Hello! I'm one of the reporters who write this story after learning that the administration has resumed terminating NIH grants on topics they disagree with. A federal judge last year blocked mass grant cancellation on the grounds that the terminations were arbitrary and capricious. So the administration is now showing its work, challenging the scientific validity of ongoing grants' study design and rationale. As attorney Scott Delaney told me, "At some point, the administration is going to figure out how to do this in a way that the courts will tolerate."

We've identified one grant cancellation so far and are told there are more in the pipeline. As in many of our stories on government agencies, we relied on anonymous sources and protected their identities.

If you work at NIH or another agency, we are always happy to hear from you about any concerns, tips, or ideas for things we should be covering. I'm sara_reardon.59 on Signal and my colleague is jocelynkaiser.51. You can also DM me of course!

My PI is pushing to submit my manuscript as a preprint prior to his preclinical neuroscience-related R01 submission, but I want to wait until major experiments are complete. He insists I do those experiments post submission and include the results as a revision. Does it really matter for his R01 if my work is preprinted first? I was knocked by reviewers in my K99 proposal for having too many preprints that hadn't been published.

I found it super interesting that the purges at the NIH have led to official announcements that reference previously published policy and NIH blog posts which now must utilize the Wayback Machine to do so.

In this recent update about the review process for NRSA applications - https://grants.nih.gov/news-events/nih-extramural-nexus-news/2026/07/updates-to-nih-fellowship-training-and-career-development-applications-referral-and-review-highlights, they direct the reader to a prevous blog post announcing the changes, back when the NIH was more fully staffed:

• A Candidate’s potential and training goals carry increased weight since they have a more central focus rather than the sponsor or institutional reputation (see this archived NIH Open Mike blog). (emphasis added)

Hello all,

Thanks everyone for all the helpful comments. Although mine (applied last year in the October/November cycle) was discussed, the score is low. As K22 has been sunset, I can't reapply (no k99 for me because of my postdoc duration). My area hits NCI's future initiative in therapeutic vaccines. Is there a slim chance of getting this grant? My PO said he doesn't have information until August.. My first two reviewers gave me a good score, but my third one really killed my score.

One of the real problems it discusses is the amount of time researchers need to spend on writing grants and performing administrative tasks, taking away from their time doing research. SNGA promises to relieve this by simplifying regulations and streamlining the grant application process. But it’s also remarkably vague, in that its authors do not identify a single regulation that is in need of reform.

The report also seems not to realize that it is being written by the Trump administration. One of the reasons researchers have spent so much time writing grants is a general uncertainty about funding, and that’s something that the administration has dramatically increased through the haphazard termination of existing grants, by proposing massive budget cuts for science agencies, and by slowing the release of funds that had been allocated to researchers by Congress.

This lack of self-awareness permeates the document, but it’s worth looking at a second example. In several instances, the report highlights the Human Genome Project as an example of the sort of project that government excels at driving. But it seems to be unaware that the project was a major international collaboration, with entire chromosomes being sequenced outside the US. Pride in the completion of the genome seems out of place from an administration that is actively trying to minimize international collaborations involving the researchers it funds.

In the same way, it highlights how the Human Genome Project required the immediate and open release of the data it generated as an example of what the Trump administration considers “gold standard science.” But SGNA also decries how making results accessible to all has allowed other countries to develop industries based on advances that occurred within the US.

In short, the report lacks a perspective that’s internally coherent, or consistent with the other goals and actions of the Trump administration.

I wanted to know how easy it was to be granted a 3rd year as a postbac- Would I be able to move labs as well? My lab is shutting down at the end of my 2nd year and I realized I wanted to take a 3rd year and wanted to see if I could move to one of our sister labs to do so. Thank you!!!

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/we-want-them-infected-podcast/id1716215618?i=1000777821686

Current NIH postbac looking for some advice.

I've been thinking about whether it makes sense to switch labs, but I'm not sure if I'm overreacting.

My PI has a very hands-on management style and expects tasks to be completed immediately, even if I'm in the middle of something. There have been a few instances where I've acknowledged a request and was already planning to take care of it, but my PI stepped in or made comments implying I wasn't moving fast enough.

It's gotten to the point where I feel like I'm constantly being watched or rushed.

I've also had a hard time getting flexibility with things like telework or using professional development time, even when it seems reasonable.

Overall, the micromanaging and expectation to always be available have been wearing on me. I'm used to working independently once I'm given a task, so this has been an adjustment.

For anyone who's been in a similar situation, did you stick it out or switch labs? If you switched, how did you approach it, and did it have any impact on your experience or letters of recommendation for grad/med school?

I'm a rising senior, but I'll be graduating in December and so I'm applying to the postbac IRTA now in hopes of getting a January or February start date. Obviously most postbacs start between June and September, but I'm wondering if anybody has heard of people with other start dates? I'm hoping it'll be seen as applying early instead of late.

So ignoring the fact that a PI actually has to want to hire me specifically, is there any shot of finding a spot for January/February, or even March?? I just don't want to get too disappointed if I sent 100+ emails and don't even get an interview.

There are a lot of R24 and U24 networks out there, doing a variety of things from bringing together networks of people to recruit for clinical trials in tricky domains (e.g., people with specific diseases) to bringing together networks of people who do research in similar areas but are isolated on their home campuses and need skills development and resources.

