now (and every day) registering your disapproval for these policies. especially critical for Republican reps
2) Register your teen to get ready to vote when they turn 18, in advance of 2026 election. And VOTE! There isn't a big gap in Senate or House.
3) Donate NOW to Dem candidates across the country for Sen, House, Gov races as much as you can comfortably afford.
4) If you have a lot of money, donate to your kids' colleges and note you want it to support faculty research.

[Anonymous]

In the past it’s the public R1s that have taken the biggest hits when federal priorities change, followed by private R1s. LACs in theory are the most insulated but can be affected too (they do some research, but significantly less.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To state it simply, all universities and research institutions will be negatively impacted by this anti-science approach.

Nobody benefits from a world view that values dogma over discovery.

I absolutely agree, of course. This is 100% destructive and terrible.

Maybe because we feels so powerless at the moment, we’re trying to figure out if there’s anything we can or should “do” to reframe our DC’s college research process re 2026.

At the moment, DC is looking at a mix of public flagships and mid-sized privates. Should we be looking at the schools’ financials - endowments, dependence on federal funding etc - to try to identify those that may weather the storm better than others? Or is that like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic?

Absolutely. Forbes has a list of the financial ratings of each college. Cross reference that with NSF, NIH, and other departments. For example, NIH is here:

https://report.nih.gov/funding/categorical-spending#/

Each school will list their total federal funding through research, through all modalities. Some competitive grants, others non-competitive.

This is an earthquake followed by a Tsunami.

If we want to have a shot at a return to normalcy, we need the Senate and House out of Trump's control as soon as possible. The 2026 mid-terms will be critical to have Dems win. But Trump, Musk, Vance and Bannon will do so much damage to our children's education before then. Look how active they've been in just days/weeks.

Also, it doesn't matter if you are a lifelong GOP or Dem, if you voted for Trump or not, everyone must organize fast and work together now against Trump's crew to save this country for our kids. Otherwise, we are launching our kids into a permanent dystopia.

+1 million

1) Call all your reps in Congress now (and every day) registering your disapproval for these policies. especially critical for Republican reps
2) Register your teen to get ready to vote when they turn 18, in advance of 2026 election. And VOTE! There isn't a big gap in Senate or House.
3) Donate NOW to Dem candidates across the country for Sen, House, Gov races as much as you can comfortably afford.
4) If you have a lot of money, donate to your kids' colleges and note you want it to support faculty research.

Yes to ALL of this. This isn't the time to sleep. Act now so our kids don't get permanently screwed.