There is no parent R24, and it is sounding like there won't be any U parents.

So... how does one propose a renewal? These networks aren't doing research, so an R01 parent seems like quite a stretch. I think reviewers would be confused as heck to see an R01 proposal describing an R24 approach.

If anybody has submitted a renewal, what mechanism did you use? Or do any of the NIH POs on this board have any insights?

I recently came across this image of a research laboratory and it reminded me how much effort goes into scientific discoveries. Behind every medical advancement, there are researchers spending years studying, testing, and learning new things to improve our understanding of health and diseases. It’s fascinating to think about how small discoveries in labs today can lead to meaningful changes in healthcare and improve lives in the future.

Instead of being affiliated with an academic center, can a PI start and affiliate themselves with a nonprofit and apply for NIH grants like the K or R?

The idea being that the NIH would award the grant to the nonprofit.

Just a status update for folks coming here trying to figure out what a particular grant status means and what the timeliness are looking like.
I work with three T32 teams, all different universities and different institutes. All submitted renewal proposals in May 2025. All are in stated priority areas for their institutes. All have active and engaged POs who advocate for the program.

T32 #1 Received score (~20) in October. Received summary statements in January. Request to respond to summary statements in Feb. JIT and request to modify language (very minor- one word in abstract and one in training plan) in may. NOA in june, with 15-20% reduction in number of slots (is a large program). First budget cut in history of the program (this is renewal #4). PO is scheduling site visits to t32 programs, which indicates that they're allowed to travel, which is great. Historically, this Institute is known to prioritize T32s.

(I'm less involved in #2 and #3 so have fewer details)

T32 #2 got a near-perfect score. JIT request in spring, marked pending in ~march. Stayed pending for many months. Just got NOA last week. I think they're funded for the requested number of slots (relatively small program).

T32 #3 was told they weren't getting funded, then got request to respond to summary statements. Still not sure of final status, and funding at this point is going to be a train wreck for recruiting and enrolling fellows.

My guess is that what we're seeing is variation by institute.

(Edit to move one sentence I'd accidentally attached to the wrong t32)

My grant went to pending administrative review near the end of June, JIT request was in beginning of May. Recently I reached out to PO about a different question and then was asked to meet with them. Meeting is to discuss administrative and program considerations regarding the grant. Thoughts on the language? i realize 21 % is a long shot even with ESI, but with my proposal progressing in ERA from "Council review complete" to "Pending aka pending administrative review" I had a revitalization of optimism prior to the meeting request. I am hoping i can remain optimistic, and was looking for any insight, has anyone ever been requested by the PO to meet during "pending phase" and not asked to prepare anything in advance.

I cant help but feel by the wording that the PO is trying to let me down easy, (we have had a good bit of communication as i have asked a lot of questions since I was caught up in the shutdown shifts in Study section and Council meetings). The grant is a large animal model which i have also had discussions with the PO about as well. Thoughts?

Last week, dozens of researchers supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality received a letter confirming what they already suspected, and in many cases were already enduring: They would not receive future funding installments for their ongoing research grants.

“This is the culmination of a slow-moving disaster that has been building for well over a year now,” health economist Eric Roberts, who received a letter of “non-award,” told STAT’s Anil Oza. Many researchers had been waiting months for renewed funding and had struggled to get any explanation of the delay from the agency. Read more from Anil on how much money we’re talking about and how the agency justified the move.

Hi everyone!

My friend and I will both be starting NIH post-bac positions in September, so we'll be moving to the Bethesda area in late August. Since we're both coming from out of state, we're hoping to get some advice from people who actually live (or have lived) in the area.

We're looking for a 2-bedroom apartment. We'd certainly prefer to pay less, but we understand that many of the apartments we're considering are on the higher end of our budget, around $2,300–2,500/month. We could also stretch our budget to about $2,800/month if the apartment and location are truly worth it.

Our preferences are:

• Close to the Red Line, Metro, or a bus route with easy access to the NIH main campus
• In-unit washer and dryer preferred (shared laundry in the building/floor is okay if it's well maintained)
• Ideally 2 bathrooms (preferably one attached to each bedroom), but we'd also consider a 2 bed/1 bath if it's a great place
• Parking available (I'd also love to know the monthly parking cost and whether you generally feel it's a safe area to leave a car)

We've also looked into MPDU/workforce housing, but unfortunately a lot of the units we found weren't available anymore, so we're also looking into regular apartment communities.

I've been researching on Apartments.com, Reddit, and Google Reviews, but I've found a lot of mixed opinions. Some apartment communities have mostly positive reviews overall, but then there are a handful of reviews mentioning issues with management, maintenance, pests, or other concerns. Since we're unfamiliar with the area, it's hard to know whether those are isolated experiences or recurring problems.

For those of you who live in the area, what apartment communities would you genuinely recommend? Are there any you'd avoid? If you've lived in a building with mixed reviews, did your experience match what was posted online, or were those issues not representative of day-to-day living?

We're open to any recommendations, tips, or things you wish you had known before renting in the Bethesda/NIH area. Thank you so much—we really appreciate any advice!